Jump to content

Football: 3rd Season Meltdown


Consigliere

Recommended Posts

Less than three years ago, this was the line-up for Klopp's first game in charge of Liverpool.  (A draw with Spurs)

Mignolet, Clyne, Skrtel, Sakho, Moreno, Leiva (Lucas), Can, Milner, Lallana, Coutinho, Origi
Substitutes: Touré, Allen, Ibe, Bogdan, Sinclair, Teixeira, Randall

Of 11 starters, only Milner is a possible starter these days, with Clyne, Moreno and Lallana definitely back-ups.  None of the subs are still are the club.  Once Mignolet and Origi are sold in the next two weeks, 14 of that 18 will have departed the club.  In fairness, Firmino, Henderson, Lovren, Alexander-Arnold, Gomez were at the club then but either injured that day or not yet a senior player.  So it's not like we've bought an entire squad since then.  But we've sure shifted a lot of deadwood, and our recruitment has been much more successful since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

It seems premature to estimate a timeframe when the injury hasn’t been evaluated yet.  I hope it’s not too bad for him. 

It may be completely unrelated but I do fear that a WC and shorter preseason causes more injuries in general. 

I've always wondered how taxing soccer is on the players. I find myself confused at times when people say a player isn't going to be fit because he played three days earlier. Soccer doesn't strike me as a more exhausting sport than say basketball, and at times they will play four games in five nights. I know that soccer players travel the most distance relative to their sport (where for instance in football there's only 9-11 minutes of action in a three hour game), but it seems like there's a lot of walking involved. What am I missing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basketball is over in 50 minutes basically with a bench that players can interchange from. Also running in mostly straight lines plus a fair bit of jockeying side to side right? 

In football(soccer) players that are key men play 90 minutes often 2 times a week and they jog/run for most about 8-10km a game full backs can get up to 12-13km and they can go from walking pace to flat out in a split second multiple times as well as changing direction at full pace quite a lot. Also its a fairly rough sport with sizeable collisions and tackling with feet/legs. Lots of players exagerate the effect of tackles slight touches which makes it seem like its a soft game when it really isnt.

1 hour ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

I've always wondered how taxing soccer is on the players. I find myself confused at times when people say a player isn't going to be fit because he played three days earlier. Soccer doesn't strike me as a more exhausting sport than say basketball, and at times they will play four games in five nights. I know that soccer players travel the most distance relative to their sport (where for instance in football there's only 9-11 minutes of action in a three hour game), but it seems like there's a lot of walking involved. What am I missing? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, lmanion said:

So basketball is over in 50 minutes basically with a bench that players can interchange from. Also running in mostly straight lines plus a fair bit of jockeying side to side right? 

In football(soccer) players that are key men play 90 minutes often 2 times a week and they jog/run for most about 8-10km a game full backs can get up to 12-13km and they can go from walking pace to flat out in a split second multiple times as well as changing direction at full pace quite a lot. Also its a fairly rough sport with sizeable collisions and tackling with feet/legs. Lots of players exagerate the effect of tackles slight touches which makes it seem like its a soft game when it really isnt.

 

Also, a much smaller court/ pitch.

Also, the game stops a lot more often, and for a lot more time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

I've always wondered how taxing soccer is on the players. I find myself confused at times when people say a player isn't going to be fit because he played three days earlier. Soccer doesn't strike me as a more exhausting sport than say basketball, and at times they will play four games in five nights. I know that soccer players travel the most distance relative to their sport (where for instance in football there's only 9-11 minutes of action in a three hour game), but it seems like there's a lot of walking involved. What am I missing? 

What's an average career duration In American football? 3-4 years or something like that?

In football it's over 10 years, with some players (Totti, Giggs, Maldini) even reaching 20 years at top level.

Also, there's a lot jogging with short bursts of speed involved which almost comes down to interval training which is definitely not easy on the body. Sure, there's no hitting like in American football or ice hockey but there's a lot more playing time for each player and there's no "oh, you sit down for a couple of minutes now while this other guy plays and you'll get back out there" and let's not forget that majority of hits in AF or hockey are at least somewhat cushioned by all the protective gear while football players do get studs in ankles on a more or less regular basis.

One more thing, North American pro leagues are closed systems which can be organized much better than a bunch of different football competitions in Europe so that overhead stress is reduced. For example, top English teams play in the Premier league, two Cups and international competitions which can take them anywhere in Lisbon-Moscow-Athens triangle. A team from London might play in Manchester tonight then go to Moscow midweek and then to Newcastle next weekend so there's a lot of travel involved which players definitely feel, and top teams may do it for 60 matches over the 9 month period. In NFL, there are 16 matches in a regular season plus a couple more in the playoffs. In NHL, road trips are organized so that when there is a long trip team plays multiple games in cities relatively close to one another before returning home etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

I've always wondered how taxing soccer is on the players. I find myself confused at times when people say a player isn't going to be fit because he played three days earlier. Soccer doesn't strike me as a more exhausting sport than say basketball, and at times they will play four games in five nights. I know that soccer players travel the most distance relative to their sport (where for instance in football there's only 9-11 minutes of action in a three hour game), but it seems like there's a lot of walking involved. What am I missing? 

ESPN had a tracker for "scheduled losses" for basketball last season where teams play really packed schedules. It was fairly accurate as far as I remember, so regardless of all the other factors, just because basketball players are available to play doesn't necessarily mean they are "fit". 

It seems that, as a fan of the Wolves, you have unfortunately bought into Thibs philosophy. I think it will be better to see what Pop does with the Spurs as what is appropriate. I mean, look at where Rose, Noah and Deng are now after Thibs was done with them. Best wishes for KAT, Butler and Wiggins! :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

I've always wondered how taxing soccer is on the players. I find myself confused at times when people say a player isn't going to be fit because he played three days earlier. Soccer doesn't strike me as a more exhausting sport than say basketball, and at times they will play four games in five nights. I know that soccer players travel the most distance relative to their sport (where for instance in football there's only 9-11 minutes of action in a three hour game), but it seems like there's a lot of walking involved. What am I missing? 

Ah, the old my sport is more demanding than yours, hadn't seen one of those. It's a bit silly to compare different sports.

Having that said, a more serious answer. The demands on the atheletes are somewhat different. Basketballers need more speed strength, footballers (or soccer players for the yanks) need more stamina. In practical terms, if we let a professional football (soccer) team and a pro basketball team both compete in marathon, I'd put my money on the footballers finishing with a better time on average (well, at least the outfield players). If you pick another discipline that is closer to the skill set of the basketballers, they will have an edge there.

Yes, the shifts on a basketball courts are faster and more action packed at the very same time they are also shorter, but the footballers have to play 2x45 minutes straight. If LeBron or Curry (and the others) had to stay on court for the duration of the entire game, I am quite sure Basketball would lose quite a bit of its pace after while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking of it this way: an average Premier League outfielder will run 10K in 90-odd minutes, except that 10K consists largely of walking or jogging interspersed with sudden, intense sprints that usually terminate in either an abrupt stop and turn, a tackle, a leap, a stretch, or some combination of these things. That takes a toll on muscles, ligaments and hamstrings. Recovery time is important. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/la-liga-usa-games-new-york-chicago-miami-premier-league-international-a8494401.html

La Liga is going to host at least one match a year in the US for the next fifteen years. That is a depressing move - I expect it will be Getafe/Leganes vs Sevilla/Valencia to mitigate the impact whilst still being a good draw, but I feel very sorry for both sets of fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Burnley are about to kick off their second leg match against Istanbul in their EL qualifiers.  It's 0-0 from the first leg.  Burnley don't look full of goals at the moment but hopefully they can progress and eventually make their way to the group stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Philokles said:

La Liga is going to host at least one match a year in the US for the next fifteen years. That is a depressing move - I expect it will be Getafe/Leganes vs Sevilla/Valencia to mitigate the impact whilst still being a good draw, but I feel very sorry for both sets of fans.

Shitty move, but not totally unexpected. It was just a matter of time before a league decided to play a league game in a different country to open up new markets. I didn't think it would be La Liga in the US, I thought it would be EPL or Bundesliga playing in China.

Gotta hate modern football.

With regards to the teams, I could also see La Liga terminating a game in the christmas period to send one of Real or Barca to the states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FC Dudelange, relatively successful south Luxembourgish team, just beat Legia Warszawa, arguably the most successful ever Polish team, in EL qualifying, including a win in Warsaw last week. Nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Burnley got an ET winner to progress to face Olympiakos.  Their last tie with Aberdeen went to ET too.  They'll be exhausted against Watford this Sunday.

And Rangers got a 0-0 draw to progress.  Celtic drop down to the EL too after getting bumped from the CL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/15/2018 at 6:06 PM, lmanion said:

So basketball is over in 50 minutes basically with a bench that players can interchange from. Also running in mostly straight lines plus a fair bit of jockeying side to side right? 

In football(soccer) players that are key men play 90 minutes often 2 times a week and they jog/run for most about 8-10km a game full backs can get up to 12-13km and they can go from walking pace to flat out in a split second multiple times as well as changing direction at full pace quite a lot. Also its a fairly rough sport with sizeable collisions and tackling with feet/legs. Lots of players exagerate the effect of tackles slight touches which makes it seem like its a soft game when it really isnt.

 

First, I want to say I'm not calling soccer players soft. All pro-sports, even baseball, are taxing. I just found it strange while watching the World Cup to hear the announcers talk about how hard it is to play on three days rest.

It's also important to note that the basketball played in Europe is nothing like it is here in the states, hence why we destroy you guys with relative ease. A typical basketball game is 48 minutes, with star players playing 35-42 minutes per game. You don't log as many miles as you do in soccer, but the pace of play is much faster and more physical, plus you have to factor in what jumping hundreds of times per game and fighting for rebounds does to you. Yes there are breaks, but there are mini-defacto breaks in soccer too. Often times I see dudes standing around and lightly walking or jogging. You'll almost never see the in American basketball, especially when you get teams you like to run. Also, teams tend to play about four games per week, so the comparable minutes are fairly similar, especially if the guys get pulled from the pitch midway through the second half.

23 hours ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

Also, a much smaller court/ pitch.

Also, the game stops a lot more often, and for a lot more time.

Not really. As I said above, the clock might always be running, but the players aren't. In basketball, when the clock is running, so are players. There's very little dead time over the course of the game.

The size of the pitch vs. the court is an interesting idea. One the one hand it is larger by a lot, but passing greatly reduces the amount of energy one needs to exhaust to get the ball from point A to B. And the small size of the basketball court forces the game to get very physical, especially in the paint. The game has been cleaned up since the 80's and 90's, where the paint was a straight up brawl, but it's still far more physical than anything I've seen on the soccer pitch with a few rare exceptions.

12 hours ago, baxus said:

What's an average career duration In American football? 3-4 years or something like that?

In football it's over 10 years, with some players (Totti, Giggs, Maldini) even reaching 20 years at top level.

Also, there's a lot jogging with short bursts of speed involved which almost comes down to interval training which is definitely not easy on the body. Sure, there's no hitting like in American football or ice hockey but there's a lot more playing time for each player and there's no "oh, you sit down for a couple of minutes now while this other guy plays and you'll get back out there" and let's not forget that majority of hits in AF or hockey are at least somewhat cushioned by all the protective gear while football players do get studs in ankles on a more or less regular basis.

I was a solid football player in high school, and I think it's kind of silly to compare soccer with football. The two sports have nothing in common, hence why I used basketball as an example. I suspect most pro soccer players would quit after playing a game of football in the NFL. Just watch this, for example.

Quote

One more thing, North American pro leagues are closed systems which can be organized much better than a bunch of different football competitions in Europe so that overhead stress is reduced. For example, top English teams play in the Premier league, two Cups and international competitions which can take them anywhere in Lisbon-Moscow-Athens triangle. A team from London might play in Manchester tonight then go to Moscow midweek and then to Newcastle next weekend so there's a lot of travel involved which players definitely feel, and top teams may do it for 60 matches over the 9 month period. In NFL, there are 16 matches in a regular season plus a couple more in the playoffs. In NHL, road trips are organized so that when there is a long trip team plays multiple games in cities relatively close to one another before returning home etc.

I understand the chaos of playing in multiple leagues, but the issues with travel are just as relevant here as they are in Europe. The U.S. is bigger than Europe, and the road trips basketball players take can be brutal. Plus you have to factor in that the larger you are, the more taxing flight is on your body. It's what the NBA players hate most about the game.  

10 hours ago, Proudfeet said:

ESPN had a tracker for "scheduled losses" for basketball last season where teams play really packed schedules. It was fairly accurate as far as I remember, so regardless of all the other factors, just because basketball players are available to play doesn't necessarily mean they are "fit". 

It seems that, as a fan of the Wolves, you have unfortunately bought into Thibs philosophy. I think it will be better to see what Pop does with the Spurs as what is appropriate. I mean, look at where Rose, Noah and Deng are now after Thibs was done with them. Best wishes for KAT, Butler and Wiggins! :devil:

I hate you!

:box:

8 hours ago, mormont said:

Thinking of it this way: an average Premier League outfielder will run 10K in 90-odd minutes, except that 10K consists largely of walking or jogging interspersed with sudden, intense sprints that usually terminate in either an abrupt stop and turn, a tackle, a leap, a stretch, or some combination of these things. That takes a toll on muscles, ligaments and hamstrings. Recovery time is important. 

10k is roughly 6 miles, and at my peak fitness I could have easily run that in under 40 minutes. I don't do as much cardio these days, preferring strength training, but if you gave me six weeks to train I could probably do that in under 50 minutes. And if you made me cycle between walking, jogging and sprinting, I'm pretty sure I could do it in 75 minutes. I get there's a lot more to it than that when it comes to playing a match, but I think a lot of you are vastly underestimating the other aspects of basketball. 

But again, as I said before, I'm not trying denigrate the difficulties of playing soccer, I just think it's odd the way I hear commentators talk about their match to match fitness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

10k is roughly 6 miles, and at my peak fitness I could have easily run that in under 40 minutes. I don't do as much cardio these days, preferring strength training, but if you gave me six weeks to train I could probably do that in under 50 minutes. And if you made me cycle between walking, jogging and sprinting, I'm pretty sure I could do it in 75 minutes. I get there's a lot more to it than that when it comes to playing a match, but I think a lot of you are vastly underestimating the other aspects of basketball. 



Yeah but the point is would you be able to do that again three nights later, and again three nights after that, to the same level (because the point isn't that they can't play at all, but they have to maintain the top standard otherwise they're passengers at that level)? And then add on to that the kicking and all that which, by the end of the game, you have to maintain the technical form in while exhausted.

I'm not one to say football is more demanding than basketball overall, it obviously isn't, but even if not as much as other sports they do test different things and one thing that football tests more than basketball is stamina. And that's where the recovery comes in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see a risk in the sell at all tbh.

You still have four centrebacks on the team, who are supposedly better. Klavan was a depth signing when came to Liverpool, now Gomez has improved sufficiently it seems like a natural decission to let Klavan go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

But again, as I said before, I'm not trying denigrate the difficulties of playing soccer, I just think it's odd the way I hear commentators talk about their match to match fitness. 

It's not odd at all though. It's difficult to explain the physical toll of a sport to someone who has little to no experience of actually playing that sport. Anyone who has played football/soccer will tell you that 4 games a week on a consistent basis is just not possible - you would end up with players dropping like flies due to fatigue related injuries. Since both basketball and football players at the highest level are top class athletes (so the difference in fitness levels is negligible), it becomes reasonable to conclude that the physical demands of basketball allows for players to play more games in a shorter space of time whereas football requires more recovery time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I don't see a risk in the sell at all tbh.

You still have four centrebacks on the team, who are supposedly better. Klavan was a depth signing when came to Liverpool, now Gomez has improved sufficiently it seems like a natural decission to let Klavan go.

It’s a risk imo because 3 of the 4 are constantly out injured or sick. Even last weekend Lovren and Matip were out and Gomez was a question mark until game day.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...