## 3 Results
### IPF and RFD  
The ANOVA revealed a main effect of time for both legs IPF for quadriceps and hamstrings (quadriceps: 0.13 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.29, \(p\) < 0.05; hamstrings: 0.18 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.21, \(p\) < 0.05), RFD\({}_{\rm max}\) for hamstrings (0.19 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.20, \(p\) < 0.05) with no time effect for quadriceps (0.01 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.04, \(p\) > 0.05), RFD\({}_{\rm 150}\) for quadriceps and hamstrings (quadriceps: 0.13 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.16, \(p\) < 0.05; hamstrings: 0.13 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.29, \(p\) < 0.05) and RFD\({}_{\rm 250}\) for quadriceps and hamstrings (quadriceps: 0.18 \(\leq\eta P^{2}\)\(\leq\) 0.22, \(p\) < 0.05; hamstrings: \(\eta P^{2}\) = 0.14, \(p\) < 0.05). A summary of mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (SD) values, repeated-measures ANOVA and post hoc comparisons for strength parameters measured across the time of measurement is presented in Table 2. IPF values for the isometric quadriceps action showed a significant decrease post-match with respect to baseline values in the dominant leg (\(ES=-0.46\), \(p=0.008\)) and non-dominant leg (\(ES=-0.61\), \(p=0.001\)). Overall, IPF during the isometric quadriceps action regained baseline values after 48 h post-match, evidenced by a significant 48 h post-match increase with respect to post-match values for the non-dominant leg (\(ES=0.64\), \(p=0.001\)). During the isometric hastrings test, IPF values showed a significant post-match decrease from baseline values in the dominant leg (\(ES=-0.32\), \(p=0.041\)) and non-dominant leg (\(ES=-0.55\), \(p=0.027\)). Similarly, 48 h post-match values for isometric hastrings IPF increased from post-match values in the dominant (\(ES=0.53\), \(p=0.007\)) and non-dominant leg (\(ES=0.61\), \(p=0.011\)) and were similar to baseline values.  
RFDmax values during the isometric hastrings test remained unchanged from baseline to post-match but 48 h post-match values increased to baseline in the dominant leg (\(ES=0.80\), \(p=0.008\)) and concerning post-match values in the non-dominant leg (\(ES=0.65\), \(p=0.004\)). RFD\({}_{150}\) values showed significant changes during both quadriceps and hastring actions. During the isometric quadriceps test, post-match values decreased from baseline in both dominant (\(ES=-0.68\), \(p=0.003\)) and non-dominant legs (\(ES=-0.69\), \(p=0.023\)). Overall, RFD\({}_{150}\) during the isometric quadriceps action regained baseline values 48 h post-match. During the isometric hastrings test, RFD\({}_{150}\) values decreased post-match in the non-dominant leg (\(ES=-0.73\), \(p=0.006\)) to baseline. Isometric hastring RFD\({}_{150}\) results showed no changes in 48 h post-match values from baseline but there were significant increases in 48 h post-match changes to post-match values in the dominant (\(ES=0.41\), \(p=0.046\)) and non-dominant leg (\(ES=0.88\), \(p=0.001\)). Lastly, RFD\({}_{250}\) values during the isometric quadriceps action showed a significant post-match decrease from baseline values in dominant (\(ES=-0.67\), \(p=0.001\)) and non-dominant leg (\(ES=-0.72\), \(p=0.004\)). RFD\({}_{250}\) during the isometric quadriceps test regained baseline values after 48 h post-match, with a significant 48 h post-match increase with respect to post-match only for the dominant leg (\(ES=0.50\), \(p=0.034\)). During the isometric hastrings test, post-match RFD\({}_{250}\) values decreased from baseline values in the non-dominant leg (\(ES=-0.55\), \(p=0.040\)). Apart from that, RFD\({}_{250}\) during the isometric hastrings test regained baseline values 48 h post-match, with a significant 48 h post-match increase with respect to post-match values in the non-dominant leg (\(ES=0.52\), \(p=0.046\)).