Ball possession has been a topic of interest for coaches and sport scientists alike over a varied of different sports such as basketball (1, 2), field hockey (3), ice-hockey (4), futsal (5) and soccer (6). Generally, it was questioned how possession is connected to winning and for the latter sports multiple scientific investigations connected ball possession to successful teams (7–11) in national championships (9–13) as well as international tournaments (7, 8). On the contrary, it was also observed that ball possession did not significantly influence game outcome (14) and furthermore longer ball possession duration was even linked to losing (15) and unsuccessful teams (16). A relative recent systematic review (17) concluded that ball possession is not related to match outcome and being highly variable itself depending on seasonal variations, characteristics of the leagues (12), playing style (18) as well as other factors such as game location (home vs. away), game status (winning vs. drawing vs. losing) and opposition quality (15, 19).

Furthermore, ball possession was observed to affect the team's technical and physical performance (17, 18, 20, 21). For the technical variables teams characterized by possession-play achieved higher values in variables related to passes (21–23) and goalscoring (e.g., pass accuracy, shots inside the box) (18). However, the effect on physical performance was not as consistent and dependent on style of play (23), positional (20, 24, 25) and competition (20) circumstances. Firstly, possession playing style was physically more strenuous compared to counterattacking over the entire match (23). Scientific evidence from the English Premier League (21), the Chinese Super League (24) and from players competing in the FIFA World Cup (22) did not show significant differences in crucial variables between high- and low-possession teams. However, players in the Spanish LaLiga applying very high ball possession showed lower physical running per minute at any speed (25), while players in the UEFA Champions League employing high ball possession strategies experience greater sprinting and high-intensity running (20). Given these contradicting circumstances, ball possession remains a topic of interest, especially as it remains a common feature incorporated into small-sided games (SSG) of the training routine of modern-day teams However, no study to date has compared ball possession small-sided games SSG vs. those promoting goal scoring. This seems crucial to further inform the training and load monitoring process. Therefore, this narrative mini-review aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effects of ball possession SSG compared with goal scoring formats in male players.

While methods for literature searches are not mandatory for narrative reviews their inclusion can help to circumvent the increased risk for selection and inclusion bias (26), associated with a narrative style of review especially, when limited number of references are present (27). Therefore, a basic search strategy was adopted, inclusive of inclusion/exclusion criteria. Major databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SportDiscus, and Scopus, Google scholar) were searched from the earliest date available until November 2025 using various combinations of the following key words “coaching”, “training”, “possession”, “soccer”, “football”, “small-sided games”, “scoring”, “goal”, “goal number”. This search was supplemented by utilizing grey literature (https://opengrey.eu) and reference list screening of included studies, along with searches within previous reviews on similar topics. Identification of suitable articles involved the initial screening of the titles and abstracts while the second stage comprised a full-text review of the remaining articles. To be included in this review, studies needed to focus on possession and goal scoring during SSG and its effect on physiological, physical, technical and tactical parameter. Strength of evidence synthesis of quality assessments were not conducted as not required (26). All included references and the effect of possession soccer on outcome variables can be observed in Table 1.

A total of 14 studies (221 male players) involving adult (five studies 90 participants) (28–32) and youth (nine studies 131 participants) (33–41) players, in different small-sided games (SSG) in different playing modes such as 2 vs. 2 (30), 3 vs. 3 (28, 32, 35, 37), 4 vs. 4 (29, 30, 36, 38, 39, 41), 5 vs. 5 (31–34, 40), 6 vs. 6 (39, 40), 7 vs. 7 (31, 32) and 10 vs. 10 (31) were explored.

This narrative mini-review aimed to provide a first overview of the influence of ball possession compared to goal-scoring SSG in soccer. Ball possession is a specific task constraint implemented frequently by coaches during SSG. However, there are several consequences utilizing possession games with regards to physiological, physical, technical and tactical outcomes. Possession games increase the physiological load in players. Coaches can increase heart rate and the duration >90%HRmax for their players, who subjectively feel greater exertion in possession games. Therefore, this makes possession SSG particularly effective for aerobic conditioning, especially in small formats (2 vs. 2–4 vs. 4), whilst subjectively very tasking. However, as player numbers increase (≥6 vs. 6), physiological differences between possession and scoring formats diminish. Coaches should therefore prioritize smaller possession games when the goal is to overload cardiovascular systems, while larger formats may be used for physiologically less demanding sessions and positional-specific training.

Players will also experience greater physical strain whilst playing possession SSG. Greater total distance, distance per minute with greater average moving speed, more distance in high(er) speed bands (e.g., >18 km/h) and mechanical load through ACC and DEC can be expected with implementing possession games. These characteristics make possession SSG suitable for developing physical work capacity, particularly, considering higher-work-to-rest ratio. However, it seems that scoring games may better stimulate maximal sprinting and peak speed actions, suggesting both formats should be alternated depending on the targeted physical quality.

The present narrative mini-review indicates that technical execution (e.g., passing frequency, ball touches) can be increased through possession SSG. This makes them useful for coaches working with cohorts where the primary goal is to enhance technical skills by exposing players to constant technical involvement (e.g., individual sessions). However, the reduced number of shots and goal-related actions suggests that possession games should be complemented with scoring-based tasks when finishing and attacking outcomes are prioritized.

The limited evidence regarding the tactical consequences in SSG due to possession games indicate that greater number of players are involved for extended period of time exploring greater space, while decreasing distance to nearest opponent. From a practical perspective, possession SSG appear suited for training objectives related to collective organization in possession, particularly when the aim is to develop coordinated team behaviors. Additionally, emerging evidence suggests that possession SSG may encourage players to utilize a greater proportion of the available playing space. Coaches can exploit this by designing possession tasks that emphasize width and depth, as well as continuous off-ball movement and adjustment (e.g., during build-up phases).

The aforementioned should be interpreted cautiously given the limited and somehow heterogeneous evidence. More precisely, this narrative mini-review utilized all available scientific evidence regarding the effects of possession format SSG in comparison to goal scoring SSG involving any types of goals and their effect on physiological, physical, technical and tactical parameters disregarding various other task constraints such as the relative pitch size (48), number of players (32), and touch restrictions (49), that influenced the aforementioned parameters. In addition, the statements within each section (physiological, physical, technical, tactical) might be based on different populations (youth and adults) with various playing experience and skill level. However, due to the limited available research with regards to possession SSG in comparison to scoring-format, the available scientific information was pooled in this narrative mini-review. Consequently, more research using more format configurations (e.g., relative pitch size, number of players) in various populations (e.g., male, female, youth and adults) is required to provide more generalisable recommendations for coaches. Coaches should be cognizant that younger footballers might present difficulties maintaining possession during SSG. Nevertheless, in the light of these limitations, coaches can utilize possession SSG to influence the physiological, physical, and technical demands during SSG.