In Season - Loading/Periodisation: Put your conjecture here.

[1964_2 2,357]

3 minutes ago, Webber said:

Well put, and in significant part why the club will never venture into ‘reasons’ territory, because the red corner (I know you chose red because it denotes anger, thus hinting you might be in the blue corner 😉) will habitually re-position them as excuses. Essentially the ‘reds’ (see what you’ve made me do?) want 100% diligence converted into 100% performance and outcomes 100% of the time, and find it near impossible to accept that this is an irrational expectation. Hard to imagine why they follow sport, let alone the MFC, as gloriously short of 100% as almost any club in the AFL (nods to lifelong St. Kilda supporters, admittedly the true hero supporters of the AFL). 

The other key reason the club will never admit it, is the intel it provides to the opposition when planning for games against us. 

[Lord Nev 13,511]

11 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Exibit A your honour 

I mean, I know I didn't use the saracstica font, but there's clearly a bit of facetiousness in the last line there.

If you're using it as a legal argument, you may even use the 'puffery' defence.

[Webber 10,061]

12 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Exibit A your honour 

Just makes me like @Lord Nev more, particularly because that post is so gleefully and obviously tongue-in-cheek. I think you need another example. 

[DemonWA 3,436]

12 minutes ago, Webber said:

Just makes me like @Lord Nev more, particularly because that post is so gleefully and obviously tongue-in-cheek. I think you need another example. 

This was a recent post on the most recent post match thread. I'm not going to keep trawling to dig out more examples, but no doubt I've seen them.  Lord Nev's humour only works as a joke because we're seeing the same sort of posts by others that are believing this sort of thing. 

[Webber 10,061]

Now that @Engorged Onionhas invoked Socrates, I’m going to give Schopenhauer a bit of a whirl ….”All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident”. 👴🏻

[Lord Nev 13,511]

11 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

This was a recent post on the most recent post match thread. I'm not going to keep trawling to dig out more examples, but no doubt I've seen them.  Lord Nev's humour only works as a joke because we're seeing the same sort of posts by others that are believing this sort of thing. 

To clarify, I'm in the "I think we're loading" camp, and definitely think it has affected our performance, but I also believe we wouldn't go so hard with the loading that we would then expect to lose. If they're doing it, I would think it would be about riding the balance between timing the peak fitness and not impacting so much that it means we'll likely lose.

Probably the best way to explain my thinking on it is perhaps the effects of loading have magnified some existing issues with our performance - specifically forward structure and delivery, backline cohesion, centre clearances and lack of full understanding of the zone movements due to instability in selection.

[DemonWA 3,436]

24 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

To clarify, I'm in the "I think we're loading" camp, and definitely think it has affected our performance, but I also believe we wouldn't go so hard with the loading that we would then expect to lose. If they're doing it, I would think it would be about riding the balance between timing the peak fitness and not impacting so much that it means we'll likely lose.

Probably the best way to explain my thinking on it is perhaps the effects of loading have magnified some existing issues with our performance - specifically forward structure and delivery, backline cohesion, centre clearances and lack of full understanding of the zone movements due to instability in selection.

Just to clarify I'm in the 'were probably loading but that's not why we're loosing' camp. I hope you're right though 

[Webber 10,061]

14 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

To clarify, I'm in the "I think we're loading" camp, and definitely think it has affected our performance, but I also believe we wouldn't go so hard with the loading that we would then expect to lose. If they're doing it, I would think it would be about riding the balance between timing the peak fitness and not impacting so much that it means we'll likely lose.

Probably the best way to explain my thinking on it is perhaps the effects of loading have magnified some existing issues with our performance - specifically forward structure and delivery, backline cohesion, centre clearances and lack of full understanding of the zone movements due to instability in selection.

So you’re both accepting reason, then acknowledging and understanding imperfection. Shame on you. 

[Webber 10,061]

6 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Just to clarify I'm in the 'were probably loading but that's not why we're loosing' camp. I hope you're right though 

You understand how that reads? What it says about your expectations? That we are probably loading, but should still be able to win against two top 4 aspirants even whilst at our most vulnerable. Ergo, we should really go through the season undefeated. 

[DemonWA 3,436]

18 minutes ago, Webber said:

You understand how that reads? What it says about your expectations? That we are probably loading, but should still be able to win against two top 4 aspirants even whilst at our most vulnerable. Ergo, we should really go through the season undefeated. 

Not at all - team's form fluctuates for a range of reasons - injury, illness, complacency, being not quite there mentally etc. They're reasons that were currently loosing imo. 

To link all form to training loads is the concept I don't subscribe to, which you seem wedded to.

[Dwight Schrute 16,774]

12 minutes ago, Webber said:

You understand how that reads? What it says about your expectations? That we are probably loading, but should still be able to win against two top 4 aspirants even whilst at our most vulnerable. Ergo, we should really go through the season undefeated. 

It's really interesting topic to discuss on Demonland because there is so much varied knowledge poster to poster on the topic that it's almost impossible for the conversation to play out productively. 

For the record, i am almost certain out training is in some sort of loaded phase at the moment, to what degree that impacts is impossible to tell because it's different player to player, some players performance won't change at all, some will fall away 5-10% due to fatigue potentially. it's a hard thing to balance. 

I'd say the loss of Steven May has had a bigger impact on our two most recent results than anything to do with training. i think we would have definitely beaten Sydney if May played, and likely would have beaten Fremantle had he not gotten concussed. 

[Webber 10,061]

2 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

which you seem wedded to.

No, and I’ve given NO indication of that at ANY point. I accept that we are beatable on any given day for a number of reasons. Loading is but one, and makes us MORE vulnerable. Obviously. 

[von 1,220]

There’s those that see the game as coaches and those who see it as journalists. 
the afl media are the most reactive short sighted bunch going around. They refuse to dig into detail and make bold predictions without consequence. They refuse to see trends, history etc as relevant in their analysis. Plainly because it doesn’t sell. Some pretend to look at detail when making a claim, but really don’t. Like David king. Most just make short sighted claims that will get clicks.
coaches have to see the long term. They play the season as a long game with many small ones within. They try things out. They manage situations, form etc. we were 10-0. Surely from there you manage things to make sure you are cherry ripe when it matters. History tells you from 10-0 you are a huge chance at a prelim at worst. I don’t think it matters who we lose to. We have to lose and it’s better to lose now, while we are without question, loading, injured and sick. 
the season is long. The game is too hard aerobically and the competition too tight to have an essendon 2000 season these days.

to those who are in the sky is falling down camp. We almost beat Sydney while playing like [censored] and everything that could go wrong did go wrong against freo. Both games we were in dominant positions at one point aswell, showing that while we have legs we look fine. I’m not claiming we are a lock for the grand final but I dont think much is wrong with where we are currently at.

[praha 10,279]

3 hours ago, DemonWA said:

Again, this comment is a speculative narrative derrived from the W/L column of the ladder that suits the position that were not just down on form. 

 

Relax. I have no idea about loading. 

[DemonWA 3,436]

29 minutes ago, Webber said:

No, and I’ve given NO indication of that at ANY point. I accept that we are beatable on any given day for a number of reasons. Loading is but one, and makes us MORE vulnerable. Obviously. 

Your incessant challenge to my views suggests that you're wedded!

[Webber 10,061]

3 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Your incessant challenge to my views suggests that you're wedded!

“Incessant”? I made one challenge. 

[binman 38,112]

50 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Not at all - team's form fluctuates for a range of reasons - injury, illness, complacency, being not quite there mentally etc. They're reasons that were currently loosing imo. 

To link all form to training loads is the concept I don't subscribe to, which you seem wedded to.

Again, no one is linking ALL form to training loads. 

But i honestly cant understand how you can accept we are loading, but not accept, despite the evidence (eg our form slump this year and last year, and the obvious fatigue) that doing so is almost certainly going to negatively impact our form, and therefore our chances of winning.

Loading fatigues players. That is undeniable fact.

Fatigue, in any sport, negatively impacts skill execution and decision making and exacerbates any issues (ability to play a role, cohesiveness, injuries, illness etc etc) a team or individual might be battling with.

It is harder to win when fatigued. 

I tried to bump this thread, but im not sure why i can't see it on my home page. But it is worth scanning because the questions now being asked about our from slump were all being asked last season (the date the thread began and ended is interesting, and suggests we have a few more weeks of sub optimal performance to endure - buckle up).  

 

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by binman

[Dwight Schrute 16,774]

The interesting thing is that the Brisbane Lions are in exactly the same boat as us. 

they've won 1 of their last 3 games, been beaten by Fremantle and Hawthorn, and had a very narrow win against the Giants that could have easily been a loss. but they're not getting the same media attention we are. 

I think both teams have done a great job banking early wins without an enormous injury list, and only doing that really allows yourself to load to the extent that may offer a really serious advantage in the back end of the season. 

It's a really interesting topic to discuss on here because we've been awful for so long, that we've not been in a position for decades where this sort of thing is something that's even been relevant to us.

[—coach— 3,466]

52 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Not at all - team's form fluctuates for a range of reasons - injury, illness, complacency, being not quite there mentally etc. They're reasons that were currently loosing imo. 

To link all form to training loads is the concept I don't subscribe to, which you seem wedded to.

Would agree with this statement and think you have a good point that our current form is not ALL to do with training loads.

peak performance requires all three of physical, mental and emotional readiness to be in an ideal zone. At the moment I think we are below ideal in all three.

it’s worth noting as a side note that we could quite easily have won the game on the weekend if our dominant patches in the third and four quarter resulted in scoreboard pressure which they did not for many reasons.

I think we’ll be fine, just need to lower expectations for a few weeks then enjoy the ride.

[binman 38,112]

8 minutes ago, Dwight Schrute said:

The interesting thing is that the Brisbane Lions are in exactly the same boat as us. 

they've won 1 of their last 3 games, been beaten by Fremantle and Hawthorn, and had a very narrow win against the Giants that could have easily been a loss. 

Yep.

Our round 15 clash against them will be interesting. 

[Smokey 4,126]

15 hours ago, DemonWA said:

Not at all. And to be clear I'm  not saying the technique doesn't exist, I'm just saying I think the masses on hear are using it as an excuse to build a conveniant narrative around our run of poor form. I don't think the 2 are related (or the comparison to last year's form), but happy to be proven wrong. 

Why does this bother you so much? Live and let live mate 
 

[Smokey 4,126]

8 minutes ago, binman said:

Yep.

Our round 15 clash against them will be interesting. 

At least they've still been scoring. Based on that I'm not convinced there's a comparison in the context of loading. 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Smokey

[binman 38,112]

1 minute ago, Smokey said:

At least they've still been scoring. Based on that I'm not convinced there's a comparison in the context of loading. 

Scoring yes.

But their defence has been woeful

The hawks put 117 points past them

[Dwight Schrute 16,774]

16 minutes ago, Smokey said:

At least they've still been scoring. Based on that I'm not convinced there's a comparison in the context of loading. 

I think you should look closer. they've been scoring, but their scores against have risen dramatically. so it's pretty clear to me that loading fatigue has caused the less natural game phase for both sides to fall away slightly. 

we've lost our offensive game a little bit, and they're struggling to transition back and defend. 117, 96 and 99 have been their last 3 scores against, and important to note 2/3 sides are outside the top 8 pretty comfortably. 

[binman 38,112]

2 minutes ago, Dwight Schrute said:

I think you should look closer. they've been scoring, but their scores against have risen dramatically. so it's pretty clear to me that loading fatigue has caused the less natural game phase for both sides to fall away slightly. 

we've lost our offensive game a little bit, and they're struggling to transition back and defend. 117, 96 and 99 have been their last 3 scores against, and important to note 2/3 sides are outside the top 8 pretty comfortably. 

In terms of scoring, i reckon our game plan makes us more susceptible to problems with our offence as our offence is reliant on our defensive system working.

And fatigue makes it all but impossible for our defensive system to work properly becuase we struggle to stop teams' hitting up free players and once they do, hold that player up, meaning we struggle to stop opposition transition.