TOPIC: Lobb Season Over

shane Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #85

shane
Presumably they have their own policy on ground firmness so we'll also find out if the AFL are involved in some sort of conspiracy to save a small amount of water or not.
Login to reply,

Morgan Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #86

Morgan
So, why do you think both the Eagles and Dockers have stopped training there?
Login to reply,

shane Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #87

shane
Mob mentality. It's the football industry. They used to have players wearing magnetic bracelets. They blamed Subiaco Oval on knee injuries because they had 2 knee injuries in short succession. If they have evidence it's an issue they should contact the AFL and science them into submission.

That and the bloke who's job it is to get the players fit is the same one they ask why he thinks the players are injured. He's not going to say he ran them too hard.
Login to reply,

Raglan Matt Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #88

Raglan Matt
Morgan,

Post #74
Have they figured out a better way to measure firmness of the ground? Last time I checked they were still using a penetrometer, which is basically Tony Grieg’s key test of the grass without any consideration of the soil below.

Post #81
A penetrometer measures how hard it is to push a 5mm spike into the soil.

Make up your bloody mind.
Login to reply,

Suker Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #89

Suker
A tool used in construction industry to gauge compaction of sand pads etc.
Login to reply,

Raglan Matt Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #90

Raglan Matt
Although, Shane, I do know that some jockeys, trainers and owners that don't trust the Turf Clubs, walk the track poking an umbellar tip into it to give an indication of the firmness of the track. Maybe Lyon and Simpson (and Nic Nat) should get the umbrellas out.
Login to reply,

Morgan Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #91

Morgan
Sorry RM.

What I was trying to get across was a penetrometer was effectively TG's key test (albeit the key test didn't really measure the soil below). I'm just not sure it is a good measure for determining what it is like to running on the top of the grass.

I understand it's used for horses, who tend to dig up the track a fair bit, and you can track how fast they go relative to the penetrometer, but it doesn't measure how much shock is being absorbed by the horses themselves. It's also the case that different tracks rate their courses differently even using the same penetrometer reading (two tracks might ahve the same penetrometer reading by one will be rated dead while the other is rated good). I'm not sure if that is custom, or an acknoledgement that a penetrometer score only tells part of the story.

I agree I didn't communicate that very well. Hopefully that clears it up a bit and you can sleep tonight.
Login to reply,

shane Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #92

shane
Yeah, the turf club convert the reading to the track rating. That can be murky if the turf club is crooked and doesn't want to discourage betting on a softer track. It's also an average and the jockey wants to know where the soft spots and the firm spots might be.
Login to reply,

Raglan Matt Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #93

Raglan Matt
Also, Shane, the reason why the penetrometer readings are made public. The track rating is an average, but the penetrometer readings are give for set sections of the track. The reason why the jockeys etc walk the track is because of the variation as you say, not only along the track, but more importantly, from the rail to the middle of the track. This does not take away from the fact that the penetrometer is a reliable and consistent measure of the firmness of the ground.

Morgan, the penetrometer was around before TG's gimmicky, made for TV, "key test". How long have those CH9 pitch reports been made a joke of?

The penetrometer reading does actually give trainers an indication of how their horses will handle the going, the reason why turf clubs use them and publish the results.

Post 91:
What I was trying to get across was a penetrometer was effectively TG's key test (albeit the key test didn't really measure the soil below). I'm just not sure it is a good measure for determining what it is like to running on the top of the grass.

Post #74
Have they figured out a better way to measure firmness of the ground? Last time I checked they were still using a penetrometer, which is basically Tony Grieg’s key test of the grass without any consideration of the soil below.


Again, which post are you running with???
Login to reply,
shane said You Beaut

Morgan Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #94

Morgan
I’m not trying to be obtuse RM, but I’m not sure what you’re asking.
Login to reply,

Raglan Matt Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #95

Raglan Matt
Sorry Morgan, confused my posts,
Which post are you running with, this one;
What I was trying to get across was a penetrometer was effectively TG's key test (albeit the key test didn't really measure the soil below). I'm just not sure it is a good measure for determining what it is like to running on the top of the grass.
Or this one;
A penetrometer measures how hard it is to push a 5mm spike into the soil. I'm sure it does a great job of measuring that. My question is whether it’s a good tool for measuring what it is like for running over the top of the grass - where most players spend their time.
Login to reply,

Morgan Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #96

Morgan
I’ll try and simplify by saying that I don’t think a narrow piece of metal going into the surface of an oval, be it a short key or a penetrometer, seems like a good way to measure what a player feels when he plays a game of football on a grass oval.

It might not be a worse measure than a professional footballer’s subjective opinion, but where the two are markedly and consistently different, and the ‘scientific’ measurement was pilfered from horse racing, it might be worth asking why that is rather than ascribing it to mass-delusion or incompetence.

The penetrometer readings were fine for years at Docklands even when everyone felt it was too hard.
Login to reply,

shane Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #97

shane
I don't mean to be rude but your attacks on penetrometers makes you sound insane. Nasa use them in their space exploration. Madness.
Login to reply,

Morgan Lobb Season Over 1 month 1 week ago #98

Morgan
Fair enough, but at one point there was a discussion about whether different types of grass might be responsible for different injury rates. Do you think a penetrometer would differentiate between different types of grass?

There’s some suggestion that Perth Stadium is harder than other grounds and/or is more likely to cause injuries. The evidence against is that a penetrometer reading says it’s within AFL standards.

Penetrometers might be very useful and accurate tools to measure soil compaction, but it might not tell the whole story.

Do you really think that’s a crazy suggestion?
Login to reply,