Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
Warburton: 20 games a year for welsh players a year
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Peat" data-source="post: 495291" data-attributes="member: 42330"><p>I'm not surprised by the response to this thread but am slightly saddened.</p><p></p><p>How many of us express our sympathy and sorrow when players retire prematurely from injury? This is a chance to do something about that. The sheer size of players and impact of collisions has increased the rate of wear and tear on the body a lot. I don't think its realistic to expect rugby players to keep on undergoing that at the rates they currently do in some countries. Our choices are either to limit the amount of gametime, or encourage them to lose bulk. I don't believe the latter is realistic as if one team cuts the amount of strength training and the other one doesn't, you've got a fair inkling of who's going to win their next match.</p><p></p><p>If we want these players around to entertain us then we've got to take better care of them. Right now, the only union in the NH that seems to be doing that is Ireland, and lo and behold, they have one of the lowest injury rates around at a guess. It's also resulted in more success at Domestic and European level; international level, not so much, although they don't seem to have the radical boom-or-bust of Wales who've been consistently around 4th when not winning the 6N for quite a while. In fact, before this year, Wales haven't finished above 4th since 2007-08 when they last picked up the Grand Slam, which is the last time Ireland finished below 3rd as well. Part of the reason for Wales' dodgy performances have, imo, been paper-thin depth combined with heavy attrition from injury. The depth has improved but I still think they're only a couple of injuries away from stinking the place out again.</p><p></p><p>In short, limiting player gametime means less premature player retirements, and a higher level of performance when they do play. I don't see where the downside lies. I'd agree with Olyy that it does mean central contracting. 20 games overall would be too low; I'd suggest 20 club games, not including knock-out games, would be a reasonable amount for those involved heavily in the international set-up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Peat, post: 495291, member: 42330"] I'm not surprised by the response to this thread but am slightly saddened. How many of us express our sympathy and sorrow when players retire prematurely from injury? This is a chance to do something about that. The sheer size of players and impact of collisions has increased the rate of wear and tear on the body a lot. I don't think its realistic to expect rugby players to keep on undergoing that at the rates they currently do in some countries. Our choices are either to limit the amount of gametime, or encourage them to lose bulk. I don't believe the latter is realistic as if one team cuts the amount of strength training and the other one doesn't, you've got a fair inkling of who's going to win their next match. If we want these players around to entertain us then we've got to take better care of them. Right now, the only union in the NH that seems to be doing that is Ireland, and lo and behold, they have one of the lowest injury rates around at a guess. It's also resulted in more success at Domestic and European level; international level, not so much, although they don't seem to have the radical boom-or-bust of Wales who've been consistently around 4th when not winning the 6N for quite a while. In fact, before this year, Wales haven't finished above 4th since 2007-08 when they last picked up the Grand Slam, which is the last time Ireland finished below 3rd as well. Part of the reason for Wales' dodgy performances have, imo, been paper-thin depth combined with heavy attrition from injury. The depth has improved but I still think they're only a couple of injuries away from stinking the place out again. In short, limiting player gametime means less premature player retirements, and a higher level of performance when they do play. I don't see where the downside lies. I'd agree with Olyy that it does mean central contracting. 20 games overall would be too low; I'd suggest 20 club games, not including knock-out games, would be a reasonable amount for those involved heavily in the international set-up. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
Warburton: 20 games a year for welsh players a year
Top