Comparing Physical Fitness Adaptations Induced by Small-Sided Soccer Games with and Without Ball Touch Limitations: A Randomized Parallel and Controlled Study

While ball touch limitations are frequently implemented in small-sided games (SSGs) to alter physiological and physical responses, existing research has yet to assess their medium-term impact on physical fitness adaptations. This study aimed to compare the effects of SSGs with ball touch limitations (limitedBT) versus free play (freeBT) on adaptations in linear speed, anaerobic power, and aerobic performance. In this randomized parallel controlled trial, 47 youth male soccer players (16.6 ± 0.6 years) were randomly assigned to limitedBT (n = 16), freeBT (n = 16), or a control group (n = 15). Over six weeks, participants in the experimental group attended three additional SSG sessions per week, lasting 12 to 20 minutes, with formats including 4v4, 3v3, 5v5, and 2v2, where the only difference between groups was that the freeBT group had no ball touch limitations, while the limitedBT group did; the control group only participated in regular training. Players were assessed at baseline and post-intervention for linear speed over 10 and 30 meters, anaerobic power performance using the Repeated Sprint Ability Test (RAST), and aerobic performance using the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery test (YYIRT). While at the baseline, no differences were found between groups, following the intervention, significant differences between the groups were observed in the YYIRT (<i>p <</i> 0.001; <i>η_p ²</i> = 0.278), 10-m sprint time (<i>p <</i> 0.001; <i>η_p ²</i> = 0.367), RAST total time (<i>p <</i> 0.001; <i>η_p ²</i> = 0.367) and RAST initial-final decline (<i>p<</i>0.001; <i>η_p ²</i> = 0.274). In the case of YYIRT, the control group showed significantly lower values post-intervention compared to both freeBT (<i>p</i> = 0.048) and limitedBT (<i>p</i> < 0.001). For the 10-meter sprint time, limitedBT demonstrated significantly faster times than both freeBT (<i>p</i> = 0.045) and control (<i>p</i> < 0.001), while freeBT was also significantly faster than control (<i>p</i> = 0.042). Regarding RAST total time, limitedBT recorded significantly better times than both freeBT (<i>p</i> = 0.042) and control (<i>p</i> < 0.001), with freeBT also outperforming control (<i>p</i> = 0.045). Finally, in the RAST initial-final decline, the control group performed significantly worse than both limitedBT (<i>p</i> < 0.001) and freeBT (<i>p</i> = 0.034). In conclusion, this study found that limitedBT effectively enhances anaerobic and short-distance sprint performance, while both limitedBT and freeBT formats similarly improve aerobic capacity, suggesting that incorporating ball touch conditions into training can optimize overall player fitness.