A&H

Distance covered

The Referee Store
santa sangria said:
Have you tried the 4km interval run FIFA test (75 in 15secs, 20 secs rest for 25m x 40)?
I tried a few on the track to get a feel for the pace. Hard not to go too quick. I am dreading the feeling half way through. I haven't tried the whole thing yet. Our fitness tests are in a month.
Click to expand...
We have just changed to this from the 150m in 35secs 50m in 40sec and it was relatively easy. Doing the new one in a few weeks time, will be the same pace but I normally run faster than that anyway, it's the run walk run thing annoys me.
 
A Freethinker said:
@Charlie Jones I am never reaching the half century and I can! average around 4.55 but best in the last six months is 4.27!
Click to expand...

its not the 1km in under 5 minutes, as others have said - I can do 1km in under 5 minutes easy ... its the keeping that pace for 10km that I struggle with - I start to drop off after 4km
 
A Freethinker said:
We have just changed to this from the 150m in 35secs 50m in 40sec and it was relatively easy. Doing the new one in a few weeks time, will be the same pace but I normally run faster than that anyway, it's the run walk run thing annoys me.
Click to expand...
Do you mean the old one was easy?
I think the old one was easy - long rest - pace not crazy.
The new one - the rest is quick - the pace is closer to sprinting and the whole thing is twice as long... much much tougher I think...

Still, it's the Yo-yo IRT (that is optional still in the Fifa test) that really separates the frogs from the spawn...
 
If you want to keep your pace up you probably need to join a running club, I find two track sessions a week one distance and one on speed helps my reffing espeicially when I have 3 games in a weekend. Richard Ramjane good luck with your park run I ref most Saturday Mornings but if I have a 10.30 KO and my game is local I try and squeeze one in. I do most of mine in the summer thouf=gh as I am not reffing PB 22.48 in mud!
 
santa sangria said:
Do you mean the old one was easy?
I think the old one was easy - long rest - pace not crazy.
The new one - the rest is quick - the pace is closer to sprinting and the whole thing is twice as long... much much tougher I think...

Still, it's the Yo-yo IRT (that is optional still in the Fifa test) that really separates the frogs from the spawn...
Click to expand...
Yes old one....haven't tried the new one yet will just do it when I need to...personally find the sprints more difficult to judge the pace cos there is so little time 6 secs so you can't really ease of too much otherwise you could miss in a heart beat! Yo-Yo Irt as long as you aren't first to do it! lol
 
Most modern sports watches use GPS tracking, very few rely on calibration from a set stride length.
Accuracy of GPS depends on two factors, number of satellites available/used and frequency of tracking. Even when running road races they can easily be 2 or 300 metres out in ten kilometres and that is why they are never used for accurate course measurement. GPS measurements only work in straight lines so the inaccuracies occur on bends and corners...........very unreliable on a football pitch but will never be 'short'. So when I say I normally cover 8k in an open age match, I know that's the minimum.
 
When my legs worked properly up until a couple of years ago I could easily run 10km in well under 45 minutes. Originally I had a Garmin Forerunner, but switched over to a Polar V800. The Garmin would report that I did 20-30% more than the Polar, so they can't both be right. So I did fitness test practices with both, and when you then look at how they actually map onto the Google maps image of the track the Polar was MASSIVELY more accurate.

Which deflated me a little, as where I thought I was actually doing 11-12km a game, it was actually much less. Which makes sense when you think about it. A top level box to box central midfielder will rarely top 12km per game, so it is nonsensical to think that a late 30 / early 40s referee will run more than him in a semi-pro game.
 
RustyRef said:
When my legs worked properly up until a couple of years ago I could easily run 10km in well under 45 minutes. Originally I had a Garmin Forerunner, but switched over to a Polar V800. The Garmin would report that I did 20-30% more than the Polar, so they can't both be right. So I did fitness test practices with both, and when you then look at how they actually map onto the Google maps image of the track the Polar was MASSIVELY more accurate.

Which deflated me a little, as where I thought I was actually doing 11-12km a game, it was actually much less. Which makes sense when you think about it. A top level box to box central midfielder will rarely top 12km per game, so it is nonsensical to think that a late 30 / early 40s referee will run more than him in a semi-pro game.
Click to expand...
That seems like a crazy difference. There are few accuracy tests floating about (I can't find any with those two models)... Polar comes out well (it is Finnish - the best - after all) but accuracy seems to be varying less than 10% between watches...

That said I can't find any comparative tests with the kind of running we do as refs. The combination of sprinting, walking, backwards, sideways or just circular trotting for some ;) is probably the hardest for any device to track...
 
santa sangria said:
Pray tell, why so?
Click to expand...
GPS measures straight lines very well but measures curves or arcs in short straight line segments, ergo, running ' in circles' around a footie pitch will always measure short.
RustyRef said:
When my legs worked properly up until a couple of years ago I could easily run 10km in well under 45 minutes. Originally I had a Garmin Forerunner, but switched over to a Polar V800. The Garmin would report that I did 20-30% more than the Polar, so they can't both be right. So I did fitness test practices with both, and when you then look at how they actually map onto the Google maps image of the track the Polar was MASSIVELY more accurate.

Which deflated me a little, as where I thought I was actually doing 11-12km a game, it was actually much less. Which makes sense when you think about it. A top level box to box central midfielder will rarely top 12km per game, so it is nonsensical to think that a late 30 / early 40s referee will run more than him in a semi-pro game.
Click to expand...

May have a lot to do with the GPS technology and the number of satellites it picks up.
 
richard ramjane said:
i'll let you know hopefully after this weekend... if friday night doesnt get me then i'm doing a parkrun in the morning saturday :)
Click to expand...

Can confirm Apple Watch is pretty accurate 5k park run. Measures in on the device as 5.03 km. As someone said though a lot of straight lines there and not a collection of short sharp runs with quick direction changes
 
richard ramjane said:
think the iwatch 2 has its own GPS now , but again not sure as to its accuracy... Runkeeper is the app they recommend for it
i'm going to try it this weekend and see how it goes.
Click to expand...

i have the iWatch 2 and find it very accurate on the GPS side, in game tracker the "map" makes no sense but the road runs are very easy to read. color scale for pace etc.
 
Id prefer it if polar could show you a heat map.

The red lines are fine for a normal run, swim or bike ride but dont really show a good representation of where you spend most of the match on a football pitch.
 
zarathustra said:
Id prefer it if polar could show you a heat map.

The red lines are fine for a normal run, swim or bike ride but dont really show a good representation of where you spend most of the match on a football pitch.
Click to expand...
zara do you have a polar watch then? I'm only asking as I want to invest into one but not sure which to go for? Polar or garmin!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top