ozzy_ozman
Juniors
- Messages
- 1,280
Player burnout: Why is it so hard, it's just simple Mathematics
www.rleague.com
Written by: James Stewart
Player burnout - its the issue that has been hovering above the game for a little while now.
For the last few years we've heard plenty from the players that the season is too long.
And the number of games is growing.
Rugby League as a game is trying to push for an expanded and growing international program to try and turn the tide against the game internationally, especially as rugby union expands. I don't think anyone in the game wants to try and reduce the growth of test football in Rugby League.
But the problem arises that without reducing the numbers of internationals the only way to achieve this goal is to reduce the length of the NRL and ESL seasons.
The biggest cries are coming from the Australian NRL players.
The games elite players - those that play up to 30 games in the NRL + Origin + Tests - barely have a break between the end of an international program around November till the start of new years NRL season. Most NRL clubs are already back into pre-season training now.
Players of recent times have been criticised with the claims that players in the past - particularily in the part-time era - played as many or even more games a season than now. Remember the pre-season comps and the mid-week cups along with the 22 game NSWRL season with finals, origin and plenty of tests? Throw the odd Kangaroo tour in and thats a lot of games.
However, has the intesity of the game changed where there is no chance of players being able to coast through games as they once might have? Is it really all that different or worse now than it once was? Or is it even easier with the players fulltime and plenty of physiotherapists at their disposal?
But I'll leave it up to those who have played the game at the highest level to judge on whether the games 10-20 years ago were tougher on the body over the course of the season than those of todays.
The biggest issue is money - and this is where the maths comes into it.
Both the NRL and the ESL cannot financially reduce the length of their seasons. The administration and the clubs both cannot afford it. This has been stated over and over.
Where is all the money going: The Players.
Who is complaining about the length of the season: The Players.
Simple mathematics. The players either accept the responsibilities to the game that they gain through their paychecks and play the games required of them, or they take pay cuts to allow the NRL and the ESL to financially afford the shortening of the seasons.
Really, the ball is in the players court. They either put up or shut up on the issue.
www.rleague.com
Written by: James Stewart
Player burnout - its the issue that has been hovering above the game for a little while now.
For the last few years we've heard plenty from the players that the season is too long.
And the number of games is growing.
Rugby League as a game is trying to push for an expanded and growing international program to try and turn the tide against the game internationally, especially as rugby union expands. I don't think anyone in the game wants to try and reduce the growth of test football in Rugby League.
But the problem arises that without reducing the numbers of internationals the only way to achieve this goal is to reduce the length of the NRL and ESL seasons.
The biggest cries are coming from the Australian NRL players.
The games elite players - those that play up to 30 games in the NRL + Origin + Tests - barely have a break between the end of an international program around November till the start of new years NRL season. Most NRL clubs are already back into pre-season training now.
Players of recent times have been criticised with the claims that players in the past - particularily in the part-time era - played as many or even more games a season than now. Remember the pre-season comps and the mid-week cups along with the 22 game NSWRL season with finals, origin and plenty of tests? Throw the odd Kangaroo tour in and thats a lot of games.
However, has the intesity of the game changed where there is no chance of players being able to coast through games as they once might have? Is it really all that different or worse now than it once was? Or is it even easier with the players fulltime and plenty of physiotherapists at their disposal?
But I'll leave it up to those who have played the game at the highest level to judge on whether the games 10-20 years ago were tougher on the body over the course of the season than those of todays.
The biggest issue is money - and this is where the maths comes into it.
Both the NRL and the ESL cannot financially reduce the length of their seasons. The administration and the clubs both cannot afford it. This has been stated over and over.
Where is all the money going: The Players.
Who is complaining about the length of the season: The Players.
Simple mathematics. The players either accept the responsibilities to the game that they gain through their paychecks and play the games required of them, or they take pay cuts to allow the NRL and the ESL to financially afford the shortening of the seasons.
Really, the ball is in the players court. They either put up or shut up on the issue.
