By Rob Braat
Contents
1. Summary
2. Discussion
3. Practical Implications
4. Final Thoughts
5. References
6. About the Author
Summary
Sprinting is one of the most important—and most neglected—aspects of football training. This article explores why regular exposure to near-maximal speed is essential for performance and injury prevention and how coaches can program it effectively. Sprinting must be a weekly priority if you want faster, more resilient players.
Discussion
Straight-line sprinting is the most frequent action in goal-scoring situations in football, emphasizing the critical role of speed and power in high-performance outcomes (Faude et al., 2012). Despite this, the importance of periodizing sprint training is often underestimated in many team-sport settings and is avoided due to perceived injury risk. Nevertheless, professional players cover between 200 and 1200 meters of sprinting distance during a single match (Andrzejewski et al., 2013), and these high-intensity efforts often define the game's most crucial moments.
Hamstring muscle strains, meanwhile, are the most common non-contact injuries in football and represent the leading cause of time loss among professional players (Yu et al., 2017; Ekstrand et al., 2021). These injuries are predominantly stretch-induced, occurring when a muscle is eccentrically lengthened under load (Garrett Jr. et al., 1996). Strains happen when external forces exceed a muscle's internal force production. Since eccentric contractions involve high force with fewer active motor units, sprinting becomes the most relevant mechanism of injury. In fact, sprinting accounts for 57% of all hamstring strains (Woods et al., 2004).
In sports where sprinting is frequent and decisive, avoiding it in training due to congested scheduling or fear of injury is not a solution—it's the problem. Exposure to near-maximal sprinting speeds is essential for injury mitigation and performance enhancement.
"Simply put, gym exercises alone cannot prepare an athlete to sprint—only sprinting can."
While eccentric-focused interventions like the Nordic hamstring curl have shown value (Bourne et al., 2018), they cannot replicate the neuromuscular and mechanical demands of sprinting at full intensity. Simply put, gym exercises alone cannot prepare an athlete to sprint—only sprinting can (Buchheit et al., 2023). If we want to build fast, durable, and match-ready athletes, we must stop worrying about sprinting risks and start programming them deliberately.
Recent findings support this approach. Near-maximal sprinting (>95% of maximum sprint speed) was associated with reduced hamstring injuries in a large dataset of elite football players. No hamstring injuries were reported in half of the weekly cycles where these exposures occurred. Conversely, injuries occurred during 85% of the weeks examined when players failed to reach those sprint intensities. Despite its clear protective potential, the majority of players still aren't sprinting enough in training.
So, how do we implement this safely and effectively? What is the optimal intensity, and more importantly, when should we prescribe these efforts within the training week? MD-1 offers too little time for recovery. MD-3 may be too early, with any protective effects potentially fading before competition. Instead, MD-2 appears to be the sweet spot — close enough to match day to provide a conditioning effect, but far enough to allow adequate recovery (Bucheit et al., 2023).
However, it's important to note that while maximal sprinting exposure plays a pivotal role in injury mitigation and performance, it is not a standalone solution. Effective hamstring injury prevention must account for complex risk factors, including posterior chain strength, fascicle length, movement quality, and load history (Buckthorpe et al., 2018). Sprinting helps address many of these through high specificity and mechanical loading, but if players are under-recovered, poorly conditioned, or lack neuromuscular coordination, sprinting alone may not be protective. Integrating sprint exposure within a structured, individualized program — that balances load progression, recovery, and targeted strength work — represents a more complete strategy. Simply exposing players to 95% MSS is not enough if that exposure is inconsistent, misaligned with the rest of the training load, or applied without monitoring recovery status.
In addition to the need for linear maximal sprinting exposure, it's important to consider the multidirectional nature of sprinting in football. Approximately 85% of maximum-velocity efforts in match play occur along curvilinear trajectories, not in straight lines (Filter et al., 2020). Curved sprinting places asymmetrical demands on the body — the inside leg experiences greater activation in the semitendinosus and adductors, while the outside leg shows higher involvement of the biceps femoris and gluteus medius. These lateral specific muscular demands suggest that curve sprinting may introduce unique strain patterns, potentially increasing hamstring injury risk, especially if athletes are underprepared for these directional changes. Furthermore, performance is often asymmetrical between a player’s preferred and non-preferred curve direction, implying that unilateral deficits in strength or control could further contribute to injury risk. Integrating curve sprinting into weekly exposure may therefore offer a more valid and protective stimulus compared to solely linear sprinting.
Practical Implications
From a practical standpoint, strength and conditioning coaches must approach sprint training with a high level of precision and periodization. Load management becomes paramount, ensuring athletes are physically prepared for maximal speed exposures without accumulating excessive neuromuscular fatigue. Monitoring tools such as reactive strength index (RSI), RPE, and daily wellness tracking can provide valuable insights into fatigue status and readiness, allowing coaches to make informed adjustments.
Weekly programming should prioritize near-maximal sprinting exposures around MD-2, balancing recovery and stimulus while reducing the risk of acute overload. Importantly, sprinting should not be limited to linear patterns. Given that the majority of in-game sprints occur along curved lines, coaches must progressively introduce high-speed, curvilinear sprinting to better reflect match demands and prepare athletes for asymmetrical loading patterns.
Finally, acute-to-chronic workload ratios (ACWR) specific to high-speed running can guide how much exposure an athlete may need within a given micro- or mesocycle. When used in combination with individualized profiling and contextual factors (e.g., position, injury history, match minutes), this approach allows for the kind of tailored sprint exposure that maximizes both performance outcomes and injury resilience.
"Sprinting should be treated as a non-negotiable part of weekly training."
Final Thoughts
Sprinting remains one of the most critical, yet underutilized tools in football training. As recent studies have shown, avoiding sprint exposure does not prevent injury — it increases the risk. High-speed running, particularly at or above 95% of a player’s maximum velocity, plays a critical role in conditioning the hamstrings and preparing the body for the most intense demands of match play. Sprinting should be treated as a non-negotiable part of weekly training, rooted within a well-managed and tailored program.
Maximal sprint exposure is not a magic cure. However, when integrated purposefully — especially on the right training days and with load monitoring — it can significantly reduce injury risk and enhance physical readiness. Furthermore, accounting for curve sprinting and directional asymmetries adds another layer of specificity that reflects the true nature of football performance.
Coaches must shift the paradigm to build faster, more resilient footballers. Sprinting should no longer be feared—it should be trained, tracked, and strategically programmed. The players who have the capacity to train at high speeds are the ones most likely to stay on the pitch.
References
Andrzejewski, M., Chmura, J., Pluta, B., Strzelczyk, R., & Kasprzak, A. (2012). Analysis of sprinting activities of professional soccer players. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27(8), 2134–2140. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0b013e318279423e
Bourne, M. N., Timmins, R. G., Opar, D. A., Pizzari, T., Ruddy, J. D., Sims, C., Williams, M. D., & Shield, A. J. (2017). An Evidence-Based Framework for strengthening exercises to prevent hamstring injury. Sports Medicine, 48(2), 251–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0796-x
Buchheit, M., Settembre, M., Hader, K., & McHugh, D. (2023). Exposures to near-to-maximal speed running bouts during different turnarounds in elite football: association with match hamstring injuries. Biology of Sport, 40(4), 1057–1067. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125595
Buckthorpe, M., Wright, S., Bruce-Low, S., Nanni, G., Sturdy, T., Gross, A. S., Bowen, L., Styles, B., Della Villa, S., Davison, M., & Gimpel, M. (2018). Recommendations for hamstring injury prevention in elite football: translating research into practice. British Journal Of Sports Medicine, 53(7), 449–456. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099616
Ekstrand, J., Spreco, A., Bengtsson, H., & Bahr, R. (2021). Injury rates decreased in men’s professional football: an 18-year prospective cohort study of almost 12 000 injuries sustained during 1.8 million hours of play. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55(19), 1084–1092. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-103159
Faude, O., Koch, T., & Meyer, T. (2012). Straight sprinting is the most frequent action in goal situations in professional football. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(7), 625–631. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.665940
Filter, A., Olivares-Jabalera, J., Santalla, A., Morente-Sánchez, J., Robles-Rodríguez, J., Requena, B., & Loturco, I. (2020). Curve sprinting in soccer: Kinematic and Neuromuscular analysis. International Journal of Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1144-3175
Garrett, W. E. (1996). Muscle strain injuries. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 24(6_suppl), S2–S8. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354659602406s02
Woods, C., Hawkins, R. D., Maltby, S., Hulse, M., Thomas, A., & Hodson, A. (2004). The Football Association Medical Research Programme: an audit of injuries in professional football—analysis of hamstring injuries. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 38(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2002.002352
Yu, B., Liu, H., & Garrett, W. E. (2017). Mechanism of hamstring muscle strain injury in sprinting. Journal of Sport and Health Science/Journal of Sport and Health Science, 6(2), 130–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2017.02.002
About the Author
Rob Braat
Rob is the Founder of The Athlete Forge and Premium Movement & Performance (PMP). Rob holds a Bachelor of Science in Sports and Exercise Science from Victoria University in Melbourne, Australia, and is currently completing his Master’s degree in Strength and Conditioning at St. Mary’s University in London, Twickenham.
In addition to his academic background, Rob works within the Academy of a professional football club in the Eredivisie (Netherlands), where he helps develop and enhance the performance of athletes training at the highest level. With extensive experience in both coaching and performance science, Rob is dedicated to advancing the field and supporting athletes to reach their full potential.
Add comment
Comments