## 1 Introduction  
Football is a long-duration intermittent sport characterized by periods of low intensity alternating with short periods of high and very high intensity [1]. The physiological demands of the sport constantly change, with a key feature of modern football being the increased intensity during the match [2; 3]. Therefore, to cope with these demands, football players must develop both endurance and speed, strength, and power [4]. A key indicator of a footballer's level is the number of successful high-intensity actions performed [5]. In recent decades, technological advancements have greatly assisted coaching staff in improving players' physical condition. Specifically, the development of the Global Positioning System (GPS) has enabled the quantification and better monitoring of physical load to enhance performance [6]. Additionally, the use of the GPS and proper load management help prevent injuries [7]. Thus, in the past decade, the GPS has been used daily to measure the external load experienced by footballers both in training and matches. Knowing the match load helps the coaching staff better design the training load during the microcycle [8]. Match data recordings have shown that players' running performance depends on various factors, including the formation the team plays in and the playing position [9; 10]. From a practical standpoint, knowing the running load for each playing position within each formation helps better individualize training loads. For example, knowing that central defenders cover a significantly shorter distance at sprint speed compared to wide midfielders during a match, they will be trained over different distances during the microcycle. Additionally, the knowledge of match-specific running profiles can assist in determining player suitability for specific formations. Finally, coaches working with young players can better prepare them (physically) for transitioning from one age category to another (e.g., from under the age of 17 to under the age of 19). A review of the literature shows that Central Defensive Fielders (CDFs) in formations with three defenders cover greater distances during a match compared to formations with two CDFs [11; 12; 13]. Also, Central Midfielders (CMFs) have been reported to cover more distance at maximum speed in the 1-4-2-3-1 formation compared to the 1-4-4-2, while Wide Defensive Fielders (WDFs) in the 1-4-4-2 formation appear to cover a shorter distance at high speed compared to the 1-3-5-2 formation [11]. Moreover, the 1-4-4-2 formation appears to limit high-intensity actions compared to the 1-4-3-3 [14; 15]. Another factor influencing running performance is the number of central strikers in the formation. Specifically, using two Forwards (FWDs) (1-3-5-2) has been associated with greater distances covered at high speeds compared to formations with a single FWD (1-4-3-3) [16; 17]. In most formations, CMFs are observed to cover the greatest distances [10; 14; 18; 19]. The GPS also records the number of accelerations and decelerations a player performs. Previous studies have reported that the number of such high-intensity actions affects players' neuromuscular load and is, therefore, a significant factor in estimating fatigue [20; 21; 22]. The existing literature clearly shows that dozens of such actions occur in all football matches, regardless of the level [6; 23]. Another parameter evaluated by the coaching staff is the change in players' running performance between the two halves. A decrease of \(\sim\)10% is commonly observed and may be due to various factors (scoreline, reduced effective playing time), among which fatigue is included [24]. For example, a recent study conducted on youth players playing in a 1-4-3-3 formation observed a reduction in the distance covered at high intensity in the second half, though not in the total distance [25]. A reduction in high-speed distance has also been reported in other studies on professional players [24], although there are also reports that found no change [26; 27].