• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Injuries

yiddo37 said:
Solanke out for 6 weeks now
Click to expand...
As I keep saying, we should have played "crappy" Lankshear for half a game, so Solanke doesn't have to.
Lankshear would be "crappy" but that is not the point, saving Solanke from SIX WEEKS OFF is the point.
 
thfcsteff said:
Geoff Scott is upset about several things, so he has his own agendas. The timing of all this should absolutely register as curious. Because it is. I smell rats...
Click to expand...
Its true though. Ive got mates in the sports science team who have been furious all year that all their advice is being ignored
 
Bullet said:
As I keep saying, we should have played "crappy" Lankshear for half a game, so Solanke doesn't have to.
Lankshear would be "crappy" but that is not the point, saving Solanke from SIX WEEKS OFF is the point.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much having to play 30 minutes on that 3G pitch at Tamworth contributed to Solanke’s knee injury.

As I seem to recall knee injuries being mentioned by Redknapp following our CL match on Bern’s artificial turf.
 
The two specific things ive been told is that he wont let players who flag as injury risk in the data be pulled out of training sessions, as has always happened.

And that he makes used subs do full training the day after matches, instead of having them on the rehab schedule with the starters, which again is very irregular.
 
Last edited:
Gutter Boy said:
Its true though. Ive got mates in the sports science team who have been furious all year that all their advice is being ignored
Click to expand...

Errr...IF your friends in the sports science team are being honest with you, I can tell you you're only hearing THEIR side of it.
 
thfcsteff said:
Errr...IF your friends in the sports science team are being honest with you, I can tell you you're only hearing THEIR side of it.
Click to expand...
Of course. Their perspective is their advice is being ignored, whereas most managers heed it.

Ange's side is that the players are wimps and pain is just weakness leaving your body, or some alpha nonsense. But no sure, he has a very short term focus - losing the next game could get him sacked. Whereas the sports science team focus is on the longer term and player welfare. But the balance has supposedly gone much worse than Conte now.
 
Gutter Boy said:
The two specific things ive been told is that he wont let players who flag as injury risk in the data be pulles out of training sessions, as has always happened.

And that he makes used subs do full training the day after matches, instead of having them on the rehab schedule with the starters, which again is very irregular.
Click to expand...

But what does that mean? Physiologically, Van De Ven is going to 'flag' as a higher injury risk due to physical build, age, and dynamic nature of combining those factors. Pedro Porro might flag 'less' as he is a different physicality. What you're suggesting is that if a player flags as being in pain or feeling uncomfortabkle in training, Ange tells them to get on with it. I have not heard that. As for the second point, subs are playing what, on average 10-15 mins? I am not sure I see a massive issue. Has this egregious 'sub training' caused any injuries?
 
Gutter Boy said:
Of course. Their perspective is their advice is being ignored, whereas most managers heed it.

Ange's side is that the players are wimps and pain is just weakness leaving your body, or some alpha nonsense. But no sure, he has a very short term focus - losing the next game could get him sacked. Whereas the sports science team focus is on the longer term and player welfare. But the balance has supposedly gone much worse than Conte now.
Click to expand...

I will only say I have not heard the same.
I'll leave it there.
 
thfcsteff said:
But what does that mean? Physiologically, Van De Ven is going to 'flag' as a higher injury risk due to physical build, age, and dynamic nature of combining those factors. Pedro Porro might flag 'less' as he is a different physicality. What you're suggesting is that if a player flags as being in pain or feeling uncomfortabkle in training, Ange tells them to get on with it. I have not heard that. As for the second point, subs are playing what, on average 10-15 mins? I am not sure I see a massive issue. Has this egregious 'sub training' caused any injuries?
Click to expand...
No, as in data readings. VdV has done 20+ sprints in 5 consecutive days. Our readings show he's now top of the red, 95% likely to strain a hamstring if he doesnt now have 2 days with no sprints. *Ping*... Oh...
 
Gutter Boy said:
No, as in data readings. VdV has done 20+ sprints in 5 consecutive days. Our readings show he's now top of the red, 95% likely to strain a hamstring if he doesnt now have 2 days with no sprints. *Ping*... Oh...
Click to expand...

OK. I'm not buying that personally. The only thing regarding him and Romero I would consider purchasing is the fact that Ange decided to gambe on both against Chelsea (which IF HE made the decision was a stupid one for sure - I said at the time it felt desperate OR he had been poorly advised). Of course, my other thought over that is WHY would they have told Postecoglu that each player 'could maybe' play? Why not say 'absolutely not for another 10 days' or whatever? Your mates are fighting for their professional reputations. I'm sure they'll want perspectives shared...
 
thfcsteff said:
OK. I'm not buying that personally. The only thing regarding him and Romero I would consider purchasing is the fact that Ange decided to gambe on both against Chelsea (which IF HE made the decision was a stupid one for sure - I said at the time it felt desperate OR he had been poorly advised). Of course, my other thought over that is WHY would they have told Postecoglu that each player 'could maybe' play? Why not say 'absolutely not for another 10 days' or whatever? Your mates are fighting for their professional reputations. I'm sure they'll want perspectives shared...
Click to expand...
Its not been about game calls. Its him insisting they do full training, against medical advice. The problems are being sown there. It just a timebomb from there.

Everyone of us knows Porro is next to pull up with a big one, with Kulu and Sarr in close behind. Even with lay eyes we can see he is flogging them
 
Gutter Boy said:
Its not been about game calls. Its him insisting they do full training, against medical advice. The problems are being sown there. It just a timebomb from there.

Everyone of us knows Porro is next to pull up with a big one, with Kulu and Sarr in close behind. Even with lay eyes we can see he is flogging them
Click to expand...

OK mate. This has become a discussion we will not be fully aligned on, so onwards!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back