Are large injury lists just bad luck or a sign of something else?

[chopper55555]

Nope, but I also don't subscribe to the 'we've just got the worst bad luck ever' theory either.

Investigation needs to be made - particularly this cycling regime.

Bureaucratic Fool

You think those guys aren't pros ? Who haven't done it as a professional job for decades ? With local through to world class athletes at the international level ? And haven't thought to consider the possibilities whereas you have ?

 

[Crow-mo]

If something is going wrong in an organisation, they will conduct an internal investigation.

lets look at the word "IF" here. at what point has it been established that something has gone wrong?

It's best practice, not a 'vote of no confidence'. It's not a blame game unless you make it one.

only in textbooks

I think you're off base.

see above.

 

[- PC -]

Some people may think this is out of left field but:

I think that the fact we do most of our pre-season training on Max Basheer reserve contributes to our soft tissue injuries. It is not maintained as an oval and I've talked to a relative of someone who has trained on Max Baseer reserve and said it is as hard as concrete on the feet whereas they trained at Alberton oval and it was a fantastic surface.

The constant training during the summer with no rainfall on hard ground would tend to gradually weaken the muscles making them more prone to acute injury. Muscle soreness would also result from this training.

In October/November 2004, we had a very high rainfall so Max Basheer reserve was softer and we hardly had any injuries in 2005. I would like to see the Crows have a pre-season of training on AAMI stadium and see what injuries we sustain, however, not much hope of the SANFL allowing that.

Just a thought,

Scott

You would think our fitness guy would have some idea... especially after he helped author this report

Evidence for the aetiology of injuries in Australian football
K Norton1, S Schwerdt2 and K Lange1
1 School of Physical Education, Exercise and Sport Studies, University of South Australia, Underdale, Australia
2 Adelaide Football Club


Dr Norton, School of Physical Education, Exercise and Sport Studies, University of South Australia, Holbrooks Road, Underdale,

Objectives—To determine in Australian football (a) the influence of ground hardness and playing grade (level) on game speed and structure, and (b) player movement patterns throughout the game and across levels.

Methods—The design consisted of several studies. Seventeen games played on grounds of different hardness in 2000 were used to determine game speed and structure. Four first grade and four second grade grand final games (1994, 1996, 1997, 1999) were used to determine the game speed and structure on the same ground but at different levels. Fifty one players (44 first grade and seven second grade) were used to measure movement patterns within games and across levels during the 2000 season.

Results—There was a significant relation between ground hardness and game speed, which could lead to higher injury rates when the ground is harder. There was a 6.7% difference in game speed between the first and second grade levels reflecting differences in injury incidence. The first grade games were also characterised by a greater number of shorter, high intensity play periods and longer stop periods than the second grade games. Midfield players in the first grade games covered about 24% greater distance than their second grade counterparts, and there was a significant difference in their playing speeds.

Conclusions—Over the past 40 years, the game speed in the top level of Australian football has approximately doubled. Over the same time, the number of collisions and the estimated injury incidence have also doubled. This study provides additional support to the suggestion that these variables are strongly linked. Factors such as ground hardness, playing level, and time during the game influence game speed and are therefore important in injury development in Australian football.

------------

Would like to see SS put his mind to whether training on hard grounds also has some effect

 

[chopper55555]

Jeepers that's interesting. Nice pickup. Given Dr Norton's apparent association with AFC, and NC's background (a Masters in physiology, or something high falutin like that), then yes OK I too would tend to think they probably have some ideas. I wonder what they are...

Isn't there a thread on posing questions to NC (was that for real ?) and so maybe this could be put there ?

 

[just maybe]

Yet you demanded an external investigation?

If an internal investigation suggests that unbiased external experts need to be a part of it, then yes.

You do know companies hire consultants when doing internal investigations?

 

[just maybe]

lets look at the word "IF" here. at what point has it been established that something has gone wrong?

Gee, maybe the size of our injury list.

only in textbooks



see above.

Never run a business I take it?

 

[just maybe]

Bureaucratic Fool

You think those guys aren't pros ? Who haven't done it as a professional job for decades ? With local through to world class athletes at the international level ? And haven't thought to consider the possibilities whereas you have ?

The hardest person to be truly critical of is yourself.

 

[chopper55555]

Possibly. I gather NC specifically values a professional culture of honesty and feedback in a range of ways, rumour has it that he put methods in place in the club, so I'm unconvinced that's a relevant issue especially in light of the other material above.

In regard to consultants I gather the good Dr N has been engaged at least once to assist the club, maybe others too for all we know, however I am unsure of the reasoning leading to an assessment that the knowledge, skills and attitude are not available within the club to deal with the issue(s) ? Possible but not certain as far as I know. You may have more information to ascertain that need, but it's not entirely apparent.

 

[just maybe]

An outside perspective sees things from an outside perspective. That's the point.

 

[chopper55555]

Gee, maybe the size of our injury list.

Er, a bit of an imaginative leap of faith on your part - size of the injury list does not = something's actually wrong. It's an indicator, that something may or may not be, like the OP was suggesting.

Never run a business I take it?

No, only multiple teams of people.

 

[just maybe]

Er, a bit of an imaginative leap of faith on your part - size of the injury list does not = something's actually wrong. It's an indicator, that something may or may not be, like the OP was suggesting.

OK.

Let's look at this slowly.

When we have the largest injury list in the competition, something is wrong.

When we have a spate of soft tissue injuries since our loading began last year, something is wrong.

When we have too many players sustaining serious injuries from standard football 'impacts', something is wrong.

Yes, they're all indicators that something is wrong.

Now, along with this, we have players complaining about training levels.

Craig says there's nothing wrong and that impact injuries aren't his fault. Automatically, that should question whether he has lost his objectivity - as training can definitely effect whether you sustain serious injury from impact situations.

All of these issues suggest that a prudent management would ask for an external consultant to assess the Crows' training programs and report on whether they could be contributing to the injury list.

If Craig is a professional, he will accept external assessment as part of the personal improvement of his own coaching - after all, he admits he is a novice who needs to learn.

Lord knows we have enough money - and if the answer came out either way, wouldn't the management then be happier in being sure?

What is the reason not to exercise this prudence?

 

[NikkiNoo]

JM - you personally have had experience with 'over-training' issues, is that correct? If so, don't you think that you are letting your experience in that particular case / environment colour your opinion of what is going on down at West Lakes?

I know I get accused of being NC's press secretary by some on here due to my willingness to trust his experience and knowledge. But my observations and listening carefully to interviews with him and the training staff have given me the impression that there are a few different systems in place and the club is continually monitoring data and information in relation to injuries. Now, as Neil has often said, you can collect a lot of data and information but unless you are able to understand that data then it is useless. I can't see that the club, with the scientific minds down there, would be collating data that wouldn't be of use to them.

 

[just maybe]

JM - you personally have had experience with 'over-training' issues, is that correct? If so, don't you think that you are letting your experience in that particular case / environment colour your opinion of what is going on down at West Lakes?

Nope.

It has made me aware.

Again, please explain why we should not use our barrels of cash to hire a consultant to examine the training.

What is wrong with having the peace of mind?

I know I get accused of being NC's press secretary by some on here due to my willingness to trust his experience and knowledge. But my observations and listening carefully to interviews with him and the training staff have given me the impression that there are a few different systems in place and the club is continually monitoring data and information in relation to injuries. Now, as Neil has often said, you can collect a lot of data and information but unless you are able to understand that data then it is useless. I can't see that the club, with the scientific minds down there, would be collating data that wouldn't be of use to them.

Yes, you're right, you are far too trusting and uncritical of Craig, and when he's made mistakes as he has previously, that is a dangerous attitude. He admits he is a novice - yet you claim you trust his 'experience'.

Perhaps you need to take a more critical view, because novice coaches get things wrong.

Those within the club may collect all the data they want - it doesn't mean they necessarily can see the forest for the trees. Sometimes it takes someone with an external perspective to light the way. As they say, you can't smell your own B.O.

Again, please explain to me why, with our barrels of cash, we should not hire someone to have a look over, given the critical state of our injury list?

 

[NikkiNoo]

Nope.

It has made me aware.

Again, please explain why we should not use our barrels of cash to hire a consultant to examine the training.

What is wrong with having the peace of mind?

I agree to disagree with you as I think it has coloured your perspective of this issue. I would look to an outside perspective only when the inside examinations of the training has been finalised. We don't know fully what internal examinations are taking place, and the club, rightly imo in the current state of media in this state, would not be fully advertising what they are doing.

Yes, you're right, you are far too trusting and uncritical of Craig, and when he's made mistakes as he has previously, that is a dangerous attitude. He admits he is a novice - yet you claim you trust his 'experience'.

Perhaps you need to take a more critical view, because novice coaches get things wrong.

All coaches get things wrong, whether they are a novice or experienced - it's the nature of human beings that we stuff things up all the time. If we don't learn from those mistakes then there are issues.

I have been critical of Craig previously but I don't have the need to shout it out on here. I think there are enough posters here willing to be critical that I try and temper that with some positive outlooks.

This is my coaching experience coming through. I have spent over ten years of my life coaching a highly technical sport so I think I have some understanding of coaching issues and techniques as well as looking continually at training methods.

You will often get better results by being critical in a positive way. Most people respond better to positives than they do negatives but it is actually very hard to talk positively, especially in relation to coaching or sport. Our society is geared towards being negative in all aspects of our life.

I did a little social experiment once with my gymnasts. I took two groups of them and told them to watch one of their teamates perform a routine. At the end I asked one group to tell me what that gymnast did RIGHT in their routine. Needless to say they actually could not tell me what they did right, they did not offer one observation. I then asked the other group to say what the gymnast did wrong. This group were able to articulate many aspects of what was wrong in the routine by the gymnast. After they finished I actually informed the group what was the positives from the routine and what were the negatives. My list of positives was considerably longer than the negatives but my gymnasts were trained via society and also the sports scoring system to only look at the negatives.

Those within the club may collect all the data they want - it doesn't mean they necessarily can see the forest for the trees. Sometimes it takes someone with an external perspective to light the way. As they say, you can't smell your own B.O.

Sometimes if it stinks enough you can.... See you are making assumptions just like I was and that is what I was trying to get at before - we don't and can't know for sure and I prefer to have facts at my disposal before throwing the book at my club. My nature is to be optimistic and yours is to be pessimistic so we shall agree to disagree on this.

Again, please explain to me why, with our barrels of cash, we should not hire someone to have a look over, given the critical state of our injury list?

I have no problems with an external person looking at it but whose to know that Craig has not talked with his network of outside mentors about these issues or that the club hasn't already approached some external people?
But I would prefer that the internal mechanisms and systems are looked at by the internal people first before jumping up and down yelling that things are wrong only an external person can fix it. We don't know and you don't either that an external person will be able to fix the issues if there are any. This is just becoming a circular discussion.

We can't and I wouldn't expect the club to come out and say it to the media in this state if those things have happened or are happening. You also don't want to put anything out there that would give the opposition some ammunition. You need to consider who asked the questions about our injuries and why the club and their representatives would be responding with limited information to that particular person.

Just because the money is at your disposal is not a valid reason to start throwing it around.

 

[Markthirtytwo]

Yes, you're right, you are far too trusting and uncritical of Craig, and when he's made mistakes as he has previously, that is a dangerous attitude. He admits he is a novice - yet you claim you trust his 'experience'.

Perhaps you need to take a more critical view, because novice coaches get things wrong.

2 words - thin ice.

 

[chopper55555]

Well...

Er, a bit of an imaginative leap of faith on your part - size of the injury list does not = something's actually wrong. It's an indicator, that something may or may not be, like the OP was suggesting.

got

Let's look at this slowly.

When we have the largest injury list in the competition, something is wrong...

Yes, they're all indicators that something is wrong.

over the head like a TAA jet... unfortunately it seems the point was both stated and missed it at the same time... NN makes sense, given the demonstrated abilities and skills of NC over time (dunno about others in AFC). I see reasons to have faith in his analysis and call on an internal/external review, ATM - isn't it inappropriate to bash him as "inexperienced" etc given top-2 finishes in the last 2 years with a list some people said were easy-beats. He's done marvelously and a lot better than most other sides in real terms.

Now, along with this, we have players complaining about training levels.

A school of thought may exist that not enough training takes you back to the pack... some need all the advantage they can get. Further, is it possible that the fitter players may be less prone to some forms of injury (think it through). Complaints about player training levels would be best in context of who the players are and where they're "coming from"... I hesitate to use the term squibs but if you want to be the best then you need to do something exceptional about it.

What is the reason not to exercise this prudence?

I don't know it's not happening - internally. If you know otherwise, please share it.

 

[just maybe]

I agree to disagree with you as I think it has coloured your perspective of this issue. I would look to an outside perspective only when the inside examinations of the training has been finalised. We don't know fully what internal examinations are taking place, and the club, rightly imo in the current state of media in this state, would not be fully advertising what they are doing.

*sigh*

Let us all believe that what Big Brother is doing is good and right.

All coaches get things wrong, whether they are a novice or experienced - it's the nature of human beings that we stuff things up all the time. If we don't learn from those mistakes then there are issues.

I have been critical of Craig previously but I don't have the need to shout it out on here. I think there are enough posters here willing to be critical that I try and temper that with some positive outlooks.

This is my coaching experience coming through. I have spent over ten years of my life coaching a highly technical sport so I think I have some understanding of coaching issues and techniques as well as looking continually at training methods.

You will often get better results by being critical in a positive way. Most people respond better to positives than they do negatives but it is actually very hard to talk positively, especially in relation to coaching or sport. Our society is geared towards being negative in all aspects of our life.

I did a little social experiment once with my gymnasts. I took two groups of them and told them to watch one of their teamates perform a routine. At the end I asked one group to tell me what that gymnast did RIGHT in their routine. Needless to say they actually could not tell me what they did right, they did not offer one observation. I then asked the other group to say what the gymnast did wrong. This group were able to articulate many aspects of what was wrong in the routine by the gymnast. After they finished I actually informed the group what was the positives from the routine and what were the negatives. My list of positives was considerably longer than the negatives but my gymnasts were trained via society and also the sports scoring system to only look at the negatives.

By 'critical', I don't mean 'criticism'. By 'critical' I meant positive critique - as you do.

I have suggested to you that Craig, as a professional, should welcome someone with an outside perspective examining his methods.

Sometimes if it stinks enough you can.... See you are making assumptions just like I was and that is what I was trying to get at before - we don't and can't know for sure and I prefer to have facts at my disposal before throwing the book at my club. My nature is to be optimistic and yours is to be pessimistic so we shall agree to disagree on this.

I'd say our current injury list stinks pretty bad.

If we need to know every single working of the club before making a comment, tell me Nikki, why do we even bother posting here?

I have no problems with an external person looking at it but whose to know that Craig has not talked with his network of outside mentors about these issues or that the club hasn't already approached some external people?
But I would prefer that the internal mechanisms and systems are looked at by the internal people first before jumping up and down yelling that things are wrong only an external person can fix it. We don't know and you don't either that an external person will be able to fix the issues if there are any. This is just becoming a circular discussion.

Who said something is wrong only an external person will fix it?

Nobody.

What was said was that a consultant with an outside perspective can give a yay or nay.

We can't and I wouldn't expect the club to come out and say it to the media in this state if those things have happened or are happening. You also don't want to put anything out there that would give the opposition some ammunition. You need to consider who asked the questions about our injuries and why the club and their representatives would be responding with limited information to that particular person.

Most of this board has asked about our injuries.

It's not just Rucci, and it's silly to claim that it is.

Just because the money is at your disposal is not a valid reason to start throwing it around.

Obviously we differ, because I don't consider getting a qualified consultant in to work through your training program to be 'throwing it around'.

I consider that to be prudent.

 

[just maybe]

Well...
got


over the head like a TAA jet... unfortunately it seems the point was both stated and missed it at the same time... NN makes sense, given the demonstrated abilities and skills of NC over time (dunno about others in AFC). I see reasons to have faith in his analysis and call on an internal/external review, ATM - isn't it inappropriate to bash him as "inexperienced" etc given top-2 finishes in the last 2 years with a list some people said were easy-beats. He's done marvelously and a lot better than most other sides in real terms.

Over the head?

No, I'm just saying you were wrong.

A huge injury list is not an 'indicator'. It's a problem. What we're looking for is the cause of the problem.

You are missing the point.

A school of thought may exist that not enough training takes you back to the pack... some need all the advantage they can get. Further, is it possible that the fitter players may be less prone to some forms of injury (think it through). Complaints about player training levels would be best in context of who the players are and where they're "coming from"... I hesitate to use the term squibs but if you want to be the best then you need to do something exceptional about it.

What other club in the AFL is having players publicly complaining about the level of training?

Not in 2005, mind you, but only since Craig's much-vaunted '9%' at the start of 2006, and the loading phase, and ever since.

I'm not sure what you understand about fitness, but more training does not equal more fitness. You can over-train, where you body becomes too tired and you don't make further fitness progress. I've been through it. So don't pretend excessive training is a good thing.

I don't know it's not happening - internally. If you know otherwise, please share it.

If it is happening - then good.

But there's no reason not to call for it as a fan.

Otherwise why bother posting on this board. Shall we all just sit in front of the TV and dribble and say 'AFC knows best'?

 

[chopper55555]

I think we can agree that we think the other misses the point. Consultant talk. Don't care what other club's squibs cry over or not. I wonder if the "training load" is more media words than actuality for a while ? Re over-training and fitness, that needs to be well managed with an understanding of the physiology and individuals attributes and capacities... who better than Mr C ?

Well... not sure who is better qualified given the credentials, background and experience of the people under discussion. If it helps I'm for it, but won't insist on starting down the "internally doubting and blaming" path.

"Manna from heaven" don't mean consultants know it all - generally they tell you what you know in a politically useful way.

 

[mick_foley]

*sigh*

Let us all believe that what Big Brother is doing is good and right.

By 'critical', I don't mean 'criticism'. By 'critical' I meant positive critique - as you do.

I have suggested to you that Craig, as a professional, should welcome someone with an outside perspective examining his methods.

I'd say our current injury list stinks pretty bad.

If we need to know every single working of the club before making a comment, tell me Nikki, why do we even bother posting here?

Who said something is wrong only an external person will fix it?

Nobody.

What was said was that a consultant with an outside perspective can give a yay or nay.

Most of this board has asked about our injuries.

It's not just Rucci, and it's silly to claim that it is.

Obviously we differ, because I don't consider getting a qualified consultant in to work through your training program to be 'throwing it around'.

I consider that to be prudent.

As you have alluded to earlier in this thread most corporate driven organizations annually tender for a consultancy firm to do an external overview of the day to day business.

Who’s to assume the AFC don’t implement this practice on an annual basis already but haven’t released the findings. Assuming they don’t practice good business principals by introducing an outside influence to critique the different departments within the football club when are you proposing they do this?

Are you talking about getting this external overview done now or at the end of the season?

Isn’t it considered dangerous to potentially jump the gun on a few irregularities such as injuries that could quite easily even themselves out over a course of a season.

If Neil Craig is negligent in his T & D and implementing unsafe training habits, why has it taken 2 year for anyone to question this?

 

[thesouthernend]

I think that injuries are generally just bad luck, your team is trained and conditioned by experts, they are. The only thing that I could suggest is the condition of Max Basheer Oval, with the drought has it changed its texture, its grip or give, I see it is watered a lot but I do not think that makes up for it all.

 

[just maybe]

his T & D and implementing unsafe training habits, why has it taken 2 year for anyone to question this?

Ít hasn't. It was asked from the point of his '9% training increase' at the start of 2006.

These injuries aren't 'a few irregularities'. We're close to struggling picking a side because we barely have 22 fit men.

Injuries can wreck seasons. Ask any club - and every club with injury woes in recent seasons has rightly had their training regime questioned.

 

[- PC -]

Injuries can wreck seasons. Ask any club - and every club with injury woes in recent seasons has rightly had their training regime questioned.

Should we stop training?

 

[just maybe]

I think we can agree that we think the other misses the point. Consultant talk. Don't care what other club's squibs cry over or not. I wonder if the "training load" is more media words than actuality for a while ? Re over-training and fitness, that needs to be well managed with an understanding of the physiology and individuals attributes and capacities... who better than Mr C ?

A lot of people. He has a sports science degree. Whoopdie-doo. Does that make him the be-all and end-all of training? Does it matter that he spent most of it dealing with cyclists?

Well... not sure who is better qualified given the credentials, background and experience of the people under discussion. If it helps I'm for it, but won't insist on starting down the "internally doubting and blaming" path.

Internal doubt and blaming?

It's just best practice when your key staff are having serious problems.

 

[just maybe]

Should we stop training?

Yes. I suggest Craig introduces a beer and movies training regime.