| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty 13:03 - May 7 with 10437 views | KensalT |
Damning
[Post edited 7 May 13:06]
|  | | |  |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 10:52 - May 9 with 1200 views | KensalT |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 10:09 - May 9 by numptydumpty |
I worked for a small charity that was absolutely shockingly run.
The manager had no fall back. Paid two staff members almost double what others got. Everyone knew they were bedroom buddies shall we say. They certainly were not great at their actual jobs.
We used to have an AGM and yearly, the figures and percentages used were all in the 90% satisfactions with our services. Council members, clients family members all seemed amazed by how great we were. Staff knew the true reality, but he was an excellent presenter, way more skilled in that than Mr Beale.
I used to live in a social housing apartment and we used to get quarterly magazines sent to us and suggesting residents were 97% fully satisfied. i lived there and spoke to a lot of people there. More like 97% fully dissatisfied.
Anytime, i see figures over 90%, i smell something that has an odour of something most unpleasant.
If it was myself having to present something that i knew to be false, I would not be able to say it. And if i did, everyone would be aware that i was saying words i had no confidence in.
i was aware how questions were asked in survey questionairres and then analysed and analysed afterwards to get these 90% satisfaction answers.
I actually would not mind if we were presented with the realities of a situation and saying lessons have been learned. We are realising certain ways of treating injuries and managing recoveries and returns have not been that successful so far. We feel that we have tinkered with our way of operating and we feel confident next season, there will be a marked improvement.
They could also say we have taken a risk on some players we believe can develop and have talents that can be nurtured, but we realise our money is not everlasting and we have signed several players known in the past that have injury and fitness issues, but we feel after researching their issues, that we felt that they could be managed so much better so their long term availability is much greater than it previously has been. With some, its still a work in progress and we have made mistakes along the way, but we are confident we are heading in the right direction.
But no, we get told we have 90% availability - EVERYONE KNOWS THATS BS MISMANAGED DATA !!
No news about methods used - BECAUSE WE ARE ALL TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND !!
And no specific news about how if we have improved, how we have done it and with specific examples about certain players recoveries in the treatment room - NOT TELLING US THEIR METHODS DOESN'T MEAN OUR COMPETITORS WILL GAIN EXPERT INFORMATION ABOUT OUR SECRET NEW ADVANCED AND INNOVATIVE WAYS OF DOING THINGS.
Most of THEM are doing BETTER !!!!
Usually when you get limited information it is to cover up that you are really not exactly sure about what you are doing is right so you bluff and throw out soundbites such as this 90% data "facts"
If the club were a lot more honest about certain issues i think everyone would welcome this. If Ben Williams can say, yes we understand our track record so far has not been where we want it to be, but we have adapted plans with how training, playing style and treatment is done so that many injuries are much less likely to occur and we all know some of our players are decent but wouldnt be with us, if previously they were injury free, then all well and good.
They may well be doing this, but for me bluff as a policy to communicate gets you nowhere. All it does is create mistrust !!!!
I hope they can learn to improve on this.
When people are too sure of themselves. Thats when you start to wonder...... |
You can get away with a lot of dodgy reporting in the public and charitable/voluntary sectors because there are too many people in authority heavily invested in wanting the figures to look right and they either won't or can't subject data to proper scrutiny.
Competitive sport, particularly football is a different kettle of fish.
Every word and every detail gets picked apart because the public really care and it matters to them.
That's why throwing around nonsense figures like 90% availability and thinking you have done enough and can hide behind that is counterproductive.
No one is fooled, and as Clive said it just erodes trust and fosters resentment.
It would be better for Nourry, Williams, and all of us if they admitted there is a problem and are working hard to fix it. And if they can't fix it with the skills and knowledge they have in-house they need to bring in someone who can, even if that means changing key personnel. | | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:11 - May 9 with 990 views | nix |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:10 - May 8 by dmm |
Yep, fair enough. You could well be right about Nourry wanting to prove their fitness. But, don't forget we finished 15th, same as last season so Stephan may well have wanted those points to climb a place or two.
Of course, I agree Madsen and Burrell should not have been put at risk but if Mr Expert tells you they're okay, you can understand why Stephan then plays them. Clearly he should have been a lot more circumspect about Williams. |
That’s why in theory unlike some fans I don’t think the fitness and rehab guy should report to the manager but to the DOF or the Board. They should be independent and be able to say that this player is not fit enough to play and the manager shouldn’t be able to overrule that because they should be less tied to short term results and more to the long term outcomes for the players.
With us though it’s not clear whether one or both of the DOF and the fitness guy are not looking at the bigger picture so it either makes them look better or makes the players theoretically more marketable over the summer. If that’s the case then it backfired badly. |  | | |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:22 - May 9 with 981 views | OldPedro |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:11 - May 9 by nix |
That’s why in theory unlike some fans I don’t think the fitness and rehab guy should report to the manager but to the DOF or the Board. They should be independent and be able to say that this player is not fit enough to play and the manager shouldn’t be able to overrule that because they should be less tied to short term results and more to the long term outcomes for the players.
With us though it’s not clear whether one or both of the DOF and the fitness guy are not looking at the bigger picture so it either makes them look better or makes the players theoretically more marketable over the summer. If that’s the case then it backfired badly. |
Thing is, if the fitness/rehab guy is targeted on player availability, they might be tempted to say a player is fit to hit a target and just hope that either they don't get picked or that they manage to play just a few minutes. |  |
| Extra mature cheddar......a simple cheese for a simple man |
| |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 10:15 - May 11 with 802 views | nick_hammersmith |
| Tell me that one again about 90% availabilty on 17:22 - May 9 by OldPedro |
Thing is, if the fitness/rehab guy is targeted on player availability, they might be tempted to say a player is fit to hit a target and just hope that either they don't get picked or that they manage to play just a few minutes. |
Exactly!
I think this is all counter productive.
IF the club really do have a game model where we develop players as assets to sell, then this should be the core objective cascaded down for all the staff.
So, if Kolli is sold for £15m one day then this shows that everyone played their part to develop a player, keep him fit, give him minutes, sell him for the best price.
There are clear measurable targets all the way along this path, but if making a player available when they are not, or risking a key player for a non competitive game, then this is damaging the core objective |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.