Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A comparison of physiological and anthropometric characteristics among playing positions in junior rugby league players.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the physiological and anthropometric characteristics of specific playing positions and positional playing groups in junior rugby league players.

METHODS: Two hundred and forty junior rugby league players underwent measurements of standard anthropometry (body mass, height, sum of four skinfolds), muscular power (vertical jump), speed (10, 20, and 40 m sprint), agility (L run), and estimated maximal aerobic power (multi-stage fitness test) during the competitive phase of the season, after players had obtained a degree of match fitness.

RESULTS: Props were significantly (p<0.05) taller, heavier, and had greater skinfold thickness than all other positions. The halfback and centre positions were faster than props over 40 m. Halfbacks had significantly (p<0.05) greater estimated maximal aerobic power than props. When data were analysed according to positional similarities, it was found that the props positional group had lower 20 and 40 m speed, agility, and estimated maximal aerobic power than the hookers and halves and outside backs positional groups. Differences in the physiological and anthropometric characteristics of other individual playing positions and positional playing groups were uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that few physiological and anthropometric differences exist among individual playing positions in junior rugby league players, although props are taller, heavier, have greater skinfold thickness, lower 20 and 40 m speed, agility, and estimated maximal aerobic power than other positional playing groups. These findings provide normative data and realistic performance standards for junior rugby league players competing in specific individual positions and positional playing groups.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app