## 4 Discussion
The average relative HSR for forwards can be impacted measurably by players who play a shorter number of minutes having a higher or lower relative HSR. Therefore, a direct comparison with past research on this metric is not feasible. Past research had, on average, higher TT and TD for midfielders and forwards but lower relative TD in both game formats compared with the current study [18]. In a separate study of elite female athletes' activity profiles in the two halves format, the athletes played higher minutes in midfield and forward, had higher TD, and relative TD was similar for all positions except for defenders compared with the current study [19]. In the four-quarter format, elite female athletes had similar TT, higher TD in defenders, and higher relative TD for forwards compared with the current study [5]. Maximum velocity in the current study is slightly higher than in previous studies [5; 18]. Similar to past studies, the forwards and midfielders also covered more absolute distance at higher speeds than the defenders [3; 5; 17]. To our knowledge, only one prior study has examined activity profiles in Division I field hockey athletes, and this study was conducted prior to the game format change [3]. When comparing positional differences, consistent with past research, defenders spent the most amount of time on the field relative to forwards and midfielders [3]. Similarly, the relative distance traveled was higher for forwards and midfielders than it was for defenders, and midfielders covered more distance in HSR and had a higher relative HSR compared with other positions [3]. Another similarity between the studies saw midfielders covered more total distance in medium (8.1-16.0 km/h) and high (16.1-20.0 km/h) speed running compared with forwards [3]. Comparing the numerical values for [PERSON] and [PERSON] [3] with this study shows some differences; however, direct numerical comparison between the two studies is not appropriate due to differences in methods. The prior work only included data from a fixed number (ten starting players and up to five substitutes) of players and not the whole team. For example, past research showed higher playing time, higher distance traveled, and a lower relative distance in comparison with this study, with each of these results being consistent with a limited number of athletes who participated the most during the game being monitored [3]. The number of substitutions also was not reported, which could impact these numerical differences. Finally, the rotation scheme used by a team will impact not only the number of substitutions but also the other metrics. For example, if four players rotated across three forward positions, the average playing time and other absolute performance metrics should be higher than if six players rotated across those same three forward positions. Importantly, the number of substitutions can be the same in those two cases, or they could be different. There are several limitations to this study. First, results should be taken contextually. Only one team was recorded, and the results may not be extrapolated to other collegiate field hockey teams. This study should be expanded to include multiple teams from different athletic conferences. The GPS units used in this study did not record time spent in each speed zone. Therefore, the relative HSR and LSR presented in this study may not be the same as other studies that calculated the relative HSR and LSR as time spent in HSR and LSR. Additionally, past studies do not use the same range for low-speed and high-speed running, making it hard to compare across studies [5; 17; 18]. Finally, comparisons to past research were difficult due to previously stated unclear methods or differences in methodology.