Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

[King-Eliagh]

Football allows 3 replacements, that's it, no interchange.

The AFL players may have multiple breaks but they cover 50% further distance and the AF is also a contact sport

And the AFL players have 33% more time to cover the additional distance as well as an additional 2 rest breaks and of course the walky times in which they cover atleast 5km

[pussycat]

yes , totally agree, The site I was at said all that. And to the best of my knowledge a soccer match doesn't allow you to make 90 replacements during a match.

AFL is a sport more suitable for retirement villages and old peoples homes. Is it a sport though? The AFL is a very corrupt organisation, maybe it is just a tag team event pretending to be a sport in order to qualify as a not- for- profit organisation.

This helps to explain why the post match presentation attracts more viewers than the tag team event.

fuck youre a dickhead. The post match presentation is averaged over a very short amount of time where the maximum audience tune in to see the end result. The game itself averages less because at time during the 120 minute game, like half time, there are less viewers. Your stupidity is mind-boggling.

https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/AFL/t ... 263693a59a
Running machine Gaff is undoubtedly the king when it comes to total distance covered, being the leading player on the ground in 15 of his 16 matches this season. Gaff’s record mark is 18.4km, when he gathered a team-high 27 disposals in the loss to Melbourne at Domain Stadium in round 14. Sam Mitchell and Liam Duggan are both listed as running 22km, or more than half a marathon, in the same match.

Soccer covers around 10kms for a 90 minutes plus stoppage time. AFL players cover around 15-17kms for 80 minutes plus stoppage time. http://www.AFL.com.au/news/2017-07-19/t ... speed-king https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... er_players

And now on to RL: http://www.theroar.com.au/2017/06/22/au ... by-league/
Rohan provided me with some de-identified GPS data from a recent coaching appointment. The data showed players travelled an average of 5.9 kilometres per game, or 7.9 kilometres per 80 minutes. Of this, less than ten per cent, or around 500 metres, was classed as ‘high intensity running’.

LOL i'm sure people regularly refer to you as 'The problem solver'.But as usual your But, But Excuses don't go close to explaining a farcking thing. No other sport/ tag team event regularly has the post match segment as the highest rating part of the match and the Melbourne cup isn't Australia's highest rating show each year. AFL land is the only place where the presentation is the highlight of the match. If your latest theory+ had anything going for it then post match segments in all codes would often out rate the match .

And trying to make out that the pouncing about of AFL players to the plum fairy and nutcracker suite is anywhere near comparable to the running metres made by League players is the epitome of stupid!

90 interchanges down from 120

[NlolRL]

Football allows 3 replacements, that's it, no interchange.

The AFL players may have multiple breaks but they cover 50% further distance and the AF is also a contact sport

And the AFL players have 33% more time to cover the additional distance as well as an additional 2 rest breaks and of course the walky times in which they cover atleast 5km

you love pulling figures out your arse dont you

[NlolRL]

LOL i'm sure people regularly refer to you as 'The problem solver'.But as usual your But, But Excuses don't go close to explaining a farcking thing. No other sport/ tag team event regularly has the post match segment as the highest rating part of the match and the Melbourne cup isn't Australia's highest rating show each year. AFL land is the only place where the presentation is the highlight of the match. If your latest theory+ had anything going for it then post match segments in all codes would often out rate the match .

I'd hardly call it a theory, it's common sense. Shows with finals like masterchef, MKR, the block etc are split into sections, and the final announcement is almost always the highest rating. Similarly the AFL GF has a higher audience at the end which spills over into the segment including the presentation. Here's an example: the bathurst wrap up and podium rated far better than the actual race itself....https://tvtonight.com.au/2017/10/sunday ... -2017.html Why? Because the greatest audience tuned into the end of the race and kept watching the shorter averaged segments which were the podium and wrap up.

Thanks for coming

And trying to make out that the pouncing about of AFL players to the plum fairy and nutcracker suite is anywhere near comparable to the running metres made by League players is the epitome of stupid!

based on what? Your opinion?

[King-Eliagh]

120 mins vs 90 mins? Do u get the maths?

3breaks minus 1 break = ???

Go to an AFL game and watch how much the players walk, there's shitloads of walking going on. They walk around every time they get the chance and that's at every stoppage and when the ball is far away from them. It's part of the reason why AFL players have similar physiques to Olympic walkers

Members, im that confident that I'm happy to attend an AFL match next season and literally record how much time one of the players walks for during the entire match. My bet is about 40-50minutes. Avg human walks 7km an hour. I reckon AFL players can do better than the avg human walker so they'd cover avg about 5km a game on the walk

[King-Eliagh]

Oh shoot! I forgot, AFL teams are allowed 90 interchanges!!!

My bad. I must then reduce the amount of walky time because they get the opportunity to sit on their asses heaps more than any other sport in the world....bar chess So I'd say the avg AFL player walks about 30-35 mins per game. In that time they'd cover about 4km.

[Terry]

For any fumbler to gloat about the GF post game presentation rating better than the actual game is idiotic and embarrassing. I mean is your game so ugly (actually some chance here lol) that more people purposely tune in to watch the presentation than the game? If I were a fumbler I would hope it is laughably wrong.

Once again I must be voice of reason: The GF finishes at 5.30pm. The presentation leads into the 6 o'clock news. Non sporting people turn on the tele just before 6 o'clock readying for the news. This gives that small rating period a slight spike in numbers on GF day. It is zero, zilch and nought to do with the AFL GF. Problem solved. Move on. Thank me later!!!!

[NlolRL]

120 mins vs 90 mins? Do u get the maths?

3breaks minus 1 break = ???

Go to an AFL game and watch how much the players walk, there's shitloads of walking going on. They walk around every time they get the chance and that's at every stoppage and when the ball is far away from them. It's part of the reason why AFL players have similar physiques to Olympic walkers

Members, im that confident that I'm happy to attend an AFL match next season and literally record how much time one of the players walks for during the entire match. My bet is about 40-50minutes. Avg human walks 7km an hour. I reckon AFL players can do better than the avg human walker so they'd cover avg about 5km a game on the walk

I've provided figures showing AFL players cover almost double the distance of NRL players despite only 50% more game time. Even an idiot like yourself can deduce that means they must have a greater average speed. If you think AFL players do a lot of walking, that must be pretty much all NRL players do. Oh, that's right, the link I provided above says they only spend 10% of the game time running at high intensity. 10%!!!!!

[King-Eliagh]

Hi folks, I just changed the title, symbol and slightly adjusted the op to better reflect this enlightening thread

The AFL's players rep as amazing endurance athletes is getting absolutely demolished in here!!

[NlolRL]

For any fumbler to gloat about the GF post game presentation rating better than the actual game is idiotic and embarrassing.

you think I'm gloating about that? Do you have any brains??

Once again I must be voice of reason: The GF finishes at 5.30pm. The presentation leads into the 6 o'clock news. Non sporting people turn on the tele just before 6 o'clock readying for the news. This gives that small rating period a slight spike in numbers on GF day. It is zero, zilch and nought to do with the AFL GF. Problem solved. Move on. Thank me later!!!!

prime time at the and of the game is another factor. A fair percentage of the audience would be looking for something to watch leading into the news, and would be happy to watch the end of the GF. This is a large reason why the AFL GF would rate more if it were shown in primetime. There are more people watching in primetime

[NlolRL]

Hi folks, I just changed the title, symbol and slightly adjusted the op to better reflect this enlightening thread

The AFL's players rep as amazing endurance athletes is getting absolutely demolished in here!!

by your complete lack of data?

[King-Eliagh]

Hi folks, I just changed the title, symbol and slightly adjusted the op to better reflect this enlightening thread

The AFL's players rep as amazing endurance athletes is getting absolutely demolished in here!!

by your complete lack of data?

Do you even understand what data is? Here's some for ya

Your lads get 30mins more than soccer lads to cover their on field distance, 40mins more than NRL players

Your lads get two additional break times and a longer half time than soccer and rugby league.

Your lads get many additional 'stoppages' during play in which they do not and mostly don't run, almost every player will get time to walk during stoppages like ball ins,
Behinds, ball ups and goals. many less rl tries and soccer goals than AFL goals and behinds, many many many less many less

And some more thoroughly damaging data to AFL players reps as amazing endurance athletes???
90 interchanges... down from 120

[Terry]

For any fumbler to gloat about the GF post game presentation rating better than the actual game is idiotic and embarrassing.

you think I'm gloating about that? Do you have any brains??

Once again I must be voice of reason: The GF finishes at 5.30pm. The presentation leads into the 6 o'clock news. Non sporting people turn on the tele just before 6 o'clock readying for the news. This gives that small rating period a slight spike in numbers on GF day. It is zero, zilch and nought to do with the AFL GF. Problem solved. Move on. Thank me later!!!!

prime time at the and of the game is another factor. A fair percentage of the audience would be looking for something to watch leading into the news, and would be happy to watch the end of the GF. This is a large reason why the AFL GF would rate more if it were shown in primetime. There are more people watching in primetime

Haha. Nice deflection pal lololololololololol. I demolish your rubbish presentation ratings hocus pocus and you move on to 'prime time'. This is easier than taking candy from a baby.

candy from a baby.jpg (16.33 KiB) Viewed 2207 times

Thanks pal lolololololololololol.

[NlolRL]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21358424

The aim of this study was (a) to examine the physiological demands of competitive Rugby League match play using portable Global Positioning Systems (GPSs) to monitor players' movement patterns and heart rate (HR) and (b) examine positional comparisons to determine if players' physiological requirements are influenced by their playing position during Rugby League match play. Twenty-two elite male Rugby League players were monitored during 5 regular season competition matches using portable GPS software. There was no difference in the total distance traveled between backs (5,573 ± 1,128 m) and forwards (4,982 ± 1,185 m) during match play. Backs and forwards had an average HR of approximately 80% of their maximum (162 ± 11 and 165 ± 12 b · min(-1), respectively) throughout each match. Backs achieved greater maximum running speed (8.6 ± 0.7 m · s(-1)), completed a greater number of sprints (18 ± 6), had less time between sprints (3.2 ± 1.1 minutes), achieved a greater total duration of sprinting (44.7 ± 9.1 seconds), and covered more distance sprinting (321 ± 74 m) than forwards did (6.8 ± 0.7 m · s(-1), 11 ± 5, 5.2 ± 2.2 minutes, 25.8 ± 9.2 seconds, and 153 ± 38 m, respectively). The GPS successfully provided real-time feedback to identify significant positional differences in distances covered, running speed characteristics, and the physiological demands of competitive Rugby League match play.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20364877

Nomadic players (a broad term for midfielders and ruckmen because they follow play over the entire playing field) cover slightly greater distances (12,310 m) than both forwards (11,920 m) and backs (11,880 m) in a game. Compared with players in other positions, midfielders are consistently found to spend the most time at higher intensities (running and sprint efforts with movement velocities > 4.44 m/sec), complete more high intensity efforts (approximately 98 per game), sustain them for longer and have shorter recovery periods between high intensity exercise bouts (approximately 90 seconds on average).

So the most demanding position in the AFL covers on average 12.3kms compared to NRL of 5.5kms, has 98 high intensity running efforts compared to a measly 18 for NRL, and shorter breaks in between sprints of 90 seconds compared to 3.2 minutes.

Furthermore, NRL back only covered an average of 321m sprinting in total. Forwards only sprinted for 153m total for the game.

[NlolRL]

Haha. Nice deflection pal lololololololololol. I demolish your rubbish presentation ratings hocus pocus and you move on to 'prime time'. This is easier than taking candy from a baby.


candy from a baby.jpg


Thanks pal lolololololololololol.

you didnt even address my point, let alone demolish it. All you did was provide another explanation which I agree is a factor. Now, on your bike little boy