Futsal, the 5-a-side version of soccer (i.e. 1 goalkeeper and 4 outfield players), was introduced in 1930 and continues to grow in popularity around the world. Competitive games comprise of two 20-min periods of high-intensity and intermittent activities requiring substantial physical, tactical, and technical efforts from the players. A greater understanding of the physical and skill requirements will aid the development of futsal and enable practitioners to undertake appropriate training regimes for the demands of the sport. The objective of this review is to examine key aspects of futsal such as match analysis, physiological demands, energy requirements, fitness measurements, and skill requirements. Futsal players experience fatigue as the game progresses due to the high-intensity nature of the game and the repeated maximal sprint efforts required. The intermittent nature of the sport necessitates the use of aerobic and anaerobic energy pathways throughout exercise. Therefore, a futsal player needs to have a great capacity of intermittent endurance, repeated sprint ability, and leg power, while technical aspects include the ability of high level shooting and passing skills, agility and coordination. Future research is warranted to help practitioners develop more specific tests into futsal performance, especially with regards skill.

Macadam, P, Simperingham, KD, and Cronin, JB. Acute kinematic and kinetic adaptations to wearable resistance during sprint acceleration. J Strength Cond Res 31(5): 1297–1304, 2017—Wearable resistance (WR) in the form of weighted vests and shorts enables movement-specific sprint running to be performed under load. The purpose of this study was to determine the acute changes in kinematics and kinetics when an additional load equivalent to 3% body mass (BM) was attached to the anterior or posterior surface of the lower limbs during sprint running. Nineteen male rugby athletes (age: 19.7 ± 2.3 years; body mass: 96.1 ± 16.5 kg; height: 181 ± 6.5 cm) volunteered to participate in the study. Subjects performed six 20 m sprints in a randomized fashion wearing no resistance or 3%BM affixed to the anterior (quadriceps and tibialis anterior) or posterior (hamstring and gastrocnemius) surface of the lower limbs (2 sprints per condition). Optojump and radar were used to quantify sprint times, horizontal velocity, contact and flight times, and step length and frequency. A repeated measures analysis of variance with post hoc contrasts was used to determine differences (p ≤ 0.05) between conditions. No significant differences were found between the anterior and posterior WR conditions in any of the variables of interest. There was no significant change in sprint times over the initial 10 m, however, the 10–20 m split times were significantly slower (−2.2 to −2.9%) for the WR conditions compared with the unloaded sprints. A significant change in the relative force–velocity (F–v) slope (−10.5 to −10.9%) and theoretical maximum velocity (V ₀) (−5.4 to −6.5%) was found, whereas a nonsignificant increase in theoretical maximum force (F ₀) (4.9–5.2%) occurred. Wearable resistance of 3%BM may be a suitable training modality to enhance sprint acceleration performance by overloading the athlete without negatively affecting sprint running technique.

Hip extension is an important action in daily activities (standing, stepping and walking) and sporting actions (running, sprint-running and jumping). Though several different exercises exist, a comprehensive understanding of which exercises best target the gluteus maximus (Gmax) and the magnitude of muscular excitation associated with each exercise is yet to be established. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the electromyographic (EMG) excitation of the Gmax during body weight exercises that utilize hip extension. A systematic approach was used to search Pubmed, Sports Discuss, Web of Science and Science Direct using the Boolean phrases (gluteal OR gluteus maximus) AND (activity OR excitation OR activation) AND (electromyography OR EMG) AND (hip extension). Articles that examined injury-free participants of any age, gender or excitation level were included. Articles were excluded when not available in English, where studies did not normalize EMG excitation to maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), where a load or resistance was added to the exercise, or where no hip extension occurred. Exercises were grouped into vertical and horizontal (anteroposterior or posteroanterior) force vectors. Thirty-nine studies of high methodological quality were retained for analysis. Twenty-five exercises were performed in the vertical vector (average: 33.4% MVIC, highest: single leg wall squat 86% MVIC), fourteen exercises were performed in the horizontal (anteroposterior) force vector (average: 32.8% MVIC, highest: single leg bridge 54.2% MVIC, while thirty-eight exercises were included in the horizontal (posteroanterior) vector (average: 30.4% MVIC, highest: plank with bent leg hip extension 106.2% MVIC).Limitations: The differences in subject's backgrounds, exercise technique and the methodological approaches varied between studies, most notably in the different positions used for obtaining MVIC, which could have dramatically impacted normalized levels of gluteal activation. The findings from this review provide an indication of Gmax muscle excitation generated by a variety of hip extension body weight exercises, which may assist practitioners in making exercise selection decisions for programming.

This systematic review aimed to quantify the acute and longitudinal effects that occur with weighted vests during sprint-running. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science were searched using the Boolean phrases (vest OR trunk) AND (sprint*) AND (resist* OR weight OR load*). From 170 articles retrieved, 11 studies (6 acute, 5 longitudinal) met the inclusion criteria. Vest loads (5-40% body mass) were found to significantly increase acute over-ground times (10-50 m 4.1-16.9%, effect sizes [ES] = 0.93-3.11) through significantly decreased velocity (-2.2% to -17.3%, ES = -0.41 to -3.19), horizontal force (-5.9% to -22.1%, ES = -0.85 to -3.30), maximal power (-4.3% to -35.6%, ES = -0.32 to -3.44), and flight times (-8.3% to -14.6%, ES = -0.88 to -1.03), while increasing contact times (14.7-19.6%, ES = 1.80-3.17). Treadmill sprints were less effected until loads >11% body mass were used. Improvements in velocity (1.2-1.3%, ES = 0.24-0.37) and times (10-50 m 1.2-9.4%, ES = 0.25-3.30) were found in longitudinal studies (5.6-18.9% body mass, 3-7 weeks). Future studies should focus on determining the optimum load and volume to clearly establish the training benefits of this form of resisted sprinting.