Twitter has become a little more interesting recently. I started following Raymond Verheijen (@raymondverheije) and Craig Duncan (@DrCraigDuncan) and enjoy reading the ‘discussions’ between two leading football practitioners. I don’t currently work in football so my knowledge of Verheijen was limited until I came across some articles about football periodisation including one on the BBC sport website. As a S&C coach, it’s a standard term so I figured here was someone willing to delve a little deeper with the public into some of the sport science support and training principles used in professional football. Brilliant I thought, as this is an area that seems very rarely to be covered in the media, and some education for football fans into what the players go through at the training ground.

Then I started to read, I read about managing training volume on an individual basis dependant upon training tolerance, box ticked. I read about completely dismissing doing two sessions a day, each to their own maybe. Then I read about football is fitness and fitness is football.

If all you had to do to get fit for a sport was to play it, then strength and conditioning wouldn’t exist. Gyms wouldn’t exist. Rugby players would just play touch rugby in training, tennis players would just have a hit up, rowers would just row and training would get pretty boring for runners. I don’t see how football is any different. You accelerate, you decelerate, you change direction, you jump and you exert force onto an external object. To do that you need to be able to produce and control forces with good postural control and correct neural recruitment. Sound biomechanics developed as part of a long term athlete development plan including strength based training, metabolic conditioning and technical training is used in every sport, why can’t it be used in football.

The answer is that it is. Many S&C practitioners in football work like this. They do their jobs, they keep their heads down and they concentrate on coaching their athletes as part of a support team. They discuss and share what they do with their contemporaries for free (including those from other sports), that’s part of reflective practice. They don’t comment on the work of their contemporaries publicly without full knowledge of the facts. They work with the technical coaching staff to help educate them on some of the sport science so words like anaerobic and aerobic don’t sound like nonsense, and they work with the technical coaching staff to be educated on some of the finer technical nuances of the sport so that the work they do is the best possible they can produce.

The reason 10 different S&C coaches may use 10 different training methodologies is that they’re working with 10 different sets of playing and coaching staff with 10 sets of widely varying training histories, responses and needs and different philosophies on how to play the game. That’s a lot of variables which would explain why different approaches exist, in the same  way every football team doesn’t play the same way.

I listened to couple of pieces on five live this morning and evening, both were discussing pre-season football training. The interview this morning was with an ex pro turned personal trainer talking about body image and how, in his opinion, players in the lower leagues were more interested in body image as a result of their training rather than performance outcomes. The second this evening was with several ex pros and a couple of managers discussing pre-season and different methods.

The body image point is a good one and I’m sure body image is a factor with the majority of athletes, I know it’s something that has come up one way or another with probably every athlete I’ve worked with. I explain to my athletes that an athletic physique is a natural by product of training and eating well and pointing to examples of other athletes within the sport is a useful way to demonstrate this. It seems that the culture within the sport could be to blame. A lot of footballers I know (I haven’t worked with any on a professional basis yet) don’t know what strength and conditioning is and wouldn’t lift weights if they couldn’t sit down on a large machine to do it. This is shown through the media, I’ve never seen strength and conditioning getting a mention in any article, every team seems to have a fitness trainer who will put the team through their paces though. The majority of other sports seem to have bought into S&C and athletes when interviewed will name drop the field at least.

Relating to this, the evening discussion was full of 7 mile runs in a different location each day so the lads didn’t get bored, 8 week breaks after the season and even the suggestion of playing a full game every 2 days throughout pre-season (you’d have to change the name to the pre-season season though). It leads me to conclude that football, particularly in the lower leagues, is in dyer need of some education as to what proper preparation to play a multi-sprint, multi-direction, field team ball game is. It would be interesting to measure the effect on injury rates by comparing clubs who brought in S&C coaches to work with their players against those who didn’t. I’ll bet if you were able to present the benefits in terms of playing hours and related to wage bills you’s suddenly find a lot more demand for S&C.

This is a question I’ve had asked of me on numerous occasions.  It is one aspect of the professional sportsperson’s life that has been well reported in the media and has resulted in uptake by many of the amateur sporting population.  Judging by the number of times it’s been mentioned, a large portion of those doing it aren’t really sure why they are and expect it to be a one stop shop for recovery post training.

First of all the theory behind cold water immersion.  It is thought that it reduces swelling and causes blood vessels to constrict and allow blood to pool around the previously active muscles. This allows the metabolic by-products of exercise to enter the pooled blood and be removed once peripheral blood flow continues after bathing.  Another method that may help is alternating a hot and cold stimulus (easily done with a shower), otherwise known as contrast water therapy.  The intermittent mix of cold and hot water effectively switches peripheral blood flow on and off helping to ‘pump’ lactic acid and other by-products away from the muscle enhancing recovery and reducing impact of damage to the muscle.  Both have shown reductions in muscle soreness post training and recovery of markers of strength and power.

Research is inconclusive as to which method is better, if either, and different individuals may find one preferable to the other which would perhaps indicate the importance of central fatigue (theorised that the brain acts as a protective mechanism to prevent excessive damage to muscles).  Most athletes I’ve worked with have found one of the two to be of benefit and it is worth trying both to find one that works for you.  The one point to note would be that it isn’t necessary to use an ice bath and that cold water immersion at around 15°C for 10 mins has been shown to work.  Contrast therapy has been used with different protocols and some experimentation will help individualise your preferences, but 1 minute at each temperature changing 4-5 times should be a decent starting point.

The main point on recovery strategies to note is that there is no one method of recovery in the literature that works for everyone and an individualised holistic approach will most likely bring about the best results.  Good quality nutritional intake consisting of a protein and carbohydrate heavy meal/drink, preferred passive recovery method (cold water immersion, contrast immersion and massage etc.) and/or active recovery (light jog or cycle post training etc), a sound 8 hours of sleep and a nap post training if possible will likely provide excellent results.  Keep checking for a new, more detailed, piece on recovery under we believe in the near future.