Olly On Sky Sports News Today

Substitutions were originally brought out so that genuinely INJURED players could be replaced not tactically used, BUT ---

Quoted from Boris Johnson

Ridiculous idea, these clubs and ours have massive squads, no need just rotate the squad.

Have to say I agree with this.  I'm not even sure I get the argument that it would benefit the bigger sides more either.

Be it with an extra two subs or through rotation of the starting eleven, the bigger clubs will always have an advantage when it goes beyond their starting eleven.

This probably won't go down well.  But GTFC have had a problem with injuries for a long, long time.  Well before Covid. We're forever picking up niggles and injuries.  We're forever struggling to get people back up to speed.  I think we need to have a full review when we can of why this is.  Are we only signing players with existing problems, if so how detailed are the medicals before signing and why aren't they picking this up?  Are our training methods up to scratch?  Is our medical infrastructure good enough?  

The argument about knocks, niggles and fitness is getting thinner and thinner with me.  Yes we've got a lot of games to play but it's not like we're playing four times a week every week.  Hell, we had two weeks off early October!  We've got a big enough squad to cope with the demands of a hectic schedule and we're rotating every single game.  There's no reason that every single member of the squad should be up to full fitness (genuine injuries permitting).  We can't hide behind a lack of pre-season and a busy schedule any longer.

Quoted from diehardmariner

Have to say I agree with this.  I'm not even sure I get the argument that it would benefit the bigger sides more either.

Be it with an extra two subs or through rotation of the starting eleven, the bigger clubs will always have an advantage when it goes beyond their starting eleven.

This probably won't go down well.  But GTFC have had a problem with injuries for a long, long time.  Well before Covid. We're forever picking up niggles and injuries.  We're forever struggling to get people back up to speed.  I think we need to have a full review when we can of why this is.  Are we only signing players with existing problems, if so how detailed are the medicals before signing and why aren't they picking this up?  Are our training methods up to scratch?  Is our medical infrastructure good enough?  

The argument about knocks, niggles and fitness is getting thinner and thinner with me.  Yes we've got a lot of games to play but it's not like we're playing four times a week every week.  Hell, we had two weeks off early October!  We've got a big enough squad to cope with the demands of a hectic schedule and we're rotating every single game.  There's no reason that every single member of the squad should be up to full fitness (genuine injuries permitting).  We can't hide behind a lack of pre-season and a busy schedule any longer.

Non league teams generally train twice a week and have part time staff. Chorley's manager is a Headteacher for example. Lots of L1 and L2 clubs have been embarrassed this week in the F.A. Cup despite having more players and resources than clubs lower in the pyramid. Is there really a strong link between regularity and intensity of training and success? Could less training be better for some players?
On paper, we should have beaten D and R 9 times out of ten so our excuses about Rose's substitution, number of subs, Covid and Tues/Sat fixtures are wearing thin. In addition to your earlier questions, is there also an issue over the quality of time spent at Cheapside as much as quantity? How would Matt Tees and Jimmy Greaves have excelled on their GPS data?

There's a clear correlation for me - always has been, pre-covid:

When a team is struggling for form and results in the league, you get more injuries.

When a team is bang in form, you get fewer injuries.

Part of the reason why teams enjoy good form is down to a consistent XI, which allows partnerships to develop all over the park and for players to better anticipate their teammates' movements.

As a result, any players carrying knocks tend to play on until they can't move, and then have operations in the summer.

It's a bit chicken-and-egg, but when the team is in form, everyone wants to play and be a part of the success. When it's going through a rough patch, players may be more aware of their knocks and bruises and may want to protect themselves (despite what they might say in the media).

I think about that Leicester team, playing week in, week out, together, to win the Premier League. Was the lack of injuries down to luck? Was Paul Groves lucky to get through every minute of 68 games in 97/98?

Quoted from RichMariner

There's a clear correlation for me - always has been, pre-covid:

When a team is struggling for form and results in the league, you get more injuries.

When a team is bang in form, you get fewer injuries.

Part of the reason why teams enjoy good form is down to a consistent XI, which allows partnerships to develop all over the park and for players to better anticipate their teammates' movements.

As a result, any players carrying knocks tend to play on until they can't move, and then have operations in the summer.

It's a bit chicken-and-egg, but when the team is in form, everyone wants to play and be a part of the success. When it's going through a rough patch, players may be more aware of their knocks and bruises and may want to protect themselves (despite what they might say in the media).

I think about that Leicester team, playing week in, week out, together, to win the Premier League. Was the lack of injuries down to luck? Was Paul Groves lucky to get through every minute of 68 games in 97/98?

Or it could be the opposite. Teams with more/worse injuries do less well. Best players not available, less competition for places. That’s the simplest explanation. Occam’s razor.

Groves was renowned as a professional for keeping himself in peak condition. He was also not noted for indulging in the rougher side of the game, rather using his intelligence like Macca Mk I used to do when he defended without tackling. I’d say he wasn’t lucky. I think he went through a spell of about 4 seasons without time out for injury. No one is that lucky.

Quoted from RichMariner

There's a clear correlation for me - always has been, pre-covid:

When a team is struggling for form and results in the league, you get more injuries.

When a team is bang in form, you get fewer injuries.

Part of the reason why teams enjoy good form is down to a consistent XI, which allows partnerships to develop all over the park and for players to better anticipate their teammates' movements.

As a result, any players carrying knocks tend to play on until they can't move, and then have operations in the summer.

It's a bit chicken-and-egg, but when the team is in form, everyone wants to play and be a part of the success. When it's going through a rough patch, players may be more aware of their knocks and bruises and may want to protect themselves (despite what they might say in the media).

I think about that Leicester team, playing week in, week out, together, to win the Premier League. Was the lack of injuries down to luck? Was Paul Groves lucky to get through every minute of 68 games in 97/98?

Joe Waters as well...the value of a player like Groves or Waters is not just their massive contribution at the heart of the midfield, nor just their outstanding leadership, by example, and mentoring younger players, but the fact for season after season they were ever-presents. One thing is for certain it's no coincidence that these two played throughout two of our most successful post-war periods. Arguably Shaun Cunnington could be put in that category as well, these two are the standouts though.

Quoted from RichMariner

There's a clear correlation for me - always has been, pre-covid:

When a team is struggling for form and results in the league, you get more injuries.

When a team is bang in form, you get fewer injuries.

Part of the reason why teams enjoy good form is down to a consistent XI, which allows partnerships to develop all over the park and for players to better anticipate their teammates' movements.

As a result, any players carrying knocks tend to play on until they can't move, and then have operations in the summer.

It's a bit chicken-and-egg, but when the team is in form, everyone wants to play and be a part of the success. When it's going through a rough patch, players may be more aware of their knocks and bruises and may want to protect themselves (despite what they might say in the media).

I think about that Leicester team, playing week in, week out, together, to win the Premier League. Was the lack of injuries down to luck? Was Paul Groves lucky to get through every minute of 68 games in 97/98?

Incorrect. Paul Groves was substituted on 85 minutes in both the League Cup Round 4 defeat at Liverpool & the FA Cup Round 1 replay 4-0 win over Shrewsbury (with the score at 3-0 and Shrews down to 9 men). And he was subbed on 71 minutes in the 0-0 home league draw with Wycombe

So he played 68 matches - 29 minutes.

I do notice the correlation and have always wondered if some of it is mindset.

Malik Wilks tore it up the season after being here when he was at the top end of League 1 with Doncaster.

People always want to be associated with success and if you get injured, I suppose there is a danger of becoming forgotten.

Klopp and Gaudiolla complaining about not having 5 subs only the 3 but neither used their 3 in Sunday’s game!!!