Agility, as the ability to react rapidly to unforeseen events, is an essential component of football performance. However, existing agility diagnostics often do not reflect the complex motor–cognitive interaction required on the field. Therefore, this study evaluates the criterion and ecological validity of a newly developed motor–cognitive dual‐task agility approach in elite youth football players and compare it to a traditional reactive agility test. Twenty‐one male youth elite football players (age:17.4 ±0 .6; BMI:23.2 ± 1.8) performed two agility tests (reactive agility, reactive agility with integrated multiple‐object‐tracking (Dual‐Task Agility)) on the SKILLCOURT system. Performance was correlated to motor (sprint, jump), cognitive (executive functions, attention, reaction speed) and football specific tests (Loughborough soccer passing test (LSPT)) as well as indirect game metrics (coaches' rating, playing time). Reactive agility performance showed moderate correlations to attention and choice reaction times (r = 0.48−0.63), as well as to the LSPT (r = 0.51). The dual‐task agility test revealed moderate relationships with attention and reaction speed (r = 0.47−0.58), executive functions (r = 0.45−0.63), as well as the game metrics (r = 0.51−0.61). Finally, the dual‐task agility test significantly differentiated players based on their coaches' rating and playing time using a median split (p < 0.05; d = 0.8–1.28). Motor–cognitive agility performance in elite youth football players seems to be primarily determined by cognitive functions. The integration of multiple object tracking into reactive agility testing seems to be an ecologically valid approach for performance diagnostics in youth football.

Introduction: Agility and cognitive skills are essential in sports. However, standardized agility assessment tools often lack a reactive component, and cognitive assessments are performed using computer-based or paper-pencil tests. The SKILLCOURT is a newly developed testing and training device allowing agility and cognitive assessments in a more ecologically valid setting. This study evaluated the reliability and sensitivity to changes in performance (usefulness) of the SKILLCOURT technology. Methods: In a test–retest (7 d, 3 months) design, 27 healthy adults (♀ = 12; age, 24.9 ± 3.3 yr) performed three trials of agility (Star Run, Random Star Run) and motor–cognitive tests (1-back, 2-back, executive function). Absolute and relative intersession and intrasession reliability was determined using the intraclass coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV). A repeated-measures ANOVA was applied to identify potential learning effects between trials and test sessions. The smallest worthwhile change and typical error (TE) were calculated to investigate the intrasession and intersession usefulness of the tests. Results: Agility tests revealed good relative and absolute intersession (ICC, 83–0.89; CV, 2.7%–4.1%) and intrasession (ICC, 7–0.84; CV, 2.4%–5.5%) reliability accompanied by adequate usefulness from test day 3 onward. Motor–cognitive tests showed good relative intersession reliability (ICC, 0.7–0.77) with marginal CV values (4.8%–8.6%). Adequate intrasession reliability and usefulness can be assumed from test day 2 (1-back test, executive function test) and day 3 (2-back test) onward. For all tests, learning effects were observed within and compared with test day 1. Conclusions: The SKILLCOURT is a reliable diagnostic tool for assessing reactive agility and motor–cognitive performance. Because of learning effects, sufficient familiarization with the tests is required when used for diagnostic purposes.

Agility, defined as the ability to rapidly respond to unforeseen events, constitutes a central performance component in football. Existing agility training approaches often focus on change of direction that does not reflect the complex motor-cognitive demands on the pitch. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of a novel motor-cognitive dual-task agility training (Multiple-object tracking integrated into agility training) on agility and football-specific test performance parameters, compared to agility and a change of direction (COD) training. Adult male amateur football players (n = 42; age: 27±6; height: 181±7cm; weight: 80±12kg) were randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups (COD, agility, agility + multiple object tracking). The Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT), a dribbling test with/without cognitive task as well as the Random Star Run (with/without ball) and the modified T-Test were assessed before and after a 6-week training period. Time effects within the T-Test (F = 83.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and dribbling test without cognitive task (F = 23.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.38) with improvements of all intervention groups (p < 0.05) were found. Dribbling with cognitive task revealed a time effect (F = 7.8; p = 0.008; η2 = 0.17), with improvements exclusively in the agility and dual-task agility groups (p < 0.05). Random Star Run with and without ball exhibited a time (F = 38.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.5; F = 82.7; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and interaction effect (F = 14.14; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.42; F = 27.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.59), with improvements for the agility and dual-task agility groups. LSPT showed no time, group or interaction effect. The effects of change of direction training are limited to change of direction and dribbling test performance within preplanned scenarios. In contrast, motor-cognitive agility interventions result in notable enhancements in football-specific and agility tests, incorporating decision-making and multitasking components. No differences were observed between agility and agility + multiple object tracking. To achieve a transfer to game-relevant performance, coaches should focus on integrating cognitive challenges into motor training.

In football, unpredictable events (e.g. unexpected landings) seem to play a crucial role in the mechanism of non‐contact knee injuries. This study investigated the effects of a single bout of an injury preventive warmup protocol on biomechanical landing stability and decision‐making quality during preplanned and unanticipated jump‐landings. A crossover study on 18 male amateur football players was performed. The participants completed a standard (ergometer) and an injury‐preventive warmup protocol (Prevent injury and Enhance Performance (PEP)) on two different test days. After each protocol, participants performed countermovement jumps with preplanned (landing side displayed before takeoff) and unanticipated (landing side shown after takeoff) single‐leg landings on a force plate. Outcomes were landing stability (height and time of the maximum vertical ground reaction force (pGRF), centre of pressure (CoP), the number of standing errors (ground contact with free leg)) and decision‐making quality (landing error (wrong foot) count). Carry‐over and crossover‐tests were performed to find potential between‐condition‐differences. No carry‐over effects occurred (p > .05). The PEP led to a reduced CoP trace length (−18.4 ± 32.2%, p = .021) and earlier occurrence of pGRF (−4.72 ± 6.78%, p = .017) in the preplanned condition. No significant between‐treatment‐differences occurred within the unanticipated landings and decision‐making quality (p > .05). The primarily neuromuscular warmup protocol affects landing stability in the preplanned condition. However, it does not seem to better prepare football players for unpredictable events than a standard warmup.Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register identifier: DRKS00016942.Highlights Adapting movements rapidly to unanticipated external stimuli (e.g. unexpected landings) is crutial to prevent injuries in football It is unclear wether popular neuromuscular injury preventive warmup programmes (e.g. Prevent injury and Enhance Performance (PEP)) adaquatly prepare athletes for these situations Our study shows that the PEP warm up programme has acute effects on anticipated landing stability, but no influence on unanticipated landings or decision making quality Classic neuromuscular warm up programmes may not be the optimal choice to prepare athletes properly for the upcoming motor‐cognitive demands in a football match

Three-dimensional surface topography offers a noninvasive alternative to radiographic imaging for evaluating trunk morphology and posture. This study aimed to establish normative values of trunk cross-sectional geometry and to examine their associations with spinal alignment in healthy young adults. A cross-sectional sample of 108 participants (62 women, 46 men; 19–23 years, normal BMI) underwent assessment using two complementary techniques: TorsoScan, which reconstructed 360° trunk cross-sections at thoracic levels T1, T4, T8, and T12, and DIERS Formetric 4D, which quantified spinal posture parameters. For each cross-section, sagittal and coronal diameters and cross-sectional areas were calculated; sex differences were analyzed using Welch’s t tests and effect sizes, and associations with posture were examined by Pearson correlations with false discovery rate correction and regression modeling. Trunk geometry followed a regular thoracic profile, with the largest coronal diameter at T4 and the maximal area at T8. Men showed consistently larger diameters and areas than women, with large effect sizes at T4–T12. Four associations remained significant: reduced mid-thoracic breadth and area were linked to greater lumbar lordosis, while upper thoracic depth correlated positively with thoracic kyphosis. Predictive models based on posture explained limited variance (R² ≤ 0.19). These findings provide sex-specific reference values and demonstrate that TorsoScan and DIERS Formetric yield complementary, partly convergent measures that may support radiation-free evaluation of trunk morphology in clinical and rehabilitative settings.

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Die staatlichen Maßnahmen zur Eindämmung des Coronavirus SARS-CoV‑2 im Jahr 2020 brachten den Trainings- und Wettkampfbetrieb im professionellen Fußball in vielen Ländern zum zeitweiligen Erliegen. In Folge des Lockdowns waren die Trainingsmöglichkeiten zumeist auf unspezifische heimbasierte Trainingsmethoden begrenzt. Es ist unklar, ob sich die fehlenden sportspezifischen Belastungsreize negativ auf die physische Leistungsfähigkeit der Fußballspielenden auswirkten. Methodik Im Rahmen eines narrativen Reviews wurde mittels einer selektiven Literaturrecherche in den Datenbanken PubMed, Google Scholar und BISp-Surf nach Studien gesucht, welche die Auswirkungen des Lockdowns auf physische Leistungsparameter bei erwachsenen professionellen Fußballspielenden untersuchten. Ergebnisse In die Übersichtsarbeit wurden sechs prospektive Längsschnittstudien eingeschlossen. In allen Studien kam während der Quarantäne ein heimbasiertes Ersatztraining zum Einsatz. Vier Studien verglichen die Leistungsfähigkeit der Fußballer/-innen mit Leistungsdaten aus vorherigen Spielzeiten. Zwei Studien ermittelten die Leistungsfähigkeit der Sportler/-innen unmittelbar vor und nach der Lockdownperiode. Diskussion Während die allgemeine Kraft- und Ausdauerleistung durch heimbasierte Ersatztrainingsprogramme erhalten werden kann, weisen die Studien darauf hin, dass sich die fehlenden spezifischen Belastungsreize vor allem negativ auf die Schnelligkeits- und Schnellkraftleistung der Fußballspielenden auswirken könnten. Bei Rückkehr in den regulären Trainingsbetrieb sollte daher auf eine progressive Belastungssteuerung insbesondere im Schnelligkeitstraining geachtet werden, um das Risiko für Verletzungen zu senken.