On 25/09/2012 at 03:01, sue said:

1858: To say that the implication of Llyod's article was that we didn't do enough analysis rather than we didn't have enough GPS units is the sort of desperate spin you'd expect from a politician trying to defend a blooper he made in a speech.

I didn't say that, I said the implication of the article (to me) was how many we were using, rather than how many we could afford.

The lack of GPS units being used may be an indicator of how much use we are getting out of them at this time due to other constraints. IMO Lloyd made a pretty general comment about that and everyone is crying that he is kicking us while we're down and saying we can't afford GPS units when he said no such thing.

  On 25/09/2012 at 02:55, rpfc said:

So Lloyd shoudl get credit for points made by someone incorrectly inferring what was meant in his article?

Lloyd is truly a magical show pony.

Oh, won't he come and save us from Royal and be our midfield coach?

He can say something and then Craig can make a brillant point to the boys on what he thinks.

But Craig would never had said it if it wasn't for Lloyd...

It's all there in Lloyd's new book:

'Brillant things others have said misinterpreting things I have said'

Mark Stevens - "It's a must read. Would have liked more stats though."

Mark Robinson - "I couldn't put it down. No, seriously, I had some chocolate when I was reading it and now it is stuck to me!"

Gerard Whateley - "No-one has made a book so tangential and misdirected. The brillance is in not what he says - it's in what others say after they think they know what he means."

Ok, I may have gone all out on this one.

Mate you talk about MFCSS (or what ever it is) and then trot this out.

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:17, 1858 said:

I didn't say that, I said the implication of the article (to me) was how many we were using, rather than how many we could afford.

The lack of GPS units being used may be an indicator of how much use we are getting out of them at this time due to other constraints. IMO Lloyd made a pretty general comment about that and everyone is crying that he is kicking us while we're down and saying we can't afford GPS units when he said no such thing.

There is a future for you as a spin doctor. So the interpretation now is that we have enough GPS units but are not using them.. Odd thing for Llyod to mean in an article which talks about clubs being under resourced. So for your interpretation to hold water, he must have meant lack of money to employ people to analyse the data. But It is hard to believe the club would not collect every bit of data it could even if it did not have the resources to analyse it week by week. Disk space is cheap, and one can always do a bit more analysis when time permits. So your defence of Llyod is extremely weak.

BTW I don't think he is kicking us while we are down. I think he is a poor journo just looking to jump on the 'resource divide' bandwagon to fill up his copy. I don't deny the divide is reall -quite the contrary.

  On 25/09/2012 at 02:55, rpfc said:

It's all there in Lloyd's new book:

so this is really just idiot Lloyd plugging his own trashy book.. If I run out of toilet paper id probably consider this .

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:35, belzebub59 said:

so this is really just idiot Lloyd plugging his own trashy book.. If I run out of toilet paper id probably consider this .

Careful. I don't think Lloyd elected for the 2 or 3-ply.

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:33, sue said:

There is a future for you as a spin doctor. So the interpretation now is that we have enough GPS units but are not using them..

That was my exact inference in post 119

"The intimation is that not all of our players WEAR gps units. Affordability of the units themselves IMO makes up no part of his point."

You're as sloppy as a politician.

  On 25/09/2012 at 00:45, 1858 said:

Just as I thought nothing about GPS units which was your original claim.

We are under resourced (if you can't analyse all the data then you can't monitor all the players in the most meaningful sense of the word) Craig verified that - he also said that once our funds improve he hopes to address this so there is a clear monetary link. I think we all need to deal with it (like the club hopefully will) and move on.

Rubbish, Lloyd stated that Melbourne couldn't afford to monitor all the players, he specifically said that only some can be monitored each session. Which device is used to monitor the players? GPS, he even clearly stated that in comparison Essendon had all their players wired up.

You need to deal with the fact that Llyod was wrong and it's bloody embarrasing that Melbourne fans are so desperate to believe his [censored], Melbourne do not have problems with collecting the information, yes they could do with more people to analysis the info but Lloyd's accusation that Melbourne can't afford to monitor our players is bullshiite

  On 25/09/2012 at 01:13, 1858 said:

The intimation is that not all of our players WEAR gps units. Affordability of the units themselves IMO makes up no part of his point.

Spending all of my time at Essendon, I thought it was standard practice that every player was monitored throughout every session with GPS data to get 100 per cent accuracy on workload and fatigue. This, obviously, costs money but I was shocked to hear that in 2012 only some players at the Dogs and Demons can be monitored each session as they don't have the funds to monitor all players.

Maybe just me but I read that as rather unambigious. He says we dont have the money for enough GPS's and as such cant monitor all players.. Its exactly what he says !!

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:53, belzebub59 said:

Spending all of my time at Essendon, I thought it was standard practice that every player was monitored throughout every session with GPS data to get 100 per cent accuracy on workload and fatigue. This, obviously, costs money but I was shocked to hear that in 2012 only some players at the Dogs and Demons can be monitored each session as they don't have the funds to monitor all players.

Maybe just me but I read that as rather unambigious. He says we dont have the money for enough GPS's and as such cant monitor all players.. Its exactly what he says !!

Spot on bub, it's bewildering that any Melbourne fan would be so desperate to believe anything Lloyd says about our club with zero evidence to back up his claim.

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:53, belzebub59 said:

Spending all of my time at Essendon, I thought it was standard practice that every player was monitored throughout every session with GPS data to get 100 per cent accuracy on workload and fatigue. This, obviously, costs money but I was shocked to hear that in 2012 only some players at the Dogs and Demons can be monitored each session as they don't have the funds to monitor all players.

Maybe just me but I read that as rather unambigious. He says we dont have the money for enough GPS's and as such cant monitor all players.. Its exactly what he says !!

He's giving us a whack no doubt with the povo stick but I chose to give this statement a little bit more context than just the units themselves ie personell and other related costs. It is simply my take on it, I'm not trying to convince anyone else otherwise and in no way do I think Matty Lloyd is worth defending, it's just the way I interpreted his point.

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:46, 1858 said:

That was my exact inference in post 119

"The intimation is that not all of our players WEAR gps units. Affordability of the units themselves IMO makes up no part of his point."

You're as sloppy as a politician.

Sorry, I might be sloppy in not referencing every one of your posts accurately, but I did fairly sum up your argument and point out the flaw in it.

Please tell me why we wouldn't collect as much data as we could even if we didn't have enough resources to analyze it week to week?

Keeping data for later analysis when time permits is cheap. Also even if we didn't have resources to analyse every player in detail every week, a player with a problem might stand out without the need for a detailed analysis. I think the defense of Llyod must be reduced to ' it is too much effort for the players to put them on every time'. I hope that wouldn't be the case.

Glad to hear you don't feel the need to defend Llyod. I just think your interpretation is wrong. No big deal. I agree there is a 'resource divide issue' but I have a need to dish Llyod. Can't think why.....

  On 25/09/2012 at 03:18, 1858 said:

Mate you talk about MFCSS (or what ever it is) and then trot this out.

Huh?

You accuse me of being ironically afflicted with an affliction that you don't know?

Am I being punk'd?

Are you Matthew Lloyd?

  On 25/09/2012 at 04:27, sue said:

Please tell me why we wouldn't collect as much data as we could even if we didn't have enough resources to analyze it week to week?

Keeping data for later analysis when time permits is cheap. Also even if we didn't have resources to analyse every player in detail every week, a player with a problem might stand out without the need for a detailed analysis. I think the defense of Llyod must be reduced to ' it is too much effort for the players to put them on every time'. I hope that wouldn't be the case.

You raise a good point. I'm happy to profess my ignorance on the intricacies of the average training session wrt the monitoring side of things and why/why not certain players would be monitored at any given time. I could offer circumstantial reasons at best.

I think though that he has been given feedback of some nature from the players and based on that information he has the impression that not all the players are monitored when they should be. He may be right, he may be completely wrong but when you read an article you have to give it some context.

It's possible he may have plucked the whole thing out of thin air and completely misrepresented how we train and (and why we train that particular way) and contorted any information passed on to him. Heck he may not have even talked to any players. At some point we have to draw a line in the way we consume information though. If our players all use GPS at the appropriate times and he has presented a fallacy then be it. I won't disagree that he is a goose and we all move on.

  On 25/09/2012 at 04:30, rpfc said:

Huh?

You accuse me of being ironically afflicted with an affliction that you don't know?

Am I being punk'd?

Are you Matthew Lloyd?

You're being something...

Ok what Lloyd said. The MFC do not monitor everyone at training because of a lack of GPS Units..not enouf $$$ being spent is the crux of his jobe.

What Neil Craig said. Players are all monitored with ample GPS Units, but at present we only haveone person collecting all the data and it is too much for one person.

To the Dive Bomber i say...Get your facts double checked before print.

To the MFC i say Please employ more people in your IT Dept. because we need all the data we can get to improve onfield.

Use the war chest if needed.

Jobe....freudian ?? Lol

  On 25/09/2012 at 04:54, 1858 said:

You raise a good point. I'm happy to profess my ignorance on the intricacies of the average training session wrt the monitoring side of things and why/why not certain players would be monitored at any given time. I could offer circumstantial reasons at best.

I think though that he has been given feedback of some nature from the players and based on that information he has the impression that not all the players are monitored when they should be. He may be right, he may be completely wrong but when you read an article you have to give it some context.

It's possible he may have plucked the whole thing out of thin air and completely misrepresented how we train and (and why we train that particular way) and contorted any information passed on to him. Heck he may not have even talked to any players. At some point we have to draw a line in the way we consume information though. If our players all use GPS at the appropriate times and he has presented a fallacy then be it. I won't disagree that he is a goose and we all move on.

Also don't discount the "player" spoken to could be someone like Brent Moloney or one of the 'unknown' players that refused to buy in to Neelds methods....

  On 25/09/2012 at 05:47, belzebub59 said:

Jobe....freudian ?? Lol

I think too many Jacks is our problem!

and not enough Davids and Pauls

  On 25/09/2012 at 05:47, belzebub59 said:

Jobe....freudian ?? Lol

haha! I might just leave that error!!

  On 25/09/2012 at 05:51, Oucher said:

Also don't discount the "player" spoken to could be someone like Brent Moloney or one of the 'unknown' players that refused to buy in to Neelds methods....

Completely plausible.

At the end of the day who knows what has been said and by whom? - you're right.

By implication Lloyd has made the assertion that we have insufficient monitoring which (to me) is more of a source of debate than whether he has/hasn't accused us of being able to afford GPS units (which nobody would conceivably beleive).

I hope it is all BS and appreciate Craigy coming out and addressing any conceptions/misconceptions.

  On 25/09/2012 at 04:54, 1858 said:


I think though that he has been given feedback of some nature from the players ...


Seeing we're all being very pedantic here, he didn't speak to "the" players, he says he spoke to "some of the" players.

Though given how poorly the relevant phrase is written, hard to make any deductions at all:

"I was staggered with the limitations the Bulldogs and Melbourne players have when chatting to some of them during the week"

Based on that, it's not an article about GPS units or the lack thereof, it's an article about how the players aren't much chop at using Twitter.

  On 25/09/2012 at 06:19, 1858 said:

By implication Lloyd has made the assertion that we have insufficient monitoring which (to me) is more of a source of debate than whether he has/hasn't accused us of being able to afford GPS units (which nobody would conceivably beleive).

I did, and Neil Craig did.

  On 25/09/2012 at 06:31, rpfc said:

I did, and Neil Craig did.

Which nobody would conceivably beleive that we actually couldn't afford GPS units for crying out loud.

  On 25/09/2012 at 06:34, 1858 said:

Which nobody would conceivably beleive that we actually couldn't afford GPS units for crying out loud.

Matthew Lloyd did.

I feel like we are going around in circles.

The feeling is similar to reading an article from Matthew Lloyd - one is left disoriented and ashamed.

  On 25/09/2012 at 06:19, 1858 said:

Lloyd has made the assertion that we have insufficient monitoring ..

Lloyd is not talking about analysing or reviewing data, or being short-staffed in the back office. He's talking about monitoring (= collecting) GPS data. Which you do with a GPS unit.

"only some players at the Demons can be monitored each session as they don't have the funds to monitor all players"

Lloyd's meaning is crystal clear, and is that a) we don't have enough GPS units and B) the reason for this is that we don't have the funds to buy them.

Which is also what Craig responded to.