Injury League Table

Seems we were 7th in the overall injury league table according to physioroom.com. Newcastle were top with 1871 days, we came in 7th with 1145 days. Interesting that both Newcastle and Villa slotted in above us, I thought we would be a bit higher than that.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11667/9875110/man-utd-clocked-39-injuries-in-201415-season

 

Exactly what I've been saying all season. The extent of our injuries was a myth, every team gets players injured every season and it's strange how our injured players suddenly become much better when they're not available.

 

Interesting to see how few players Leicester had injured. It meant they were able to field a more consistent starting 11.

 

Leicester very low. Give them our injuries and...

So we're only 7th Man U must use outdated methods, clueless dinosaurs , rush players back etc etc too

 

We had injuries to 'key players' big difference to just days of players injured

 

That can't be right.

Assem himself said we were the most injured team in the league, and he's never wrong.

 

What do you mean by this and who is it aimed at?

 

Who? I've already stated many times on here that I think if Snodgrass had been fit and Hernandez had got injured 3 games into his career with us then Snograss would be seen as the worst signing we've ever made and the injury to Hernandez was the reason we went down.

 

Diame , Snodders , Jelly , Ramirez ,McGregor , Chester ,Robertson , Bent Albert all either were , or could have been Key players

 

Diame you have a point. Jelavic still played a lot, when he didnt play it was our fault mismanaging the situation having no plausible back up for a player who had been at the world cup, had hardly any rest and then puts his body on the line every week. Chester, Mcgregor and Robertson have all been dropped this season. Ramirez and HBA just werent interested.

 

OK , i see now , close the thread :/

 

Missing Brady too

Key players:
Snodgrass 8m spent
Gaston - mistake to loan, he was never fit
Diame - bought as an attacking midfielder and we lacked that
Jelly - we won most of our games when he was 100%
Chester
Brady

I still think Bullard was the worse signing we ever made, we may still get good money back on Hernandez, he says crossing his fingers lol

Hernandez was never the same after he went home after a few games, what was the reason? Someone die?

 

Key players:
Snodgrass 8m spent - doesnt mean he's good. I said the day we signed him I dont rate him, he's far too slow to put into an incredibly slow team.
Gaston - mistake to loan, he was never fit - so we didnt miss him then
Diame - bought as an attacking midfielder and we lacked that - agreed, big loss. Most teams lose one big player.
Jelly - we won most of our games when he was 100%. Our fault having no back-up so he can recover when he had no end of season rest.
Chester - not always first choice
Brady - not always first choice.

I'm not saying we didnt have injuries., I'm saying they're no excuse as every team has them.

 

And I'm saying that the article just says how many days injured, not to whom.

Chester not always first choice?
Brady not always first choice? When he wasn't Robertson was and then he was then injured
Snodgrass was bought as first choice he was our main signing! Irrespective of how good you think he was going to be

Gaston was brought in to be first choice, he'll had had a Physio test and was deemed to be going to be fit soon, he never was.

 

Yes Chester wasnt always first choice.
Hernandez was bought as first choice and was our main signing.

 

I'd like to see exactly which players contributed to those stats.

The players we lost would be equivalent to Man U losing their top 7 or 8 first choices, however, they didn't lose them, and also however, they have similar backups to them, whereas we do not.

I would still suspect the teams above us are including injuries to players who wouldn't even make the first team in any case which completely skews any value in the league table.

A more interesting one would be say, a clubs best/first choice 11 or with a couple of subs included, then their injuries.

Stupid league table tbh.

 

Cheers OLM, it still doesn't feel right, like comparing apples to horses. Man U could still put out an excellent first team whereas we obviously couldn't, although yeah, they seem to have had a lot of injuries.

Must be the training they do eh?

 

Err Elmo missing 5%!!! How accurate are these.
Rosenior missed a third of the season if true.

 

yeah i wasnt sure if he was injured or just overlooked - but either way IMO he was our best player over the last 5 or 6 games by a mile , some of those crosses were biblical