Workload for Test players - no. of games

[The Observer]

I recently bought the Big League 2006 annual. Recently thinking about comments that elite players like Darren Lockyer have felt the tiring effects of a long season, I started looking at the number of games some of the elite players have played this season.

Lockyer has been cited as an example of an overworked player, featuring in 35 first class games this season. Lockyer played 22 NRL club games (of possible 24), 4 finals matches, 3 Origin matches, 1 ANZAC Test, 2 Tri Nations tests vs NZ, 2 vs GB & 1 Tri Nations final (vs NZ). NRL preseason games were not listed in annual, and the information on team lineups is sketchy. Lockyer also played in the post season Beach Footy competition hosted by leading player manager George Mimis.

So I had a look at the games played by the test players in the elite nations this season - all Kangaroo, Kiwi, Lions and France reps. Most recently Manly coach Des Hasler urged the NRL to cut the number of NRL rounds played to avoid player burnout. The season schedule is said to contribute to player burnout, so what factors can cause burnout it? How many games is too many? How many players are overworked?

OVERWORKED PLAYERS - What factors cause player burnout?

* Number of 1st class games. How many games is too many? The standard of the comp is increasing, but noone in RL has suggested a number figure as a maximum limit.

In Australian RU, elite players are limited to playing a maximum 30 first class games over the course of the season. There are 15 Super 14 games at maximum, 13 tests a season,which allows for 2 pre season games. In elite English RU, players are limited to 32 first class matches per season. with 12 tests per season, they are supposed to be limited to 20 of 38 possible club fixtures (English Premiership, Anglo-Welsh Cup and European Cup). An ongoing conflict between the RFU and the elite clubs over the season structure has led to the national team having its worst record in years.

The All Blacks have been limited to 30 first class games, yet they will be rested from the first 7 rounds of Super 14 next year to give them a 4 month gap between the November 2006 tour and their first Super 14 2007 game. Furthermore, the ABs have used a rotation policy for the last two years and are clearly the dominant team in international Rugby ATM.

 

[colonel_123]

In my opinion cutting the NRL regular season from 24 games to 22 games and aligning the conclusion of the Super League and NRL seasons would be a major boon for international rugby league.

I don't think rugby league will have the sort of international season Union has for a while at least, which is not a bad thing as Rugby League has a strong domestic comp that Union, at least in Australia, lacks and this should not be damaged.

But a reduced NRL season would allow for a better end of season international calendar that would include matches between the big three (soon to be 4) and second tier nations like PNG, Tonga, Fiji, Samoa, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and Lebanon.

 

[colonel_123]

Sorry if that was a bit off topic.

 

[The Observer]

* Inadequate rest periods - buildup of fixtures during Origin, when games are held midweek, and players must backup a short while after, takes its toll on leading clubs and Brisbane Broncos every year.

* Duration of season - players have been accustomed to getting a 3 month gap between last game of one season and first game of the next. English based players barely get two months between their last GB test and play friendlies in Dec and Jan.

* Class of match - some might argue that an NRL finals game wears a player out more than a regular comp game, or an Origin game wears a player out more than any other game, or a 3N test is tougher than an international friendly. Ranking games in intensity would be too hard.

* On field workload - how many tackles/hitups, minutes on field etc does a player undertake? Petero Civoniceva played 35 games, the same as Lockyer, yet he makes more tackles and hitups because he is a prop, yet the demands of his position, his body type, and his injury profile are all different to Lockyer. This is a complicated issue.

* Amount/type of off field training - number of weights sessions, ballwork, and fitness sessions in and out of season would require a lot of documentation.

Nevertheless, workload is an important issue for elite RL. Let's assume that 30 first class games in a season should be the desirable maximum limit for an elite test player.

Kangaroos - there were 31 Kangaroo reps in 2006. 10 Kangaroos went over a 30 game limit, playing the following no. of games:
* 35 - Lockyer and Civoniceva
* 33 - Shaun Berrigan and Smith
* 32 - Brent Kite and Jamie Lyon* (* = based in UK)
* 31 - Gasnier, Hindmarsh, Hornby, Ryan

Kiwis - there were 34 Kiwis that played a test in the Tri Series and/or ANZAC Test. I didn't include the Kiwis that only played in the XXXX Test because the status of that game as a test is questionable (both in official eyes and IMHO), and the status of the team as a Kiwi team is questionable. 4 Kiwis went over a 30 game limit:
* 38 - Shontayne Hape, Motu Tony (both UK based players)
* 33 - Jason Cayless (based in UK)
* 33 - David Kidwell

Incidentally, of the 9 extra Kiwis that only played for NZ in the XXXX Test, Robbie Paul played 34 games (AFAICT), Henry Faafili played 33 games.

 

[The Observer]

France - there were 29 players that represented France in 2006. 20 were SL players, 18 playing for Catalans, 1 playing for Wakefield (forward Elima). 4 test players went over a 30 game limit:
* 35 - Jamal Fakir (second row)
* 34 - Adel Fellous (prop/second row)
* 33 - Jerome Guisset (prop/second row)
* 32 - Gregory Mounis (lock)
Half/hooker Julien Rinaldi and winger Bruno Verges also hit the 30 game limit.

Lions - there were 34 players that represented GB in 2006. 30 had some involvement in the post season GB tests. **A staggering 22 players** went over the 30 game limit. I was able to find lineups for some preseason friendlies, so I added them to total. I'll list those that played as many or more games than Lockyer and Civoniceva:

* 40 - Keith Senior
* 38 - Leon Pryce
* 37 - Paul Wellens
* 36 - Jamie Peacock
* 35 - Rob Burrow, Gareth Ellis, Martin Gleeson

WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN?
It’s obvious that the Lions are overworked, that this leads them to under-perform when they play tests against Aus and NZ. The RFL and SL clubs are both to blame for this.

Look at Keith Senior - 40 games in a season is over the top. Did he need to play for:

* GB against a Newcastle amateur team
* GBXXXX Test - a game that does little to prepare GB for the Tri Series, doesn't commemorate any event of cultural significance (like the ANZAC Test), only fatigues the players even more.
* Leeds in easy win Challenge Cup games against lower division teams like Leigh and part timers Rochdale?
* Leeds in a pre-season friendly?

 

[The Observer]

EASING THE BURDEN

1) Change the upcoming RLIF 4 Nations to a home and away series of 6 rounds. I'd limit Roos/Kiwis/Lions players to a maximum 4 tests in the tournament. E.g. if elite Kangaroos like Lockyer and Civoniceva avoided injury/suspension, they may only play the hard-to-win tests against NZ and GB.

Games against France could be closer, since the Big 3 could successfully rotate their emerging or fringe players into the squad in place of elite players that have played a lot of games, and not lose those games e.g.
ROOS - Lyon, Hornby, Thaiday, Kaufusi and Hayne
KIWIS - Guttenbeil, Hohaia, Lauaki, Ropati and Tupou
LIONS - Burrow, Carvell, Horne, Yeaman (and the guys flown over for the Newcastle game like Aspinwall, Briers, Coley, Hodgson, Reardon, Westwood & Wood)

The current 3N format meant many senior players played 5 top line tests. However the proposed format for 2009 (3 games and a final) is a slap in the face for the success the 3N has been.

2) As you said, Colonel_123, reduce the length of the club competitions
* NRL - from 24 games (in 26 rounds of competition) to 22 rounds of games.
* SL - from 27 (2007 length, was 28 in 2006, has been 30 in previous years) to 26 rounds.

3) Scrap the XXXX Test - Introduce a D Day test between England and France if/when the SL season has been at least reduced down to 22 rounds.

4) Challenge Cup/friendlies - the RFL capitulated to the BBC's tough negotiation tactics in the last TV deal when they staggered the Cup through the SL season. This made playing conditions worse for elite players and lowered the standard of SL and the Cup. SL clubs shouldn't use their test players for Cup ties unless they are playing against other SL clubs. Recent SL Premiers and Cup winners Leeds should STILL beat Rochdale without their GB stars, and if they can't, they are a joke.

Under this system, Kangaroos Lockyer and Civoniceva may have played a more manageable 32 games, and the other 8 overworked Kangaroos may have fallen under a 30 game limit. Kiwis Jason Cayless and Kidwell may have gone under the 30 game limit.

The Poms may actually put up a fight in the Tri Nations instead of wilting every year.
Any thoughts?

 

[Quidgybo]

* Inadequate rest periods - buildup of fixtures during Origin, when games are held midweek, and players must backup a short while after, takes its toll on leading clubs and Brisbane Broncos every year.

This is one I don't understand. With players from both Origin teams forced to stand down from club football the weekend before there is absolutely no reason to play the match midweek and leave players with only a two or three day turnaround. I could never understand why we tried both Monday and Sunday nights and then didn't stick with it. For the player, either of those nights, would turn Origin into just a tough but regularly scheduled weekend of football. For the fan and television it makes bugger all difference, it's still a "school" night. Wednesday nights are the tradition argument gone insane.

Leigh

 

[carlnz]

Mate they are paid to play rugby league - its there job!! If they cant handle it then step down from Rep footy....

I suffer from work burn out be do you see me going to my boss and saying can we cut work by two weeks please?

 

[brendothejet]

I LIKE HAVING A MID WEEK FIX OF RUGBY LEAGUE...

when i was in england i loved the fact that any night of the week I could turn on the tv and watch a high quality game of soccer or league.

next year during origin weeks we will get to watch league:

Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Monday

yum yum

 

[griff]

Some good points and some solid research. No wonder Senior looked so out of sorts in the Tri-Nations (well that and the drama with the missus).

A home and away four nations will not really help with player tiredness as having to criss-cross the globe on 24 hour flights really isn't conducive to well-rested and happy players. If we must have a 4 nations (which we don't) then rotate it between Aus/NZ and GB/France.

The rotation of players in the squad is certainly something that would help ease the squeeze. But to a certain extent they could do already and don't, and I doubt the coach would rest his top players even against France. It is still a must win Test so they would probably go all out.

NRL to 22 rounds (with split rounds for Origin) and 26 round ESL in alignment with the NRL would be fantastic for both the domestic comps and the international game. Clubs are very short-sighted on this however so it would require strong leadership to get this to happen. I also don't like the idea of diminishing the status of the Challenge Cup as this is the one taste most of the GB public ever get of RL and to downgrade it would be bad for the sport.

An important point to mention which you sort of touched on is that even though the British players play more games, I don't think this necessarily makes them more tired as the class of match is a lot less than the NRL. So GB players could still play more games than their NRL counterparts.

 

[shaggy]

Mate they are paid to play rugby league - its there job!! If they cant handle it then step down from Rep footy....

I suffer from work burn out be do you see me going to my boss and saying can we cut work by two weeks please?

yes but u c unlike u the players can suggest changes & the league has the opportunity 2 make changes, which is a likely thing 2 happen, unlike u where there would be slim 2 zero chance of ur workplace reduce their trading by 2 weeks

i no in the past darren lockeyr has suggested that they play less club games 2 play more internationals

 

[deluded pom?]

Wouldn't the resting of certain players for "lesser" internationals cheapen the Aussie/Kiwi/Lions jersey? Would people pay hard earned money to see a weakened team play France or whoever? The RFU in the England are struggling to keep the clubs happy by restricting when they (the clubs) can play their international players. If Hull F.C. played a vital CC game against a leading NL team , rested their internationals , and lost , the fans would be up in arms. Dictating who and when a club can play is a dangerous game and one that should be avoided at all costs. The Lions regularly beat Australia and the Kiwis in the 40's/50's and 60's when playing 40 matches a season (as well as working a proper job too ) was the norm and not the exception. As CarlNZ said , they are highly paid professionals with the best facilities and medical staff available to them. I don't think 30 to 35 games a season is too demanding. Ask Darren Lockyer if he'd have liked to have been dropped, for no reason, in his recent dream season.

 

[shaggy]

clubs deciding who & when they play is allready the norm in the nrl as it is in many leagues 4 other sports around the would including basketball, baseball, soccer, its the norm, managers/coaches rest players 4 a variety of reasons through out a season

 

[deluded pom?]

clubs deciding who & when they play is allready the norm in the nrl as it is in many leagues 4 other sports around the would including basketball, baseball, soccer, its the norm, managers/coaches rest players 4 a variety of reasons through out a season

That's a club's prerogative. I mean it's dangerous for the controlling bodies,be it NRL ,RFL or whoever, dictating when players can and cannot play.

 

[shaggy]

ok, fair enough, i doubt clubs would have the power 2 get players 2 rest unless its 4 origin, i mean they had enough trouble getting players 2 play in the mid season kiwi v lion test, the clubs have 2 much power in the running of the nrl

the simple solution is put in bye weekends 4 test matches , city 4 country & origin like in 01, the players will suffer less from burnout & the players can go 2 regional areas & do promtion work in their weeks off

 

[Quidgybo]

I'd go slightly the other direction. Don't put the weekends in for specific matches but instead agree four international windows during the club season and leave it open to respective governing bodies what matches they choose to put on in those international weeks (where a week starts on a Thursday and continues to the following Wednesday). Australia would probably choose to use the first week for the Anzac Test and City/Country and the other three for Origin. But it also leaves all the other governing bodies free to organise their own games in those windows.

The NZRL might play the Anzac Test, a match against a Pacific Islands nation (drawing on NRL players) and two domestic Origin games. The RFL might play a four match tri series between England, France and Wales. The NRL and ESL could still choose to play during those four weeks - that's their choice. But players must be stood down and released upon the request of a governing body to compete in a sanctioned rep match during those windows. The flip side is the guarantee that players would never be called upon and would not have to released outside of those four weeks.

Leigh.

 

[griff]

Good idea

 

[shaggy]

i like ur idea as well, the nrl clubs would have no reason not 2 release their players 4mid season tests overseas & but i still think the nrl & super league clubs should suspend their comps 4 these 4 weekends, players have less chance of burnout in a season & the nrl & their clubs still get the gate money, every1 wins

 

[The Observer]

Mate they are paid to play rugby league - its there job!! If they cant handle it then step down from Rep footy....

I suffer from work burn out be do you see me going to my boss and saying can we cut work by two weeks please?

Just a couple of points for you to ponder over:
1) Elite RL players League have to come into contact with some of the fittest, strongest Rugby players ever to exist, guys that are products of full time professionalism as tough as Shane Webcke, Willie Mason, Adrian Morley, Ruben Wiki and Sonny Bill Williams. The physical demands are quite high.

2) Would you prefer Kiwis like Benji Marshall and Sonny Bill Williams went to Rugby Union where they can get paid more and play fewer games a year?

3) Do you like seeing overworked Kiwi players getting ruled out of action for tests against the Roos and Lions? Do you like seeing the Kiwis lose against us?

Wouldn't the resting of certain players for "lesser" internationals cheapen the Aussie/Kiwi/Lions jersey?

The All Blacks in Rugby have been rotating their test squad for the last two years, even against top nations, and have barely lost a test in 28 test matches.

Would people pay hard earned money to see a weakened team play France or whoever?

People in heartland Rugby League areas have done exactly that. In Kangaroo friendlies in Newcastle (in 1996, for an ARL Kangaroo team vs a Fiji village team) Central Coast and North Qld (RLWC Qualifiers resting the big guns against PNG and NZ Residents, the games got very good crowds. In those heartland RL areas, a Kangaroo team resting a few topliners like Lockyer, Civoniceva, can still attract an excellent crowd.

Furthermore, its been happening for the last five years on Kangaroo/Kiwi and 3N tournaments in the NH, AND in World Cups. Roos and Kiwis rested their elite players like captain Brad Fittler in the past two Cups in games against Russia, South Africa and Fiji.

The RFU in the England are struggling to keep the clubs happy by restricting when they (the clubs) can play their international players.

They are struggling to keep the clubs happy for a whole host of reasons, player release is only one issue. The structure of the season, the promotion/relegation issue, the issue of central contracts and a whole raft of other issues complicate matters.

If Hull F.C. played a vital CC game against a leading NL team , rested their internationals , and lost , the fans would be up in arms.

Let's assume this extremely unlikely prospect did happen - given that, since 1995, SL teams have won something like 95%+ of Cup ties against non SL teams . If Hull, somehow, weren't able to beat a leading NL team, even without their GB stars, then you must question whether they meet playing standards for SL at all.

When NRL teams play trial games against lower level teams in the pre season, the test players are often rested but the NRL club still thrashes the lower level team. Even the lowest placed NRL teams.

Dictating who and when a club can play is a dangerous game and one that should be avoided at all costs.

Clubs and governing bodies should work together to create a fair schedule for the players, test teams and the clubs. However, the structure must give the test team priority, and must give the test team the best chance of winning. However, What you seem to be suggesting is to put club before country, this shows why English teams are unsuccessful in international level at club AND country in so many team sports. Do you like watching GB lose?

I don't think 30 to 35 games a season is too demanding.

The majority of elite Kangaroos and Lions test players seem to disagree with you. Elite coaches, trainers, administrators and medical professionals disagree with you. Their argument is more compelling, they have several solid reasons to back it up. You've been talking about what players did 40 years ago.

Ask Darren Lockyer if he'd have liked to have been dropped, for no reason, in his recent dream season.

Darren Lockyer's quote after the full time buzzer in the 3N final went something like this: "glad to win it, but I'm glad this long season is over". Judging by what Lockyer actually said, he would love to have had a rest or two during the season.

 

[deluded pom?]

Yet Lockyer,instaed of heading to a beach to relax ,went and played in a beach footy tournament! Obviously it was nothing too serious but put pro sportsmen together and their competitive edge comes out. I imagine the Broncos would have been delighted if he'd been injured in it.So if Cas had retained all of their SL players and drawn Hull in the first round of the CC and beaten them after Hull rested their international players this means Hull are not good enough for SL! get real.Take out Raynor,Yeaman,Radford,Cooke,Tony, Maiava and Dowes and Hull would struggle against any of the top two or three NL teams. Because the All Blacks are strong enough to cheapen the NZ shirt then that's alright for RL to do the same? Won't it be great to tell the grandkids how you played against Japan,Namibia etc for the ABs in a WC but were dropped when the big games came along. The public aren't stupid and would soon see through the weakened teams. You patronise them even more by suggesting that if you put seventeen monkeys in a Kangaroos shirt the people of NQ and the Central Coast would turn out. Players now play less games than they ever did. God forbid if we do ever get a truly serious international scene going. Some of the Kangaroos may have to play a few more games! Try telling a young player that he won't be making his Australia debut because he's already played thirty games this season.