Very interesting story. The problem was obviously weren't paid enough. If you had been paid £10,000 per week you obviously would not have got tired and you would not have had all those injuries. It's obvious to me that tiredness, fatigue, strains and injuries are nothing to do with a player's fitness, but they are a direct function of their salary.
So full time professional sportsman who (should) spend all week in pursuit of peak physical fitness should NOT be expected to play 69 hours of football in almost nine months?? I'm glad we've got that cleared up. Anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously a bit of a ****. As a side point, it wasn't uncommon for teams to play twice in one day - does that mean they were less fit, more fit or the game was less demanding playing in two ton shoes and with a medecine ball?? It's mad really.
Obviously I'm a **** then as I don't agree with you. That also means that you don't agree with me either, but that doesn't make you a **** in my eyes. It just means you have a different opinion, that's all.
It means that both teams had their 11 players playing twice in a day. If one team had 11 lads who'd played at 9am that morning v a team that had not played in a week (squad rotation) then there's only one winner. If every side had 16 blokes playing week in, week out there'd be no argument. Our problem is we don't and the players that come in have to work harder than the other teams to compete. But you know all this. Do you still pedal when you're going down hill?
Lasses ? Too busy maintaining peak physical condition to bother with distractions. Well, going for a ride on his pushbike.
Would you say Jessica Ennis is at the peak of physical fitness? The Olympic heptathlon champion. Do you know in how many heptathlons she competed in 2012? Two. Do you know how many her main competitors competed in? Two Would you say Usain Bolt, the fastest man that has ever lived, is the peak of physical fitness? Do you know how many 100m races he ran in 2012 including heats and semi-finals? Eleven. That's well under 2 minutes of running. Why so few? Because competing to your absolute maximum fcuks you up. If they competed more their performances would suffer and their times and distances would be slower and shorter. They'd also be much more susceptible to injury. Usain Bolt can command over £1 million for every race he runs. If he could don't you think he'd be out there every weekend raking in the brass? But he knows if he wants to compete at world record level then he has to limit how often he runs. These are world supertars, they're surrounded by the best coaches and sports scientists in the world. Do you think these people know what they're doing? Do you think they limit the number of competitions for a laugh, or do you think there might be something to it? Competing in sport professionally is nothing like riding your bike or going down to the gym. It requires you to give every last bit of effort, which means that the more you do it without adequate rest the worse your performances become. Footballers have it a bit different. They have to compete in far more games over a season. That means for the majority of the time they are not at their peak and are unable to give their very best. They play with fatigue and slight strains and it opens them up to injury and poor performance. They're still trying their best, but their body is unable to respond because too much competition has literally worn them out. That is exactly the situation we found ourselves in against Charlton. Fatigue from excessive competition resulted in poor performance and a number of injuries. It hit us particularly hard because of the tempo we have been playing at these last few months. We've won games by working harder than the opposition. That hard work caught up with us.
Jay, paint a face on the wall and go and talk to that. It will have more chance of considering what you say than pushbike Pete.
Do you know that in 2012 Australian cyclist Adam Hansen comleted the Giro, Tour de France and the Vuelta?? A total of 9,000km I should think. In addition to competing in numerous other races.
Mmmmmmmm, when it comes to this argument I don't think mentioning the unbelievable fitness and endurance and injury avoiding capabilities of the modern professional cyclist
How many stages did he win? How many times did he have hold of a jersey? He came 94th in the Giro d'Italia, 81st in the Tour De France and 123rd in the Vuelta a España. So he got through the season. Barnsley will get through the season, but I thought you might want us to win games. Winning is what matters isn't it, it's what this is all about. What's this bloke you've mentioned got to do with winning? We're talking about fatigue having a detrimental effect on your ability to win, not to take part.
Eddie Izzard ran 43 marathons in 51 days Trotters, I didn't hear him complaining! Bloody footballers don't know they're born!! And those Formula 1 cars, can you see them competing at Le Mans? No way, the spoilt basterds!
Better example then - Eddie Merckx won the Giro and the Tour in 1972 and1974. Mind, I think the mountains were a bit flatter in the '70s.
Not really sure how the drug riddled push-iron racing is being compared with the beautiful game, however comparing sport in 1972 and sport in 2013 is definitely apples and apples not apples and oranges. I can now see the light, why the **** can they not play 2 games a day 7 days a week. We need our moneys worth!!!!!!!!!!!