EVALUATION OF THE RELIABILITY
SOCCER-SPECIFIC FIELD TESTS
DRAGAN MIRKOV,1 ALEKSANDAR NEDELJKOVIC,1 MILOS KUKOLJ,1 DUSAN UGARKOVIC,1
1,2
AND SLOBODAN JARIC
1
The Research Center, Faculty for Sports and Physical Education, Belgrade, Serbia; 2Human Performance Laboratories,
Department of Health, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware
ABSTRACT
Mirkov, DM, Nedeljkovic, A, Kukolj, M, Ugarkovic, D, and Jaric, S.
Evaluation of reliability of soccer-specific field tests. J Strength
Cond Res 22: 10461050, 2008The soccer-specific field
tests are popular among coaches due to their simplicity, validity,
and minimal use of equipment. Nevertheless, there is a general
lack of data about their reliability, particularly regarding the tests
of anaerobic performance. Twenty professional male soccer
players performed 3 consecutive trials of the tests of throwing-in
and standing-kick performance (the distance measured) as well
as on timed 10-m sprint, flying 20-m sprint, running 10 3 5 m,
zigzag running with and without the ball, and the skill index (i.e.,
the ratio of the zigzag running without and with the ball). With the
exception of the throwing-in and standing kick, the evaluated
tests revealed high intraclass correlation coefficients (i.e.,
.0.80), small within-individual variations (coefficient of variation,
,4%), and sample sizes for detecting a 2% change in the tested
performance that are either close to or below the standard size of
a professional soccer squad. In addition to simplicity and face
validity, most of the evaluated tests revealed high reliability.
Therefore, the evaluated tests are recommended for sport-
specific profiling and early selection of young athletes as well as
for routine testing procedures that could detect effects of various
intervention procedures. Regarding the throwing-in and stand-
ing-kick tests, direct measurement of the ball velocity (e.g., with
a standard radar gun) is recommended.
KEY WORDS intraclass correlation coefficient, anaerobic
performance, agility, skill
INTRODUCTION
T
he soccer-specific physiological demands require
players to be physically fit in terms of aerobic and
anaerobic power, muscle strength, flexibility, and
agility (19). A number of laboratory and field tests
Address correspondence to Dr. Slobodan Jaric, jaric@udel.edu.
22(4)/10461050
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
2008 National Strength and Conditioning Association
the TM
1046 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
OF
have been developed to evaluate players physical abilities, deter-
mine individual strengths and weaknesses, and assess the effect
of various training and other procedures expected to improve
soccer performance. In general, the tests have provided valuable
results due to their high reproducibility, standardized testing
conditions, as well as reliable and precise equipment (14). How-
ever, laboratory measurements are less accessible and often too
expensive for routine use. Furthermore, these tests are time-
consuming, and as a result, laboratory testing is rarely used
throughout the season (24). On the other hand, the sport-
specific field tests are popular among both coaches and athletes
due to their simplicity, validity, and minimal use of equipment.
A number of field tests have been described in the literature and
routinely used by coaches in order to assess various aspects of
soccer-specific fitness (22). However, most of them assess
endurance (4,9,16) rather than various aspects of motor
performance, such as speed, agility, anaerobic power, or skill.
Activities like sprinting over a short distance, accelerating
and decelerating with or without changing direction, as well
as controlling the ball during those activities are expected to
have the property of face validity when used for assessing
soccer-specific performance. However, although the results of
those tests have been reported in the literature (3,11,23), the
reliability of the tests has not been assessed. Therefore, this
study applied several tests of the anaerobic power and skill of
professional male soccer players with the main aim of
evaluating the tests reliability. The selection of the tests was
based not only on their soccer-specific validity, but also on
their simplicity and a minimum of required equipment.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
The tests were conducted on a high-quality soccer field (i.e.,
natural grass) on 2 separate days without precipitation and at
an ambient temperature of 24 to 26C. On the first day, the
anthropometric measurements were taken. Thereafter, the
throwing-in, standing kick, 10-m sprint, and flying 20-m sprint
were performed. On the second day, running 10 3 5 m, zigzag
test, and zigzag with the ball were tested. Both testing pro-
tocols were preceded by a standard warm-up and stretch-
ing procedure and followed by a regular training protocol
designed by the main coach.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

Each test was demonstrated, and thereafter, 1 practice trial

was allowed for habituation. The following 3 trials were
recorded as experimental trials. Each subject had 3 or more
minutes of rest between 2 consecutive trials.

Subjects
The tested subjects were 20 professional senior male soccer
players, excluding goalkeepers, who belonged to the first
selection of a premier national league team. The average
(mean 6 SD) age, mass, and height for the subjects were
20.4 6 1.8 years, 8.9 6 6.6 kg, and 1.85 6 0.06 m, respectively.
All participants were highly trained soccer players with
extensive experience in the tested activities, including various
kinds of agility, due to their regular soccer activities. At the
time of the study, all players had an average of over 8 years of
soccer training experience. Their training programs over the
year preceding the experimental testing included 8 to 10
training sessions a week, with each lasting about 90 minutes.
None of the subjects reported neurological diseases or recent Figure 1. Illustration of the 10-m sprint and flying 20-m sprint (A) and
zigzag test (B).
injuries. The data reported herein were obtained through the
regular preseason testing procedure. The study was approved
by the Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Sport and
the kicking leg, kicked the ball as fast as possible. The kicking
Physical Education of the University of Belgrade. Subjects
distance was measured to the nearest 0.2 m.
received a complete explanation of the purpose of the testing
protocol and signed the institutionally approved written 10-m Sprint. The ability to rapidly accelerate from a standing
consent according to the Declaration of Helsinki. position was measured over a 10-m dash initiated from
a standing position (1,2,11).
Test Descriptions
Body height and mass were measured to the nearest 0.1 cm Flying 20-m Sprint. This test assessed the sprinting ability over
and 0.2 kg, respectively. a short distance, which should be of particular importance for
soccer (2,11). The running time along 20 m following the
Throwing-In. This test evaluated the power of the upper body 10-m maximal acceleration (see previous test) was measured.
(10). The standing subjects were asked to throw the ball with As a consequence, the subjects were instructed to run with
both hands as far as possible in the fashion of throwing-in in maximal speed over 30 m, and both the 10-m (i.e.,
a real game. The distance was measured to the nearest 0.2 m. acceleration) and the 20-m (i.e., maximal speed over a short
distance) tests were obtained from the same trial.
Standing Kick. This test was expected to assess both the power
of the lower body and the kicking skill (13,15). Subjects Running 10 3 5 m. This test assessed running agility from
were instructed to kick the ball without a run-up (i.e., while the required rapid changes in direction (18). Subjects were instructed
player was stationary) for maximal distance. They were stand- to run as fast as possible between 2 parallel lines positioned 5 m
ing with the nondominant leg positioned beside the stationary apart, back and forth consecutively, 10 times. Each time, they
ball and, while using a preparatory countermovement swing of were expected to step over the line with at least 1 foot.

TABLE 1. Descriptive statistics of the results obtained from all eight tests.

Throwing-in Standing kick 10-m Flying 20-m 10 3 5 Zigzag Zigzag with

(m) (m) sprint (s) sprint (s) m (s) test (s) the ball (s) Skill index

Mean 19.39 33.38 1.90 2.52 16.09 4.92 6.40 0.79

SD 2.04 2.51 0.08 0.10 0.49 0.16 0.27 0.043
Maximum 22.73 39.13 2.06 2.74 17.06 5.24 7.08 0.87
Minimum 15.60 30.17 1.79 2.36 15.22 4.61 6.08 0.70
Range 7.13 8.97 0.27 0.39 1.84 0.63 1.00 0.17

VOLUME 22 | NUMBER 4 | JULY 2008 | 1047

Reliability of Soccer-Specific Field Tests

Zigzag Test. This test assessed running agility from changes in

direction. A zigzag course consisted of 4 5-m sections set

165 (102311)

*ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient; CI = 95% confidence interval; TEM = typical error of measurement; CV/% = coefficient of variation; n = estimated sample size; N= 20.
out at 100 angles. The selection of this test was based on rapid

98 (62175)

30 (19 56)
21 (1336)

21 (1436)
acceleration, deceleration, and balance control required for

9 (515)

12 (821)
n(CI)

3 (25)
short running time, which represented the result of the test (11).

Zigzag With the Ball. The ability to control the ball while
changing direction was assessed. Subjects were instructed to
run with the ball as fast as possible along the same zigzag

3.9 (3.1 5.4)

9.2 (7.212.6)
7.1 (5.69.4)

3.2 (2.64.3)
2.1 (1.72.8)
1.2 (0.91.5)
2.5 (2.03.2)
3.3 (2.64.3)
CV/% (CI)
path used in the previous test.

Skill Index. The ratio of the results obtained from the zigzag
test without and with the ball was calculated. A higher index

TABLE 2. Reliability statistics calculated from three consecutive trials (mean 6 SD) and the corresponding indices of reliability.
(i.e., a smaller relative increase in the zigzag running time
when the ball had to be controlled) was interpreted as

0.062 (0.0500.081)
0.053 (0.0420.070)

0.098 (0.0790.130)

0.029 (0.0230.039)
a higher skill of controlling the ball.

1.27 (1.021.68)
2.81 (2.233.80)

0.18 (0.150.24)

0.21 (0.170.27)
The distance between the standing position (i.e., throwing-

TEM (CI)
in) or initial ball position (i.e., standing kick) and the point
where the ball had reached the ground was measured by a
50-m tape. Instructions for both tests were to throw, or kick,
the ball as far as possible.
The time in all running tests was recorded to a resolution

0.87 (0.740.95)
0.76 (0.530.89)
0.81 (0.640.92)
0.93 (0.850.97)
0.94 (0.880.98)
0.84 (0.560.89)
0.81(0.640.91)
0.89 (0.730.96)
of 0.01 s by photocells (Newtest Oy, Oulu, Finland).
The photocells were positioned approximately 0.8 m above

ICC (CI)
the floor, which typically corresponded to the hip level. The
positions of the photocells in the 10-m and flying 20-m sprint
are shown in Figure 1A. The first pair was positioned along
the starting line, the second 10 m apart, and the third pair
along the finish line. The individual trials were self-initiated

6 0.061
6 0.09
6 0.11
6 0.57
6 0.23
6 0.38
by subjects starting with their front foot positioned 0.3 m
6 2.4
6 3.4
Trial 3

behind the photocell. Poles 1 m high were used as obstacles

for the zigzag test, and the subjects were not allowed to touch
19.7
33.4
1.89

16.12
2.50

4.89

0.771
6.37
them as they ran around them.
Statistical Analyses 0.769 6 0.053
All data are reported as mean 6 SD. The precision of
1.90 6 0.09
2.52 6 0.12
16.16 6 0.45
4.92 6 0.17
6.42 6 0.33
19.3 6 2.4
33.0 6 3.8

population estimates is shown as 95% confidence intervals

Trial 2

(CIs). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated

measures and a Tukey post hoc multiple-comparison test
were used for detection of possible systematic bias between
3 consecutive trials of each particular test. Statistical sig-
0.048

nificance was set at p , 0.05. Relative variability was

0.11
0.09
0.47
0.16
0.29
2.1
3.1

expressed as an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (25).

Trial 1

19.2 6
33.4 6
1.92 6
2.50 6
15.96 6
4.95 6
6.42 6
0.775 6

Absolute (i.e., within-individual) variability was assessed by

typical error of measurement as well as by coefficient of
variations (CV) (5). Sample size was estimated from the retest
correlation by using the following formula:
Zigzag with the ball (s)

p
n 2tCV =aCV 2 5
Standing kick (m)
Throwing-in (m)

The statistical analysis was performed by using SPSS for

10-m sprint (s)
20-m sprint (s)
10 3 5 m (s)

Windows, version 12.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL).

Zigzag (s)

Skill index

RESULTS
Table 1 depicts the results of all evaluated tests through the
descriptive statistics calculated across the subjects. The
results of individual tests are based on the best of the
the TM

1048 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research


3 consecutive trials, and in all running tests, shorter times
represent a better result.
Table 2 depicts the performance averaged across the sub-
jects for each recorded trial, together with the corresponding
measures of reliability. When applied on each particular test,
ANOVAs revealed F(2,60) = 0.160.74 (p . 0.05), suggesting
that the differences between consecutive trials proved to be
small and inconsistent.
The reliability, as depicted by ICC, for most of the tests was
high and exceeded 0.80. The only exception was the standing
kick (ICC, 0.76). Similarly, the throwing-in and standing kick
revealed considerably higher within-subject variation ex-
pressed as CV (7.1% and 9.2%, respectively) than the 1.2% to
3.9% variation obtained from the remaining tests.
Based on CV, the estimated sample size required to detect
a 2% change in assessed variables for most applied tests was
close to the sample size of the current study (range, 230). Again,
the exceptions were the throwing-in and standing kick, in which
the estimated sample sizes were 98 and 165, respectively.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability of
selected soccer-specific field tests. Regarding their validity,
throwing and kicking the ball are parts of a soccer game per se.
Sprinting over various distances is also an important demand
in soccer, including rapid changes in direction in particular
(22). During a soccer game, a sprint bout occurs approxi-
mately every 90 seconds, with each lasting an average of 2 to
4 seconds and covering up to 11% of the total distance (22).
Therefore, one could claim a face validity of the selected tests.
Their various versions have been often applied in soccer
practice as well as frequently described in the professional
literature. Finally, the tests belong to the tests of performance
of rapid movements, which do not require normalization for
body size (6,7) and thus add to their simplicity. Therefore, the
remainder of the article is focused on the tests reliability as
well as on some particular test-specific issues.
The reliability of a test depends on a number of factors, such
as the number of subjects, the number of performed trials, the
subjects skills, and the homogeneity of the sample (5,13). The
current study included 20 professional soccer players from
a first national division. This number approximately cor-
responded to the number of players on a professional soccer
squad. Since the participants also performed 3 trials in each of
the tests after familiarization with the test procedure, it could
be concluded that the tested sample of participants and num-
ber of performed trials was appropriate for the evaluation of
the reliability of the selected soccer-specific tests (25).
A reliable performance test is one that has small changes in
the mean (i.e., no significant systematic bias), a small within-
individual variation, and a high testretest correlation (21).
The tests evaluated in this study demonstrated no signifi-
cant differences among consecutive trials, while the within-
individual variations, as expressed by CV, were rather low,
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
except for the throwing-in and the standing kick. Since most
of the ICCs were high, one could conclude that most of
the evaluated tests could be highly reliable. An additional
argument in favor of the evaluated tests is the relatively low
number of subjects required to detect a worthwhile effect.
Namely, for most of the tests, that number corresponds to the
size of a soccer team, suggesting that changes in soccer-
specific performance associated with training and other
procedures could be detected by the evaluated tests.
It has been suggested that the agility tests could discriminate
elite soccer players from other populations better than any
other field test of strength, power, or flexibility (17,20) and that
the agility tests should be used in conjunction with single-
sprint tests to obtain a thorough indication of a players speed
capacity (11). Based on these studies, a recent review of testing
methods applied in soccer concluded that the agility tests
could be the best single indicator of overall soccer perfor-
mance and provide the best differentiation among nonplayers
and elite and recreational performers (24). Surprisingly, although
a number of studies recommend the agility and running tests
(2,8) as highly valid, there is no evidence regarding their reli-
ability. From that perspective, the running 10 3 5 m and the pair
of evaluated zigzag tests could be of particular importance.
In addition to running agility (i.e., running 10 3 5 m and zigzag
test), they also measure running with the ball (i.e., zigzag with
the ball), which could be a highly valid soccer-specific test for
assessing dribble performance and control of the ball. Finally,
the skill index that was evaluated is a novel one. It revealed
a high reliability, while its validity should be justified by the
movement tasks. Simply, when the ball has to be controlled, the
zigzag running time should increase less in individuals more
skilled in controlling the ball. Nevertheless, due to the novelty of
this test, further studies are needed. For example, if future studies
show that the skill index can distinguish among various levels of
players, the test could become a widely used one.
Several kicking tests have been recently evaluated by Markovic
et al. (13). The maximal ball speed was measured by means of
a radar gun, and the reliability appeared to be exceptionally high.
This finding implicitly suggests that a relatively low reliability
and, consequently, a high CV and relatively large number of
subjects required to detect 2% changes obtained in the
throwing-in and standing-kick tests could be partly caused by
the selected method of the performance assessment. Specifically,
the distance that was recorded in both tests could be
considerably confounded by the elevation angle (12). After
also taking into account the low cost and simplicity of use, using
radar guns could be recommended in future tests of ball speed
instead of the distance travelled, as measured in this study.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
Although the evaluated tests could need further evaluation (e.g.,
assessment of independent groups of participants with different
levels of athletic proficiency and establishing standards for
them), of considerable practical importance is that they are
based on a simple experimental protocol and require relatively
VOLUME 22 | NUMBER 4 | JULY 2008 | 1049
Reliability of Soccer-Specific Field Tests
inexpensive equipment. They could also be performed close
to the training environment and easily administered within
a relatively short time. Nevertheless, the results obtained suggest
a high reliability for most of the evaluated tests as well as
a relatively low number of subjects needed to detect expected
changes in physical performance associated with training and
other procedures aimed toward improvement of sport perfor-
mance. Because of their face validity, the evaluated tests are
recommended not only for sport-specific profiling and early
selection of young athletes, but also for the regular assessment of
sport performance that is sensitive enough to detect effects of
various intervention procedures. The novel set of zigzag tests
could be particularly promising for performance assessment in
soccer players. However, direct measurement of the maximal
ball velocity (e.g., with a standard radar gun) is recommended in
the throwing-in and standing-kick tests, instead of the velocity
assessed by the distance travelled.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This study was supported in part by Serbian Research Council
grant 145082.
REFERENCES
1. Chamari, K, Hachana, Y, Ahmed, YB, Galy, O, Sghaier, F, Chatard,
JC, Hue, O, and Wisloff, T. Field and laboratory testing in young elite
soccer players. Br J Sports Med 38: 191196, 2004.
2. Cometti, G, Maffiuletti, NA, Pousson, M, Chatard, JC, and Maffulli,
N. Isokinetic strength and anaerobic power of elite, subelite and
amateur French soccer players. Int J Sports Med 22: 4551, 2001.
3. Dawson, B. Speed, agility and football. In: Communication to the Fifth
World Congress of Science and Football. Madrid, Editorial Gymnos,
2003. p. 14.
4. Hoff, J. Training and testing physical capacities for elite soccer
players. J Sports Sci 23: 573582, 2005.
5. Hopkins, WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science.
Sports Med 30: 115, 2000.
6. Jaric, S. Role of body size in the relation between muscle strength
and movement performance. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 31: 812, 2003.
7. Jaric, S, Mirkov, D, and Markovic, G. Normalization of muscle
strength and movement performance tests for body size: a proposal
for standardization. J Strength Cond Res 19: 467474, 2005.
8. Kolath, E and Quade, K. Measurement of sprinting speed of
professional and amateur soccer players. In: Science and Football II.
Reilly, T, Clarrys, J, and Stibbe, A, eds. London: E & FN Spon, 1993.
pp. 136.
the TM
1050 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
9. Krustrup, P, Mohr, M, Amstrup, T, Rysgaard, T, Johansen, J,
Steensberg, A, Pederson, PK, and Bangsbo, J. The yo-yo intermittent
recovery test: physiological response, reliability, and validity.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 35: 697705, 2003.
10. Kukolj, M, Ugarkovic, D, and Jaric, S. Profiling anthropometric
characteristics and functional performance of 12 to 18 year-
old elite junior soccer players. J Hum Mov Stud 45: 403418,
2003.
11. Little, T and Williams, AG. Specificity of acceleration, maximum
speed, and agility in professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res
19: 7678, 2005.
12. Lees, A and Nolan, L. The biomechanics of soccer: a review. J Sports
Sci 16: 211234, 1998.
13. Markovic, G, Dizdar, D, and Jaric, S. Evaluation of tests of
maximum kicking performance. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 46:
215220, 2006.
14. MacDougall, JD and Wenger, HA. The purpose of physiological
testing. In: Physiological Testing of the High-Performance Athlete.
MacDougall, JD, Wenger, HA, and Green, HJ, eds. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics, 1991. pp. 1 5.
15. McCrudden, M and Reilly, T. A comparison of the punt
and the drop-kick. In: Science and Football II. Reilly, T, Clarrys, J,
and Stibbe, A, eds. London: E & FN Spon, 1993. pp. 362368.
16. Ramsbottom, R, Brewer, J, and Williams, C. A progressive shuttle
run to estimate maximal oxygen uptake. Br J Sports Med 22(4):
141144, 1988.
17. Raven, P, Gettman, L, Pollock, M, and Cooper, K. A physiological
evaluation of professional soccer players. Br J Sports Med 109:
209216, 1976.
18. Reilly, T, Bangsbo, J, and Franks, A. Anthropometric and
physiological predispositions for elite soccer. J Sports Sci 18:
669683, 2000.
19. Reilly, T and Doran, D. Fitness assessment. In: Science and Soccer.
Reilly, T, and Williams, AM, eds. London: Routledge, 2003.
pp. 2146.
20. Reilly, T, Williams, AM, Nevill, A, and Franks, A. A multidisciplinary
approach to talent identification in soccer. J Sports Sci 18: 695702,
2000.
21. Schmidt, RA. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1999.
22. Stolen, T, Chamari, K, Castagna, C, and Wisloff, U. Physiology of
soccer: an update. Sports Med 35: 501536, 2005.
23. Strudwick, A, Reilly, T, and Doran, D. Anthropometric and fitness
profiles of elite players in two football codes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness
42: 239242, 2002.
24. Svensson, M and Drust, B. Testing soccer players. J Sports Sci 23:
601618, 2005.
25. Thomas, JR and Nelson, JK. Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2001.