Too many games over the festive period?

[G-Dragon]

Rotation Rotation Rotation. #squad

 

[Cornish Piskie]

all the knee-jerk 'fuck u i ain't feeling sorry for footballers' stuff, but that isn't what these managers are saying at all? It seems almost self-evident, given the pace the game is played at these days, that footballers need more recovery time to be able to meet the almost olympic levels of athleticism and endurance required from them week in, week out.

Is the pace of the game that much greater now than in the past? Not from what I see in edits from byegone days. Sure, it's quicker but by how much..? Where are the studies that would back that statement up..?

And is any additional pace to the game not compensated for by advances in science, technology and adjustments to the culture of football such as the way the game is refereed..?

Sure, there is an excessive demand on players for a short period during the season. That's a given. But this should be within the capacity of "olympian" athletes to cope with, especially in the light of all the benefits the modern player has. It makes me wonder how great Bobby Charlton would have been if he'd had sports scientists monitoring his every heartbeat, a dietician to count every calorie on his plate and only played 70 minutes of a match because there were sufficient substitutes available to ensure he could be replaced whenever. How good would George Best have been if the laws of the game in his day had deterred defenders from trying to break his legs with every tackle..?

I'm not suggesting that players are mollycoddled. It makes sense to take advantage of scientific advances in order to achieve improvements in performance and adapt the laws to reduce or prevent injury. Footballers don't come cheap and the game wants to get the best out of, and protect, their "investments". Fair enough.

It would be great if we could say "Yep..... 96 hours minimum between matches." Nirvana..!! But what effect would that have on the structure of the game..? A longer season in order to fit all the matches in..? So, we start the season in late July and it ends in mid June. And what happens when the domestic season ends and the top players then want to go to the World Cup or Euros without having had any rest first..? And then afterwards, are straight back into preps for the next season..?

Or do we just cut the size of our league, drop a competition here and there or scrap friendly internationals....... with the resultant loss of revenue which would have the knock on effect on the game's attractiveness to TV audiences, attendances, merchandising and the rest of the circus. Where will the money come from for all those stadium redevelopments, big money signings and massive wages then..?

There is a balance involved in football. It's not all about the players (it should be, but it isn't). The game has gone beyond being a sport, it is now a huge corporate monster which has to be fed and that means putting boots on pitches when the public wants to see them. And in England, that includes Christmas.

As a biologist, I'm in full agreement that players need appropriate levels of rest. I'll get technical if you want, but let's just agree to agree, yeah..? I would love to see fresh, fit players giving their best at all times. But I recognise the wider aspects of the game now and as much as I don't particularly like them, I must confess to selfish enjoyment of Christmas football.

I can't propose any panacea to resolve the issue, all I can say is that I don't want to change the current structure and if that means that players get a bit legsore for a couple of weeks in December and January, and they can't tuck into a big plate of turkey on Christmas Day because they've got a match on Boxing Day, then I feel that it goes with the territory.

 

[Camborne Gills]

Which is what they are paid north of 100K a week for

 

[Jockney]

We can look at some peer-reviewed studies if you like, but I'm not sure what keywords to use in a search. In the mean-time, from the Guardian:

"Prozone has worked out that the number of runs made during matches at three-quarters of sprint pace or faster increased from 627 per team per match in 2002-03 to 1,209 in 2005-06, and the ground covered while sprinting increased by 40% over that four-year period."

Sure, there is an excessive demand on players for a short period during the season. That's a given. But this should be within the capacity of "olympian" athletes to cope with, especially in the light of all the benefits the modern player has. It makes me wonder how great Bobby Charlton would have been if he'd had sports scientists monitoring his every heartbeat, a dietician to count every calorie on his plate and only played 70 minutes of a match because there were sufficient substitutes available to ensure he could be replaced whenever. How good would George Best have been if the laws of the game in his day had deterred defenders from trying to break his legs with every tackle..?

I'd say that playing four matches within a ten day period precludes top-level performance: as in, it becomes a physiological impossibility. Of course, that's why Premier League clubs have such big squads, but that still doesn't protect players from injury and only having two transfer windows puts a limitation on fixing these problems. This is a big problem for football league clubs, especially. I watched Millwall play QPR a couple of days before NY. The players looked knackered. It felt like a reserve game, and in the end it was hard to say that any team truly deserved to win (although we did win the game). We lost our next game a few days later in our worst performance of the season. I don't understand why at least one of these games couldn't be played on a free weekday before or after the festive period to give the players adequate recovery time. Boxing Day and NY games are a tradition, but games played in that intervening period? It seems unnecessary even from a financial and commercial standpoint -- everybody's bloody skint, and many people are staying with their families.

Or do we just cut the size of our league, drop a competition here and there or scrap friendly internationals....... with the resultant loss of revenue which would have the knock on effect on the game's attractiveness to TV audiences, attendances, merchandising and the rest of the circus. Where will the money come from for all those stadium redevelopments, big money signings and massive wages then..?

There is a balance involved in football. It's not all about the players (it should be, but it isn't). The game has gone beyond being a sport, it is now a huge corporate monster which has to be fed and that means putting boots on pitches when the public wants to see them. And in England, that includes Christmas.

This is a larger question that requires political and economic transformation going beyond even the football-media industry. Personally, I would be happier with de-commercialisation and less games. We're a long way from that point, though, yes.

 

[Jockney]

Which is what they are paid north of 100K a week for

Well yes, but I could pay you a billion quid to lift a car with your bare hands -- it doesn't mean you'd be able to do it.

 

[Pagnell]

I'd give it a shot though. Money up front however.

 

[Jockney]

I'd give it a shot though. Money up front however.

I'd even do it even knowing that salty fuckers on the internet would be forever rolling their eyes at me.

 

[Cornish Piskie]

We can look at some peer-reviewed studies if you like, but I'm not sure what keywords to use in a search. In the mean-time, from the Guardian:

"Prozone has worked out that the number of runs made during matches at three-quarters of sprint pace or faster increased from 627 per team per match in 2002-03 to 1,209 in 2005-06, and the ground covered while sprinting increased by 40% over that four-year period.".

Thanks for that. Do you have a link to the article and the study that underpins it, please? I'd like to have a read of that rather than just a snip.

Not being picky or anything but I've seen a lot of data in various forms in my work and have learned to take the whole thing and apply a couple of checks and controls rather than take it at face value.

Things to consider might be:

For the purpose of the analysis, what has been defined as a sprint?
What was the distance travelled to qualify for inclusion as a sprint?
Were the sprints analysed carried out by all league clubs or restricted to one division?

Who sponsored the analysis?
What was was the laid down criteria?
What methodology was used to produce the report?
If existing data was used, what sources were used to extract data from?
What business were the sponsors involved in

You say that Prozone produced the report above. Interesting. I did a little digging on Prozone and found that they are an organisation that sells statistical data to interested parties. Their website "about us" section offers the following benefits to its customers:

• Reduce time collecting sports data
• Save time prepping, maintaining & cleaning data
• Increase customer engagement
• Maximise advertising & sponsorship revenue
• Decrease technical implementation costs

They do this by, among other things, a system known as Meta Analysis. This is defined as: A subset of systematic reviews; a method for systematically combining qualitative and quantitative study data from several selected studies to develop a single conclusion that has greater statistical power.

In other words, they select a set of existing reports and studies, and extract data according to the criteria set down for them by whoever is paying them to do it. No actual research - or maybe very little - original research is done.

It's perfectly legal and can be a powerful tool for producing data that can say anything the paying customer wants it to.

Peer reviewed studies are better because they are critiqued by reputable specialists, but these mostly appear in trade journals which tend not to give free access online. But if you can find any I'd be very interested to read it.

I'll do a bit of poking around myself and see what I can come up with.

This is getting interesting now.

 

[Jockney]

Thanks for that. Do you have a link to the article and the study that underpins it, please? I'd like to have a read of that rather than just a snip.

Not being picky or anything but I've seen a lot of data in various forms in my work and have learned to take the whole thing and apply a couple of checks and controls rather than take it at face value.

Things to consider might be:

For the purpose of the analysis, what has been defined as a sprint?
What was the distance travelled to qualify for inclusion as a sprint?
Were the sprints analysed carried out by all league clubs or restricted to one division?

Who sponsored the analysis?
What was was the laid down criteria?
What methodology was used to produce the report?
If existing data was used, what sources were used to extract data from?
What business were the sponsors involved in

You say that Prozone produced the report above. Interesting. I did a little digging on Prozone and found that they are an organisation that sells statistical data to interested parties. Their website "about us" section offers the following benefits to its customers:

• Reduce time collecting sports data
• Save time prepping, maintaining & cleaning data
• Increase customer engagement
• Maximise advertising & sponsorship revenue
• Decrease technical implementation costs

They do this by, among other things, a system known as Meta Analysis. This is defined as: A subset of systematic reviews; a method for systematically combining qualitative and quantitative study data from several selected studies to develop a single conclusion that has greater statistical power.

In other words, they select a set of existing reports and studies, and extract data according to the criteria set down for them by whoever is paying them to do it. No actual research - or maybe very little - original research is done.

It's perfectly legal and can be a powerful tool for producing data that can say anything the paying customer wants it to.

Peer reviewed studies are better because they are critiqued by reputable specialists, but these mostly appear in trade journals which tend not to give free access online. But if you can find any I'd be very interested to read it.

I'll do a bit of poking around myself and see what I can come up with.

This is getting interesting now.

I don't think I can match your level of engagement, but sure, I'll have a look during the week. Who knew that going back to university would have the added benefit of making forum discussions more interesting, eh.

 

[Cornish Piskie]

I know I get a little carried away, but that's how I am when I get involved in something and start going deeper into it. Mea Culpa.

I'm sorry if I've put you off.... or put anybody off the discussion. I'll try to lighten up a little. Or a lot.