Jump to content
Melbourne Football

Player injuries


Cinnamon
 Share

Recommended Posts

And then there's this...

"Van't Schip said the club's Slovenian marquee Koren might not be seen until February."

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2014/11/28/vant-schip-expects-melbourne-citys-fortunes-improve

 

Admittedly, I had a chuckle. But, it seems a bit alarmist, given his quote to end the article.

 

"Maybe he can be involved in the last games before the (Asian Cup) break," he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sack koren

Probably posted tongue in cheek, but may be should be considered? Outside the cap so paying him out isn't a problem from that perspective. After all, what has he done for us so far - didn't even look that impressive in pre-season. My understanding is we are only allowed 1 marquee per season, thus his replacement would be within the cap.

We could however replace him for next year if we could find someone older and more injury prone.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

sack koren

Probably posted tongue in cheek, but may be should be considered? Outside the cap so paying him out isn't a problem from that perspective. After all, what has he done for us so far - didn't even look that impressive in pre-season. My understanding is we are only allowed 1 marquee per season, thus his replacement would be within the cap.

We could however replace him for next year if we could find someone older and more injury prone.

 

 

Cassio will be 35 in January and has been not been getting a game with Adelaide United due to injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

sack koren

Probably posted tongue in cheek, but may be should be considered? Outside the cap so paying him out isn't a problem from that perspective. After all, what has he done for us so far - didn't even look that impressive in pre-season. My understanding is we are only allowed 1 marquee per season, thus his replacement would be within the cap.

We could however replace him for next year if we could find someone older and more injury prone.

 

That marquee rule had slipped my mind. But (given that I don't have to personally pay the contract out!) I still think it should be considered as part of clearing the decks.

 

Whether it's bad luck or whatever, our record with most of our 30+ signings is appalling. So, using the "balance of probabilities" criterion, it's a mistake to go sign any more players in that category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding (based on presentations by sports medical staff) is that injury risk intensifies after 28.  So having players in their 30s injured can't be called unlucky.   I'm not against having guys of this age in the team, but you can't have too many of them and you don't want to be relying on them.

 

To sign a mid 20s marquee instead would almost certainly require paying a transfer fee and whilst money might be no object at New York or Manchester, this seems to be a problem here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing to remember is that most professional sportspeople are carrying some sort of long-term injury, even in their 20s and will likely cause trouble from time to time. The big change with >30 year olds though is with recovery time. We are unlikely to have any players without some injury issues at all and neither are any other team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding (based on presentations by sports medical staff) is that injury risk intensifies after 28.  So having players in their 30s injured can't be called unlucky.   I'm not against having guys of this age in the team, but you can't have too many of them and you don't want to be relying on them.

 

To sign a mid 20s marquee instead would almost certainly require paying a transfer fee and whilst money might be no object at New York or Manchester, this seems to be a problem here.

 

There is no point talking 'in general' this really needs to be considered on a case by case basis. Take for example Germano. Of the right age but injury prone. Compare him to Frank Lampard who is still extremely durable in his mid to late 30's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding (based on presentations by sports medical staff) is that injury risk intensifies after 28. So having players in their 30s injured can't be called unlucky. I'm not against having guys of this age in the team, but you can't have too many of them and you don't want to be relying on them.

To sign a mid 20s marquee instead would almost certainly require paying a transfer fee and whilst money might be no object at New York or Manchester, this seems to be a problem here.

There is no point talking 'in general' this really needs to be considered on a case by case basis. Take for example Germano. Of the right age but injury prone. Compare him to Frank Lampard who is still extremely durable in his mid to late 30's.

Frank's just lucky he didn't come here or he'd be injured too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duff:    Dude, why is your training pitch called "The Indian Burial Ground?"
JVS:    Well, there was an Indian burial ground here before we bought it.
Duff:    So you just- built your training facility on top of an Indian burial ground?
JVS:    Oh, hell no! First I dug up all the bodies, pissed on 'em, then buried them again upside down.
Duff:    Why?
JVS:    Why? I don't know. I was drunk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Duff out until 2015.

Ramsay on the wing. Yay.

 

Just what we needed  :rolleyes:

 

Maybe, in fact, just what we do need to tell the club to wake its ideas up and stay away from 30+ players unless they really are top crowd-pullers.

 

We now have 3 out of our 4 visa players out through injury, and the fourth was dropped for the last match.

 

Just hastens the inevitable changes in management required for us to be successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I really don't think the amount of injuries we have is significantly above average.

Or is the problem that it's key players that seem to be always injured?

The stats I saw last season indicated that we were near last on every injury metric.

 

 

Last as in we have the least injuries or last as in we are the worst for injuries?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

above average injuries, way above average missed games (as in more missed games), way above average recovery times.

Interesting, do you have any idea if injuries overall in the A-League are lower than other leagues (eg Europe), there are a lot less games and a shorter season. Because most European clubs seem to have a similar amount of injuries to us.

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can look at some EPL injuries here: http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_premier_league/epl_injury_table.php

 

I'm not sure what the problem is with us. Is it the number of players injured, or is it the duration of the injuries, or is it both?

 

I seem to recall a recent comment that the potential problem as a player gets older is not that he is more likely to be injured but that when he is his recovery time will be longer. However, I have just looked at a couple of papers on-line to read that a player's likelihood of injury itself increases with age. For example http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/38/1/36.full

 

Prima facie it does not appear to be good policy to be recruiting older players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • jw1739 unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...