6 day breaks

[Indie_]

"People make far too much of 6 day breaks. Truth is if you're struggling to cope with a 6 day break in this day and age it probably means you're just having a bad year. No excuses." - Ted Richards.

I think Richards has a good insight into the preparation that goes into football games. It's not like he's a youngster too.

Now can we stop the incessant whining about team x had a 6 day break and that's why they lost. As Richards says, it's a shitty excuse.

 

[Underarm]

Easy to say it when you're the best team in the land...

 

[Dirty Bird]

Now can we stop the incessant whining

You first.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Thre's nothing wrong with six day breaks, so long as the opposiiton hasn't had 8 days or more. Its not the break so much as the differential between them. But the AFL don't mind scheduling 6 day v 14 day breaks after bye weekends.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

It doesn't mean as much as some people like to make out, but it's not meaningless either. Back-to-back six-day breaks, six-day breaks when coming back from (or back to) Perth, games when you have two less days to prepare than the opposition, they'd all be contributing factors to a team being a little bit below its peak, which can sometimes be the difference between a win and a loss.

Even if Richards downplays it (what else is he going to say?), at the very least, players are less likely to get over minor injuries on six days. A six day break may have cost the Swans having Franklin in the lineup last night, while a nine-day break might mean Pavlich can play next week. But Sydney won, so the players don't need any excuses.

 

[tangolikelama]

In on brag thread

 

[Furn2]

Getting a free ride from the umps certainly helps make up for it.

 

[romeoh]

Of course he will say that and maybe 1 /6 day turnaround is fine, if the other team is coming off the same break. But I have no doubt that back to back 6 day breaks( even 3 in a row of them) have an impact. Then factor in who and where a team played, and who, where and how long ago the opposition played -it can become a game breaker. And given, that it is mostly avoidable, I see no need to add to the inequality in the comp.

 

[Arwib]

They unavoidably fall out of our supercomputer level complicated fixturing requirements.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Well if one player says it's fine then obviously the other ~700 must feel exactly the same.

Case closed.

 

[Fitzey]

This thread belongs on the Sydney board.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

try this one on for size - Imagine your a Victorian club and you play PA at AO followed by a 6 day break, then NM in Vic followed by a 6 day break, then Sydney at the SCG who just had a bye the week before. Welcome to Geelong.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

try this one on for size - Imagine your a Victorian club and you play PA at AO followed by a 6 day break, then NM in Vic followed by a 6 day break, then Sydney at the SCG who just had a bye the week before. Welcome to Geelong.

Eh...?

The game against Port Adelaide was on Sunday 27 April. The game against North Melbourne was on Friday, 23 May. I assume you must be referring to the run following the bye of Fremantle at Subiaco on Saturday night, North in Geelong on Friday night and Sydney in Sydney on Thursday night.

And, of course, we do play Hawthorn on a Saturday night in three weeks, backing up from a Friday night game against Carlton at Etihad the previous week. The Hawks, on the other hand, are coming back from a Sunday game at Subiaco against Fremantle the previous week. Swings and roundabouts.

 

[TedDougChris]

"People make far too much of 6 day breaks. Truth is if you're struggling to cope with a 6 day break in this day and age it probably means you're just having a bad year. No excuses." - Ted Richards.

I think Richards has a good insight into the preparation that goes into football games. It's not like he's a youngster too.

Now can we stop the incessant whining about team x had a 6 day break and that's why they lost. As Richards says, it's a shitty excuse.

It actually depends on a few factors. We lost to North earlier in the year, after a 6 day break. We had played in Perth, in 35 degree heat. They had 8 or 9 days off after their match.

North have had an up and down year, but they are a better performing side than us this year, by a margin. We may not have beaten them in the end, had all things been equal. But a massively reduced break - COMPARED TO YOUR OPPONENTS - early in the season if you have a young side, does impact the final result and margin.

This time of year, not so much. But to say that it has no impact is bullshit.

 

[Falchoon]

Swans mouthpiece says a 15% difference is no difference.

Tomorrow the sun will rise in the east.

 

[SA HAWK]

How does Teddy feel about 3 consecutive 6 day breaks?

 

[salim malik]

Try the longest road trip in the game and then play of a six day break
Freo and West Coast cop the long travel and then the 6 day break to often
Trying to rehab in the airport and the plane home and then front up 6 days later is nearly impossible
Malthouse said the WA sides need to be 10% better in playing personal to make up for the constant travel
The 6 day break exacerbates the problem

 

[hawkman]

How does Teddy feel about 3 consecutive 6 day breaks?

Probably loves it because the last 2 years Sydney have played against those teams

 

[The GOAT]

Of course players are going to say it doesn't matter, that doesn't mean they really think it though.

 

[mike14]

does anyone know if there are any published studies on muscle/fatigue recovery rates for AFL footballers. I'm assuming the clubs have done them internally, but are there any in the public domain?

 

[Duskfire]

"People make far too much of 6 day breaks. Truth is if you're struggling to cope with a 6 day break in this day and age it probably means you're just having a bad year. No excuses." - Ted Richards.

I think Richards has a good insight into the preparation that goes into football games. It's not like he's a youngster too.

Now can we stop the incessant whining about team x had a 6 day break and that's why they lost. As Richards says, it's a shitty excuse.

Its never the main reason, but it is a reason. If team A has a six day break and Team B has an 8 day, and Team B wins by a couple of goals, it would be hard to argue that the longer break didn't contribute to the victory, however marginal. Its common sense really; if you rest more and have more time to prepare, there is more energy and less niggles/injury problems.

Its mentioned alot throughout the season, to the extent that I find it hard to believe it doesn't have some baring. Its obvious that multiple six day breaks hurt, alot. Especially with traveling involved.

 

[Air_Chester]

Players being softcocks.

You tell em, Teddy.

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Am sure the AFL tries to minise the Demetriou Swans' 6 day breaks. The Hawks finish the H&A season with three of them.

 

[Noobrifle]

It would interesting to see a statistical analysis on the effect of 6 day breaks on win/loss chances. With enough of a sample size, it should show whether this is an actual issue or not.

Interestingly most of Freo's losses have come after 6 day breaks this year.

 

[The King!]

Only hawthorn get 6 day breaks whats this crap