I hope... (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter skybluetony176
- Start date
- Status
Otis
Well-Known Member
After coming on as an 89th minute substitute because there's simply no-one else.Throwing up on the sidelines for the local pub team
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
"The physical outputs of players have been shown to go up and up over the last five or six years," says Dr Sam Erith.
That can't be true. The experts on here (sickboys catchphrase) have told us nothing has changed in the last 10 years.
covmark
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Hang on, I'm lost.
So what a load of people are arguing is that Joe Cole should have come to us even more fit than Wise when he came here, because Cole was benefitting from the amazing progress of sports science in the top flight?
So what a load of people are arguing is that Joe Cole should have come to us even more fit than Wise when he came here, because Cole was benefitting from the amazing progress of sports science in the top flight?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Of course you have.
idm1975
Well-Known Member
Its impossible to debate with someone who answers a question with a question.....it shows you for what you are.
tomreagan84
Well-Known Member
A bit of a sidetrack from our important debate, but I've just got home, been using my mobile; half the comments that are viewable on tapatalk, aren't showing on the desktop site.
Obviously one for Nick, is there a delay in mobile comments being posted?
Obviously one for Nick, is there a delay in mobile comments being posted?
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Of course the technology has changed. Do you agree that it is not possible to compare a player from 2016 to one from 2006 due to this?
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I've noticed that but thought it was a way of sparing the others from the 'debates'
usskyblue
Well-Known Member
It stands to reason.
And Grendel took the majority opinion of everyone on here as a guide...stunning, given he called them 'intellectually bereft'.
....you couldn't make it up
Otis
Well-Known Member
Maybe it has a bullshit filter fitted?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The quote is about the results on player's because of the technology, try reading it again.
Try reading the whole article. It's the opinion of experts based on knowledge and facts. It's not the half arsed supposition of two numpties on a forum who wouldn't know what a treadmill looked like if they tripped over it in a gym, assuming that they actually knew what a gym was.
The technology (according to Dr Sam Erith, not me or USSB) has had an effect on players fitness over the last 5-6 years. That's an even shorter period of time than the 10 years you find laughable.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that the good Dr is better qualified to make that call than you and Grendull. Unless of course you're about to tell us you're more qualified than the Dr?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
It seems not
It seems Science says Dennis Wise benefited from played in the era he did
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Rise of sport science cannot hold back sands of time for footballers....
What is striking, though, is how much faster football has become in the past decade. TV commentators in the 1970s and 1980s were fond of talking about matches being played at 100-miles-an-hour. It was a Sunday morning pootle compared to today's game.
Average sprint distances.
In 2006-07 the average number of sprints per team in a Premier League match was 330.2. This season Prozone's data show that it is 431.1, a 30.6% increase. Meanwhile recovery time between high intensity sprints (speeds of greater than 5.5 metres per second) has dropped from 54.6 seconds to 43.5 seconds, a decline of 20%.
Perhaps it is not surprising there are so few full-backs, wide midfielders and forwards over 33. They play in positions where a dip in pace is more likely to affect performance. It is not only in road safety adverts where speed kills.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
In layman terms
Sports Science should be helping the longevity of a footballs career.
However the negative impact of the increases in the intensity and pace of football is outweighing the benefits of sports science.
Sports Science should be helping the longevity of a footballs career.
However the negative impact of the increases in the intensity and pace of football is outweighing the benefits of sports science.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So basically everyone agrees with me that we should never have took a risk on signing someone whose recovery time was slow and would hamper the team if selected in the interim.
That signing someone if that age whose recovery time is apparently slower than others was a huge risk?
Seems odd that people arguing against me are spending all night googling theories that prove my point.
That signing someone if that age whose recovery time is apparently slower than others was a huge risk?
Seems odd that people arguing against me are spending all night googling theories that prove my point.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Again, this can't be true. The experts on here have claimed different. Ain't that right Sickboy and Grendull :laugh:
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Some people even slower are better than other people who are fitter and faster
tomreagan84
Well-Known Member
It stands to reason.
And Grendel took the majority opinion of everyone on here as a guide...stunning, given he called them 'intellectually bereft'.
....you couldn't make it up
I really think that Joe Cole was a good signing and we're really going to appreciate it in a few months time.
To play devil's advocate though, the fitness would be a valid point if you took a 33 year old premier league player from 2006 and threw him into a league 1 team in 2016. That obviously hasn't happened though.
In 2006, Dennis wise was too old for premier league fitness standards at that time. He dropped one league and adapted quickly to the fitness standard of the championship at that time.
In 2016, Joe Cole was too old for premier league fitness standards at that time. He dropped two leagues and adapted slowly to the the standard of league 1 at that time.
At the time they were playing, both players had supposedly top levels of fitness. They both then went to a lower level, wise certainly adapted quicker than Cole.
I do think by the end of the season we'll be grateful to have had Cole. However the comparison is irrelevant, not because of 10 years having passed, but because they're completely different physically and completely different type of players. It's like comparing Vieira to Wilshire
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Grendel
Well-Known Member
This is hilarious
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I still maintain that a player from 2006 could still cope in today's leagues. Their level of fitness wold already be high enough to quickly adapt.
I have mentioned serval times on this thread now that we should get Cole signed up for another year, possibly even with a view to go into coaching, as he expressed an interest in it in the past.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
You don't think it is possible for a player with better natural skill and talent than others. To still be one of the best players on the pitch as he gets older and loses his pace?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Careful. If Grendull hears you say this you'll be on the naughty step. According to him we shouldn't have signed him in the first place. I have a feeling you'll be proven correct, Grendull has already been proven wrong IMO.
tomreagan84
Well-Known Member
He's taken his time to get fit, initially he had the odd good game followed by several indifferent games. I can see your point that he did disrupt the balance of a winning side.
However recently he has shown real improvement as he's got fitter and fitter.
I'm sure Mowbray didn't anticipate him taking this long to get up to standard, but assuming that Cole doesn't now get a serious injury, he's going to be the creative fulcrum of our attack.
However recently he has shown real improvement as he's got fitter and fitter.
I'm sure Mowbray didn't anticipate him taking this long to get up to standard, but assuming that Cole doesn't now get a serious injury, he's going to be the creative fulcrum of our attack.
usskyblue
Well-Known Member
tomreagan84
Well-Known Member
Fitness has undoubtedly improved in the last ten years, but that doesn't make a difference to the player at the time, they just have to be up to the standards at that time.
Stanley Matthews was 50 when he retired in the 1950s, Ryan Giggs was 40 when he retired in the 2010s.
Kevin Keegan retired at age 33 in the 1980s, Joe Cole is still playing at 33.
Players have to be up to the fitness standard of any given time. Certain players will have the physicality to maintain, certain players won't.
Stanley Matthews was 50 when he retired in the 1950s, Ryan Giggs was 40 when he retired in the 2010s.
Kevin Keegan retired at age 33 in the 1980s, Joe Cole is still playing at 33.
Players have to be up to the fitness standard of any given time. Certain players will have the physicality to maintain, certain players won't.
usskyblue
Well-Known Member
I respect, and understand what you're saying. But by making a direct comparison, you're negating 'at that time'.
That's the crux of the point. At there respective 'times' means you blur the line of comparison.
Not even allowing for the fact that they were different types of player, playing a different formation and style of game etc, etc...
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
At the top level that is probably true, if you made the argument with respect to league 2/conference clubs it may hold some weight as lots of the small clubs have easier access to technology and equipment they probably didn't have 10 years ago.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
And I've also seen it mentioned a couple of time that Wise joined us after being out of the game for 6 months, not true apparently. He was at Southampton for the first half of the season
tomreagan84
Well-Known Member
I think that we're almost arguing the same point, correct me if I'm wrong:
- You're saying Wise and Cole shouldn't be compared because of the differing fitness standards of the time.
- I'm saying, the fitness standards are irrelevant, because they where both at the standard they needed to be at that time. They shouldn't be compared because they're completely different types of player.
- You're saying Wise and Cole shouldn't be compared because of the differing fitness standards of the time.
- I'm saying, the fitness standards are irrelevant, because they where both at the standard they needed to be at that time. They shouldn't be compared because they're completely different types of player.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Fitness is too simplistic a concept. It has improved but so has the fitness of your opponents. There are other factors which determine the longevity of a player. A player who relies on pace will not last as long as an intelligent player who makes the ball do the work instead of himself. Teddy Sheringham was an example of an intelligent player who had a long life in the game. A lot depends on how a player looks after his body. Smoking, drinking or drugs will curtail a football career drastically.
tomreagan84
Well-Known Member
I mean have different levels of natural fitness.
usskyblue
Well-Known Member
Same page.
Indeed, strange why anyone would try and compare them, purely based on their different playing styles...let alone fitness.
- Status