Winter Training Camp | [FT] Rangers 2 - 2 Copenhagen

[Bluedell 5,329]

13 hours ago, Bill said:

So a purely subjective opinion then and no more objectively valid than @compo's opinion to the contrary?

It's a forum. Most posts are subjective opinion. Surely you're aware of that?

 

[Uilleam 5,409]

10 hours ago, Scott7 said:

I wouldn’t bank on that.

He's under a ban, anyway, or so I am told. Nothing to do with the medics, it's for excessive use of the whip. 

[Fa1833 148]

3 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

He's under a ban, anyway, or so I am told. Nothing to do with the medics, it's for excessive use of the whip. 

Or those tight socks there not letting the players rip 🤣🤣

[Uilleam 5,409]

37 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

His nickname was 'Polaris' to be precise. Which not only dates me but also the UK's nuclear deterrent programme too. 

Polaris was the missile carried by the sub, as far as I recall, and not a bad moniker for a striker. Better than 'Scud', anyway. 

I take the point that the player was perceived to be be less surface to air than air to surface. 

I have heard a story that John Greig declared his intention to 'build his team' around John McDonald, which perhaps explains something about his tenure as Manager. 

 

[Bill 13,717]

2 hours ago, Bluedell said:

It's a forum. Most posts are subjective opinion. Surely you're aware of that?

 

Only expressing my own subjective opinion, as one does on a forum. 😂 As you were surely aware.

[JohnMc 2,468]

The type of football played today is different to the football played in the 1950s and the 1970s and even the 1990s. As such the type of player who thrives in it has changed and the type of fitness they possess, or build, is different. I'm surprised there's even a debate that today's players are fitter, I don't think there's any doubt about that, but I accept there's a debate around whether they are stronger or more robust. 

 

The English FA did research back in the early 2000s around elite player fitness. Dr Neil Phillips was a medical advisor to the FA during the 60s and 70s. He tells the story of Alf Ramsay wanting to introduce warming up before training to the England side and it being met with resistance by many players. Jimmy Greaves in particular was quite vocal in his resistance to this, seeing it as "namby pamby", despite Ramsay getting the idea from witnessing a training session by Brazil where they had done a warm up. It might be coincidental but Jimmy Greaves retired from first class football at only 31. Does anyone think Harry Kane will retire from first class football at 31, despite being financially secure for 10 lifetimes? 

 

The FA's research also compared data taken from the English top flight First Division in 1976, they found that the distance covered in a game was an average 8-11 kilometres, 25 per cent of which was walking and 11 per cent sprinting. By the early 2000s physiologists reckon that Premiership footballers now cover around 12-14 kilometres per match and that a greater percentage of that distance is run at top speed. 

 

There was further research published in 2019 around body shape of professional footballers. 

 

"The research team included sports scientists at Portsmouth and Cardiff Metropolitan universities and was led by University of Wolverhampton.

They examined how body size, shape and age characteristics had changed for footballers since the 1970s. Findings showed footballers have steadily been getting taller, with an average height increase of a centimetre per decade, but in the most recent decade are now also lighter, nimbler and much more angular.

Dr Webb, an expert in sports management in the Department of Sport and Exercise Science, said: “We were quite surprised at the findings, and in particular the changes in body shape of those players who are successful in the modern game, these changes appear to have occurred very quickly.

"Obviously, the game is developing and evolving all the time but, even so, there does seem to be a very quick shift in the body type of some of the most successful players, at successful clubs. This has added consequence for the clubs and the recruitment of young players, as well as any player transfer strategy.

“Clubs should be aware of these developments, and it could help to inform any talent identification and development strategy at an elite club. Clubs take into account physiological metrics, as well as other factors, in any talent identification strategy or approach, and as such these findings will be of interest."

 

Perhaps more pertinent to this thread;

 

"Lead researcher Professor Alan Nevill, a biostatistician and Professor of Sport at the University of Wolverhampton, said: “Footballers of today have adapted to the modern game, and as a result their body shape has altered. Modern players are ectomorphic, characterised by a lean, slender body, as opposed to the muscular, mesomorphic builds which were more common in the 1970s and 80s.

“A lot of this can be attributed to the increased quality of playing surfaces where footballers train and compete. Modern pitches are immaculate and well-maintained and not the mud baths that they used to be. Pitches used to get very heavy and soggy, particularly in mid-winter, which accounted for players being bulkier and more muscular.”

As recently as December last year, Belgium international and Manchester United star Romelu Lukaku admitted that his poor form at the start of this season was because he was too muscular.

Professor Nevill concurs: “Today’s players are more like endurance athletes than power athletes. To compete at today’s high levels, they are also working harder and harder so are much leaner.”

The findings, which examined more than 2,600 top-division players using football yearbook data, also showed a dramatic decrease in BMI, which Professor Nevill believes is more a measure of muscularity as in athletes it is an indication of lean body mass rather than fat mass. He said the research could have an impact on talent scouting for the future.

“Body shape is clearly important and English professional clubs might be advised to attract young, less muscular, more angular players as part of their talent identification and development programmes to improve future chances of success,” said Professor Nevill. “In an industry that is so financially competitive, any advantage that can be gained has the potential to positively influence future performance.” 

 

Lastly, one hundred percent agree with the posters who stated that Murder Hill was psychological rather than physical. Wallace was far smarter than he gets portrayed. The whole 'jungle fighter' 'fire in their bellies' narrative does him a huge disservice. Wallace took over a Rangers side that was good enough to win a European trophy but couldn't beat Celtic for the league. He, correctly, realised that this was a mentality issue in the team, they didn't believe they were better than Celtic, who were managed by Stein and on the way to winning 9 titles in a row. 

 

Murder Hill was Wallace's way of changing that mentality. He told the players running the sand dunes would make the fitter. That running them until the were literally sick meant they were now the fittest team in the league, no one was fitter than them, they had an advantage. It was nonsense, but the players believed it, or at least enough of them did. Wallace went on to win the league and followed that up with 2 trebles. In reality you're no fitter running up sand dunes that running up the terrace steps at Ibrox, which is what the players did before this. Fitness is vital, but the right mentality even more so. 

[CammyF 6,779]

3 hours ago, JohnMc said:

His nickname was 'Polaris' to be precise. Which not only dates me but also the UK's nuclear deterrent programme too. 

After typing that post, I thought it may have been Polaris! Decent wee player for us mainly in a barron time success wise.

[ranger_syntax 3,765]

Going to go back and look at all the preseason/winter training threads.

 

Then I'll take a look at how long it takes for Gullane to be mentioned.

 

After that I'll take a look at the number of (pointless) words that are posted in response to it.

[Blue Moon 1,113]

2 hours ago, JohnMc said:

The type of football played today is different to the football played in the 1950s and the 1970s and even the 1990s. As such the type of player who thrives in it has changed and the type of fitness they possess, or build, is different. I'm surprised there's even a debate that today's players are fitter, I don't think there's any doubt about that, but I accept there's a debate around whether they are stronger or more robust. 

 

The English FA did research back in the early 2000s around elite player fitness. Dr Neil Phillips was a medical advisor to the FA during the 60s and 70s. He tells the story of Alf Ramsay wanting to introduce warming up before training to the England side and it being met with resistance by many players. Jimmy Greaves in particular was quite vocal in his resistance to this, seeing it as "namby pamby", despite Ramsay getting the idea from witnessing a training session by Brazil where they had done a warm up. It might be coincidental but Jimmy Greaves retired from first class football at only 31. Does anyone think Harry Kane will retire from first class football at 31, despite being financially secure for 10 lifetimes? 

 

The FA's research also compared data taken from the English top flight First Division in 1976, they found that the distance covered in a game was an average 8-11 kilometres, 25 per cent of which was walking and 11 per cent sprinting. By the early 2000s physiologists reckon that Premiership footballers now cover around 12-14 kilometres per match and that a greater percentage of that distance is run at top speed. 

 

There was further research published in 2019 around body shape of professional footballers. 

 

"The research team included sports scientists at Portsmouth and Cardiff Metropolitan universities and was led by University of Wolverhampton.

They examined how body size, shape and age characteristics had changed for footballers since the 1970s. Findings showed footballers have steadily been getting taller, with an average height increase of a centimetre per decade, but in the most recent decade are now also lighter, nimbler and much more angular.

Dr Webb, an expert in sports management in the Department of Sport and Exercise Science, said: “We were quite surprised at the findings, and in particular the changes in body shape of those players who are successful in the modern game, these changes appear to have occurred very quickly.

"Obviously, the game is developing and evolving all the time but, even so, there does seem to be a very quick shift in the body type of some of the most successful players, at successful clubs. This has added consequence for the clubs and the recruitment of young players, as well as any player transfer strategy.

“Clubs should be aware of these developments, and it could help to inform any talent identification and development strategy at an elite club. Clubs take into account physiological metrics, as well as other factors, in any talent identification strategy or approach, and as such these findings will be of interest."

 

Perhaps more pertinent to this thread;

 

"Lead researcher Professor Alan Nevill, a biostatistician and Professor of Sport at the University of Wolverhampton, said: “Footballers of today have adapted to the modern game, and as a result their body shape has altered. Modern players are ectomorphic, characterised by a lean, slender body, as opposed to the muscular, mesomorphic builds which were more common in the 1970s and 80s.

“A lot of this can be attributed to the increased quality of playing surfaces where footballers train and compete. Modern pitches are immaculate and well-maintained and not the mud baths that they used to be. Pitches used to get very heavy and soggy, particularly in mid-winter, which accounted for players being bulkier and more muscular.”

As recently as December last year, Belgium international and Manchester United star Romelu Lukaku admitted that his poor form at the start of this season was because he was too muscular.

Professor Nevill concurs: “Today’s players are more like endurance athletes than power athletes. To compete at today’s high levels, they are also working harder and harder so are much leaner.”

The findings, which examined more than 2,600 top-division players using football yearbook data, also showed a dramatic decrease in BMI, which Professor Nevill believes is more a measure of muscularity as in athletes it is an indication of lean body mass rather than fat mass. He said the research could have an impact on talent scouting for the future.

“Body shape is clearly important and English professional clubs might be advised to attract young, less muscular, more angular players as part of their talent identification and development programmes to improve future chances of success,” said Professor Nevill. “In an industry that is so financially competitive, any advantage that can be gained has the potential to positively influence future performance.” 

 

Lastly, one hundred percent agree with the posters who stated that Murder Hill was psychological rather than physical. Wallace was far smarter than he gets portrayed. The whole 'jungle fighter' 'fire in their bellies' narrative does him a huge disservice. Wallace took over a Rangers side that was good enough to win a European trophy but couldn't beat Celtic for the league. He, correctly, realised that this was a mentality issue in the team, they didn't believe they were better than Celtic, who were managed by Stein and on the way to winning 9 titles in a row. 

 

Murder Hill was Wallace's way of changing that mentality. He told the players running the sand dunes would make the fitter. That running them until the were literally sick meant they were now the fittest team in the league, no one was fitter than them, they had an advantage. It was nonsense, but the players believed it, or at least enough of them did. Wallace went on to win the league and followed that up with 2 trebles. In reality you're no fitter running up sand dunes that running up the terrace steps at Ibrox, which is what the players did before this. Fitness is vital, but the right mentality even more so. 

Thanks for that, John, it is very interesting.  Does it explain a lot about Scottish football's dreadful Record in Europe (us excepted)?  

Edited January 12 by Blue Moon

[ian1964 10,410]