Read that article last night.

It suggests a number of possibilities for the reasons as to the level of injuries but none are conclusive.

There is little doubt that it's a combination of smaller lists, lengthened seasons and shorter off seasons.

With competition equalisation luck has now become a major player. The luck of the fixture, the luck of the draft, the luck of father son selections.. the list goes on

Interesting quote in among that; "(Libby, a physio in training) Birch suspects this year’s round zero might have played into this landscape, not because it made the season one week longer for some clubs, but because they would have geared a block of training to an earlier-than-usual bye in the season proper." 

Anyways, I'm anti-rotation cap. I don't get the concept (on multiple levels) of fatiguing players to improve the spectacle. Why would any sport want to lessen the performance of its players, and run the risk of the league becoming more ANB and less Petracca? And there has been a clear decrease in scoring since each cap was introduced. 

Subjective, but I think football was at its height in the era of massive rotations preceding the first cap (during which we were [censored] and probably otherwise distracted), which was introduced due to concerns over increased injuries, and not congestion. And now we have another spike in injuries? Plus congestion is as bad as ever. 

Also speculation, but if I was a tired mid I would jump on the ball and tie it up rather than attempting to burst from a stoppage. Less likely I have receivers running past as well. But doing so reduces goal-scoring and opportunities for a moment of rest in between, and also increases contact and the potential of injury.

 

 

 

Oh an epidemic now.

This is why I don't read or watch footy media anymore.