Liverpool FC Forum

by **heimdall** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:47 pm

I also have never understood this tiredness argument for footballers. If you compare football to most other sports like basketball, cricket, tennis etc then footballers have far more time off yet they are the ones constantly bitching about being tired. Either they are much unfitter than their fellow sports stars or they are a bunch of whinging overpaid prima donnas!

by **cornetto1** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:57 pm

the media blame our poor season on rotation, but look at how much ferguson has rotated and they're not having any problems, and the simple reason whether we like it or not - the strength of their squad is far superior to ours. While we may have a great starting 11, we dont have the backup required. Look at Uniter bringing Tevez and Nani on from the bench, how we would love to have such quality coming from our bench.

Chelsea havea strong squad too and Arsenal are in a similar position to ourselves, which is the reason why United and chelsea will be 1st and 2nd and Arsenal and Liverpool will occupy the 3rd and 4th place positions. We need to invest and heavily

by **Judge** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:58 pm

Bamaga man wrote:if Gerrard was rested for five months it will have an amazing effect on his physical shape right now.

yeah - fatter

:laugh:

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:15 pm

heimdall wrote:I also have never understood this tiredness argument for footballers. If you compare football to most other sports like basketball, cricket, tennis etc then footballers have far more time off yet they are the ones constantly bitching about being tired. Either they are much unfitter than their fellow sports stars or they are a bunch of whinging overpaid prima donnas!

Can't speak for cricket or tennis but basketball is a game with lots of stoppages for breathers and it's a game that allows players to be substituted for a rest and reintroduced later in the game. Physically, it's a completely different kettle of fish than footy.

by **JoeTerp** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:48 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
heimdall wrote:I also have never understood this tiredness argument for footballers. If you compare football to most other sports like basketball, cricket, tennis etc then footballers have far more time off yet they are the ones constantly bitching about being tired. Either they are much unfitter than their fellow sports stars or they are a bunch of whinging overpaid prima donnas!

Can't speak for cricket or tennis but basketball is a game with lots of stoppages for breathers and it's a game that allows players to be substituted for a rest and reintroduced later in the game. Physically, it's a completely different kettle of fish than footy.

but the NBA plays 82 games a season, and their playoffs are quite lengthy as well lasting a month and half

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:53 pm

JoeTerp wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
heimdall wrote:I also have never understood this tiredness argument for footballers. If you compare football to most other sports like basketball, cricket, tennis etc then footballers have far more time off yet they are the ones constantly bitching about being tired. Either they are much unfitter than their fellow sports stars or they are a bunch of whinging overpaid prima donnas!

Can't speak for cricket or tennis but basketball is a game with lots of stoppages for breathers and it's a game that allows players to be substituted for a rest and reintroduced later in the game. Physically, it's a completely different kettle of fish than footy.

but the NBA plays 82 games a season, and their playoffs are quite lengthy as well lasting a month and half

But their courts are tiny compared to a footy pitch!

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:03 pm

I can speak for cricket and they do a lot more than footballers do. Even just country cricketers, they play four days (11am-6pm) is the equivilant of our league, then their cup competitions are 50 overs, 45 overs and 20 overs. All this in the space of April through till September. 18 games for the four day game, 9 for both 50 and 45 overs and 15 for the twenty/20 game.

International cricketers are a lot worse because they travel round the globe on a regular basis playing five straight days of test cricket and that's just on test. Most test series last for on average of three tests. Yet you very rarely hear of cricketers saying they're tired. Fair enough international cricketers don't play as much county cricket as international footballers play for their clubs. Still don't agree with tiredness with modern day footballers.

by **JoeTerp** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:06 pm

GBJH you might as well have posted that in Chinese.

by **JoeTerp** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:08 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
heimdall wrote:I also have never understood this tiredness argument for footballers. If you compare football to most other sports like basketball, cricket, tennis etc then footballers have far more time off yet they are the ones constantly bitching about being tired. Either they are much unfitter than their fellow sports stars or they are a bunch of whinging overpaid prima donnas!

Can't speak for cricket or tennis but basketball is a game with lots of stoppages for breathers and it's a game that allows players to be substituted for a rest and reintroduced later in the game. Physically, it's a completely different kettle of fish than footy.

but the NBA plays 82 games a season, and their playoffs are quite lengthy as well lasting a month and half

But their courts are tiny compared to a footy pitch!

but basketball players are MUCH more skilled with their hands

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:20 pm

JoeTerp wrote:GBJH you might as well have posted that in Chinese.

no chance mate, my english isn't great never mind chinese :laugh:

by **JoeTerp** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:22 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:GBJH you might as well have posted that in Chinese.

no chance mate, my english isn't great never mind chinese

I was saying that I have no idea what all that Crickett jargon meant

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:24 pm

JoeTerp wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:GBJH you might as well have posted that in Chinese.

no chance mate, my english isn't great never mind chinese

I was saying that I have no idea what all that Crickett jargon meant

i knew what you were saying mate.

by **Judge** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:24 pm

JoeTerp wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:GBJH you might as well have posted that in Chinese.

no chance mate, my english isn't great never mind chinese

I was saying that I have no idea what all that Crickett jargon meant

and he was saying that its chinese

get the pun yet joe

by **bigmick** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:34 am

Well I don't the think the win against Everton was due to the new found discovery of sensible team selections, but I must say it is nice for once that a poor perfomance was not followed by an extended bliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip while we chopped and changed the positions, formations and line ups. We still aren't for me playing with anything like the fluency that us non-rotationists promised we would once we got sensible, but we are at least in the habit of winning games and closing them out a bit better.

Despite the fact we had a collective bad day at the office at Old Trafford, the truth is we weren't going to win the league anyway so yesterdays game was far more important. I remain extremely encouraged by Rafa's conversion to a settled pattern and a largely settled team, despite the fact that he is claiming in interviews that little has changed.

We are obviously going to get quite a stiff examination over the next few matches with Arsenal, and at least the win yesterday means that if Rafa really must have a little dabble, he can do it in the league game and it shouldn't be too disasterous. Funnily enough, we are at the stage of the season now where a little bit of sensible rotation here and there probably makes sense. Torres won't be fresher in the second leg of the Champions league tie because he only played half an hour in the Pompey and Birmingham games five months ago, but it might well make a difference if he doesn't play the whole ninety in this next league match.

I predicted a couple of months back that the other top of the table teams would begin to rotate more not less as the season rolled on, and particularly in Man Utd's case they have borne out the theory. They did it the other way around to us, a settled team for the first half of the season until they had well and truly established momentum before some resting as the players became tired later on, followed no doubt by a settled team for the run in. I suppose the fact that they've chopped and changed in the third quarter of the season and we've suddenly got quite sensible should at least allow the likes of Tompkins to profess at the end of the season that infact we've rotated only 0.0234 more players per game in which we played against a team with a ginger haired manager more than Man Utd. No doubt we won the "two legged" versions of the league meetings with said teams as well but that's another story.

I hope rafa is brave enough to go in with the same system but with the obvious inclusion of masherano for the next game. Perhaps Hyppia won't be needed although these days with Adebayor Arsenal do play much more direct than they used to, but I hope he continues to give the team the chance to keep grinding out results. Now is not the time to blink and go back to Rafa style.

by **66-1112520797** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:38 am

JoeTerp wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:GBJH you might as well have posted that in Chinese.

no chance mate, my english isn't great never mind chinese

I was saying that I have no idea what all that Crickett jargon meant

Dont worry Joe, Cricket is shyte anyway. :sleep

Liverpool FC Forum

Rotation, - The 2008/09 season question.

Who is online