Workload Monitoring in Team Sports: Using Elite Cricket as an Example

Abstract

Workload monitoring is used to assess athlete preparedness to ensure that they are optimally prepared for competition. Although many workload studies have been done, most are delimited to individual sport athletes and endurance athletes. There is also controversy regarding which measures and in what combinations they should be used. There is a paucity of literature on workload monitoring in team sports such as cricket. Cricket is an interesting and complex sport which has dimensions of many other sports (team and individual) and was the focus of this broad, narrative review. The review highlights the unique demands of the sport and why consideration of the sport in question is important. It further identifies that most of the workload research has been done on fast bowlers with debate surrounding optimal workloads. It calls for research in specific areas and importantly on other player positions considering their unique demands and identifies what can be used currently by practitioners in the field.

Introduction

The main purpose of monitoring loads in athletes is to determine the efficacy of a training program; to manage fatigue and promote adequate recovery to minimize the risk of non-functional overreaching, illness and injury [1,2]. Importantly, this has relevant performance implications [4] which is the main goal of competition particularly at the elite level; an athlete who is not optimally trained and/or injured will not perform at their full potential.

According to the consensus statement of Bourden et al. [2], it is important to measure both internal (biological stressors) and external (objective measures of work performed by the athlete) loads. Measures of internal load can be either subjective or objective such as heart rate and session rating of perceived exertion, respectively [4]. External load measures include distances covered, balls thrown, global position system (GPS) measures and many more (for a summary of some of these methods, refer to Bourden et al. [2]). The consensus statement provides a good overview of load monitoring and emphasizes the importance of using multiple measures to get an integrated understanding.

The context is important and, therefore, understanding the sport the athlete is participating in is key; this includes the broader context of the systems in which these teams and sports are operating [4]. So, while the basic principles of workload monitoring can be applied across all sports, what is measured and how the data are used should be sport and context specific. Furthermore, the level of play is important to consider and most of the research on load management has been done at a semi-elite level and on endurance and ultra-endurance sports [5] and there is a paucity of literature on load monitoring in elite athletes and on athletes participating in team sports, such as cricket.

Cricket is unique as it is both an individual and a team sport with elements of sprinting, striding, walking, standing, throwing and catching-elements required by many other sports and the reason this review has focused on this particular sport. Although there is some research on managing workloads in elite-level cricketers, the information is inconclusive and incomplete particularly as the sample foci is usually fast bowlers. At the elite level in any sport, there are many challenges to obtaining workload data including the coach and athlete’s beliefs, which can determine their ‘buy-in’ to certain workload measures and, what resources are available. More important, though, is that many of the data are being obtained but are unpublished [5] as this may be seen as taking away their competitive advantage.

Therefore, the aim of this review is to provide an overview of the current literature on workload monitoring, using elite cricketers as an example, to guide practice and future research.

The Demands of Cricket

The game of cricket is a highly technical and skilled game that is played by two teams, of eleven players each, on an oval field. The greatest challenge about cricket is that it consists of four distinct disciplines all requiring specialized skills; these include batting, bowling, fielding and wicket keeping [7]. These different roles are all unique with their own physiological and biomechanical demands [7–11].

The main formats at elite level are test match cricket (multiday cricket) and limited overs cricket which consists of two formats (1-day games and 20 over games) These three formats have different demands [8–11]. In the past, cricket has been perceived as a game that required a low level of physical fitness as well as minimal physical requirements [13]. Recent research, though, has shown that the demands have increased [12,13], due to the different formats and the different demands for the unique disciplines [14]. Further, because of the introduction of additional matches and T20 competitions, elite cricketers are subjected to longer seasons [9].

The demands of the game are impacted by duration and intensity of effort, so different distances are covered at varying intensities depending on the activity required of each position. This is influenced by a multitude of factors; for example, the competition, the stage of the game and crowd dynamics, to name a few. During limited overs, cricket batters cover, on average, the least amount of distance compared to the other disciplines [7,15]. Out of the three disciplines the fast bowlers cover, on average, the most distance with the most sprints [12]. A batter covers 1.4 km and 1.7 km for 1-day cricket and T20s, respectively [7,15]. A hypothetical century scored by a batter will require them to cover a distance on average of 3.2 km [12]. During the batting innings, the batter spends approximately 63% of the time above 75% of their maximum heart rate [13].

For bowling, fast bowlers have a high physical and biomechanical demand due to the complexity of the bowling action and high ground contact velocity forces during the landing action [18,19]. Spin bowlers do not cover as much distance [7,15] because of differences in run-up length and because they require more fine motor skills compared to fast bowlers who use more gross motor skills [8].

The demands of fielders in recent years have been more recognized particularly as the margin for error is smaller in the field than what it used to be [20]. Nowadays, fielders need to cover more distance at faster speeds to try and limit the number of runs that are conceded by the bowlers [20]. Fielders have to maintain concentration levels for a long period of time just by virtue of the time required to field. During a T20 match, fielders have to remain focused for a period of 90 min and during a 1-day match for up to 5 h [20]. Fielders cover, on average, between 5.4 km and 6.0 km during T20 and 1-day matches, respectively [7,11,15]. However, high-intensity efforts during a T20 are highest and more than double than that of both test matches and 1-day matches [10,11]. This indicates that the duration of the match does not affect the distance, but it does affect the intensity of effort by the fielders as more work is required in a shorter space of time [7,11,15]. All of the disciplines also use full-body movements to execute their respective tasks on the field and these tasks are also constantly varied and changing. This makes it a difficult sport to get a true indication of the load experienced by each player. How best we measure load and how relevant it is to cricketers is, therefore, an important area for future research.

Workload Monitoring in Elite Cricketers—What is the Evidence to Date?

Monitoring training load in cricket is still a relatively new concept, with very few published articles available on elite cricketers; of the available literature, most is focused on elite fast bowlers. There is a paucity of literature linking workload to performance. A few studies have identified how bowling performance is impacted during repeated spells or examined muscle damage following acute bouts of bowling [9]. Workload can also be used in conjunction with other measures to identify various physical and physiological responses (training and competition loads) in elite cricketers.

Fast bowlers have been reported to have a higher competition workload when compared to non-fast bowlers and subsequently have greater fatigue responses [21]. There are suggestions that bowlers should bowl between 123–188 deliveries per week; anything below or above this range has been lined to increased injury risk [22]. More than 3 and 1/2 days between sessions and greater than 50 deliveries per day can lead to injury [21]. Furthermore, it has been suggested that there is a risk of injury when bowling less than two and greater than 2 and 1/2 days per week [21]. These studies have concluded that future research is needed on monitoring fast bowler workload [21,22].

A high acute workload in elite cricket fast bowlers has been linked to a delayed increase in risk of injury up to 21–28 days after the acute overload has occurred [9,21,24]. A study by Orchard et al. [25] reported no increased risk of injury 28 days after the higher match bowling workload for periods of 12–26 days. However, if the bowling workload exceeded 100 overs in 17 days or less, the injury rates were higher [25]. This “acute overload” can also be referred to as spikes in workload and is often visualized using acute:chronic ratios, which has been used in various studies. Hulin and colleagues [9] found that injury risk increased significantly one week following spikes in acute workload in elite fast bowlers which is in contrast to the 3–4-week-delayed injury risk identified by Orchard et al. [24]. More research around this is warranted.

There is very little evidence on other player position’s workloads although higher throwing workloads have been linked to increased injury risk in elite cricketers [26]. Injured players completed a greater number of throws (more than 75 throws per week), with less rest days the week before the injury occurred compared to the rest of the season [26]. Thus, increased throwing workload is a risk factor for the development of upper limb injuries in cricketers [26]. The authors noted that only one injured player was a bowler [26]. Future research needs to analyze throwing workloads of specific disciplines in conjunction with their combined workloads [26] as all players are required to bat and field with others also being required to bowl and keep wicket.

One study has linked workloads to types of injuries; a study done on fast bowlers [27]. Fast bowling workload patterns are associated with an increased risk for tendon, muscle, bone and joint injuries [27]. High acute match workload and high previous season workload are risk factors for tendon injuries and a high previous season workload is marginally protective against muscle injuries [27]. Tendon injuries are most affected by workload and it has been suggested that with workload planning needs to be individualized as some players are more or less susceptible to various injuries [27].

Conclusion and Recommendations for Players and Practitioners

Workload monitoring is seen as an important tool to determine whether an athlete is in a relative state of fitness or fatigue [28]. This is important from both a player and coach’s perspective as correct workload prescription can help with reducing injury risk as well as improving performance. However, in the game of cricket, the evidence is still weak and so, a lot more research is required particularly at the elite level.

Irrespective of the sport, the literature is divided in terms of which monitoring methods to use, when to implement them and lastly how to analyze the data, specifically within the sporting environment [28]. Furthermore, when looking particularly at the game of cricket, it is often practically challenging to monitor player workload as cricket is unpredictable in nature. The fact that there are three main formats and multiple competitions played around the world means that players are often working with different coaches and trainers which makes it difficult to monitor total workload accurately; different trainers also use different methods and measures.

Although there are limitations to monitoring player workload in a cricket setting, there are several advantages as well as recommendations that can be suggested for coaches and practitioners based on current evidence (these are useful for all sports):

• The acute:chronic workload ratio has been linked to injury, more specifically spikes in acute workload. Coaches and trainers, therefore, need to avoid exposing players to sudden, high acute workloads and build an elevated chronic workload through properly controlled progressions and periodisation programs.

• There is a need to view external, internal, objective and subjective responses in combination with each other when providing training prescriptions rather than relying on a single monitoring tool. This is of particular importance in cricket due to the unpredictable nature of the game.

• Regardless of budget, equipment or facilities there are cost-effective measures to monitor workload (e.g., questionnaire based, subjective measures). These do, however, have to be interpreted carefully as additional stressors may also play a role, for example, sleep and emotions.

• There is a need to educate both players and coaches on monitoring workload as well as the different methods and approaches that can be used to ensure accurate and reliable inferences to be made.

Author Contributions

CJC: Concepts, Design, Definition of intellectual content, Literature search, Manuscript preparation, Manuscript editing, Manuscript review. DVB: Concepts, Design, Definition of intellectual content, Literature search, Manuscript editing, Manuscript review. LP: Concepts, Design, Definition of intellectual content, Literature search, Manuscript editing, Manuscript review. CEM: Concepts, Design, Definition of intellectual content, Literature search, Manuscript editing, Manuscript review.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

Ethical standard statement

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed be the any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, informed consent is not required.