FC Bayern Forum

This is a question about footballer's physiscs in general whatever team, leauge or country they might play for/in. What is it with footballer or the game itself that requires several days between matches to recooperate? If you compare with ice hockey on top level they can easily play two matches in two days, the first one at home and the second away or only one day rest between matches. Som games goes to overtime which can go on for a long time before someone scores (sudden death). But footballers need 3-4 days rest between matches. Why is that? In ice hockey I have never heard players, coaches or the fans complain or argue about this. Nor that a player need some rest 'cause he has been playing a lot lately, unless they are injured or some other medical reason that force them to rest. I find it hard to believe that ice hockey is less physical demanding then football, not saying it's more physical either and definitely not saying that footballer's in any way are weaker than hockey player's.

This has also intrigued me as well. Even basketball players are able to play back to back nights in the regular NBA season.

Except the pitch measures are every day way smaller than football and tactics, strategy are fewer and smaller and you have time for every attack in most of the sports.

Firefox1234 wrote:This has also intrigued me as well. Even basketball players are able to play back to back nights in the regular NBA season.

Yes, and then we have Handball which is quiet physical but plays back to back or with less rest.

Fénix wrote:Except the pitch measures are every day way smaller than football and tactics, strategy are fewer and smaller and you have time for every attack in most of the sports.

Could be one explanation. But look at bandy, the pitch is about the same size as a football pitch and is performed by 11 players per team, playing 2 *45 minutes. Of course they sometimes rotate the player's but can easily play two days in a row. When it comes to tactics you're right about Basketball and Handball for example. You have more times to build up your offensive and defensive, but not when it comes to ice hockey when you're given no time att all to rest, wether you're defending or attacking. Wether one sport has less or more tactics or strategys to choose from I can't tell.

You can answer the question just by playing a single 90-minute match of football. It's as simple as the fact that the physical strain of covering 20-30km on foot can't be recuperated with one night's rest.

Also note that players sometimes DO come back to training after a matchday. The physical exertion of training isn't much less than that of the real matches so it shouldn't be said that footballers can't recover either.

Can't compare to hockey, you literally slide on ice.

In regards to basketball, the court is much smaller than a football pitch and there are subs throughout the game so nobody is running nonstop for 45 mins before a break. Also the games are much shorter. 4 quarters of 12 minutes in the NBA and 4 quarters of 10 minutes in European basketball.

I know it could be tricky to compare sports/athletics physics for several reasons. All practitioners regardless of sport on high level prepares differently depending what they are suppose to achive sportingly. Maybe it is so that sports on smaller fields, shorter games and subs throughout the game are less physically demanding than football or easier to recuperate from. I really can't say.