**3.2 Floating players during possession games**

There are not many studies performing POGs with different numbers of floaters. Asian-Clemente et al. [43] compared two formats (non-oriented area), with two floaters (both exercises were designed with the same relative area per player; 81 m<sup>2</sup> per player) and official matches (**Figure 5**). In both formats, players were divided into three teams. The POGs were classified on whether they exhibited a change of play area (POGca) or if there was no change of play area (POGnc). In both cases, floaters always have an offensive role, playing with teams in possession of the ball. During POGca, two teams played in a certain area (5 vs. 5 + 2) and when the attacking team scored 7 passes or the defensive team recovered the ball, they had to perform a pass to another zone where the third team was waiting the pressure of one of them. In POGnc, two teams played against one team (10 vs. 5 + 2). The aim of both games was to maintain ball possession until another team intercepted the ball or kicked it outside the pitch. Next, they had to exchange roles with the other team of five players (**Figure 5**). The authors concluded that POGca performed higher values regarding a greater total distance, high-speed, peak speed, and number of accelerations (> 3 m/seg2 ) and decelerations (<sup>&</sup>lt; 3 m/seg2 ) than POGnc. Comparing both exercises with match situation, POGs showed a significantly higher speed and an increased number of accelerations-decelerations [43].

#### **Figure 5.**

*Possession games designs with 5 vs 5 + 5 plus 2 floaters (extracted with permission from Asian-Clemente et al., 2021). In brackets, the width and length of the pitch used in each design (in meters).*

*Methodological Approach in the Development of Specific Games in Elite Soccer DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108399*

#### **Figure 6.**

*Possession game designs with 4 vs 4 and 4 vs 4 plus 2 floaters formats (extracted with permission from Asian-Clemente et al., 2022). In brackets, the width and length of the pitch used in each design (in meters).*

In another research, Lacome et al. [33] performed a study comparing POGs vs. SSGs with one floater (61–120 m2 per player). The authors reported that total distance, high-intensity distance (> 14.4 km/h), accelerations (>2 m/seg2 ), decelerations (<sup>&</sup>lt;2 m/seg2 ), and changes of direction were lower in the floaters compared with regular players independently of SSGs or POGs designs.

Another relevant information was recently obtained by the same authors utilizing 4 vs. 4 format (non-oriented area) with the incorporation of two floaters (<sup>120</sup>–150 m2 per player), who always assumed an offensive role during ball possession tasks [44]. They demonstrated that regular players completed a greater total distance and distance covered between 14 and 17.9 km/h than without floaters (**Figure 6**).

Regarding technical profiles during these exercises, studies from Mallo and Navarro [45] found that the introduction of wildcards in 3 vs. 3 formats (where the objective was to maintain possession of the ball) significantly reduced the number of contacts with the ball. Additionally, they found that error percentage in passes performed by the players retained no modification in heart rate response or locomotor activity.

#### **3.3 Technical-tactical outcomes**

Concerning inherent factors related to tactical and technical skills, there are some authors who studied the specific actions associated with each match effort during

"*ball possession"* and *"out-of-possession"* [46]. As previously described, the POGs' principles give rise to factors as *"concepts"* related to strategy and tactics, which have a greater transfer capacity toward specific match situations (**Figure 2**). The different variety of shapes and spaces facilitate the implementation of specific movement patterns. For instance, in "*the hexagon shape"* (**Figure 4**, POG#1), the attackers carry out actions of overlapping (player runs from behind to in front of or parallel to the player on the ball) to progress the collective movements and perform depth passes to opposite box to break into the adversary team lines. Meanwhile, defenders cover the spaces, closing down the opponent players, trying to cut out passes from them. In other designs of POG, *"the double diamond shape"* (**Figure 3**, POG#5) contemplates the attackers' actions of movements with depth (diagonal and vertical movements), swiftly enabling different sides profiles, with visual optimization and technical skill. Finally, the players must find a suitable pass to the opposite side considering always viewing the space beyond their immediate area. Moreover, the defensive team has specifics tasks, as a main one recovery of the ball by running in a collective way toward opponent players, attempting to intercept the ball and change spaces immediately to another triangle or diamond; in this manner, a possession sequence begins. There is a relevant concept to be considered when the team loses the ball: the team has no other choice but to reorganize and jump in to put pressure into recovering the ball as quickly as possible (**Figure 2**).

*A new tactical dimension starts when players take up specific role positions, trying to have a gravitational effect on their opponent by superiority, when a new approach of specific games is proposed: the "Positional Games."*

#### **4. The positional games**

The positional games (PGs) are performed with the objective of team ball possession in which the players have priority action areas based on their position in competition, where playing space is adapted to the player's usual context in matches, but without restricting the players'spatial exploration during the tasks [15]. These positional games require selected roles to position themselves intelligently (this design usually uses vertical and horizontal lines on the pitch, with each player assigned to a zone), and the team works dynamically and collectively in accordance (**Figure 7**).

Ball possession takes on a more tactical sense in the PGs: they attract the opponent to press in such a way that they must press on the offensive (persuading action), demonstrating at some point certain vulnerability on the defensive side. This will be the moment to act speedily to confront the opponent's moves and thus, finally, break the defense originated by opposing team (**Figure 7**). Therefore, ball possession is a constructed phenomenon, because it is a possession that aims to destabilize the opponent, eliminate rivals, and condition their defensive balance, forcing them to adjust constantly to these elements and thus play at their mercy rather than play as the rival would wish to do so.

In general, PGs are utilized with *"floating players,"* who encourage ball retention and generate numerical superiority for the team during ball possession [15]. The floaters intervene only on the offensive side, placing themselves in intelligent positions (most appropriate positioning for tactical resolution), thus favoring ball possession and attacking progression (**Figure 7**) [15].

Head coach and former player Gabriel Heinze considers PGs as *"A style of play, a team identity, a way of perceive training and competition, all of which require conviction on* *Methodological Approach in the Development of Specific Games in Elite Soccer DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108399*

#### **Figure 7.**

*Basic principles of the positional games. a) Ball possession by means of individual movements toward collective movements, b) visualize the playing context, retaining the ball and generating superiority in small spaces, c) attract the opponent and persuade them to press, d) the most appropriate floaters positioning for tactical resolutions during the attack, and e) passing sequence with other teammates or, alternatively, the possibility of ball conduction and progression in the game (Vilamitjana, J. & Heinze, G.).*

*the part of the coach."* At the same time, they also require faith and trust from the players; otherwise, these types of games will be difficult to implement.

#### **4.1 Relative playing area per player and player numbers: Physiological responses**

To the best of the author's knowledge, no previous references have been published in order to contrast PGs data with the other games. In one practical experience, a comparison of three formats of PGs (68–81.6 m2 per player, polarized area, 1–2 floaters) with official matches was carried out (**Figure 8**). On the one hand, the findings revealed that some metrics decreased progressively from PG1 to PG3 (PG1 > PG2 > PG3): 9.2–4.9% in meters per minute, 8.8–7.7% in player-load, and 4–3.2% in mean heart rate (171.8–164.8– 159.6 beats per min), respectively. On the other hand, high-intensity patterns increased progressively from PG1 to PG3 (PG3 > PG2 > PG1): distance above 19.9 km/h (4.7– 9.2%), and maximal speed (3.2–5.6%).

#### **Figure 8.**

*Positional game designs with floaters format studied by Vilamitjana, J., & Heinze, G. (under revision). In brackets, the width and length of the pitch used in each design (in meters).*

When PGs were compared with match situation, obtaining lower values of work rate profiles for each format on which the study was undertaken. Only parameters such as sprints, accelerations, and decelerations were higher in all formats compared with official matches. Finally, the conclusion was similar to those determined with SSGs: increasing the number of players and relative playing area per player would induce high-speed patterns, and it seems that when smaller games are compared with larger ones, with a higher number of players, these did not reach similar intensities and distances to those obtained during matches. In this context, it should be made clear that physical performance is important, but the tacticalcognitive conception that the players carry is what prevails the most in this type of game.

#### **4.2 Technical-tactical outcomes**

Beyond the physical and physiological performance, in order to achieve the principles described above, PGs have a high level of cognitive and technical skill requirements (**Figure 7**). To begin with, every player has a direct (with the ball) or indirect (without the ball) responsibility in relation to a defined tactical concept for each playing position. On the one hand, players without the ball must occupy certain spaces to provoke a determined, sought-after behavior in the opponents (attract the opponent and persuade them to press), either by jumping in to pressure the ball carrier or by maintaining proximity to their teammate with their mark. This facilitates the passing sequence with other teammates or, alternatively, the possibility of ball conduction and reach a *"progressive play."* On the other hand, the player with the ball has the intention of attracting the opponent's pressure to find free players located at different heights of the field (**Figure 7**).

Another relevant concept to be considered in PGs is "superiority" (numerical, qualitative, and positional) [47]. Numerical superiority is a team with possession overload in any area of the pitch (floaters help the team to generate this aspect). Qualitative superiority is when a player who is superior to their direct opponent isolates them in a 1 vs. 1 or 2 vs. 2 situations (it is relevant the movements from players without ball). Positional superiority involves getting players into positions between or behind the opposition lines, where they are most likely to have time and space relative to the ball. Consequently, the aforementioned superiority is more likely to affect the game (trying to find the free man directly or indirectly). Any player in a team using positional play can achieve one of these types of superiority, but everyone must sustain his or her specific playing role during the game (**Figure 7**). It is essential that this tactical concept is built from the back (first tactical line). For this reason, a fundamental principle of its idea of play is that the ball comes out cleanly from the defenders: From the first line, the different game positions will try to retain the ball generating superiority in small spaces (progress the ball forward through the creation of triangles or diamonds that give the ball-carrier space and several passing options at any given time). For instance, center-backs moving wide, trying to provoke that the forward of the opposing team jump in to press, which in turn creates a passing lane into the midfielders (in a higher position). Players need to be ready to move based on the movement of a teammate. This creates constant rotations that aim to disrupt the opposition.

The *"out-of-possession"* is a very important phase inside PGs, because on account that the team has to reorganize and jump in rapidly to put pressure on the opponent (in coordination with all lines of tactical positioning). It is considered a similar

*Methodological Approach in the Development of Specific Games in Elite Soccer DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108399*


#### **Figure 9.**

*Positional game designs with floaters format (extracted with permission from Casamichana et al., 2018). In brackets, the width and length of the pitch used in each design (in meters).*

concept to the one described previously in POGs, even though there exist specific outof-possession strategies employed by the teams using this style of game.

#### **4.3 Floater players during positional games**

The implementation of floaters during PGs facilitates ball possession and consequently, generates numerical superiority for the team retaining the ball [48]. Casamichana et al. [15] studied the kinematic demands imposed on floaters and regular players in addition to comparing the demand imposed on wildcards in different PGs formats (<sup>20</sup>–74 m2 per player respectively) (**Figure 9**). The main conclusion that resulted was that floaters imposed lower intensities than regular players in high metabolic distance (> 25.5 W.kg), but this difference was smaller in PG1 and larger in PG4 format. Moreover, the demand imposed on floater players in PGs that were studied also revealed the following differences: there were a greater number of accelerations and decelerations in the smaller format (PG1) compared with the larger formats (PG3- PG4), while total distance covered and high metabolic distance were greater in the larger formats (PG3-PG4) compared with the smaller ones (PG1-PG2) (**Figure 9**).

#### **5. Conclusions**

There are a considerable number of designs within the three types of games described in this chapter to be taken advantage of. During these specific types of exercise, "*ball possession sequence"* is a typical common denominator to be considered. In particular, SSGs appear to be a basic concept in which all the game's elements interact in a flexible way: the aim of the task is to maintain ball possession, but the disposition of the players is not preset, and the occupation of the spaces is not predetermined. In another approach, there are POGs where the players who maintain possession of the ball are positioned in such a way that the interrelation among them

and the space is as efficient as possible. Hence, free spaces are generated by individual and collective movements, which make the ball possession *"progress"* with greater fluidity, with a particular direction and purpose. Finally, we have PGs that count with a higher level of cognitive and technical skill requirements. In these games, ball possession takes on a more tactical sense, in which the players have priority action areas based on their position in competition.
