Effects of a Numerical Superiority and Numerical Inferiority Tactical Training Program Compared With Conventional Training on Procedural Tactical Knowledge and Executive Functions in Soccer Players
Phase: NA
Conditions: Decision Making in Soccer Players and Executive Functions
Sponsor: Universidad de Antioquia

Effects of a Numerical Superiority and Inferiority Tactical Training Program Compared to 
Conventional Training on Procedural Tactical Knowledge and Executive Functions in 
Soccer Players. A Randomized Controlled Trial 
 
 
 
 
Date: September 9th, 2023 
  
 
 

Protocol 
There is a great need to establish reliable evaluation and intervention protocols to 
improve the tactical component, decision making (TD) and procedural tactical knowledge 
(PTK) in Soccer. 
Objectives 
To determine the effects of a tactical training program of numerical superiority and 
inferiority during 12 weeks of follow-up on the PTK, which will be evaluated by 
calculating offensive, defensive and global effectiveness indices (EI) of 24 male amateur 
soccer players, as well as the effect on their executive functions. 
Type of study 
The study corresponds to a predominantly quantitative approach. According to 
Friedman et al., (2010) it is a prospective, experimental study, in parallel, with 2 
randomized groups (experimental and control). The study is a repeated measures design 
because measurements of the most important outcomes (primary and secondary) will be 
performed at four times: pretest (week 1), intermediate test 1 (week 6), intermediate test 2 
(week 11) and posttest (week 16). 
Site Selection (Context and Access) 
The study is being carried out with soccer players from a club that competes in the 
Antioquia Soccer League who train on fields in the city of Medellín, which are made of 
synthetic grass and natural grass. These fields are in good condition and offer adequate 
technical conditions and security for soccer players. 
Population 
The investigation is being carried out with amateur soccer players, male, in the First B 
departmental category. 
Selection criteria 
Inclusion criteria 
Soccer players belonging to a soccer club. 

Soccer players playing roles of outfield (all except goalkeepers). 
They compete in the First B category of the Antioquia Football League in the 2023 season. 
Players aged between 17 and 26 years. 
Players with at least six months of experience in federated soccer. 
Players who do not present cognitive disorders that make learning difficult, which can be 
identified through monitoring by the coaches and/or tests carried out by the 
Neuropsychology staff. 
They must be affiliated to the health system of the contributory or subsidized regime. 
They must agree to participate in the study after knowing and signing the consent or 
informed assent as appropriate. 
Exclusion criteria 
Players with musculoskeletal disorders at the time of sample selection. 
Players recovering from injury. 
Sample Size Calculation 
A systematic probabilistic sampling of permuted blocks was carried out, for which 
the Epidat software, V. 4.2, was be used. Taking into account the study by Sierra-Ríos et 
al., (2020) in which they report a mean difference of 1.13 and a standard deviation of 0.81, 
5 scenarios were established to calculate the sample size (with powers of 80, 85, 90, 95 and 
99%). Based on these five scenarios, the samples found are: 
Scenario 1 (80% power): (20 soccer players. GE = 10 and GC = 10). 
Scenario 2 (85% power): (22 soccer players. GE = 11 and GC = 11). 
Scenario 3 (90% power): (24 soccer players. GE = 12 and GC = 12). 
Scenario 4 (95% power): (30 soccer players. GE = 15 and GC = 15). 
Scenario 5 (99% power): (40 soccer players. GE = 20 and GC = 20). 

Based on these results of the calculation of different sample sizes, it decided to work with 
scenario 3 described above. 
Randomization Process 
To carry out the randomization sequence generation method, a sequence of 
permuted blocks of 4, 6 was generated. The relationship between groups is 1:1, for which 
the random assignment software (simulation) was used https:/ 
/www.sealedenvelope.com/simple-randomiser/v1/lists. 
The allocation was concealed by means of sealed and opaque envelopes, for which 
the 24 envelopes were available for each one of the participants. The envelopes were 
numbered from 1 to 24, the name of each research participant was added to them along 
with a sheet of carbon paper and the name of each research participant was marked for each 
intervention experimental group (GE) and control group (GC). This process of 
randomization sequence generation, allocation concealment, and allocation was performed 
by someone other than the research staff. 
Variables 
The study’s variables, their operationalization, function, nature, measurement scales, units 
of measurement and instruments used are described in Table 1. 
Table 1. Variables and their operationalization 
Variable 
Function 
Nature 
Scale 
Unit of 
measurement/values 
Instrument 
PTK (Offensive 
IE) 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Volumen (N° of times 
the action is performed) 
FOCOS 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
IE (*formula) 
PTK (IE 
Defensive) 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Volumen N° of times 
the action is performed) 
FOCOS 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
IE (**formula) 
PTK (IE global) 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
IE (***formula) 
FOCOS 
Executive 
functions 
"component" 1 
Problem solving 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Number of Hits/Errors 
 
Tower of 
Hanoi 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
Time (sec, min) 
"component" 2 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Number of Hits/Errors 
Tower 
of 
Hanoi  

Cognitive 
flexibility 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
Time (sec, min) 
"Component" 3 
Impulse control 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Number of Hits/Errors 
 
Stroop test 
"component" 4 
Visuospatial 
working memory 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Number of Hits/Errors 
Corsi Cubes 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
Time (sec, min) 
"Component" 5 
Executive 
Attention 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
Time (sec, min) 
Trail 
Making Test 
(TMT) 
“component 6” 
Sustained 
attention 
 
Dependent 
Quantitative 
Discrete, 
interval 
Number of Hits/Errors 
Crossing out 
boxes 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
Time (sec, min) 
Age 
Confounding 
Quantitative 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
Years and months 
Survey 
Sports age 
Confounding 
Quantitative 
Continuos 
Years 
Survey 
Playing position 
Confounding 
Qualitative 
Nominal 
Lateral, Central, 
Midfielder, Winger, 
Forward 
Survey 
 
Socioeconomic 
Confounding 
 
Qualitative 
 
Ordinal 
 
Scale from 1 to 6 
Bill of public 
services 
of 
the house 
Educational level 
Confounding 
Qualitative 
Ordinal 
School grade 
Survey 
Mass 
Confounding 
Quantitative 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
(kg) 
Scale 
Height 
Independent 
Quantitative 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
(cm) 
Stadiometer 
IMC 
Confounding 
Quantitative 
Continuos, 
Ratio 
(kg/mˆ2) 
Equation 
Mental fatigue 
Confounding 
Qualitative 
Ordinal 
Scale from 0 to 100 
Question 
 
Notes: 
*Offensive effectiveness indices (IE) = Sum of the IE of the offensive tactical behaviors/Number of 
categories in which the soccer player developed offensive tactical behaviors. 
** Defensive IE = Sum of the IE of the defensive tactical behaviors/N° of categories in which the 
Soccer players developed defensive tactical behaviors 
*** Global IE = Offensive IE + Defensive IE/2  
Masking 
People who carry out the assessments are masked (they do not know which group 
the athletes were assigned to). In order to carry out an adequate strategy to control 
information biases, the professionals who carry out the evaluations are masked (blinding). 
Consequently, the evaluators of the primary, secondary, and exploratory outcomes were 
masked as follows: 

PTK (offensive, defensive, and global IE) (expert soccer coach, licensed A soccer 
coach from the Colombian Federation, video analyst with excellent knowledge and 
management of videoanalysis’s software such as Nacsport and he is an expert of 
observation categories and trained in the FOCOS (Football Competence Observation 
System) evaluation instrument, as well as in the management of the LINCE PLUS 
software). 
Executive functions (problem solving, cognitive flexibility, impulse control, 
visuospatial working memory, executive attention, and sustained attention). These 
evaluations are developed by the neuropsychologist. 
Professional who carry out the anthropometric evaluations is masked, she is 
researcher with training in sports training and use of scales and height rods. 
Person who applies the survey to the soccer players to inquire about the 
sociodemographic characteristics of the population is masked too. 
In the same way, the professional who asking to the research participant are masked 
too, which inquiries about the level of mental fatigue that they perceive just before the 
evaluations of executive functions and the FOCOS test. 
The evaluations are carried out by expert professionals, with training and experience 
in each of the areas as described in the previous section, which guarantees their reliability. 
The evaluators of each of the areas mentioned above only carry out the tests (pretest and 
posttest) and intermediate tests 1 and 2 for the offensive, defensive, and global IE. These 
evaluators will report the results to the principal researcher, who in turn will file them on a 
personal computer with a password so that no one else has access to the information and 
will make backup copies in the cloud. In this way, this level of the investigation will be 
masked. Subsequently, the principal researcher will send the data to the statistician to 
proceed with data processing and information analysis. 
In the same way, the statistician who will analyze the data will be masked, in this 
sense, the statistician will not know the identity of the participants he is analyzing, he will 
process data from coded subjects. The statistician will also not know to which comparison 

group the data of the participants he will analyze belongs. In this way, 2 levels of the study 
will be masked (evaluators and data analysis). 
Ethical aspects 
The guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki (updated at the 64th general assembly 
in Fortaleza in 2013) and of the Ministry of Health and Social Protection of Colombia 
through resolution 8430 of 1993 will be followed. All measures will be provided to 
guarantee the confidentiality of the data of the participants by assigning codes. All 
participants and their legal representatives (for minors) were informed of the particularities 
of the research through informed consent and/or assent regarding exposures, expected 
results, and contributions to the academic and sports field. The results obtained will be 
returned to the participants, their relatives and/or legal representatives and the participating 
soccer club. The endorsement of the research bioethics committee of the Institute of 
Physical Education and Sport (IUEFD) was obtained (ACEI 39-2023, June 20th, 2023). The 
present investigation is classified in the category of minimum risk according to article 11 of 
resolution 8430 of 1993 of the Ministry of Health of Colombia. In any case, the 
development of this research does not represent an additional risk to the activities, training 
sessions and competitions in which the soccer players participate daily. 
Interventions (GE and GC Training Plans) 
GE (Tactical Training in Numerical Superiority and Inferiority) 
The participants of the GE will carry out a specific training program, with the 
objective of improving both offensive and defensive technical and tactical action (ATT) 
that allow the increase of the IE (offensive and defensive). The formats through which the 
GE subjects will train are Small Sided Games (SSGs) and ATT 2v1, 3v2 and 4v3, 
alternating them during the week (SSGs on Tuesdays and ATT on Thursdays). It is 
important to mention that, in terms of physical demand, the training through these 2v1 and 
3v2 formats are similar, and therefore, can be assimilated in part, to those proposed by 
Casamichana and Castellano (2016) to the SSGs of level 14 and level 16 (on a scale from 1 
to 20, with 20 being those with the greatest physical demand), in which the JER of 1v1 and 
2v2 present the following specifications: Level 14: 2 series X 6 repetitions X 1'30” of 

exercise X 1' 30” pause (total 12 repetitions of SSGs) and Level 16: 2 series X 7 repetitions 
X 1'30” of exercise X 1'30” of rest (total 14 repetitions of SSGs). 
Regarding the game area in which the training sessions will be carried out through 
SSGs, the classification made by García et al., (2019) will be used as a reference, in which 
they state that for a game to be considered reduced, 34mˆ2 must be allocated to each player 
(approximately 7m X 5m). These authors suggest that the 3v2 SSGs should be developed in 
an area of approximately 168.75mˆ2 to 170mˆ2 (12.5m X 13.5m). In the same way, they 
propose that the SSGs of 4v3 should be carried out in an area of approximately 238mˆ2 to 
240mˆ2 (15m X 16m). Although these authors do not propose a specific area for the SSGs 
2c1, a space correspondence can be made following these same guidelines; In this way, the 
JER 2c1 can be developed in an area of approximately 102mˆ2 to 100mˆ2 (10m X 10m). In 
this study, SSGs training will be carried out in the following areas:  
2v1: 11.5m long and 9m wide (total: 103.5mˆ2), equivalent to 34.5mˆ2 for each player. 
3v2: 14m long and 12m wide (total: 168mˆ2), equivalent to 33.6mˆ2 for each player. 
4v3: 17m long and 14m wide (total: 238mˆ2), equivalent to 34mˆ2 for each player. 
The characteristics of this training program are training frequency 5 times/week, 
plus 1 competition on weekends, frequency of stimulation of the SSGs and ATT of 
numerical superiority and inferiority 2 times/week, the specific training time assigned to the 
development of these formats and exercises will be from 30 to 42 minutes/training session 
and will be carried out after the set-up (warm-up). The total volume of the program is 920 
minutes. 
The SSGs (2v1, 3v2 and 4v3) that will take place on Tuesdays have a specific 
duration and can be easily controlled. However, the executions of the ATT (2v1, 3v2 and 
4v3) that will be carried out on Thursdays, do not have a specific duration because it will 
depend on the dynamics of each repetition, which normally do not exceed 20 seconds. It is 
important to mention that, during the application of the stimuli (SSGs and ATT) no one 
from the coaching staff will provide feedback, or corrections to the soccer players in order 
to feedback does not become confusing variables. In addition, during the executions of the 

SSGs, there will be balls and personnel around them to supply balls when they leave the 
pitch and, in this way, guarantee their continuity so that the training time is effective. 
In the event that one of the subgroups is missing player(s) to perform the repetitions 
set out in the protocol, due to any circumstance (non-attendance to the session, physical 
discomfort, momentary bruises, injury or unexpected situations), their replacement will be 
arranged with other soccer players who are not part of any of the comparison groups (GE 
and GC), they can be students of the IUEFD of the University of Antioquia (UdeA) with 
experience as soccer players and who previously know the ATT to be developed and also 
soccer players who are on trial within the team. For the registration, quantification and 
monitoring of the number of repetitions, a coach will be arranged so that each time the 
soccer players in each of their subgroups execute a repetition, he will write it down on 
forms designed for that purpose. Once the participants have completed the number of 
repetitions stated in the protocol, this coach will finish this part of the training. 
After the specific stimuli oriented to actions and situations of numerical superiority 
and inferiority, the coaches will possibly perform other training stimuli not considered in 
the study; however, they will be asked not to perform additional JER or ATT training in 
numerical superiority and inferiority, nor ATT 1v1, 2v2, or 3v3 during the duration of the 
experiment to avoid co-interventions that could generate bias. It is important to mention 
that the coach who will execute the EG training program will be different from the one who 
will execute the CG training program to avoid intervention bias. 
GC (Conventional Training of ATT in numerical equality) 
The CG participants will perform conventional training. In the present study, ATTs 
that are performed in numerical equality in 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3 formats are called 
conventional training. Similarly, coaches will be asked not to carry out additional specific 
training with these formats, nor offensive or defensive SSGs or ATT in numerical 
superiority or inferiority, specifically in 2v1, 3v2, or 4v3 formats, during the duration of the 
study, to avoid confounding biases due to possible co-interventions. This GC training 
program will include individual, pair and trio ATTs. 

The characteristics of this training program are training frequency 5 times/week, 1 
official competition on weekends, ATT stimulation frequency in 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3 formats 
is 2 times/week, the specific training time assigned it will be 40 minutes per training 
session and will be done after the set-up (warm-up). The total volume of the program is 960 
minutes. As mentioned above, the coach that will execute the CG training program will be 
different from the one that will execute the GE training program. As with the provisions of 
the GE, for the CG a coach will also be assigned to register, quantify, and monitor the 
training stimuli of this group, who will record it in forms designed for this purpose. 
The training sessions, both for the GE and CG, will take place on synthetic and 
natural grass pitches, which are in good condition to guarantee the normal development of 
the practices. If for some reason of force majeure, the training session cannot be carried out 
on the day assigned within the protocol, an attempt will be made to carry it out the 
following day, that is, Tuesday session would be performed on Wednesday and Thursday 
session would be performed on Friday, thus guaranteeing the weekly specific stimulation 
frequency (FEES). The exercises will be carried out with GOLTY N°5 balls. 
Information Collection Instruments 
To evaluate the primary, secondary, exploratory outcomes and the confounding 
variables, a battery of tests and protocols will be carried out, which are described below. 
PTK (Offensive IE, Defensive IE, Global IE) 
The PTK will be evaluated through the FOCOS test. This test evaluates all the 
actions in attack (21 actions) and all the actions in defense (10 actions) through which the 
offensive score, defensive score and total score are obtained and with these scores the IE is 
calculated (offensive, defensive and global) of each participant and each group. 
Likewise, strengths, weaknesses, aspects to improve in each tactical behavior and/or 
phase of play can be determined according to the role (attacker with the ball, attacker 
without the ball in the center of the play, attacker without the ball outside the center of the 
play, defender to intervene in space, defender in the center of the play and defender outside 
the center of the play). Likewise, the actions are evaluated according to the subrole, in 
attack: ball control, driving, dribbling, passing, shooting, ball circulation and positioning 

and in defense: tackle, interception, deterrence and relocation. In the same way, the 
operational principles are evaluated, in attack: maintaining possession of the ball, 
progressing towards the rival goal and scoring a goal, and in defense: recovering possession 
of the ball, avoiding the progression of the opponent and protecting the goal. Similarly, the 
specific principles are evaluated, in attack: penetration, offensive coverage, mobility in 
depth, width and length, and in defense: retardation, defensive coverage, balance, 
concentration and defensive unity. In addition, the result of the action can be established, 
both in defense and in attack, it is determined if the action in general was successful or 
wrong. If there are doubts in the valuation for any reason, it is qualified as improbable or 
that there are doubts. 
FOCOS is a field test that allows evaluating soccer players in their natural and 
contextual environment through specific soccer situations, which guarantees its ecological 
validity. 2 goalkeeper teams (P) + 4 v 4 + P are formed. There are 2 games of 4 minutes X 
1 minute pause between each game. The authors of FOCOS propose 2 formats with 
different playing areas depending on the age of the players. For children under 12 years old 
(25mt X 30mt and 6mt X 2mt goals) and for people over 12 years old (33mt X 40mt and 
7.32mt X 2.44mt goals). In this research the format for over 12 years will be used. 
It is important to indicate that the test is controlled and monitored by an expert 
coach, who has academic training at the doctoral level in the area of sports training, with 
practical experience as a former soccer player at a professional level, with more than 20 
years of experience as a soccer coach and Licensed as a CONMEBOL PRO soccer coach, 
also trained in the FOCOS evaluation protocol, carried out by means of previous readings 
of the protocol, conversations with the author of the test, and carrying out three pilot tests, 
which allowed to refine, standardize, and modify the test looking for better performance of 
the soccer players. 
To obtain the data, the games must be filmed with a camera and later, carry out the 
respective analyzes and evaluations. In the present investigation, a DJI Fly drone is used, 
which is positioned 20m high just behind one of the goals, this location guarantees 
complete visibility of the ATTs executed by the participants and full coverage of the pitch. 
Once all the corresponding games have been filmed, the videos are downloaded, which are 

sent to the video analyst who will carry out the respective analysis and data report in the 
database created for this purpose. For the analysis, the video analyst will use the LINCE 
PLUS video analysis software (Soto et al., 2019), which is available and freely accessible. 
The FOCOS units of measure are: 
Volume, which corresponds to the number of times the soccer player develops tactical 
behaviors in each category. 
The IE is determined through the following formula: 
IE = Volume of successful tactical behaviors/Number of tactical behaviors developed in 
each category of analysis 
 
Offensive IE = Sum of the IE of offensive tactical behaviors/Number of categories in which 
the soccer player developed offensive tactical behaviors 
 
Defensive IE = Sum of the IE of defensive tactical behaviors/Number of categories in which 
the soccer player developed defensive tactical behaviors 
 
Global IE = Offensive IE + Defensive IE/2 
 
The global IE represents the PTK of each soccer player. 
The authors of FOCOS report that the design of the instrument was carried out in 
six stages: review of the literature and provisional development of the observation system, 
reconfiguration of the instrument, content validity, simplification of the instrument, 
reliability, and construct validity. The content validity was obtained through a qualitative 
approach through consensus agreement of three experts, who had to meet at least two of the 
following three characteristics: having more than 10 years of experience in training, being a 
graduate in physical activity sciences and sports with a specializing in soccer, being active 
coaches with a professional level qualification. To do this, they applied a Likert-type scale 
(from 1 to 10) through the Delphi Methodology using the content validity coefficient. 
Similarly, the instrument was quantitatively analyzed calculating intra-observer reliability, 
for which Cohen's Kappa was used. Similarly, to establish inter-observer reliability, the 

Kappa Fleiss index was used. In addition, the construct validity was calculated through the 
Student t test for independent samples. 
To calculate the content validity coefficient, the averages of the two factors used 
with the group of experts were calculated following the Delphi methodology, the degree of 
agreement obtained was 8.74 out of 10 (very high content validity) in relation to the clarity 
of the language, established through the question, to what extent do you consider that the 
definition is well developed and exclusive with respect to the other categories of the 
criterion?, on the other hand, the degree of adequacy that represents the practical and 
theoretical relevance obtained it was 9.3 out of 10 (very high), which was determined 
through the question, to what extent do you think the category should form part of the 
criterion? from these two factors, the validity of the total content of the test was obtained 
9.02 out of 10 (very high). Consequently, the authors report very high total content validity. 
Following the same procedure, they determined the content validity of "general tactical 
behavior", obtaining a score of 9.4 out of 10 (very high). 
The construct validity of the instrument was calculated from its perspective of 
discriminant validity, which allows measuring the degree of the instrument to differentiate 
between groups of soccer players that are expected to be different. To do this, they 
compared two independent samples (semi-professional soccer players and amateur soccer 
players). The data were analyzed using the student t test for independent samples and the 
results showed significant differences (p ≤ 0.05). In addition, they calculated the effect size 
(ES) using Cohen's d to assess the magnitude of the difference between groups of soccer 
players (Cohen, 1988). According to the Hopkins et al. (2009) established the ES as (very 
large: d = >2; large: d = 1.2 to 2.0; moderate: d = 0.6 to 1.2; small: d = 0.2 to 0.6 and 
trivial: d = 0 to 0.2). The results showed values between 1.08 and 2.32 in favor of the group 
of semi-professional soccer players, except for 1 variable that showed differences in favor 
of the group of amateur soccer players. 
The calculation of the intra-observer stability index was carried out through test-
retest reliability, for which Cohen's Kappa (k) was applied to the data extracted with a 
difference of five weeks in the evaluation of both records. The results showed an agreement 
index of K = 0.747 considered as a good agreement (Altman, 1991). 

For the present research, the calculation of the intra-observer stability index will be 
carried out through the test-retest reliability with a difference of five weeks between both 
observations. For this, the videos and ATT of two soccer players will be observed and the 
results will be compared through the Kappa index (k). When the evaluator (video analyst) 
obtains an agreement considered good (0.61 - 0.80) or very good (0.81 – 1.00) (Altman, 
1991, slightly adapted from Landish and Koch, 1977), the videos will be evaluated and 
record the respective data. 
The inter-observer reliability of FOCOS was calculated using the inter-observer 
agreement coefficient for more than two observers (n = 3). In this case, the Kappa Fleiss 
was applied. The results showed a concordance coefficient of K = 0.766 considered as a 
good agreement. 
The PTK evaluations will take place on the synthetic grass field of the UdeA. 
Executive functions 
Problem Solving (Component 1). This component is evaluated through the Tower of 
Hanoi test, which evaluates people's planning, control, and organization capacity. The 
evaluator takes into account the number of movements that the subject must make to 
achieve the final configuration, as well as the number of errors made, and the time spent to 
solve the problem. The application of the test lasts approximately 15 minutes. 
Cognitive Flexibility (Component 2). Like problem solving, cognitive flexibility is 
assessed through the Tower of Hanoi test as described above. 
Impulse Control (Component 3). This component is evaluated through the Stroop test, 
which is an attentional test that evaluates the ability to resist verbal interference, in the 
same way, it evaluates the ability to classify information from the environment and react 
selectively to it. The evaluator takes into account the number of hits of the participant. The 
application of the test lasts approximately 10 minutes. 
Visuospatial Working Memory (Component 4). This component is evaluated through the 
Corsi Cube test, which evaluates short-term visuospatial memory and consists of 
remembering increasing sequences of cube touches. The number of hits of the sequences 

performed by the participants and the execution time are recorded. The application of the 
test lasts approximately 15 minutes. 
Executive Attention (Component 5). This component is evaluated through the Trail 
Making Test (TMT). This test assesses visual attention and task switching, as well as visual 
search speed, scanning and processing speed, mental flexibility, and executive functioning. 
The time to complete the test is recorded. The application of the test lasts approximately 7 
minutes. 
Sustained Attention (Component 6). It is evaluated through the Crossing Out of Boxes 
with non-verbal stimulation, it consists of presenting to the participant a matrix of 140 
squares with a line placed in different positions on one of the sides or angles of each box. 
The participants must cross out as quickly as possible the figures that were equal to three 
stimuli placed at the top of the sheet. There is an example, in which the evaluator must 
make sure that the participant has understood the instructions. The number of correct 
answers (maximum 48), the number of errors due to omission, the errors due to 
commission and the time are scored. The application of the test lasts approximately 5 
minutes. 
All the previously mentioned tests to evaluate executive functions are carried out 
both at the beginning and at the end of the interventions, they last approximately between 
50 and 60 minutes and they are coordinated by the neuropsychologist, applying the 
protocols of each one of them. All these tests will be carried out at the IUEFD of the UdeA. 
To evaluate the sociodemographic characteristics of the population, a survey is 
applied with simple questions to determine age, sporting age, playing position, 
socioeconomic stratum, and educational level. This survey is carried out by one of the 
researchers at the beginning and at the end of the interventions and is carried out at the 
IUEFD. If necessary, supporting documents will be requested such as an identity document, 
study certificate or degree certificate, and utility bill for the home. 
Anthropometric Variables 
Mass. It was measured using a bioelectrical impedance balance, brand Omron® HBF-510 
(Bannockburn, IL, USA), which has a sensitivity of 100 grams. The participants were 

measured in resting conditions, free of clothes and shoes (shorts only) and without carrying 
any metallic object (electronic devices, keys, jewelry, watches, piercing). 
Size. It was measured using a stadiometer, Seca 213, with a sensitivity of 1 millimeter. The 
participants were measured in resting conditions, free of clothes and shoes (only in shorts). 
The mass and height evaluations were carried out by a researcher trained in sports training 
and familiar with the use of scales and stadiometers. The measurements are made both at 
the beginning and at the end of the interventions and they are carried out in the Integrated 
Laboratory of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences (LICAFDE). 
Body Mass Index (BMI). It will be found by calculating the formula mass/heightˆ2 
(kg/mtˆ2). The BMI calculations will be made both at the beginning and at the end of the 
interventions with the respective data that shows the mass and height. 
Pilot Testing Procedures 
Several pilot tests were carried out to familiarize and sensitize all the people 
involved in the study (soccer players, coaches, researchers, and assistants). Likewise, it is 
important that everyone knows the people with whom they are going to interact, the places 
of training and evaluation, the contexts, norms, and regulations that must be complied, 
procedures and protocols for evaluation and intervention, equipment, technology, software, 
materials, and clothing to use. 
Regarding the training plans (intervention protocols) to be compared, pilot tests of 
the training sessions were implemented in the same way as established in the protocols and 
with the same people responsible of each activity. The coaches will carry out the exercises 
and sessions of the GE and GC following the parameters of the stimuli, repetitions, volume, 
order, sequence, behavior, registration, and verification of compliance established in the 
protocol. 
Participants will carry out the exercises and sessions as indicated by the coaches. 
Three weeks of training were carried out simulating the conditions described in the 
protocols (GE and GC). In week 1, the 2v1 JER and ATT formats were taking place, in 
week 2 the 3v2 SSGs and ATT formats were developed, and in week 3 the 4v3 SSGs and 

ATT formats were taking place. These pilot tests were carried out with the same group 
under investigation during the last month prior to the start of the research. 
Similarly, pilot tests of the FOCOS evaluation protocol were carried out. In this 
sense, the tests were carried out under the same conditions as set out in the protocol 
described above, on the same field, at the same time and with the people in charge of 
carrying out each of the activities (coaches, filming the test and assistants), in the same 
way, these pilot tests were carried out with the same participants with which the research 
will be carried out to familiarize the soccer players. Regarding the equipment, the 
procedures were also standardized with the same drone to be used and with the same person 
who will handle the drone during the investigation and, in addition, with the same 
implementation and clothing such as balls, demarcation cones and training bibs. 
Once the pilot test has been carried out and the videos of the SSGs of the FOCOS 
test have been obtained, the principal researcher will deliver them to the ATT and PTK 
evaluator (video analyst), so that through the LINCE PLUS video analysis software he can 
carry out the respective evaluations and record the data in the respective information bases. 
In this phase of the investigation, the evaluator must be fully familiar and trained in the 
management of the software and the ATT of the participants to determine their general 
tactical behavior. To achieve reliability in this process, the evaluator (video analyst) will be 
calculated the intra-observation stability index, which will be carried out through the test-
retest reliability, for which Cohen's Kappa (k) of the data will be applied with a difference 
of five weeks in the evaluation of both records. When the evaluator obtains an agreement 
considered good (0.61 - 0.80) or very good (0.81 – 1.00) the videos will be evaluated and 
record the respective data. 
Data Collection Procedures (Assessment Protocols) 
To evaluate the PTK (offensive IE, defensive IE and global IE) the FOCOS test will 
was applied and it was carried out through the following protocol: the groups of soccer 
players were formed randomly. To randomize the participants and form the groups, the 
random assignment software https://www.sealedenvelope.com/simple-randomiser/v1/lists 
was used. In the same way, the teams that face each other were randomized so that it is 
chance that defines the formation of the groups and the confrontation of these. 

The soccer players were undergoing conditioning to start the test, which consists of 
joint mobility and flexibility exercises for 10 minutes, basic technique exercises (passing, 
controls, driving, dribbling and shots) for 7 minutes and short sprint, struggles and disputes 
for the ball for 3 minutes. In total, this set-up phase lasts 20 minutes. Then they were 
assigned two minutes to finish getting ready, organizing, and getting ready for the 
execution of the test. 
Next, the SSGs goalkeeper (P)+4 v 4+P proposed and validated by Sánchez-López 
et al., (2021 and 2023) carried out. However, to try to correct some of the limitations 
declared by these same authors (2023), and with the purpose of guaranteeing better 
conditions of execution by the participants, some modifications were made to the protocol, 
specifically in relation to the pause between the 2 games of 4 minutes, they gave to the 
soccer players one minute. In this study, a four-minute break was given between games to 
guarantee a greater recovery and that the participants were in better condition to develop 
their tactical behaviors. In the same way, the limitation related to the time of the training 
session in which the test was carried out was modified. In this study, it was carried out at 
the beginning of the session, guaranteeing that the participants were in adequate conditions, 
without fatigue generated by actions or previous exercises (in the study by Sánchez et al., 
2023 they carried out the test in the final part of training session). 
The test carried out following the general rules of soccer 11, except for the offside 
rule, with the purpose of reducing the number of interruptions and that the effective playing 
time is high, even though this may impact positional behavior of the participants. In 
addition, there were no throw-ins when the ball goes over the sideline, these were replaced 
by goal kicks from the team opposite the one that sent the ball out of play to speed up play, 
just like when the ball goes over the end line. When a participant commits an infraction, it 
was restarted with a serve by the goalkeeper of the team that received the infraction. 
Sufficient balls were available around the field of play and auxiliaries to supply them 
quickly in order to guarantee continuity in the game. The teams wear bibs to distinguish 
themselves from the rival team. The test carried out with GOLTY N°5 balls. 
The test (pretest) was carried out on the synthetic turf field of the UdeA and the 
same evaluation conditions will be maintained in the four moments proposed in the 

research protocol, that is, pretest (week 1), intermediate test 1 (week 6), test intermediate 2 
(week 11) and posttest (week 16). Likewise, the groups formed randomly and the 
confrontation between them determined by chance at all test will be respected. If for any 
reason a participant cannot take the test due to any circumstance (absence at the session, 
physical discomfort, momentary bruises, injury or unexpected situations), his replacement 
will be arranged with IUEFD student with experience as soccer players and who previously 
know the protocol to complete the gap, or with soccer players who are on trial at the club 
and who are not part of the comparison groups. The tests will be carried out on Wednesday 
from 6 to 8 in the morning in the respective weeks (1, 6, 11 and 16). 
Once the tests have been completed and duly filmed, the respective videos will be 
passed on to the evaluator (video analyst) who will download the videos, analyze the 
different actions and behaviors developed by each of the participants through the LINCE 
PLUS video analysis software and record the data in Excel files in the database created for 
this purpose. This database will be created in such a way that a code is generated for the 
participants and no one can identify who the information registered and consigned there 
corresponds to (except the main researcher) who will save it on their personal computer, on 
a hard drive to keep copy and in the cloud. These files will be kept with a password, which 
only the principal researcher will know. 
The information and data resulting from the respective analyzes carried out by the 
evaluator will be sent to the statistician who will proceed to carry out the respective 
analysis and application of tests in accordance with the data treatment that appears in the 
data analysis section. 
Prior to carrying out the FOCOS test that evaluates the primary and secondary 
outcomes and, prior to the execution of the tests that evaluate executive functions 
(exploratory outcome), the following question will be asked to the participants: from 0 to 
100, ¿How mentally fatigued are you? Being 0 (not at all fatigued) and 100 (maximum 
fatigue). 
The evaluations of week 1 were carried out on two different days and in the 
following order: the first day the survey was carried out, mass, height, mental fatigue and 
finally, the tests were applied to assess the executive functions, for which participants were 

summoned by groups of 4 every hour. Total application time from full battery was 
approximately 60 minutes. On the second day, the FOCOS field test was carried out and all 
the participants were summoned at 6 in the morning. In the intermediate tests 1 (week 6) 
and 2 (week 11) only the evaluations will be carried out through FOCOS. Finally, the post-
test evaluations (week 16) will be carried out in the same way as in the pre-test, that is, they 
will be carried out on two different days and in the following order: the first day the tests 
will be applied to assess the executive functions and mental fatigue, on the second day, the 
field test (FOCOS) will be carried out, for which all the participants will be summoned at 6 
in the morning. 
Bias Control 
To control biases in the different stages of the study (planning, execution, and data 
analysis), different strategies and actions were established to obtain reliable results. Bias 
control was carried out as follows: 
Control of Allocation Biases (Randomization Biases) 
To avoid these biases, the participants were randomized to two comparison groups 
(GE and CG) as previously described in the randomization process. 
Control of Information Biases (Systematic Biases) 
To avoid these biases, reliable and valid protocols and tests are used, in addition, the 
evaluation protocols were standardized (pretest, intermediate test 1, intermediate test 2 and 
posttest), which will be carried out under similar conditions, with the same equipment and 
by the same evaluators). In the same way, the equipment and instruments were calibrated in 
accordance with quality norms and standards. It is important to mention that the personnel 
that carry out the evaluations and interventions are experts in their respective areas and that 
those necessary for the development of a protocol or intervention were trained. In addition, 
the evaluator of the actions related to the PTK and the IE (offensive, defensive, and global) 
must demonstrate and achieve a good stability, which will be obtained and calculated 
through test-retest, once the evaluator achieves a score for above 0.6 the PTK evaluation 
process will continue in the research. 
Confounding Bias Control 

To avoid these biases, confounding variables (age, sporting age, playing position, 
socioeconomic status, educational level, mass, BMI, and mental fatigue) will be controlled. 
The study has masking (blinding) at two levels (assessments and data analysis). 
Analysis of data 
To establish the distribution of the data of the quantitative variables, the Shapiro-
Wilk test will be applied. The variables that present a normal distribution will be 
summarized with means and standard deviation. Variables that present a non-normal 
distribution will be summarized with medians and interquartile ranges. Likewise, the 
qualitative variables will be presented in absolute and relative frequency tables. 
To establish the behavior of the offensive, defensive, and global IE, a repeated 
measures design will be carried out that includes 4 evaluations over time (pretest, 
intermediate test 1, intermediate test 2 and posttest). For this, an ANOVA of repeated 
measures or the Friedman test will be used according to the normality of the variables, in 
addition, the assumption of homogeneity of the variances will be evaluated based on the 
Levene statistic. Since different dependent variables will be evaluated, a multivariate 
analysis of variance (MANOVA) will also be performed. 
For the variables related to executive functions, an intragroup analysis of each of the 
groups (GE and GC) will be carried out, comparing the pretest and posttest values to 
establish possible differences, for which the dependent student t test or the Wilcoxon test of 
according to its distribution. In addition, an intergroup analysis will be carried out to 
compare the possible differences between the groups (GE and GC), for which the student t 
test for independent samples or the Mann Whitney U test will be applied according to the 
distribution of the variables. Similarly, confidence intervals (CI95) and two-tailed effect 
sizes will be reported, with alpha (α) set to 0.05 and statistical power 0.8 (1-β). The 
statistical significance value is set at p≤0.05. An analysis of the information will be carried 
out using the statistical package SPSS version 27 and the software R free version 4.0. 
Procedures will be carried out to detect possible inconsistencies in the measurements and to 
identify outliers and extreme values. Likewise, if necessary, statistical adjustments will be 
made. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed.