## 4 Discussion  
This research gives a direction for training methods that a technical staff could follow to prevent non-contact injuries through the individual monitoring of each professional soccer player during the playing season. The following observations were made. First, the results were related to the overall incidence of injuries among athletes as there was a higher index through ACWR for soccer players who were injured. Second, the ratios that most often resulted in a non-contact injury were at levels that often approached or exceeded 1.3. Thirdly, of the six parameters (TD, 15-20 km/h, 20-25 km/h, >25 km/h, ACC > 2.5 m/s\({}^{2}\), DEC > 2.5 m/s\({}^{2}\)), in at least three of these, recorded and analyzed in four-week (ACWR4) and two-week (ACWR2) blocks, injured soccer players received a higher load than in the previous. Fourth, significant changes were observed mainly in the speed parameter at 25-30 km/h, which negatively affected the injured footballers. In the comparison of specific weeks (second and fourth) before the injury and, more specifically, in the four-week period, the following observations were made. Soccer players who were not injured for all parameters cumulatively were at 1.04, and those who were injured were at 1.18, while at two weeks the soccer players who were not injured were at 0.98, and those who were injured were at 1.08. In the \(p\)-value category, significance is observed at four weeks before the injury for three of the six categories, while at two weeks, all six categories were statistically significant and negatively affected an injury. In the analysis of both weeks, there is a large discrepancy in the Distance Speed Range category (>25 km/h), with 1.58 for the four weeks and 1.47 for the two weeks for the non-contact-injured soccer players. Using ACWR for injury risk and comparing external loads, it was found that the ratio of immediate to chronic loads (absolute total distance) predicted injuries in elite rugby players [12]. [PERSON] et al. [11], investigating data from young elite-level soccer players, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Injury**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**No**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Yes**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Total**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\)**-Value**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & \\ \hline
**ACWR—Total Distance (km)** & 1.02 & 0.08 & 1.14 & 0.12 & 1.08 & 0.12 & 0.026 \\
**ACWR—Distance Speed Range (15–20 km/h)** & 0.93 & 0.04 & 1.08 & 0.04 & 1.00 & 0.09 & \textgreater{}0.001 \\
**ACWR—Distance Speed Range (20–25 km/h)** & 0.95 & 0.18 & 1.15 & 0.24 & 1.05 & 0.23 & 0.042 \\
**ACWR—Distance Speed Range (>25 km/h)** & 1.03 & 0.24 & 1.47 & 0.35 & 1.25 & 0.37 & 0.009 \\
**ACWR—# of Accelerations (>2.5 m/s\({}^{2}\))** & 0.99 & 0.11 & 1.16 & 0.14 & 1.08 & 0.15 & 0.010 \\
**ACWR—# of Decelerations (>2.5 m/s\({}^{2}\))** & 0.99 & 0.12 & 1.16 & 0.12 & 1.07 & 0.15 & 0.010 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: ACWR values for two weeks model (mean \(\pm\) SD). Figure 2: Values of injured and non-injured soccer players for two-week model. # denotes number. showed that three-week accelerations in particular were the strongest predictor of injury. Decelerations were particularly associated with a greater risk of non-contact injury by the same authors in 2019, and, in collaboration with professional soccer players, ACWR was directly associated with injury risk (except distance at high speed). These results contrast with [PERSON] et al. [28], who concluded that athletes should perform maximal velocities at high rates during training to protect against subsequent soft tissue injury. Moreover, according to [PERSON] [29], and since soccer players have international obligations with their national teams, contradictory data exist due to the different recording systems used by the teams for which they play, which necessarily makes predicting non-contact injuries much more difficult.