ARTICLE IX  

MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF
NUTRITION
Official publication of the Nutrition Society of Malaysia

December 1999, Volume 5 No. 1&2

Mal J Nutr 5:79-86, 1999.
http://nutriweb.org.my/publications/mjn005/mjn5n12_009.pdf

Antropometric measurements and body composition of English and Malaysian footballers

Reeves SL1, Poh BK3, Brown M1, Tizzard NH2 and Ismail MN3
1 Department of Sports Health and Excercise Science, St Mary's University Colledge, Strawberry Hill, Twickenham, TW1 4SX, United Kingdom.
2 Marborough School, Lodon Road, Iseworth, TW4 5RT, United Kingdom.
3 Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Allied Health  Science, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 50300 Kuala Lumpur.

ABSTRACT   (Full Article)
This comparative study was conducted to determine the anthropometric measurements and body composition of football teams in the UK and Malaysia. A total of 32 footballers from two teams were studied. The teams were the St Mary’s University team (UK) and the Selangor Reserved League team. The height and body weight of the subjects were measured using SECA digital balance with height attachment. Skinfold thickness measurements were taken using Harpenden skinfold callipers at four sites (biceps, triceps, subscapular and suprailiac) and the VO2max of the subjects was estimated by participation in a multi-stage 20m shuttle-run test. The UK team were significantly heavier (p<0.05), taller (p<0.05) and had a higher body fat content (p<0.05) than their Malaysian counterpart. There was no significant difference in VO2 max between the two teams, with the Malaysians recording a slightly higher VO2 max. With regard to playing position, the defenders were found to be the most physically robust and yet had the highest VO2 max, whilst the midfielders had the lightest body weights. More data on the body composition and nutritional status of Malaysian footballers would allow adjustments to be made to dietary intakes and training levels in order to obtain maximum performance throughout the football season.

 

March 1995, Vol1 No.1
September 1995, Vol1 No.2
March 1996, Vol2 No.1
September 1996, Vol2 No.2
March 1997, Vol3 No.1
September 1997, Vol3 No.2
December 1998, Vol4 No.1&2
December 1999, Vol5 No.1&2
March 2000, Vol6 No.1
September 2000, Vol6 No.2
Mar/Sept 2001, Vol7 No.1&2
March 2002, Vol8, No.1
September 2002, Vol8, No.2
March 2003, Vol9 No.1
September 2003, Vol9 No.2
March 2004, Vol10 No.1
September 2004, Vol10 No. 2
2005, Vol 11 No.1
2005, Vo l11 No.2
2006, Vol 12 No.1
2006, Vol 12 No.2
2007, Vol 13 No.1
2007, Vol 13 No.2
March 2008, Vol 14 No.1
2008, Vol 14 No.2
2009, Vol 15 No.1
2009, Vol 15 No.2
2010, Vol 16(1)

2010, Vol 16(2)

2010, Vol 16(3)

2011, Vol 17(1)

2011, Vol 17(2)

2011, Vol 17(3)