## 3 Results
The third discriminant root (Wilk's Lambda 0.84, \(p<0.001\)) explained the differences between the FW and FB, indicating the FB's superiority in the sprinting and high-speed running distances in the AP (correlations with a discriminant root of 0.72 and 0.66, respectively). Correct classifications were obtained for 96% CD, 80% CM, 65% FB, 39% WM and 35% FW (73% correctly classified in total). Significant negative associations (all \(p<0.05\)) between the total points earned at the end of the group stage of the UCL, and the total, walking and jogging distances covered in the AP were evidenced for the CD, FB, CM and WM (all moderate correlations). In addition, the WM's running zone distance covered and high-speed running distance covered in the AP were negatively associated with the total group points (all moderate correlations). On the other hand, the results indicated positive associations between the total points earned at the end of the group stage of the UCL and the total, walking and jogging distances covered in the DP of the game for all playing positions (all moderate correlations). In addition, the running zone distances covered in the DP of game were positively associated with the total group points for the FB and CM (all moderate correlations) (Table 3). Significantly lower total, walking and jogging distance covered in AP were evidenced in won matches (significant post hoc differences when compared to the lost and drew matches; all small to medium effect sizes). On the other hand, the results indicated that won matches were characterized by significantly greatest total, walking, jogging and running distance covered in DP of game (significant post hoc differences when compared to the lost matches; all small to medium effect sizes) (Table 4). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Root 1** & **Root 2** & **Root 3** & **Root 4** \\ \hline Walking in AP & 0.23 & 0.01 & \(-\)0.01 & 0.30 \\ Jogging in AP & \(-\)0.19 & 0.13 & \(-\)0.15 & 0.29 \\ Running in AP & \(-\)0.73 & 0.04 & \(-\)0.22 & 0.31 \\ High speed running in AP & \(-\)0.40 & \(-\)0.14 & \(-\)0.66 & 0.33 \\ Sprinting in AP & 0.09 & 0.03 & \(-\)0.72 & 0.10 \\ Walking in DP & 0.18 & \(-\)0.05 & 0.09 & 0.14 \\ Jogging in DP & \(-\)0.19 & 0.11 & 0.22 & \(-\)0.25 \\ Running in DP & \(-\)0.39 & \(-\)0.25 & 0.25 & \(-\)0.39 \\ High speed running in DP & \(-\)0.13 & \(-\)0.83 & 0.19 & \(-\)0.04 \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{Sprinting in DP} & 0.07 & \(-\)0.75 & \(-\)0.32 & \(-\)0.42 \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{Can R} & 0.79 & 0.68 & 0.35 & 0.21 \\ Wilks Lambda & 0.17 & 0.45 & 0.84 & 0.95 \\ \(p\) & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.142 \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{Centroid: FB} & 0.45 & \(-\)0.69 & \(-\)0.46 & \(-\)0.15 \\ Centroid: CD & 1.04 & 1.06 & 0.06 & 0.06 \\ Centroid: CM & \(-\)2.31 & 0.39 & 0.05 & \(-\)0.03 \\ Centroid: FW & 0.78 & \(-\)1.14 & 1.04 & \(-\)0.41 \\ Centroid: WM & 0.08 & \(-\)1.45 & 0.18 & 0.48 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Root—structure of the discriminant factor; Can R—canonical correlation; CD = Central defenders, FB = Fullbacks, CM = Central midfielders, WM = Wide midfielders, FW = Forwards; AP = attacking phase of game, DP = defensive phase of game.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Multivariate difference in RP in AP and DP of game among players at different playing positions. The multiple regression calculation utilized the RP variables in the AP and DP of the game as predictors for the total points earned at the end of the group stage of the UCL. In the calculation, the multiple regression variables that were intercorrelated/derived from other variables were excluded (e.g., the total distance covered and high-intensity distance covered). The results demonstrated that the RPs in the AP and DP of the game explained 37% of the variance in the total points earned at the end of the group stage of the UCL.