## 3 Results  
The variables registered from the GPS showed a significant increase in the total distance covered between matches one and two (6589.0 \(\pm\) 2372.27 m vs. 7439.80 \(\pm\) 2177.96 m; \(p\) = 0.040; \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}=0.092\)), but no significant differences were obtained for the distance run at different intensities or between the RPE values registered after the matches either (Table 1).  
The isometric knee flexion strength (Figure 2) showed significant differences for the non-dominant limb (F\({}_{(1.43,15.70)}\) = 10.60, \(p\) = 0.003, \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) = 0.198) and the post hoc tests showed that 48 h post-match 2 values were significantly higher than in all other tests (\(p\leq 0.005\)). In the dominant limb, no significant differences were found (F\({}_{(1.13,12.47)}\) = 1.08, \(p\) = 0.370, \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) = 0.052).  
Considering the ROM variables (Figure 3), the SLR test showed no differences in the dominant (F\({}_{(3,33)}\) = 1.56, \(p\) = 0.217, \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) = 0.031) or non-dominant limbs (F\({}_{(3,33)}\) = 1.28, \(p\) = 0.296, \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) = 0.014). Similarly, the ankle dorsiflexion ROM showed no significant differences for the dominant (F\({}_{(3,33)}\) = 1.30, \(p\) = 0.289, \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) = 0.022) or non-dominant limb (F\({}_{(3,33)}\) = 2.51, \(p\) = 0.075, \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) = 0.025).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Match 1** & **Match 2** & \(p\) & \(\text{n}_{\text{p}}\text{{}^{2}}\) \\ \hline Relative walking distance [0–6.0 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)] (m\(\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\)) & 68.84 + 38.63 & 75.21 \(\pm\) 21.40 & 0.522 & 0.009 \\ Relative low-intensity running distance [6.1–12.0 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)] (m\(\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\)) & 51.94 \(\pm\) 28.10 & 48.10 \(\pm\) 14.21 & 0.498 & 0.010 \\ Relative medium-intensity running distance [12.1–14.0 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)] (m\(\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\)) & 11.74 \(\pm\) 4.99 & 12.09 \(\pm\) 4.36 & 0.877 & 0.001 \\ Relative high-intensity running distance [14.1–18.0 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)] (m\(\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\)) & 12.90 \(\pm\) 7.96 & 14.13 \(\pm\) 6.01 & 0.564 & 0.007 \\ Relative very high-intensity running distance [18.1–25.0 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)] (m\(\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\)) & 3.81 \(\pm\) 3.43 & 3.94 \(\pm\) 2.19 & 0.670 & 0.004 \\ Relative sprinting distance [\(>\)25 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)] (m\(\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\)) & 0.17 \(\pm\) 0.48 & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 0.331 & 0.027 \\ Session RPE (AU) & & 346.18 \(\pm\) 231.73 & 392.31 \(\pm\) 203.82 & 0.170 & 0.061 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Abbreviations: km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\) = kilometers/hour; m = meters; AU: arbitrary units.  
\end{table}
Table 1: Difference between GPS measured variables across the two matches.  
Figure 3: Mean and individual hip flexion and ankle dorsiflexion ROM in the dominant and non-dominant limbs.  
Figure 2: Mean and individual isometric knee flexion strength in the dominant and non-dominant limbs at the different tests. * represents a significant difference at \(p<0.05\), and ** represents a significant difference at \(p<0.001\).  
Significant differences were obtained when comparing the CMJ height (F\({}_{(3,33)}\) = 11.00, \(p\) < 0.001, \(\eta_{\text{p}}\)\({}^{2}\) = 0.382; Figure 4). The post hoc tests showed that pre-match 1 values were lower than at all other test moments (\(p\) \(\leq\) 0.003). Moreover, post-match 1 values were lower than both tests before and after the second match (\(p\) \(\leq\) 0.004).