## 3 Results
### Time on Court, Distance Covered and Running Face by Playing Positions  
Table 2 shows the time played in the entire game according to different locomotion categories. Significant differences were found between the different playing positions in the total played time (F = 14.21; \(p<0.001\)), time standing (F = 163.35; \(p<0.001\)), walking (F = 4.94; \(p<0.001\)), jogging (F = 15.13; \(p<0.001\)), running (F = 36.91; \(p<0.001\)), high intensity running (F = 245.57; \(p<0.001\)), and sprinting (F = 237.50; \(p<0.001\)). Post-hoc analysis revealed that LWs played significantly more total time than the LBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.57), CBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.47), RBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.50), and LPs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.47), but similar minutes than the RWs (\(p>0.05\)). Similarly, RWs played significantly higher total time than LBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.41), CBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.31), RBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.35) and LPs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 0.35). Left and RBs, CBs, and LPs played a similar average time (\(p>0.05\)). In regards to time standing, LWs and RWs spent longer time standing than the other playing positions but similar time between each other (\(p>0.05\)). There were significant differences between the LWs and LBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.41), CBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.56), RBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.45), and LPs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.28), while RWs also spent significantly longer time standing than the LBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.27), CBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.42), RBs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.31), and LPs (\(p<0.001\); ES = 1.13). The LP was the third position spend \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline  & **Left Wing** & **Left Back** & **Center Back** & **Right Back** & **Right Wing** & **Line Player** \\ \hline \(n\) & 213 & 320 & 248 & 246 & 230 & 374 \\ Total Time & 32.08 \(\pm\) 17.01 & 23.77 \(\pm\) 12.58 & 24.91 \(\pm\) 13.64 & 24.46 \(\pm\) 13.30 & 29.98 \(\pm\) 18.43 & 24.53 \(\pm\) 13.81 \\ Standing & 4.57 \(\pm\) 3.18 & 1.37 \(\pm\) 1.36 & 1.02 \(\pm\) 0.98 & 1.27 \(\pm\) 0.98 & 4.22 \(\pm\) 3.08 & 1.77 \(\pm\) 1.31 \\ Walking & 21.23 \(\pm\) 11.30 & 17.44 \(\pm\) 9.43 & 17.85 \(\pm\) 10.25 & 18.26 \(\pm\) 10.29 & 19.98 \(\pm\) 12.33 & 18.05 \(\pm\) 10.40 \\ Jogging & 3.22 \(\pm\) 1.71 & 3.36 \(\pm\) 1.69 & 4.04 \(\pm\) 1.91 & 3.29 \(\pm\) 1.65 & 2.88 \(\pm\) 1.76 & 2.96 \(\pm\) 1.52 \\ Running & 1.81 \(\pm\) 0.99 & 1.11 \(\pm\) 0.64 & 1.29 \(\pm\) 0.68 & 1.16 \(\pm\) 0.64 & 1.72 \(\pm\) 1.13 & 1.19 \(\pm\) 0.70 \\ HIRRunning & 0.97 \(\pm\) 0.58 & 0.22 \(\pm\) 0.22 & 0.32 \(\pm\) 0.22 & 0.21 \(\pm\) 0.15 & 0.93 \(\pm\) 0.64 & 0.28 \(\pm\) 0.19 \\ Sprinting & 0.13 \(\pm\) 0.11 & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 0.10 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.00 \(\pm\) 0.01 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Total time (minutes) played in different locomotion categories by playing positions. Figure 3: Distance covered in each locomotion category by offense and defense. * Significant differences between offense and defense (\(p<0.05\)). ing longer time standing, showing significant differences with the LB and RB (\(p\) = 0.001; ES = 0.30; and \(p\) < 0.001; ES = 0.42, respectively), as well as the CB (\(p\) < 0.001; ES = 0.63). The player position spending less time standing was the CB, with significant differences with the LB and RB (\(p\) = 0.004; ES = 0.29; and \(p\) = 0.039; ES = 0.08, respectively). Results also showed that LWs spent significantly more time walking than LPs (\(p\) = 0.001; ES = 0.37), CBs (\(p\) = 0.007; ES = 0.32), RBs (\(p\) = 0.040; ES = 0.28), and LPs (\(p\) = 0.009; ES = 0.30). In regards to jogging time, the CBs were the players spending more time in this locomotion category showing significant differences with the rest of playing positions (LW, \(p\) < 0.001, ES = 0.46; RW, \(p\) < 0.001, ES = 0.63; RB, \(p\) < 0.001, ES = 0.42; LBs, \(p\) < 0.001, ES = 0.38; LPs, \(p\) < 0.001, ES = 0.64). LBs were the second playing position spending more time jogging showing significant differences with the RWs (\(p\) = 0.022; ES = 0.28) and LPs (\(p\) = 0.013; ES = 0.25).