Stats can be made to support many contradictory arguments. On the one hand the article claims less recurring injuries, but it doesn't say that the overall injuries are less too, so what is the point ? If I say to you there are less muggings you think crime is down .. until you find out there are more burglaries.
Not really a like for like analogy though HotHead, the point about recurring injuries is that the medical team are better equipped to deal with injuries that keep happening i.e. those that they are managing and are in their control. New injuries that occur are largely out of the control of the medical team, i.e. Sagna's leg break at Spurs, which was completely random, nothing could have been done to prevent that.
Yeah but with this new fangled treatment we use, it may solve one problem and introduce others, thats the point I am making. Its all well and good solving recurring problems but why are we getting so many other problems ? Leg breaks aside, we get far too many injuries and the estimation for when they are due back is often wildly incorrect. It can't just be a coincidence that every season we are riddled with injuries. Maybe its the players we are buying. I remember when Spurs always had a massive injury list, it was like they were buying players from hospital wards, this was back in the Darren Anderton era.
