Who do work more, top soccer leagues' players or nhlers?
- Thread starter Kshahdoo
- Start date
I played competitive soccer and hockey as a teen. Nothing was more exhausting than the summer sun on a soccer pitch.
and a pro soccer player who last 1 minute on the ice with their 160 pound frames. lot easier to run all day when ur not 200+ pounds.
Bryanbryoil
Pray For Ukraine
- Sep 13, 2004
- 86,180
- 34,570
This is an ignorant statement. As if every hockey player is huge or every soccer player is small.
These are some really small soccer players.
Romelu Lukaku Stats, News, Bio | ESPN
Matthijs de Ligt Stats, News, Bio | ESPN
Hulk Stats, News, Bio | ESPN
Top 10 Heaviest Soccer Players in the World in 2020 - Welsh Premier (welsh-premier.com)
Last edited:
yeah uve found a couple players in the world who play at a high level and are heavy. de ligt really isnt someone id even consider big comparatively speaking.
Yeah, add the league cup, National cup, Euro cups, international tournaments for national teams (not for all players, but still), and you'll get close to 70 games/season for some players.
I don't think that this is just about gametime but training and all the other aspects that pro athlete needs to do. In the end, it's probably pretty close.
There is a reason why hockey players take a break every 40 seconds or so and it's not because they are worse athletes than football players... That's like comparing marathon runners to boxers.
- May 9, 2014
- 4,971
- 6,777
The fitness demands of both are very different both both sets of players work as hard as each other. However those incorrectly saying football players stand around most of the time an easily be countered by pointing out hockey players are sitting down for 30-45 minutes of each 60 minute game (I disagree with both viewpoints btw). In terms of fitness though I’d saying footballers probably get more out of the work they do at the elite level as the sports science departments in football are light years ahead.
Where football does have it tougher in workload is the calendar. International tournaments are jammed in all over the place and it means players don’t get the off season time they need. They have to report for international duty and can’t pull out on the clubs say so. So even if they are not fit, according to their clubs that pay the wages, the international team can overrule them and insist the player reports. Players frequently play when half fit and get returned to their clubs with more serious injuries. Without proper off seasons plenty top football players, on successful teams, get injured due to fatigue. So I’d say that at the top le el football players have a heavier workload.
Where football does have it tougher in workload is the calendar. International tournaments are jammed in all over the place and it means players don’t get the off season time they need. They have to report for international duty and can’t pull out on the clubs say so. So even if they are not fit, according to their clubs that pay the wages, the international team can overrule them and insist the player reports. Players frequently play when half fit and get returned to their clubs with more serious injuries. Without proper off seasons plenty top football players, on successful teams, get injured due to fatigue. So I’d say that at the top le el football players have a heavier workload.
Bryanbryoil
Pray For Ukraine
- Sep 13, 2004
- 86,180
- 34,570
Kid has some really thick legs and fairly broad shoulders. Not unlike many NHL players.
alko
Registered User
Every-time when they show in TV a soccer training, the players chat together, laugh, make some light exercises.
1865
Alpha Couturier
In the Premier League, sure. In the Championship it's 46, plus the League Cup. Plus the FA Cup. Prem teams have Europe on top which can be another 20 games in some cases. Then you have internationals on top (another 10 a year) plus a tournament every other year which is usually 3 warm-ups plus 3-7 games in the tournament. Some teams play up to 60 games a season.
What I’ve learned about this board is that despite it being a hockey board, it will always lose in a comparison to another sport.
Doesn’t matter whether it’s about popularity, ease to play, conditioning, good looks, etc.
Doesn’t matter whether it’s about popularity, ease to play, conditioning, good looks, etc.
Iapyi
Registered User
You are correct. It's pathetic but true. Just remember this board is NOT a microcosm of hockey or it's fan base.
Both sports use different energy systems.
Soccer is much more aerobic whereas hockey is much more anaerobic.
The training thus is different for each sport. Soccer requires much more conditioning and cardio. Hockey is a more explosive sport. You need to train for strength and power to be effective.
Which is harder (or requires more work)....the answer is both. Just differently. The people saying hockey only requires 45-1 min shifts....well that is because the human system can only perform explosively for that long (for effectiveness). Think of jump training vs steady state cardio. All of us can use both forms of training but jump training will tire you out much more quickly vs steady state cardio. That is hockey.
Also someone mentioned something about soccer requiring more mental abilities.....I won't argue it here but I will state that hockey is one of the most demanding sports ever. It requires power, strength, balance (on skate blades), hand eye coordination and the ability to do this using a stick and players moving around you at super speeds (requiring ability to read and react at speeds much higher than many sports). The amount of multi-tasking required in hockey I believe is greater than all other sports.
ESPN did sports difficulty ranking many years ago. Hockey was #2 behind boxing (ESPN.com: Page 2 - Sport Skills Difficulty Rankings)
Soccer is much more aerobic whereas hockey is much more anaerobic.
The training thus is different for each sport. Soccer requires much more conditioning and cardio. Hockey is a more explosive sport. You need to train for strength and power to be effective.
Which is harder (or requires more work)....the answer is both. Just differently. The people saying hockey only requires 45-1 min shifts....well that is because the human system can only perform explosively for that long (for effectiveness). Think of jump training vs steady state cardio. All of us can use both forms of training but jump training will tire you out much more quickly vs steady state cardio. That is hockey.
Also someone mentioned something about soccer requiring more mental abilities.....I won't argue it here but I will state that hockey is one of the most demanding sports ever. It requires power, strength, balance (on skate blades), hand eye coordination and the ability to do this using a stick and players moving around you at super speeds (requiring ability to read and react at speeds much higher than many sports). The amount of multi-tasking required in hockey I believe is greater than all other sports.
ESPN did sports difficulty ranking many years ago. Hockey was #2 behind boxing (ESPN.com: Page 2 - Sport Skills Difficulty Rankings)
Hockeyholic
Registered User
Rugby is more exhausting then either of them, especially for front row forwards, but of all the different games I played (many), water polo was by far the most tiring.
Top end soccer players run a marathon per week if they have to play 3 games. This doesn't include practice.
The difference is that they have to mix aerobic with anaerobic exercise during games.
Soccer is also invariably a harder sport on the body with players having higher incidents of physical injuries than hockey players.
The difference is that they have to mix aerobic with anaerobic exercise during games.
Soccer is also invariably a harder sport on the body with players having higher incidents of physical injuries than hockey players.
Really?
I've done this math in the past.
A soccer ball, which is multiple times heavier than a puck, travelling far faster than the hardest Chara snapshot recorded, has many times the kinetic energy.
The shots from some players have enough force to cause serious internal harm if taken on the chest or head.
Without padding!
That's a horrifically ignorant statement to make.
No brainer it's soccer as they run 45+45 mins without rest with only 1 intermission; hockey players rest after every min of play and have 2 intermissions
Did I make a statement? Looks like a question to me.
Inadvertently blocking a shot almost killed Mats Zuccarello. Left him so messed up he had to re-learn how to talk. Blocking shots routinely results in broken bones in hockey. Does it in football?
I'm not saying taking a soccer ball to the head won't hurt/be dangerous, but they're not even remotely the same.
Last edited:
KoozNetsOff 92
Hala Madrid
- Apr 6, 2016
- 8,567
- 8,229
"soccer" is the highest participation sport in Canada and no, everyone playing isn't under 10. The best athletes don't play hockey, only the ones who can afford to play. Worldwide no one cares about hockey, the best athletes go into football, basketball, athletics, etc.
Iapyi
Registered User
I'm glad no one cares about hockey worldwide. I'm glad you agree with me about the cost of hockey being
so exorbitant. I think something should be done about it. I have some great ideas but what do you think?
I know not everyone playing is under 10, that's not even close to what I said.
btw - wasn't it just fabulous watching Canada win the WC again? That was quite the heart we showed once more.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Portland Winterhawks @ Prince George Cougars - Game 1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 3 Winnipeg Jets @ Colorado Avalanche - Series tied 1-1Wagers: 9Staked: $33,735.00Event closes- Updated: