In my youth, with the old leather ball, heavy pitches and boots(!) they used to play on Christmas Day and Boxing Day. Today it should be a doddle, plus getting paid wages that the majority in this country can only dream
They can play them but it's not physically possible to be as fit as another team of professional athletes who've had an extra day of rest.
We have done the for the last few years - okay saturday and Monday. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes it is, for 90 minutes. Its more about stamina than fitness but two games in three days, as an exception, shouldn't be too much for them to cope with.
Yes it is, for 90 minutes. Its more about stamina than fitness but two games in three days, as an exception, shouldn't be too much for them to cope with.
Johnson has pretty much blamed today's performance on it by saying they were mentally tired after playing the two games. And to think it was a situation we apparently chose to put ourselves in to save a few quid
Managers use it as an excuse and the more they say it the more people believe it. Its funny this tiredness never used to have such an impact on players. I remember Liverpool winning the league and European cup using only 14 players.
I too think that players should be able to play more games but perhaps one team playing more games than another in a shorter space of time does make one tireder than the other? Liverpool won that but did every other team play less games or were they all in the same boat?
All the other teams in the league will have played less games as there was only 1 team in euro cup back then. Liverpool once won the euro cup, league and league cup using not many more players.
Anyone who has been a pro footballer or an endurance athlete will tell you that you need 3-4 Days to recover. Colchester would have had at least a 5% advantage over the reds players. The thing which annoys me about this is that Johnson was saying the squad was big enough to cope. Not with players with no bottle it isn't.
Playing twice a week is a pre - requisite of being a footballer if the team you play for is going to be successful. Bottle is about right. We need some nous in there.
I believe the club decision to make a bit more money by playing twice in three days has cost us a promotion push. Be nice if Mansford would be asked if he agreed with it. An extra day of rest could have made all the difference. Being the only team in the league playing twice in three days isn't good.
It undoubtedly makes a difference though. It's physically impossible to have recovered as well as a player of equal fitness who has had an extra days rest.
I'd maybe have more sympathy if it was a regular occurrence but as it is, with the way the players are prepared these days I just don't think that it makes too much difference.
Sorry Mario, the amount of pre training isn't the issue, it's the time needed to replenish everything thats lost when you're working at 100%, the human body can only intake so much, and process so much, both of the energy givers and the waste products, a full days rest and replenishment in such a short space of time gives more than an edge assuming both teams have equal fitness and equal dietary plans. I don't know how much it showed, having not seen the game, but if the Saturday kick off was for purely short term financial reasons, I don't think it was worth risking the gain in the longer term. 3 points today could well have yielded more benefits at the end of the season than attracting a few extra deedahs and fair weather fans.
