I reckon they don't. These players are professional athletes. Recovery is not such a big deal. I think we ran out the game well. I'd even go as far to say we probably ran it out better and Richmond looked more exhausted. We were just playing catch up all bought and Richmond had a healthy buffer over I'd throughout the match.
Those saying we would have won with a seven day break or whatever I think they are incorrect. Richmond outplayed us, though not by as much as I reckon some people were thinking.
It was all round a good game of football I thought. Pity we couldn't get the four points.
Hopefully we can open out account next week.
To those that think six day breaks mean anything...
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3792
- Joined: Tue 02 Aug 2005 10:24pm
- desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10423
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 187 times
- Been thanked: 705 times
Re: To those that think six day breaks mean anything...
Well all the worlds sports scientists are wrong then. How does being professional athletes change the fact that less of a rest is less of a rest?
The guys were absolutely spent and kudos to them for fighting it out.
Whether an extra day would have made the difference tonight - who knows?
Doubtful as the biggest influence was skill errors and bad luck with a few decisions.
But of course a team is fresher after seven days than six. Especially when the recovery is disrupted by having to wait to board a plane and fly home, then make your way back from the airport. The afl should ensure no team playing interstate one week should have to back up again six days later, unless against a similarly disadvantaged team.
But fairness we all know is a secondary concern to revenue - so they schedule the big teams first, then fit the small fry around them.
The guys were absolutely spent and kudos to them for fighting it out.
Whether an extra day would have made the difference tonight - who knows?
Doubtful as the biggest influence was skill errors and bad luck with a few decisions.
But of course a team is fresher after seven days than six. Especially when the recovery is disrupted by having to wait to board a plane and fly home, then make your way back from the airport. The afl should ensure no team playing interstate one week should have to back up again six days later, unless against a similarly disadvantaged team.
But fairness we all know is a secondary concern to revenue - so they schedule the big teams first, then fit the small fry around them.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10191
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1306 times
Re: To those that think six day breaks mean anything...
You've clearly never played football before.OneEyedSainter77 wrote:I reckon they don't. These players are professional athletes. Recovery is not such a big deal. I think we ran out the game well. I'd even go as far to say we probably ran it out better and Richmond looked more exhausted. We were just playing catch up all bought and Richmond had a healthy buffer over I'd throughout the match.
Those saying we would have won with a seven day break or whatever I think they are incorrect. Richmond outplayed us, though not by as much as I reckon some people were thinking.
It was all round a good game of football I thought. Pity we couldn't get the four points.
Hopefully we can open out account next week.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- WinnersOnly
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 10:24pm
- Location: Canberra
Re: To those that think six day breaks mean anything...
Yeah its obviously not long enough for the Saints coaching staff to make some decent decisions leading into or during the game !
SAINTS another day older another day closer to the Holy Grail!