Sean Murphy - fitness muggins

Yes, but the fat cats at AwFL HQ could not care a rat’s clacker until some players sue them. By that time that Rsole Dillon and his mates would be retired with their millions and could care even less.

1 Like

Most of ours are happening at training!

Soft tissue curse strikes again, at least we have the bye coming up soon

I’m not convinced it’s negligent by the AFL. Onus should be back on clubs to manage their lists better in a conditioning sense to reduce injury and achieve optimal output.

Some clubs manage players with rests. Some clubs move players into different positions to aid conditioning.

This can go two ways. We keep going down path of bigger benches and more rotations, we end up with fresher players, loess fatigue levels, more congestion and lower scoring. The style of game we got in 2020 / covid exhibit A of what likely happens. That was awful football.

Or, alternatively tell clubs there’s no more rotations, bench, you need to manage your 45 players over the course of a season to manage output and conditioning. Thats what the AFL will do and I agree with them.

Clubs need to adapt to the rules and environment. Crap clubs who get it wrong will fail, have big injury lists and not win games. Other clubs will do things better and benefit. As it should be.

It’s negligent if the game has gotten too physically taxing, they are getting less than 75% (guess) of players on the field often enough through a season and don’t do anything about it.

I think the reasons behind injury increases are because of the reduced playing list and the reduced salary cap spend of football departments in 2020 as well as the rules around speeding up the game that have occurred in the last decade (kick in quickly allowed, 30 seconds to take a set shot, less stoppages in play, etc).

These rule changes have brought about some coaching adjustments too. Forwards (like 2MP) are running 13 to 15 km per game. For reference, Nathan Buckley was doing that as a midfielder a few years after winning his Brownlow. Matthew Lloyd was barely reaching double figures. And Fletch was certainly wasn’t anywhere near that load. We are playing shorter quarters, with less rotations since then.
There have also been some ‘Players Association’ rules providing a better ‘footy v life’ balance. This is all fine and good, but the level of training hasn’t reduced and it’s now constrained into a smaller period of time.

Some teams are capable of dealing with it better than others. As is the case with every year. There’s always one or two teams with a minimal injury list (these are usually successful), a handful that are decent (usually finalists) then a whole lot that are more or less around the same mark and then two that are managing it terribly (these are usually developing teams who don’t have enough decent depth to cover the injuries).

It takes a while to build up a players resistance to injury. Regardless, Murphy has had his shot. When they have the chance (not sure about huis contractural situation), it’s worth looking elsewhere.

6 Likes

it is partly on AFL.
they reduced list sizes, and want marquee players playing every week, and get stroppy when sides “rest” players in season.

1 Like

I agree with this. As ‘Blummers’ said, reduced list sizes and reduced footy spend are things that should be reviewed back to pre Covid levels.

My point is that the answer to more injuries isn’t shorter quarters, more rotations and bigger benches. Responsibility should be on clubs to manage their fitness, given the constraints more optimally. However, support mechanisms like footy dept spend and possibly larger lists are mechanisms that I think should be reviewed and beefed up.

I bet AFL want the answer to be shorter quarters though.

I don’t think they do, they will get less goals, less ads, less $$ from Tv broadcasters etc. I reckon the pressure is coming from coaches who’re asking more from their players to stop opposition from scoring, the ‘players’ whilst game league holds steady.

Shorter quarters with slightly longer breaks will cancel out that loss of ad revenue from less goals, though.

It also means lower operating costs for the broadcasters and a bit more scheduling flexibility. I reckon if there is a push for it, they’ll be leading it.

less goals, but more goal reviews/behind reviews etc.

1 Like

We should stop training so hard.

Bigger list sizes and a new head of fitness should be on our wish list.

Both may help reduce the impact of injuries.

Bigger list size means better VFL performance, as we’ll be able to carry more experienced AFL ready types in addition to the young developing guys. And will be able to target VFL ready guys with AFL potential too.

would be interesting to see the difference in teams training regimes versus how many injuries they get.

Burgess who’s been highly rated at every club he goes to has a different approach to a lot of clubs.
Geelong have said this year they train only twice a week but at a very high intensity so in theory games are less stressful and easier to handle ( hasn’t necessarily worked with a couple of older players, but in general seems to be working).

like it or not, if injury lists keep going the way they are, we are going to go back to having more “atheletes” in the game who train, prepare and recover better, but aren’t necessarily as skilled at football, rather than actual footballers.

Sorry, this fails the logic test.
The game has not gone past the players ability to cope, nor will it ever, as the limiting factor on the fitness demands of the game is the player’s fitness levels itself.

But, fitness levels collectively have continued to go up, and no doubt beyond the ability of some players ability to cope (just to be clear, I’m not talking about Darcy here)Gone are the days of carrying lazy but talented footballers.

And Darcy doing a calf, going for his first slow trot after his early rehab is just plain ■■■■ house management. Couldn’t be further from an example of the demands of the game being too high.

3 Likes

if only he was on the alter G, anti gravity Treadmill.

2 Likes

Alright fellas - taking bets on how badly Essendon lose the bye this season.

Any takers on our magical fitness department turning a 1 week injury into half a season?

Or diagnosing a corky to the quad as requiring an amputation?

Perhaps someone will have a tight calf in the car on the way to training and as soon as they seek medical treatment from the club will become a paraplegic?

I’ll give you 2-1 odds that at least one player currently listed at 2 weeks away, will still be at least 2 weeks by the conclusion of the bye, if not somehow 3 weeks :tipping_hand_man: