English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Both maturity and relative age selection biases are entrenched within professional academy soccer programmes. Lay opinion, and that of some scholars, holds that relative age effects exist as a product of advanced biological maturity, that is relatively older players succeed as a consequence of the physical and athletic advantages afforded by earlier maturation. There is, however, a growing body of evidence to suggest that this is not the case, and that relative age and maturation should be considered and treated as independent constructs. To avoid a disconnect between contemporary academic evidence and practitioner practice, the aim of this commentary is to provide a discussion of pre-existing and new evidence relating to maturity and relative age selection biases in soccer. It is hoped that this commentary will provide an overview of new insight regarding the differences between the two selection phenomena and enable practitioners who are responsible for the (de)selection of academy soccer players for talent development programmes to make more informed decisions regarding their retention/selection strategies.

One of these things is not like the other: time to differentiate between relative age and biological maturity selection biases in soccer?