Borodane 8,466 28.1k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 4 hours ago, edinboro said: I would fully expect Gibson to know if Scott is interested in this. He isn't daft and if there is a chance if our key role needing to be filled he will be on it. Scott might even have helped line up a replacement. But Scott might quite like where he is at. He could be the person responsible for us doing a Brighton, Bournemouth or Brentford. So that aspect might sway him to stay. Scott might set us up with a loan🫠 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Changing Times 17,358 24.2k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 7 hours ago, Humpty said: Agreed and I think that's my point. I think there'll have been several targets for him to hit. No one knows what they are, albeit you can make some good guesses. Unless the targets are to miss out on the play offs, increase costs, and have a first team squad decimated by injuries then I'm not sure what else he's accomplished exactly. It would certainly be another interesting move by Gibson to appoint a Head of Football whose aim wasn't to get us promoted though. Maybe Carrick's targets don't revolve around promotion as well? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinoJo3 7,394 15.6k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 38 minutes ago, Changing Times said: Unless the targets are to miss out on the play offs, increase costs, and have a first team squad decimated by injuries then I'm not sure what else he's accomplished exactly. It would certainly be another interesting move by Gibson to appoint a Head of Football whose aim wasn't to get us promoted though. Maybe Carrick's targets don't revolve around promotion as well? It’s Scott’s fault the players are injured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Changing Times 17,358 24.2k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 2 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said: It’s Scott’s fault the players are injured? He's the Head of Football. I'm assuming it's his job to oversee all football operations. If it isn't then none of the following applies of course. He's responsible for employing the staff, and he's responsible for the facilities, so yes, if we have two years worth of players being decimated by injuries, then it ultimately falls down on him. Who else would be responsible? It can only be people working under him right? Obviously the club feel there is something wrong because training pitches were identified as the issue, and then they were changed last summer. That hasn't worked, and if diggerlad is correct then there will be staffing changes this summer, so, and obviously I'm making another assumption here, I'm assuming that it's the staff that have no been identified as the issue. If things improve as a result of those changes then why wouldn't he get the credit for it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinoJo3 7,394 15.6k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 28 minutes ago, Changing Times said: He's the Head of Football. I'm assuming it's his job to oversee all football operations. If it isn't then none of the following applies of course. He's responsible for employing the staff, and he's responsible for the facilities, so yes, if we have two years worth of players being decimated by injuries, then it ultimately falls down on him. Who else would be responsible? It can only be people working under him right? Obviously the club feel there is something wrong because training pitches were identified as the issue, and then they were changed last summer. That hasn't worked, and if diggerlad is correct then there will be staffing changes this summer, so, and obviously I'm making another assumption here, I'm assuming that it's the staff that have no been identified as the issue. If things improve as a result of those changes then why wouldn't he get the credit for it? Without knowing the staff he’s employed, how the players have picked up the injuries, how they have been treated, how the training may/may not affect injuries I really don’t see how you can make that kind of judgement? He should be responsible for getting to the bottom of it yes, but responsible for the injuries? I think that’s a bit harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Changing Times 17,358 24.2k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Just now, LinoJo3 said: Without knowing the staff he’s employed, how the players have picked up the injuries, how they have been treated, how the training may/may not affect injuries I really don’t see how you can make that kind of judgement? He should be responsible for getting to the bottom of it yes, but responsible for the injuries? I think that’s a bit harsh. I'm basing that on the fact that the club appear to be changing things that's all. If it's simply down to rotten luck then he has nowt to do with it. The club seem to believe otherwise though. We're two years into it and he hasn't gotten to the bottom of it so he's responsible in that sense. I don't believe he's responsible for the injuries though if that's what you mean? It's his job to sort it out though, yes? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinoJo3 7,394 15.6k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 minute ago, Changing Times said: I'm basing that on the fact that the club appear to be changing things that's all. If it's simply down to rotten luck then he has nowt to do with it. The club seem to believe otherwise though. We're two years into it and he hasn't gotten to the bottom of it so he's responsible in that sense. I don't believe he's responsible for the injuries though if that's what you mean? It's his job to sort it out though, yes? It depends on why it’s happening I guess, with the training pitch redoing and apparent staff changes then clearly he’s looking at potential issues and must believe he’s identified them. But at the same time Carrick is deciding what work and how much of it the players do so he has to take as much of the blame/responsability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Changing Times 17,358 24.2k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 3 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said: It depends on why it’s happening I guess, with the training pitch redoing and apparent staff changes then clearly he’s looking at potential issues and must believe he’s identified them. But at the same time Carrick is deciding what work and how much of it the players do so he has to take as much of the blame/responsability. Then you would change the coach or make him change his methods presumably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinoJo3 7,394 15.6k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 minute ago, Changing Times said: Then you would change the coach or make him change his methods presumably. Yes but I’m assuming that’s already been tried. What’s baffling is in Carricks first season here we rarely had any injuries at all. Ramsey aside I can’t really think of any major injuries that season other than ‘niggles’. From that angle maybe it’s something he does in pre season? I also find it crazy that we’ve had 2 (almost 3) career ending injuries in as many seasons (smith, Lenihan, almost Clarke apparently). Have we maybe stopped doing something in the treatment process, for example I wonder how popular stem cell treatment is in football to treat muscular/tendon problems. I’d guess it’s popular as it seems to be effective, are we using medical science along those lines (if it’s actually allowed in football)? Or are we a bit ‘behind the times’? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeaCider24 20,790 25.1k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 (edited) 21 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said: Yes but I’m assuming that’s already been tried. What’s baffling is in Carricks first season here we rarely had any injuries at all. Ramsey aside I can’t really think of any major injuries that season other than ‘niggles’. From that angle maybe it’s something he does in pre season? I also find it crazy that we’ve had 2 (almost 3) career ending injuries in as many seasons (smith, Lenihan, almost Clarke apparently). Have we maybe stopped doing something in the treatment process, for example I wonder how popular stem cell treatment is in football to treat muscular/tendon problems. I’d guess it’s popular as it seems to be effective, are we using medical science along those lines (if it’s actually allowed in football)? Or are we a bit ‘behind the times’? The injuries all seemed to start hitting in quick succession at the end of Carrick's first season. McGree out in the 41st game. Fry fully out in the 41st game. Ramsey out in the 41st game. Forss out in the 43rd game. Howson and Giles out in the 45th game. Akpom injured in the 2nd play-off leg. Since then, we've basically had a regular conveyor belt of injuries, starting in pre-season, so it might have been a delay from whatever happens in Carrick's training taking effect. Or it genuinely is all just bad luck and players being injury prone. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Changing Times 17,358 24.2k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 16 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said: Yes but I’m assuming that’s already been tried. What’s baffling is in Carricks first season here we rarely had any injuries at all. Ramsey aside I can’t really think of any major injuries that season other than ‘niggles’. From that angle maybe it’s something he does in pre season? I also find it crazy that we’ve had 2 (almost 3) career ending injuries in as many seasons (smith, Lenihan, almost Clarke apparently). Have we maybe stopped doing something in the treatment process, for example I wonder how popular stem cell treatment is in football to treat muscular/tendon problems. I’d guess it’s popular as it seems to be effective, are we using medical science along those lines (if it’s actually allowed in football)? Or are we a bit ‘behind the times’? No idea mate. I only brought it up as in connection with Scott as I assume he has some part to play in all of it. Forgetting him for a moment though, something has clearly been going badly wrong regards fitness and injuries. It's not just the number of injuries, which let's face it is bad enough, but we've had serious injuries as you've mentioned there, we've numerous players being injured for much longer than it was initially thought they'd be, and of course we've got players who have multiple periods of time out injured. Howson possibly isn't a good example to use because of his age but he originally got injured back in August I think? Then he was out for a couple of months, came back around late October, was available until Boxing day, and then was injured again for a couple of months. Even now he's not actually fit, he's just less injured/unfit than the other players so we are playing him, which is far from ideal for him. And how often have we had a player out for a few weeks who then isn't seen for a couple of months at least? If it was a one off or let's say just the odd couple of players then you can put it down to bad luck but I feel like we are miles beyond that now. Maybe we've just signed a load of injury prone players but I struggle to believe that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borodane 8,466 28.1k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 2 hours ago, Changing Times said: Unless the targets are to miss out on the play offs, increase costs, and have a first team squad decimated by injuries then I'm not sure what else he's accomplished exactly. It would certainly be another interesting move by Gibson to appoint a Head of Football whose aim wasn't to get us promoted though. Maybe Carrick's targets don't revolve around promotion as well? Didn’t Pulis say it was a bigger achievement finishing 7th as opposed to the play offs? Maybe we are following his wise words. If promotion or at least play offs aren’t the target then why do we even bother? I don’t for a second doubt that they are and that’s what carrick and Scott should be judged on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinoJo3 7,394 15.6k Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Replying to both I agree it can’t just be down to bad luck, I think almost everyone has had the thought that they’ve never known anything like it, I definately haven’t. I also think the complete disappearance of injured players is what is most frustrating, Azaz seemed to buck the trend by coming off with with a slight strain and being fine for the next game, I think all of us expected not to see him again for weeks. We don’t seem to have minor injuries, a player is either fit or out for a few months/the season. Instead of being rare, multi week/month long injuries happen almost on a weekly basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkT73 1,216 1.2k Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 Just to change the topic from Scott. Surprised Armstrong has struggled at WBA, 2 goals so far... I'd love us to have a go to get him in the summer. He's been mentioned loads before so guess he's in our wishlist 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob 7,421 11.3k Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 12 hours ago, LinoJo3 said: Yes but I’m assuming that’s already been tried. What’s baffling is in Carricks first season here we rarely had any injuries at all. Ramsey aside I can’t really think of any major injuries that season other than ‘niggles’. From that angle maybe it’s something he does in pre season? I also find it crazy that we’ve had 2 (almost 3) career ending injuries in as many seasons (smith, Lenihan, almost Clarke apparently). Have we maybe stopped doing something in the treatment process, for example I wonder how popular stem cell treatment is in football to treat muscular/tendon problems. I’d guess it’s popular as it seems to be effective, are we using medical science along those lines (if it’s actually allowed in football)? Or are we a bit ‘behind the times’? to play devils advocate, if it was partially or all down to carricks training methods, then that might be the reason why in his first half season you didn't see it so much as injuries from training methods likely are not instant injuries, its going to be the training catching up with people after its been going on for long term and the constant stress accumulates on the players, which might explain why injuries started to appear more in his 2nd season as the training accumulated, maybe I'm wrong but by the end of the season when around the play offs we did had a few players who were injured too, akpom was someone carrying injuries, which I don't think he fully recovered from before he moved to ajax, sure there might been others than just ramsay, and around the time the playoffs were guaranteed the team did feel like it was running a bit on empty (although that could just be down to coventry and the others we played countering our playing style, or maybe a bit of both) was the 2nd season also the year that all the stoppage time rules changed that added quite a decent bump to the length of injury time and time the ball was in play? I think this added to fitness stress levels too 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts