Anthropometric traits and physical performance of amateur rugby players within specific playing positions

Article type: Research Article

Authors: Zabaloy, Santiago^{a; b; *} | Alcaraz, Pedro E.^c | Pereira, Lucas A.^{d; e} | Giráldez, Julián^a | González, Javier Gálvez^b | Loturco, Irineu^{d; e; f} | Freitas, Tomás T.^{c; d; g}

Affiliations: [a] Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports, University of Flores, Buenos Aires, Argentina | [b] Faculty of Sports Sciences, Pablo de Olavide University, Seville, Spain | [c] UCAM Research Center for High Performance Sport, Catholic University of Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain | [d] NAR – Nucleus of High Performance in Sport, São Paulo, SP, Brazil | [e] Department of Human Movement Sciences, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil | [f] University of South Wales, Pontypridd, Wales, UK | [g] Faculty of Sport Sciences, Catholic University of Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain

Correspondence: [*] Corresponding author: Santiago Zabaloy, Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports, University of Flores, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Tel: +54 11 4405 9303; E-mail: [email protected].

Abstract: BACKGROUND: This study examined the differences in physical and anthropometric traits between specific playing positions (i.e., forwards: front row, second row, back row; backs: half backs, centers, wings/fullbacks) in amateur rugby players and analyzed the magnitude of correlations among jump, sprint, and strength measures in forwards and backs. METHOD: Sixty-four male rugby players were assessed in anthropometrics, a variety of vertical jumps, 10- and 30-m sprint, and strength tests (i.e., squat and bench press). RESULTS: Front row forwards (FFR) demonstrated significantly higher body mass (BM) than second row (FSR) and back row (FBR) (107.4 ± 12.8, 99.1 ± 9.9 and 91.6 ± 7.6 kg respectively; p< 0.001). FFR showed greater absolute strength in bench press and squat, although no differences were found in relative strength. Regarding the differences in jump performance, FBR and FSR showed significantly (p< 0.05) and significant to non-significant (p= 0.042–0.078, ES = 0.90–1.55) higher jumps in all tasks compared to FFR. Moreover, FBR demonstrated lower sprint times and greater maximum sprinting speed (MSS) than FFR (p< 0.01). For the backs, centers (BCEN) were significantly heavier (p< 0.05) and exhibited a non-significantly moderate larger sprint momentum (p= 0.068, ES = 0.75) compared to half backs (BHB). MSS values were small to moderately greater in favor of wings/fullbacks [BWFB] (p= 0.188–0.059, ES = 0.50–0.71). Finally, statistically significant correlations were found between drop jump (flight time) and jump height across all jump tasks, sprint times and speed for both forwards (r= 0.541 to 0.996, p< 0.001) and backs (r= 0.422 to 0.995, p< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, FFR demonstrated significant, small to very large differences, when compared to their specific peers, whereas the backs were more similar. Additionally, our results indicated moderate to strong associations between explosive tasks such as sprinting and jumping in both playing positions.

Keywords: Physical performance, rugby union, testing, training

DOI: 10.3233/IES-210137

Journal: Isokinetics and Exercise Science, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 429-441, 2021