| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty 13:03 - May 7 with 9616 views | KensalT |
Damning
[Post edited 7 May 13:06]
|  | | |  |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:19 - May 7 with 6600 views | Tonto |
Well yes... and no. Trust me im not going to defned the medical team here. but i am sticking up for proper use of statistics.
Chair is an outliner here. He was out for most of the season it felt like. He played in 15 games ish? So you could pair Chair with just one of those players and not see a massive difference in the argument. Especially when you also consider that Burrell only became a regular starter in the Autumn.
To me the killer argument would be about non contact (i.e. musular) injuries, which are very preventable. And yet i can think of at least 5 players who had hammy injuries. One particular player appeared to have 4 of them! [Post edited 7 May 15:34]
|  |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:28 - May 7 with 6533 views | nick_hammersmith |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:19 - May 7 by Tonto |
Well yes... and no. Trust me im not going to defned the medical team here. but i am sticking up for proper use of statistics.
Chair is an outliner here. He was out for most of the season it felt like. He played in 15 games ish? So you could pair Chair with just one of those players and not see a massive difference in the argument. Especially when you also consider that Burrell only became a regular starter in the Autumn.
To me the killer argument would be about non contact (i.e. musular) injuries, which are very preventable. And yet i can think of at least 5 players who had hammy injuries. One particular player appeared to have 4 of them! [Post edited 7 May 15:34]
|
I am 90% sure that Poku and Burrell were both rushed back and cleared ready to play just to improve the optics of our "performance" team.
The number of non-contact injuries this season have been embarrassing, I think a drastic change is needed next season.
I think Wombat called it in another thread, but I predict someone will be bought in and cycling Ben will have a reduced remit, so he is taken out of the spotlight and has less obviously measurable goals.
Some of these injuries must be easily prevented by correct pre-loading before any activity?
I know Ben tried to patronise us on the Podcast, but it really isn't rocket science...
They should get out in front of this with a hands up, apologies and these are the lessons we learned quick sharpish |  | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:29 - May 7 with 6543 views | KensalT |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:19 - May 7 by Tonto |
Well yes... and no. Trust me im not going to defned the medical team here. but i am sticking up for proper use of statistics.
Chair is an outliner here. He was out for most of the season it felt like. He played in 15 games ish? So you could pair Chair with just one of those players and not see a massive difference in the argument. Especially when you also consider that Burrell only became a regular starter in the Autumn.
To me the killer argument would be about non contact (i.e. musular) injuries, which are very preventable. And yet i can think of at least 5 players who had hammy injuries. One particular player appeared to have 4 of them! [Post edited 7 May 15:34]
|
You make a fair point.
I'm going to counter with:
1. These are the players you want to build around and you won't achieve anything if you can only get all five of them on the pitch for one game in twelve.
2. Chair did play 15 games. And he started in 10 of them. So for fewer than half the games Chair started we still couldn't get our best players on the pitch with him.
I have nothing against the correct use of statistics. If someone from the club can explain precisely how they manufactured that 90% availability data point I am more than happy to hear them out. | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 14:16 - May 7 with 6419 views | KensalT |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:28 - May 7 by nick_hammersmith |
I am 90% sure that Poku and Burrell were both rushed back and cleared ready to play just to improve the optics of our "performance" team.
The number of non-contact injuries this season have been embarrassing, I think a drastic change is needed next season.
I think Wombat called it in another thread, but I predict someone will be bought in and cycling Ben will have a reduced remit, so he is taken out of the spotlight and has less obviously measurable goals.
Some of these injuries must be easily prevented by correct pre-loading before any activity?
I know Ben tried to patronise us on the Podcast, but it really isn't rocket science...
They should get out in front of this with a hands up, apologies and these are the lessons we learned quick sharpish |
BW has spent his career in sports science and exercise.
He spent seven and a half years working on his PhD in Sports and Exercise.
Measurable goals are supposed to be what he is all about.
1. If we don't trust him to do the job he has spent his career working up to why would we give him a different role?
2. If he accepts a less prominent role then:
- We will have to add another body to our bloated coaching staff just to protect him from scrutiny
- He would presumably accept a smaller salary to go with his diminished role
- He would have grounds to claim constructive dismissal and walk. And if he didn't take that option and stayed on in a reduced role he would be a busted flush and it would hang over the rest of his career [Post edited 7 May 15:07]
| | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 14:26 - May 7 with 6369 views | Watford_Ranger |
We don’t seem to get many slight injuries where a player misses a game or two. Every injury felt like a massive chunk of the season missed even when the original prognosis wasn’t too bad | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 14:30 - May 7 with 6335 views | wombat |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:28 - May 7 by nick_hammersmith |
I am 90% sure that Poku and Burrell were both rushed back and cleared ready to play just to improve the optics of our "performance" team.
The number of non-contact injuries this season have been embarrassing, I think a drastic change is needed next season.
I think Wombat called it in another thread, but I predict someone will be bought in and cycling Ben will have a reduced remit, so he is taken out of the spotlight and has less obviously measurable goals.
Some of these injuries must be easily prevented by correct pre-loading before any activity?
I know Ben tried to patronise us on the Podcast, but it really isn't rocket science...
They should get out in front of this with a hands up, apologies and these are the lessons we learned quick sharpish |
Hi nick yes it was me , it would be so rangers to try and hoodwink the fnas iwith such a move , nourry keeps his special friend !!! and the same crap keeps happening on the pitch . ben is of course blamless in the matter so nourry works his magic again and all is good in the world.
i just want to see my fav players every week not a lot to ask is it ? |  |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 15:12 - May 7 with 6157 views | dmm |
And the question is: Will it be any different next season? As long as Bicycle Ben is the Director of Sporting Operations, the chances are it will. |  | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 15:32 - May 7 with 6071 views | Tonto |
And it wasnt your stat, you were kindly reposting. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 15:53 - May 7 with 5999 views | nick_hammersmith |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 14:16 - May 7 by KensalT |
BW has spent his career in sports science and exercise.
He spent seven and a half years working on his PhD in Sports and Exercise.
Measurable goals are supposed to be what he is all about.
1. If we don't trust him to do the job he has spent his career working up to why would we give him a different role?
2. If he accepts a less prominent role then:
- We will have to add another body to our bloated coaching staff just to protect him from scrutiny
- He would presumably accept a smaller salary to go with his diminished role
- He would have grounds to claim constructive dismissal and walk. And if he didn't take that option and stayed on in a reduced role he would be a busted flush and it would hang over the rest of his career [Post edited 7 May 15:07]
|
Sorry, I wasn't suggested he takes a demotion.
He'd still be Head of Performance, they'd just promote an underling to be Head of non-contact rehabilitation and prevention or some nonsense.
This way its someone else fault if it goes wrong, and if it works its still the Head of Performance who facilitated this
-- I've seen this type of rubbish in the corporate world at work.
BW can focus on key stuff like building the megadome for the DS and maybe a monorail with CN.
He might have a PhD, but after listening to him on the Podcast and the fans forum I smell a bull sh1tter.
Got lucky in his first year, when we saw less injuries and almost a full season of JCS, but he's the emperors new clothes in my opinion and if he is partly responsible for Kolli slipping out cheaply then its a real shame | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:18 - May 7 with 5885 views | wombat |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 15:53 - May 7 by nick_hammersmith |
Sorry, I wasn't suggested he takes a demotion.
He'd still be Head of Performance, they'd just promote an underling to be Head of non-contact rehabilitation and prevention or some nonsense.
This way its someone else fault if it goes wrong, and if it works its still the Head of Performance who facilitated this
-- I've seen this type of rubbish in the corporate world at work.
BW can focus on key stuff like building the megadome for the DS and maybe a monorail with CN.
He might have a PhD, but after listening to him on the Podcast and the fans forum I smell a bull sh1tter.
Got lucky in his first year, when we saw less injuries and almost a full season of JCS, but he's the emperors new clothes in my opinion and if he is partly responsible for Kolli slipping out cheaply then its a real shame |
first time herinh him was at the fans forum last season where he honestly looked like somebody who was
down on there luck from. the bush green , he didnt want to be there and really couldnt be arsed to be honest , he then came out with his famour i know you want to see your fav players each week comment .
on a proffesional point i dont see how somebody whos spent a lot of his time training cyclists to. high level is suddenly the go to for a mid table fotoball team , hes tried branching out into basketball and that didnt go well , and was let go after one season
so if we are being honest the two main people involved in the club are both chancing there arms massively . | |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:18 - May 7 with 5885 views | KensalT |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 15:53 - May 7 by nick_hammersmith |
Sorry, I wasn't suggested he takes a demotion.
He'd still be Head of Performance, they'd just promote an underling to be Head of non-contact rehabilitation and prevention or some nonsense.
This way its someone else fault if it goes wrong, and if it works its still the Head of Performance who facilitated this
-- I've seen this type of rubbish in the corporate world at work.
BW can focus on key stuff like building the megadome for the DS and maybe a monorail with CN.
He might have a PhD, but after listening to him on the Podcast and the fans forum I smell a bull sh1tter.
Got lucky in his first year, when we saw less injuries and almost a full season of JCS, but he's the emperors new clothes in my opinion and if he is partly responsible for Kolli slipping out cheaply then its a real shame |
Sorry if I misunderstood the point you were making.
But I think my basic reply to you still stands.
BW has built his career on sports and exercise.
That's the job he is supposed to be doing for us. And it's what he should be judged on.
In his season at Brooklyn Nets they had a terrible record with injuries and they got rid. Simple.
We have had two years of losing players to long term muscle injuries. The types of injuries that sports scientists and physiotherapists insist are wholly preventable.
Instead of holding someone accountable the senior management wants to circle the wagons and deny the problem exists.
Why are the club apparently trying to protect someone who objectively doesn't appear to be doing the job he was hired for?
Throwing around dubious sounding statistics like "90% availability" that don't pass the eye test but can't be examined or challenged because it's all confidential isn't serving the interests of the club. | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:28 - May 7 with 5853 views | R_from_afar |
If we do - please dear God no - buy a team in Australia, I reckon it will be just for the spare parts.
Does anyone know how long it would take DHL to get a cruciate ligament from Alice Springs to Shepherds Bush?  |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:39 - May 7 with 5803 views | R_from_afar |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:18 - May 7 by KensalT |
Sorry if I misunderstood the point you were making.
But I think my basic reply to you still stands.
BW has built his career on sports and exercise.
That's the job he is supposed to be doing for us. And it's what he should be judged on.
In his season at Brooklyn Nets they had a terrible record with injuries and they got rid. Simple.
We have had two years of losing players to long term muscle injuries. The types of injuries that sports scientists and physiotherapists insist are wholly preventable.
Instead of holding someone accountable the senior management wants to circle the wagons and deny the problem exists.
Why are the club apparently trying to protect someone who objectively doesn't appear to be doing the job he was hired for?
Throwing around dubious sounding statistics like "90% availability" that don't pass the eye test but can't be examined or challenged because it's all confidential isn't serving the interests of the club. |
"Throwing around dubious sounding statistics like "90% availability" that don't pass the eye test".
I used to work in market research at a British technology company. Against my advice, senior managers would define markets to suit the company's portfolio, flying in the face of industry standard definitions and allowing them to claim much larger market shares than we actually enjoyed.
They were burying the bad news and it was self-defeating and counterproductive. The complacency and arrogance were shocking and - surprise surprise - a company which once employed 50,000 and turned over billions duly went bust  . | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:13 - May 7 with 5713 views | nick_hammersmith |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:18 - May 7 by KensalT |
Sorry if I misunderstood the point you were making.
But I think my basic reply to you still stands.
BW has built his career on sports and exercise.
That's the job he is supposed to be doing for us. And it's what he should be judged on.
In his season at Brooklyn Nets they had a terrible record with injuries and they got rid. Simple.
We have had two years of losing players to long term muscle injuries. The types of injuries that sports scientists and physiotherapists insist are wholly preventable.
Instead of holding someone accountable the senior management wants to circle the wagons and deny the problem exists.
Why are the club apparently trying to protect someone who objectively doesn't appear to be doing the job he was hired for?
Throwing around dubious sounding statistics like "90% availability" that don't pass the eye test but can't be examined or challenged because it's all confidential isn't serving the interests of the club. |
I think we are in agreement, but I don't see Nourry making any bold decisions here, because bringing in Ben Williams was one of the recommendations from him as proxy when he was Retexo, so this would be seen as some failure on his part.
I liked the idea of some head of performance coming in with new ideas and methods that might bring something different, and in that first year we saw more JCS on the pitch than ever before, but i'm not a fan of expanding that role to cover everything including the turf management at HQ, it's just not sensible.
The club should be spotlighting the issue and trying to fix it, not using stats to kid us into thinking there is no problem, and its normal to only have your best players fit for a third of the season | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:30 - May 7 with 5671 views | KensalT |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:13 - May 7 by nick_hammersmith |
I think we are in agreement, but I don't see Nourry making any bold decisions here, because bringing in Ben Williams was one of the recommendations from him as proxy when he was Retexo, so this would be seen as some failure on his part.
I liked the idea of some head of performance coming in with new ideas and methods that might bring something different, and in that first year we saw more JCS on the pitch than ever before, but i'm not a fan of expanding that role to cover everything including the turf management at HQ, it's just not sensible.
The club should be spotlighting the issue and trying to fix it, not using stats to kid us into thinking there is no problem, and its normal to only have your best players fit for a third of the season |
Let's try a counterfactual.
If Tango & Cash were still running the club would they have tolerated our chronic problems with muscle injuries for two consecutive seasons?
I think someone would have been kicked to the kerb well before now. | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 18:19 - May 7 with 5555 views | nick_hammersmith |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:30 - May 7 by KensalT |
Let's try a counterfactual.
If Tango & Cash were still running the club would they have tolerated our chronic problems with muscle injuries for two consecutive seasons?
I think someone would have been kicked to the kerb well before now. |
We'd be on our 30th manager by now, probably more coaches than Watford...
As weird as those years were, they were nothing compared to the early Tony years where the club wrote some massive cheques out.
In fact Briatore and Ecclestone never went overboard with signings etc in retrospect. They were probably too busy paying the last four managers off each year...
But, yes I agree a hands on owner would should have stepped in by now | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 18:42 - May 7 with 5498 views | AshteadR |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 13:29 - May 7 by KensalT |
You make a fair point.
I'm going to counter with:
1. These are the players you want to build around and you won't achieve anything if you can only get all five of them on the pitch for one game in twelve.
2. Chair did play 15 games. And he started in 10 of them. So for fewer than half the games Chair started we still couldn't get our best players on the pitch with him.
I have nothing against the correct use of statistics. If someone from the club can explain precisely how they manufactured that 90% availability data point I am more than happy to hear them out. |
The explanation he gave on the Open All Rs podcast was nonsensical.
They excluded Larkeche because he wasn’t named in the full squad, albeit due to injury.
They also exclude any players that aren’t named in the match day squad, even if the reason for absence is injury!
Effectively false reporting, which they clearly know. | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 22:59 - May 7 with 5289 views | NewYorkRanger |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 18:42 - May 7 by AshteadR |
The explanation he gave on the Open All Rs podcast was nonsensical.
They excluded Larkeche because he wasn’t named in the full squad, albeit due to injury.
They also exclude any players that aren’t named in the match day squad, even if the reason for absence is injury!
Effectively false reporting, which they clearly know. |
farkin unbelievable innit. Our injuries were nowhere near as bad as you think they were, if you exclude the players who couldn't be picked due to injury.
They must think we are all stoopid. Utter BS - but why are some people on here (and eslewhere) defending this nonsense, unless they are on the payroll? Are they actually thick or just bots?
FTS [Post edited 7 May 23:00]
|  |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 05:01 - May 8 with 5101 views | Match82 |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 16:39 - May 7 by R_from_afar |
"Throwing around dubious sounding statistics like "90% availability" that don't pass the eye test".
I used to work in market research at a British technology company. Against my advice, senior managers would define markets to suit the company's portfolio, flying in the face of industry standard definitions and allowing them to claim much larger market shares than we actually enjoyed.
They were burying the bad news and it was self-defeating and counterproductive. The complacency and arrogance were shocking and - surprise surprise - a company which once employed 50,000 and turned over billions duly went bust . |
Yeah but did they make bank in their salary and stock options during this period while bailing as soon as they saw the writing on the wall, that's the important question |  | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 07:49 - May 8 with 4963 views | nix |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:13 - May 7 by nick_hammersmith |
I think we are in agreement, but I don't see Nourry making any bold decisions here, because bringing in Ben Williams was one of the recommendations from him as proxy when he was Retexo, so this would be seen as some failure on his part.
I liked the idea of some head of performance coming in with new ideas and methods that might bring something different, and in that first year we saw more JCS on the pitch than ever before, but i'm not a fan of expanding that role to cover everything including the turf management at HQ, it's just not sensible.
The club should be spotlighting the issue and trying to fix it, not using stats to kid us into thinking there is no problem, and its normal to only have your best players fit for a third of the season |
This is a big test for Nourry. Leadership is not always about making the right decisions 100% of the time; it’s also about admitting when you’re wrong and putting that right. It’s not worked out with Williams and he didn’t work out in his other foray outside of cycling. He needs to go.
It’s not only the injuries although those are dire enough, it’s about not being fit enough to last 90 minutes at the end of the season - players like Mbengue and Kolli being hunched over week after week well before the end of games. |  | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 09:08 - May 8 with 4887 views | R_from_afar |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 05:01 - May 8 by Match82 |
Yeah but did they make bank in their salary and stock options during this period while bailing as soon as they saw the writing on the wall, that's the important question |
I'm not sure, but very probably.
To be fair to the company, at one point during my eight years there, it introduced a superb all employee share incentive scheme. It was designed to get everyone pulling together as hard as possible and was very generous: Everyone stood to receive 1,000 free shares if the share price reached a high, but not unattainable, level.
Unfortunately, the share price got to within four quid of the target then bombed, leaving the shares worth pennies, and the company swiftly folded. Sigh  . | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 09:13 - May 8 with 4875 views | daveB |
all depends on what metrics they use for this 90% figure. If it's 90% available to train that is probably about right but less accurate if it's available to play the next match.The likes of Chair, Burrell and Madsen were all back in training a few weeks before they were able to start a game |  | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 09:20 - May 8 with 4862 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 09:13 - May 8 by daveB |
all depends on what metrics they use for this 90% figure. If it's 90% available to train that is probably about right but less accurate if it's available to play the next match.The likes of Chair, Burrell and Madsen were all back in training a few weeks before they were able to start a game |
Agrred.
Also, 'training' can be stretched to include gym, initial rehab, etc.
Overall, imo, I think us even debating percentages dignifies the debate, and adds a false complexity to a very simple situation. He needs to go, and so does anyone who thinks he's doing a good job. |  |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 09:39 - May 8 with 4837 views | TheChef |
Anyone know Brooklyn Nets' injury record since Williams left? |  |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 10:27 - May 8 with 4770 views | OldPedro |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 07:49 - May 8 by nix |
This is a big test for Nourry. Leadership is not always about making the right decisions 100% of the time; it’s also about admitting when you’re wrong and putting that right. It’s not worked out with Williams and he didn’t work out in his other foray outside of cycling. He needs to go.
It’s not only the injuries although those are dire enough, it’s about not being fit enough to last 90 minutes at the end of the season - players like Mbengue and Kolli being hunched over week after week well before the end of games. |
Agree with you Nix, it isn't just the injuries, its the lack of fitness throughout the squad across the season. |  |
| Extra mature cheddar......a simple cheese for a simple man |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.