## 3 Results  
The soccer players had an average age of 18.25 \(\pm\) 0.44 years, a height of 1.77 \(\pm\) 0.05 m, a body weight of 67.30 \(\pm\) 8.76 kg, and a sports age of 5.25 \(\pm\) 1.41 years, resulting in a BMI of 21.33 \(\pm\) 1.66 kg/m\({}^{2}\) (Table 1). A statistically significant difference was observed in the group*time interaction for the 10 m (F = 21.44; \(p<\) 0.001; \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.67), 20 m (F = 19.40; \(p<\) 0.001; \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.64), 30 m (F = 49.56; \(p<\) 0.001; \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.82), change of direction (COD) (F = 14.66; \(p<\) 0.001; \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.58), counter movement jump (CMJ) (F = 51.50; \(p<\) 0.001; \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.83), and reactive strength index (RSI) (F = 24.91; \(p<\) 0.001; \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.70) performances. In the control group, no statistically significant difference was found between pre-test and post-test performances (\(p>\) 0.05). After 8 weeks of glyometric training, the cluster-set (CLS) group demonstrated significant improvements of \(-\)9.26% in the 10 m sprint, \(-\)4.78% in the 20 m sprint, \(-\)3.40% in the 30 m sprint, \(-\)4.71% in COD, 12.66% in CMJ, and 11.90% in RSI (\(p<\) 0.05). Similarly, the traditional-set (TRD) group exhibited significant improvements of \(-\)9.94% in the 10 m sprint, \(-\)3.72% in the 20 m sprint, \(-\)2.89% in the 30 m sprint, \(-\)4.01% in COD, 12.15% in CMJ, and 9.02% in RSI (\(p<\) 0.05). (Table 2, Figure 3). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **CLS (n = 8)** & **TRD (n = 8)** & **CON (n = 8)** & **Total (n = 24)** \\ \hline Age (year) & 18.12 \(\pm\) 0.35 & 18.50 \(\pm\) 0.53 & 18.12 \(\pm\) 0.35 & 18.25 \(\pm\) 0.44 \\ Height (m) & 1.74 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 1.75 \(\pm\) 0.04 & 1.77 \(\pm\) 0.07 & 1.75 \(\pm\) 0.05 \\ Body mass (kg) & 73.50 \(\pm\) 3.62 & 72.25 \(\pm\) 3.32 & 73.50 \(\pm\) 5.58 & 73.08 \(\pm\) 4.14 \\ BMI (kg/m\({}^{2}\)) & 24.08 \(\pm\) 1.46 & 23.42 \(\pm\) 1.54 & 23.45 \(\pm\) 1.13 & 23.66 \(\pm\) 1.36 \\ Sport Age (year) & 8.12 \(\pm\) 0.64 & 8.00 \(\pm\) 0.92 & 7.75 \(\pm\) 0.70 & 7.95 \(\pm\) 0.75 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Demographic characteristics. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & & & & **ANOVA \(p\)** & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{10 m (s)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Pre Test**} & **Post Test** & & & **Group \(\times\) Time** & \\ \cline{3-8}  & & \(\pi\pm\) Std. & \(\pi\pm\) Std. & & & & \\  & & IC (95\%) & IC (95\%) & \(\Delta\)\% & f & \(p\) & \(\eta_{\mathrm{p}}\)\({}^{2}\) \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{10 m (s)} & \multirow{2}{*}{CLS} & 1.77 \(\pm\) 0.05 & 1.63 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\mathrm{a}\mathrm{a}}\) & \multirow{2}{*}{\(-\)9.26} & \multirow{6}{*}{21.44} & \multirow{6}{*}{\(<\)0.001} & \multirow{6}{*}{0.67} \\  & & 1.72–1.82 & 1.56–1.70 & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-8}  & \multirow{2}{*}{TRD} & 1.77 \(\pm\) 0.04 & 1.61 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\mathrm{a}\mathrm{a}}\) & \multirow{2}{*}{\(-\)9.94} & \multirow{2}{*}{21.44} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(<\)0.001} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.67} \\  & & 1.73–1.81 & 1.55–1.68 & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-8}  & \multirow{2}{*}{CON} & 1.79 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 1.78 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & \multirow{2}{*}{\(-\)0.56} & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-8}  & & 1.73–1.85 & 1.72–1.84 & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Effects of Plyometric Training on Sprint, COD, CMJ, and RSI. A statistically significant difference was observed in the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) levels of the football players, favoring the cluster-set (CLS) group (t = 12.42; \(p<0.001\); d = 6.38). (Table 3, Figure 4).