Roast Hass Survives

Remove this Banner Ad

feenix67 said:
Hmm not sure that comparison holds.

Also don't think people have "blindly supported it".

What I do know (for a fact) is that Burton skimped on the initial purchase and, as a result, f’ed up the implementation. I also know (for a fact) that the club spent money to rectify that mistake. Then they hired the bloke who designed the system to re-implement it and have now hired a rehab guy to take over the rehab (which includes tools like KT).

These types of tools aren't new, and there are plenty on the market. They had good results with it at North and have enough high profile clients globally to give it some credibility. Are you saying we should have bought the Ford instead of the Holden, or are you against cars in general?.
Click to expand...

I don't have any problem with their initial product, which is a dynamometry machine. It is an incremental improvement on older system of measuring power and there are a number of similar products that do a similar thing.

What I have issue with is the software package that comes with it that, to quote their website:

Advanced software analytics allow sport specific athlete profiling to understand injury risk and guide prescription of appropriate interventions.
Click to expand...

Now in theory this sounds like a great thing, problem is that there is no actual academic, peer reviewed literature that proves it does what they claim.

Their website says:

They have been shown to be valid and reliable in a variety of populations, including elite athletes.
Click to expand...

but I just don't see the studies that prove this existing.

I have access to pretty much every medical journal out there thanks to working for a state health service and I've searched extensively. Only papers I've been able to find on kangatech were about the Dynometer and things like its test/restest accuracy with no mention of the software or its recommendations. Though I will mention the paper was written by Saunders himself which is a bit of a conflict of interest and not exactly best practice.

I just don't think we should be trusting medical recommendations from a piece of software when there is no academic evidence that it actually works. Particularly when the anecdotal evidence (2018, 2020 hamstrings for example) being well above averages across the AFL.

tl;dr
1)Dynometer seems fundementally sound and has some academic study behind it (albiet with the caviat the study and report were by Saunders himself
2)The software has no such academic evidence to support it and I don't believe it should be used without this.
 
Vhaluus said:
I'm sorry but Danger played his heart out in his very last games for us, a final.

Danger was not the issue for us back then.
Click to expand...

He was one of the few who could hold their head up in that game. And he won the B&F that year, which is hardly indicative of a player who has checked out.

There are things about Dangerfield that you might take issue with, but his level of effort, commitment and professionalism are not among them.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Vhaluus said:
I don't have any problem with their initial product, which is a dynamometry machine. It is an incremental improvement on older system of measuring power and there are a number of similar products that do a similar thing.

What I have issue with is the software package that comes with it that, to quote their website:



Now in theory this sounds like a great thing, problem is that there is no actual academic, peer reviewed literature that proves it does what they claim.

Their website says:



but I just don't see the studies that prove this existing.

I have access to pretty much every medical journal out there thanks to working for a state health service and I've searched extensively. Only papers I've been able to find on kangatech were about the Dynometer and things like its test/restest accuracy with no mention of the software or its recommendations. Though I will mention the paper was written by Saunders himself which is a bit of a conflict of interest and not exactly best practice.

I just don't think we should be trusting medical recommendations from a piece of software when there is no academic evidence that it actually works. Particularly when the anecdotal evidence (2018, 2020 hamstrings for example) being well above averages across the AFL.

tl;dr
1)Dynometer seems fundementally sound and has some academic study behind it (albiet with the caviat the study and report were by Saunders himself
2)The software has no such academic evidence to support it and I don't believe it should be used without this.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with any of this. Don't forget, though, that we didn't buy the software (initially). That was the problem. Burton plugged the metrics into a rudimentary set of excel spreadsheets already in place at the club. My understanding is that it was the flawed interpretation of the data (brought about by this half assed implementation) that caused the great hamstring awareness incident of 2018. So, Kangatech's software couldn't have been the issue in 2018 because we didn't use it.

That's what I know. My own thoughts regarding peer reviewed evidence of efficacy are that I wonder how much peer reviewed analysis there is on the industry as a whole, in relation to biometric testing and use in load/injury management. It seems a relatively new area in the context of the broader medical sector. If you look at physiotherapy as a whole, developments in this area are often incremental based on a combination of research and trial and error.

So, given that Kangatech is essentially a combination of a measuring tool and software that enables the user to interpret the data, Im wondering whether the application of the research model associated with medical research (as opposed to physiotherapeutic) is misplaced here.
 
hey shorty said:
Whilst he needs to take a large portion of blame, he's not the only person responsible.
Click to expand...
And players get delisted, dropped or traded for not meeting fitness standards. Does anyone else have a view the rest of us don't into comparable standards being applied to members of the coaching staff?
 
ltdamn said:
And players get delisted, dropped or traded for not meeting fitness standards. Does anyone else have a view the rest of us don't into comparable standards being applied to members of the coaching staff?
Click to expand...
Members of staff have been sacked, in fact Clarke is the only one who remains from the 2019 coaching setup.

Now our fitness was subpar however toward the back end of the year it didn't appear to be as much of an issue as we won games.

The club has changed almost everything bar him and there's 3 possible reasons for that....

We couldn't break his contract

We didn't have the ability to get Burgess or any other highly rated fitness guy.

Or he isn't solely to blame
 
aaa
Vhaluus said:
Because there's no academic literature that really supports the claims the company makes?

It's another collective minds, snake oil Burton bought because he lacked critical thinking skills.

Yet unlike collective minds people here blindly support it and insist it's a good thing, despite NO evidence it has been benificial.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true their sport, Kanga-Tech, and NordBoarh have been part of several research articles, over the last 5 years, from around the world,
The latest article I have read re Kanga-tech was from the 2020 paper from the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sports. volume 23 issue 9, there are earlier studies just cannot find the article at this time.
also, some great information re NordBoard from the British Journal of Sports Medicine, try Volume 50 issue 24,
Also the National Library of Medicine (USA) has published a few research documents.
NordBoard and Kanga-Tech are similar I believe both are used by the Crows,

And the answer is No if anyone asks, me to reproduce the Article on BF, I don't believe the Mods would like the blowback.
 
feenix67 said:
I don't disagree with any of this. Don't forget, though, that we didn't buy the software (initially). That was the problem. Burton plugged the metrics into a rudimentary set of excel spreadsheets already in place at the club. My understanding is that it was the flawed interpretation of the data (brought about by this half assed implementation) that caused the great hamstring awareness incident of 2018. So, Kangatech's software couldn't have been the issue in 2018 because we didn't use it.

That's what I know. My own thoughts regarding peer reviewed evidence of efficacy are that I wonder how much peer reviewed analysis there is on the industry as a whole, in relation to biometric testing and use in load/injury management. It seems a relatively new area in the context of the broader medical sector. If you look at physiotherapy as a whole, developments in this area are often incremental based on a combination of research and trial and error.

So, given that Kangatech is essentially a combination of a measuring tool and software that enables the user to interpret the data, Im wondering whether the application of the research model associated with medical research (as opposed to physiotherapeutic) is misplaced here.
Click to expand...
He did the same with the NordBoard data set.
Intresting to Note Arsenal use the NordBoard so at least Tim Parham will have knowledge of it suppose to work.
 
ad victoriam said:
aaa

Not entirely true their sport, Kanga-Tech, and NordBoarh have been part of several research articles, over the last 5 years, from around the world,
The latest article I have read re Kanga-tech was from the 2020 paper from the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sports. volume 23 issue 9, there are earlier studies just cannot find the article at this time.
also, some great information re NordBoard from the British Journal of Sports Medicine, try Volume 50 issue 24,
Also the National Library of Medicine (USA) has published a few research documents.
NordBoard and Kanga-Tech are similar I believe both are used by the Crows,

And the answer is No if anyone asks, me to reproduce the Article on BF, I don't believe the Mods would like the blowback.
Click to expand...

Read my follow up post to Feenix. I have no issue with the measuring tools, but it's their expert system that has no clinical research behind it.

Unsure why you keep referencing NordBoard as it isn't a kangatech product.
 
Vhaluus said:
Read my follow up post to Feenix. I have no issue with the measuring tools, but it's their expert system that has no clinical research behind it.

Unsure why you keep referencing NordBoard as it isn't a kangatech product.
Click to expand...
I was off the understanding There has been clinical research carried out with the lastest reports mentioning the data from the last couple of years. May be wrong I find the articl=e and read it again,
The reason I refer to the NordBoard is they are similar Kanga-Tech and the Crows use both.
 
hey shorty said:
Members of staff have been sacked, in fact Clarke is the only one who remains from the 2019 coaching setup.

Now our fitness was subpar however toward the back end of the year it didn't appear to be as much of an issue as we won games.

The club has changed almost everything bar him and there's 3 possible reasons for that....

We couldn't break his contract

We didn't have the ability to get Burgess or any other highly rated fitness guy.

Or he isn't solely to blame
Click to expand...
He's not solely responsible? Who is then? Perhaps if we don't have someone solely responsible for the fitness of our playing group we should hire for the role.

Maybe we could call it 'Head of Performance'
 
ltdamn said:
He's not solely responsible? Who is then? Perhaps if we don't have someone solely responsible for the fitness of our playing group we should hire for the role.

Maybe we could call it 'Head of Performance'
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is I don't think fitness is out biggest issue.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Vhaluus said:
So? If it's an issue of ANY size we should fix it.

Should we have let Campo stay on because Burton was a bigger issue?
Click to expand...
Like I said, I'm of the belief he should have been replaced however it may not have been possible
 
Vhaluus said:
Because there's no academic literature that really supports the claims the company makes?

It's another collective minds, snake oil Burton bought because he lacked critical thinking skills.

Yet unlike collective minds people here blindly support it and insist it's a good thing, despite NO evidence it has been benificial.
Click to expand...

Pro sports is chock full of this sort of stuff that has minimal academic research behind it. If they believe it can give an edge they’ll use it, regardless of whether there’s significant body of work behind it.

Even a lot of the end of season surgeries that pro athletes go in and get done have limited medical backing and most non-athletes wouldnt do it.

KangaTech and NordBoard are probably some of the least concerning elements Of what players make use of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

George Kramer
Survivor Thread II - Save martyparty and us…..
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
171
Views
5K
martyparty
martyparty

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top