Training Are they really unfit?

[Bunk Moreland]

Seems to be so much talk the last couple of weeks about how the players returning from a year off are really struggling with fitness.

Funnily enough it wasn't mentioned when we were winnings Round 1 and 2.

Apparently Hurley is really unfit, Hooker so unfit that he's actually incapable of playing back where he belongs, and it's been said of Heppell as well.

Is there actually anything to this or is it just hyperbole/"narrative"/bullshit/excuses that somebody has come up with and is propogating?

I don't seem to recall anything coming out of the club.

They'd totally have lacked match fitness, but so does every player at the start of the season. You absolutely lose match fitness in five months off playing just like these blokes would have.

After 2-3 preseason games and 4 H&A games, you'd hope they're getting there on that front.

Hurley I just think was outclassed by Walker and had to deal with isolation due to a poor defensive setup and zero pressure on the Crows in the midfield. Fitness? Really?

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Don't think so. our midfield and lack of defensive pressure is whats letting us down atm. Was there in the first 2 rounds and seems to completely disappeared the last 2 weeks.

 

[JayJ20]

I don't think it is about fitness.
It looks like they aren't used to the way the game is being played at the moment, which is expected after a year off. The game has moved on a lot since they last played the game. It'll get better as the season goes on hopefully.
Colyer surprisingly is the only one that looks to have adjusted very well, but that is probably because the game style played at the moment suits his game very well.

Hurley in all honesty has been the worst of our defenders so far. I don't know if we can put it on the year off or not, but something doesn't seem quite right. Time will tell.

Heppell has shown plenty of promise, so I'm not worried about him. Not clean with ball in hand like he was before, but I can easily see that improve once he starts getting used to the game

With Hooker, I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't a little worried, but that worry is only if he stays as a forward. Don't think that he'll ever be a good forward. One thing that's different from his second half of the year in 2015 to now is that he used to play with a lot of energy and enthusiasm. That has more or less disappeared so far.

Watson sadly isn't what he was anymore. He plays every bit like a player on the cusp of retirement.

Stanton. I don't know. Thought he was okay in the first game. I haven't noticed him too much to be honest. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

I find that it is more to do with energy and enthusiasm that is missing with many of the returning players. As if the reality that this is a weekly thing has set in. No surprise seeing the returning players that dominated the Hawthorn game being fairly quite yesterday.
Fortunately, that is something that happens to many people even outside of footy and it usually adjusts after initially hitting that wall.

 

[BigJoeD_]

In general terms they look sore to me, which is to be expected after such a long time away. Their bodies would be screaming from the contact, collisions etc - not so much a cardio fitness aspect.

The other issue is touch, and the feel for the game -again talking collectively, it's asking a lot to be in top nick a mere three weeks removed from what equates to an eighteen month spell.

It's going to take some time, we need to be patient

 

[Lore]

Seems to be so much talk the last couple of weeks about how the players returning from a year off are really struggling with fitness.

Funnily enough it wasn't mentioned when we were winnings Round 1 and 2.

Apparently Hurley is really unfit, Hooker so unfit that he's actually incapable of playing back where he belongs, and it's been said of Heppell as well.

Is there actually anything to this or is it just hyperbole/"narrative"/bullshit/excuses that somebody has come up with and is propogating?

I don't seem to recall anything coming out of the club.

They'd totally have lacked match fitness, but so does every player at the start of the season. You absolutely lose match fitness in five months off playing just like these blokes would have.

After 2-3 preseason games and 4 H&A games, you'd hope they're getting there on that front.

Hurley I just think was outclassed by Walker and had to deal with isolation due to a poor defensive setup and zero pressure on the Crows in the midfield. Fitness? Really?

Stat-haters will hate this, but the player ratings for the Adelaide game support the idea that they're out of form this week, at the very least. Ratings are a weighted average (based on some undisclosed algorithm) of a bunch of key stats that measure the player's effective output;



The two year averages are probably lower than they should really be for suspended guys because they were dragged down pretty significantly last year when they didn't play... and yet look who had a significantly below average game against the Crows? Green, coming back from injury. Parish, Ambrose and Baguley (make what you will of that). Heppell, Hooker, Hurley, Watson, Stanton (lower still than bogus low averages?)

 

[Longjohnmire]

Just relax.. you guys realise Adelaide did the exact same thing to gws only a couple of weeks ago. Don't Throw the toys out of the cot just yet..

 

[Laverde2Smack]

I haven't noticed much of this talk at all, where is it coming from?

Hurley has been poor but it is not down to fitness. Hooker is lacking touch but it is not down to fitness.

 

[calyam]

The two year averages are probably lower than they should really be for suspended guys because they were dragged down pretty significantly last year when they didn't play... and yet look who had a significantly below average game against the Crows? Green, coming back from injury. Parish, Ambrose and Baguley (make what you will of that). Heppell, Hooker, Hurley, Watson, Stanton (lower still than bogus low averages?)

Just a minor correction: the two year average dot represents their average in the games they have played during the past two seasons. So the average hasn't been reduced by suspension (even though their overall ranking is artificially low).

They do, however, confirm that the returning players, with the exception of Colyer, are well down on where they were during 2015. Most are struggling to have a positive influence at all.

 

[Lore]

Just a minor correction: the two year average dot represents their average in the games they have played during the past two seasons. So the average hasn't been reduced by suspension (even though their overall ranking is artificially low).

They do, however, confirm that the returning players, with the exception of Colyer, are well down on where they were during 2015. Most are struggling to have a positive influence at all.

Hm, okay. The ratings explained page thing said something about averages being over the last 40 games, but that might just be overall ratings as you say. The ones in the tweet don't come with explainers

 

[yodellinhank]

Last time i seen em they looked unfit at the 'g v carlton.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

They looked pretty fit in the final quarter in the first two games. Hooker missed a month pre season due to hammy.

Hepp was good first three games and he and Jobe just had off nights. It can happen. Stanton should play wing/ half forward, knows how to kick a goal. Hurley thrashed by Walker but thought he's been ok. Not his 2015 form as yet though, certainly seems to have lost some bulk.

The worry will be for guys like Myers and Bellchambers who effectively have been out for two years.

 

[raskolnikov]

Just relax.. you guys realise Adelaide did the exact same thing to gws only a couple of weeks ago. Don't Throw the toys out of the cot just yet..

We lost to Carlton the week before.

Anzac Day will tell us a lot. Collingwood are terrible.

 

[Howard Moon]

I reckon its a perfect storm of circumstance.

We have the returning players with questionable match fitness from time out.

We had a huge emotional victiory round one - theres always let down after those.

We then travelled, and played on a cyclone ravaged sponge. Sure it looked fine on TV but multiple players dont just lose boots in pristine conditiions, the ground was heavy.

We then played in a heavy rain stoppage laiden slog the week later.

Then we travel again off a short break to play the flag favorite who are absolutley flying.

I can underatand why there may be some fitness/sorness type issues.

The elongated break this week will be the perfect tonic to come into ANZAC day against another team who have their issues.

Jury is still out but in a positive we now know where we stand, we can take the optimistic glasses off and admit we are not top 4 or near to it. We are in the solid bunch of 7-14 just where most predicted.

Its funny tho, i watch North, every week they play well, seriously challenge their rivals but eventually get outclassed in the end to lose.

When they play us, it just feels like we wont weather that challenge and they will run off with the win.

 

[ant555]

It is about fitness base. You miss a year it generally takes a good part of the season to build that fitness base up. They do not lose the fitness base over the 6 week break because they all have programs they need to do, skin folds that have to be met and times they need to run in the first few days back. It is why all first year players end up on a modified program and all but the very best tire at some stage of the season. It is not hyperbole/"narrative"/bullshit/excuses , it is just how it is. Players fitness base improves every year they are in the system in the first 3 seasons.

Hurley was the player who did the least amount of training during the year off so there will be times when he struggles against a forward who does a lot of running and leading.

Hooker was pretty much out of action for all of Jan and the first 2 weeks of Feb. He is currently playing at around 80% - 90%.

The game in the wet against Carlton was a really hard slog. Carlton got run over in the last quarter as well. It is not surprising Jobe and Heppell who had big games in the first 2 or 3 weeks where a bit flat this week. Was also a 6 day break of that game. We now get a 9 day break which will help them.

I will say again, the wet game would have taken a lot out of the returning players.

 

[ant555]

I haven't noticed much of this talk at all, where is it coming from?

Hurley has been poor but it is not down to fitness. Hooker is lacking touch but it is not down to fitness.

So a player who is on a modified program for 6 weeks leading into the season, plays no AFL practice matches and 1 VFL match and he is not down on fitness ?

 

[Mercurial89]

Jobe qpparantly played 67% of the game and they couldnt put him in the midfield, was out on his feet. Thats from John's press conference.

Its not an excuse because im sure the players arent accepting it. It is however the reality of the situation and it will take time. Only way you work through it and build is by playing.

There is no shame in losing to Adelaide over there. There is also a chance we go down to pies, i would encourage everyone to not lose their minds. This was always going to be s building year.

 

[Gumby2Hurley]

Stat-haters will hate this, but the player ratings for the Adelaide game support the idea that they're out of form this week, at the very least. Ratings are a weighted average (based on some undisclosed algorithm) of a bunch of key stats that measure the player's effective output;



The two year averages are probably lower than they should really be for suspended guys because they were dragged down pretty significantly last year when they didn't play... and yet look who had a significantly below average game against the Crows? Green, coming back from injury. Parish, Ambrose and Baguley (make what you will of that). Heppell, Hooker, Hurley, Watson, Stanton (lower still than bogus low averages?)

crikey, couple of them had their career best game against us.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

Unfit is another bullshit excuse. Its quite funny that over the years teams with a 6 day break, against the odds all manage to get up for a game against us and look fitter, faster and more hungry.

We lack depth to share the load and rely on too few. Too many play self preservation. We need more Darcy Parish types and less Zaka/Stanton.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Unfit is another bullshit excuse. Its quite funny that over the years teams with a 6 day break, against the odds all manage to get up for a game against us and look fitter, faster and more hungry.

We lack depth to share the load and rely on too few. Too many play self preservation. We need more Darcy Parish types and less Zaka/Stanton.

Cant disagree with that.

Zaka and Stanton look great when the teams flying but rarely lift us when we are struggling.

One thing Stanton credit of though is, when everyone else has stopped running in the past, he still is running to position and providing an outlet.

 

[Doss]

I would have thought the lack of a solid, 'match fitness' base after a year off would be self evident, as Ant said.

It's not a bullshit excuse, it's human physiology.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Unfit for duty, amirite?!

Clearly there's more than one meaning to the word unfit and most of the various forms have already been addressed itt.

All I'd say is: for months people said EFC were the great unknown because no one knows how the players will fare after a year off, and that no training program can compare with actual matches.

Many of us said that as well.

Yet here we are, barely a month in, and people are freaking out wondering what's going wrong. Footy fans, goldfish have better memories than footy fans.

It's pretty simple. We're finally finding out how the players will cope after a year off, and unsurprisingly it's that they are going to have ups and downs and will struggle at times.

Yet I read constant complaints and whinges that no, actually they are no good, are overpaid, and have actually somehow lost their talent than it being the most basic and obvious thing: a byproduct of the year off that we all talked about ad nauseum for the last year.

lol

 

[yodellinhank]

I would have thought the lack of a solid, 'match fitness' base after a year off would be self evident, as Ant said.

It's not a bullshit excuse, it's human physiology.

So we pick em in the senior side and have players with a fitness base in the 2's?

 

[Doss]

Well yes, because generally they are much better than their replacements in the twos.

Hooker and Hurley running around in the magoos while we throw Begley and co to the wolves, sounds like a great idea.

 

[yodellinhank]

Well yes, because generally they are much better than their replacements in the twos.

Hooker and Hurley running around in the magoos while we throw Begley and co to the wolves, sounds like a great idea.

Hartley for hurley. Stewart for hooker. If we're bringin these guys in to the club and aren't prepared to play them then why are we bringin them in in the first place?

 

[Doss]

We are not going to play them in the twos and it's useless even entertaining the idea. Period.