9 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

As per my previous comment, I have no doubt Griffith knows the science, but how much sway he holds over selection is an entirely different matter, and I doubt he would have as much say as Burgess would have.

So why would you think Burgess had a say in selection?

He would say if the player was right to go no doubt as would Griffith.

...and according to Burgess, Goody placed faith in his staff to do their job.

I don't see why this would change, it's smart management.

Let the expert do his job.

2 hours ago, RedFox said:

Wasn't sure where to post this but listening to the pure footy show with David King and Daniel Hoyne from champion data - they were talking about how since round 11 we have a points differential of -97 points in 4th quarters... Only West coast and north are worse. Says plenty about our ability to run out games

 

In our losses it’s been -132 in last quarters. We get hammered bad  in last quarters by good sides.

11 minutes ago, rjay said:

So why would you think Burgess had a say in selection?

He would say if the player was right to go no doubt as would Griffith.

...and according to Burgess, Goody placed faith in his staff to do their job.

I don't see why this would change, it's smart management.

Let the expert do his job.

Burgess was more than just a performance manager for us, he was practically an assistant coach and Goody's right hand man. That's why he was quite vocal on the bench during games and why we paid him an absolute truck load (which he deserved).

I'm sure Griffith is a very capable performance manager, but Burgess is an entirely different beast.

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

Agreed, and part of Burgess's philosophy which he has historically detailed (which comes from evidence base from both physiology and psychology over the past 10 years ie: Explain Pain ) is for players to play with 'niggles' to increase their capacity (both physiologically and psychologically) to compete whilst experiencing discomfort... it's called stress inoculation.

So some of the driving factors of match committee choosing to select  players with soreness, is based upon peer reviewed scientific journals, which I for one, value.

https://www.noigroup.com/product/explain-pain-second-edition/

Maybe I’ve misunderstood what Burgo has gone on the record to say. I really enjoy his podcasts, and have listened to all of them, but I got the sense his resilience philosophy was about soft tissue injuries and minimising them. One interesting podcast was about Arsenal, where they reviewed several years of data (all those wellness surveys, gps data etc), and found no benefit in soft tissue injury rates for those that were managed versus those that trained through soreness etc.  At the same time, the research was coming out that showed soft tissue injuries are more likely with variation in training loads (acute-chronic ratio), and that drove his philosophy to not let players have sessions off if sore or tired.

If he was referring to knee injuries, ankle injuries, lisfranc injuries etc then I misunderstood his podcasts and that would seem to be stepping way outside his area of expertise.  He seems to have a lot of respect for doctors, and I doubt he would be telling a doctor that TMac needs to train through that foot pain.

If my interpretation is close, Selwyn has done a great job as we have had almost zero soft tissue injuries. But management of knees, feet etc is more questionable. Is Brukner still consulting now that Burgo has gone, as our head doctor is very recently graduated.

Edited September 7, 20222 yr by Watson11

I guess as the final three weeks of the season rapidly approaches, it is crunch time for the loading theory.

IF we come out and absolutely dominate the next three weeks, Griffiths will be deemed a genius : if we limp out then some (or maybe many) will condemn him as incompetent, and THE cause for failure to win back to back. 
 

GO DEES. ❤️💙❤️💙❤️💙

Edited September 7, 20222 yr by monoccular

@Watson11, that's a nicely nuanced response.

Sorry, I was probably a bit unclear.

For me, I am not delineating between soft tissue and impact injury. I'm discussing what you've termed 'resilience' and people's relationship to pain and thus how it informs pain management and consequently how to manage training with injury.

What we know is, is that tissue repairs at a maximum of 12 weeks (ie: broken bone). If pain persists, it is driven psychologically, and that is all down to the 'meaning' that someone puts on the pain experience. 

Phantom limb pain is a great example of people experiencing pain, where there is no tissue damage (because there is no actual tissue to damage).

The extension to this (as I am essentially discussing chronic pain) is that before the decent into chronicity, so 'acute' injury, we know that 'meaning' influences the pain experience. The fear of re-injury is greater than the injury itself.

An aside, did you know orchestral violinists experience greater pain than a soccer player, if they get a paper cut?

My point to all of this is that,  he probably wouldn't be telling the Dr that TMAC 'needs' to train through the foot pain, but it is probably worthwhile exploring the meaning around it for TMAC to assess whether there is tissue damage (eg: inflamation) or whether the felt experience of pain is driven by something else all together.

Couple this philosophy with, training through niggles, and then we start to see that windows of tolerance of the athletes get larger both psychologically and physiologically due to their own understanding of how pain works, and that the pain experience can be  amplified - and not a true reflection of actual tissue damage.

The inverse is true - some dude in the 1989 Grand Final played an entire match with broken ribs (was it a punctured lung as well?). That ability is all about that persons interpretation of meaning of pain... and that interpretation (and thus willingness) would have been quiet different if it was Round 8 in 1989.

Edited September 7, 20222 yr by Engorged Onion

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Why is it all on the fitness department? We've continually selected players carrying niggles and soreness, that's on the selection committee. I don't recall many of our injuries being soft tissue ones, more impact related injuries, that's not on the fitness staff at all. Those injuries would clearly have impacted our training ability which in turn obviously effects how we run out games.

Highly doubt Griffith is under "extreme pressure".

If your job is to make sure we are running out games, particularly the games that matter most, and instead we are ranked 15th in the comp for it, then you have to be feeling heat.

I find it really interesting how little criticism our fitness is getting.

11 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

In our losses it’s been -132 in last quarters. We get hammered bad  in last quarters by good sides.

This is very alarming. 

Coupled with us being 3rd last in the comp for pressure acts and it's not hard to see why we're all feeling like we're struggling despite coming 2nd and being still in the hunt. 

Doesn't bode well at all for finals footy...Sydney already bore this out 

22 minutes ago, fr_ap said:

This is very alarming. 

Coupled with us being 3rd last in the comp for pressure acts and it's not hard to see why we're all feeling like we're struggling despite coming 2nd and being still in the hunt. 

Doesn't bode well at all for finals footy...Sydney already bore this out 

I would think the opposite.

Fix it and we win.

14 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

If your job is to make sure we are running out games, particularly the games that matter most, and instead we are ranked 15th in the comp for it, then you have to be feeling heat.

I find it really interesting how little criticism our fitness is getting.

You're missing so much of the context there though.

- Clearly we have a fair few players carrying niggles and soreness.
- That would impact their ability to run out games as well as train.
- The performance manager and fitness staff would make recommendations and provide updates on fitness, but ultimately team selection and how hard the players are pushed is up to the selection committee.
- As recently as earlier this year we had examples of how hard Goody pushes the players and what influence he expects to have on fitness decisions.

This is not purely a fitness staff matter, there is far more happening here, I find it really interesting how people can't see the big picture.

7 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

You're missing so much of the context there though.

- Clearly we have a fair few players carrying niggles and soreness.
- That would impact their ability to run out games as well as train.
- The performance manager and fitness staff would make recommendations and provide updates on fitness, but ultimately team selection and how hard the players are pushed is up to the selection committee.
- As recently as earlier this year we had examples of how hard Goody pushes the players and what influence he expects to have on fitness decisions.

This is not purely a fitness staff matter, there is far more happening here, I find it really interesting how people can't see the big picture.

You make very valid points Nev. For me if this thread has taught me anything it’s that it’s better to watch what’s happening on the ground, than assume we know more.

I personally think it’s a lot to assume we’ve had injuries, and that the selection committee are aware of all of it - but just kept running players into the ground. It wouldn’t surprise me if this is true (because I’m critical of how our game plan relies very heavily on 5 players), but i can’t know it. I’m basing my opinion purely on what I can see on the ground, and what the scoreboard has told us since mid year. We looked absolutely out on our legs at 3/4 time last week (when we should be peaking). Very flat, no energy across the team. That tells me we haven’t got something right with our fitness.

Interestingly no one’s really arguing we aren’t fit enough, instead they are just speculating on what’s responsible for it. I bet Greg Stafford wishes he got that much grace around here. 👍

19 hours ago, RedFox said:

Wasn't sure where to post this but listening to the pure footy show with David King and Daniel Hoyne from champion data - they were talking about how since round 11 we have a points differential of -97 points in 4th quarters... Only West coast and north are worse. Says plenty about our ability to run out games

 

If that trend continues this week and into next year, I can't see Selwyn Griffith having an overly long tenure at the MFC.

 

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

I find it really interesting how people can't see the big picture.

So, what is the big picture?

Is it obvious or is it an educated guess on your behalf?

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

You're missing so much of the context there though.

- Clearly we have a fair few players carrying niggles and soreness.
- That would impact their ability to run out games as well as train.
- The performance manager and fitness staff would make recommendations and provide updates on fitness, but ultimately team selection and how hard the players are pushed is up to the selection committee.
- As recently as earlier this year we had examples of how hard Goody pushes the players and what influence he expects to have on fitness decisions.

This is not purely a fitness staff matter, there is far more happening here, I find it really interesting how people can't see the big picture.

Nev, the big picture is we are not running out games like last year at this time, nor are we applying the pressure consistently like we did last year. At this time of year there are no good excuses for these failures. I’m not paid to know the causes of this, but our staff certainly are. Hopefully they can resolve them in the next 5 hours. 

1 hour ago, Neil Crompton said:

Nev, the big picture is we are not running out games like last year at this time, nor are we applying the pressure consistently like we did last year. At this time of year there are no good excuses for these failures. I’m not paid to know the causes of this, but our staff certainly are. Hopefully they can resolve them in the next 5 hours. 

100% agree mate! It's absolutely an issue for us, I just differ on what I think is the cause of it. I'm not blaming Griffith, at least not without evidence it's his fault.

2 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

You make very valid points Nev. For me if this thread has taught me anything it’s that it’s better to watch what’s happening on the ground, than assume we know more.

I personally think it’s a lot to assume we’ve had injuries, and that the selection committee are aware of all of it - but just kept running players into the ground. It wouldn’t surprise me if this is true (because I’m critical of how our game plan relies very heavily on 5 players), but i can’t know it. I’m basing my opinion purely on what I can see on the ground, and what the scoreboard has told us since mid year. We looked absolutely out on our legs at 3/4 time last week (when we should be peaking). Very flat, no energy across the team. That tells me we haven’t got something right with our fitness.

Interestingly no one’s really arguing we aren’t fit enough, instead they are just speculating on what’s responsible for it. I bet Greg Stafford wishes he got that much grace around here. 👍

Yeah that's fair. I think we're all in agreement that there's some kind of 'fitness' issue there, but just differ on our guesses as to the cause and who has responsibility (and then how much).

I just wouldn't be surprised from what we know about Goodwin's relationships with fitness and medical staff that there's a different dynamic between him and Griffith compared to what there was between him and Burgess.

1 hour ago, Neil Crompton said:

Nev, the big picture is we are not running out games like last year at this time, nor are we applying the pressure consistently like we did last year. At this time of year there are no good excuses for these failures. I’m not paid to know the causes of this, but our staff certainly are. Hopefully they can resolve them in the next 5 hours. 

There are good excuses. We are banged up currently. We have been banged up for large parts of the year. Injuries interrupt a teams ability to work toward collective fitness levels due to interruptions to the individualised programs throughout the season which means as a group we just aren’t as fit as last year.  We just haven’t had the chance to build throughout the year the same way we did last year. This affects form, fitness, psychology. All kinds of stuff. There are so many factors to consider, to just say we aren’t as fit as last year, someone must be to blame is unfair. Pressure and fitness are as linked as anything could be in the game of football, it seems obvious that pressure goes down with fitness going down.

I think it's concerning a lot of us that we flirted with our form during the season with the long ranged approach that we would be in peak physical condition right now. Throw on top of that that we needed to cross our fingers and hope for minimal injuries and not give away too many tactics during the season and suddenly last year looks more like lightening in a bottle than a proven method for success. I'm not saying that by the way as there isn't enough data yet to say so but it feels like we endured a bit in the hope that there would be fruit at the end of it. 

32 minutes ago, layzie said:

I think it's concerning a lot of us that we flirted with our form during the season with the long ranged approach that we would be in peak physical condition right now. Throw on top of that that we needed to cross our fingers and hope for minimal injuries and not give away too many tactics during the season and suddenly last year looks more like lightening in a bottle than a proven method for success. I'm not saying that by the way as there isn't enough data yet to say so but it feels like we endured a bit in the hope that there would be fruit at the end of it. 

I wonder whether the club sees it as flirting with form. You have to go in with a plan. The best laid plans often go astray. The plan worked last year. It’s true in life and in sport, sometimes you have to deal with unforeseen circumstances. It’s possible trying to change the plan on the run mid season would end up being worse, I’m not sure.  A fitness plan would surely be set and then adhered to as best as possible. No team can cover injuries to players beyond a point whether it be quantity or key players. I saw the season as dealing with what we had as best we could. We ended up second and look like finishing top 4 in a very competitive season.

1 hour ago, layzie said:

I think it's concerning a lot of us that we flirted with our form during the season with the long ranged approach that we would be in peak physical condition right now. Throw on top of that that we needed to cross our fingers and hope for minimal injuries and not give away too many tactics during the season and suddenly last year looks more like lightening in a bottle than a proven method for success. I'm not saying that by the way as there isn't enough data yet to say so but it feels like we endured a bit in the hope that there would be fruit at the end of it. 

I don’t see the staid and ubiquitous practice of ‘loading’ to be flirting with our form. The real frustration for me was self-defeating playing of obviously injured players, some specifically playing through injuries (that always has a disbenefit at some point), the lack of desire to use our squad in a marathon season.

The flirting of our form was the seeming abandonment of our forward pressure game and the reliance on our back 6 to repel and then slowly work it up the ground again. My gut feel it is because it is so taxing on the team, but I would have revolved Chandler, Bedford, JVR, and Melksham through there throughout the year. Who cares if you lose one or two, we might have been better against better teams in the run home.

And lastly, and this is the most laughable one - the existence of loading was seen as the reason for our ails and to the point where we couldn’t discuss anything around the performance of the team without it pivoting back to ‘loading means that blah’ or ‘well with our loading’.

I understand that high intensity training loads will be placed on athletes at certain time to maximise performance, but that doesn’t account for what many of us were seeing even during our 10 game winning streak, or when good teams obliterated us in last terms.

So this season is a good education in watching and synthesising footy for next year. If you have a simple answer, you haven’t thought about it long enough…

Edited September 8, 20222 yr by rpfc

Nonsense. No one ever called it a panacea, just that it was a major factor. Talk about re-write history...

28 minutes ago, rpfc said:

And lastly, and this is the most laughable one - the existence of loading was seen as the panacea for our ails and to the point where we couldn’t discuss anything around the performance of the team without it pivoting back to ‘loading means that blah’ or ‘well with our loading’.

I understand that high intensity training loads will be placed on athletes at certain time to maximise performance, but that doesn’t account for what many of us were seeing even during our 10 game winning streak, or when good teams obliterated us in last terms.

So this season is a good education in watching and synthesising footy for next year. If you have a simple answer, you haven’t thought about it long enough…

Revisionist

it could be argued that the pro loading community were the ones crying out for a more nuanced look at the game and our form etc. those who were allergic to it just preferred the channel 7/fox footy talking points that are overly simplistic and lack context.

Edited September 8, 20222 yr by von

2 hours ago, von said:

There are good excuses. We are banged up currently. We have been banged up for large parts of the year. Injuries interrupt a teams ability to work toward collective fitness levels due to interruptions to the individualised programs throughout the season which means as a group we just aren’t as fit as last year.  We just haven’t had the chance to build throughout the year the same way we did last year. This affects form, fitness, psychology. All kinds of stuff. There are so many factors to consider, to just say we aren’t as fit as last year, someone must be to blame is unfair. Pressure and fitness are as linked as anything could be in the game of football, it seems obvious that pressure goes down with fitness going down.

Von, every team has injuries and is banged up at this time of year. That’s not a valid excuse in my view. We’ve been overrun / outscored in 12 of our games this year, including 4 of the first 10 games when injuries / players being banged up were not an issue; and another 8 in the last 12 games of the year - and obviously again last Friday. While I agree with you that fitness and pressure are linked, but, as I said in my previous post, I don’t know why we’ve had these failures this year. 

Injuries are the #1 factor for how well you can go throughout the year. If last year was our ceiling(for arguments sake), with the same list, how could we expect to be better this year given the difference in injuries to key personnel. We weren’t banged up this time last year. We had an incredible run. We all know the injuries we’ve had. Our continuity this year has been poor. Our stars bar Oliver have struggled to get going. How can you refuse to use injuries as a reason for why we aren’t where we were last year? It’s not the sole reason but it’s a big one. You could also say dysfunctional forward line for example, but who’s missing? Tom Mac. Why? Injuries. A few percent off this time of year can be everything. We don’t have endless depth.