Statement from Bates in the mail - assuming it's not a misstatement.
We seem to run out of steam in the latter part of a game - perhaps evidenced by the late conceding of goals and being under the cosh in the latter part of games.
I thought training should be harder than games !
Why not try 45 minutes followed by a 15 minute break and a team talk, followed by 50 minutes ( allowing for injury time )

Here's a link to the article in question so people can judge for themselves:

https://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/sport/ ... -1-9354168

Bates says it's a 70 minute intensive workout - not that the entire session from trotting out onto the pitch lasts 70 minutes - presumably they warm up and warm down properly as well!

I think I'm on the fence on this one - Pools aren't finishing games strongly as the opposition as a rule but that might equally have something to do with the manager's unwillingness to get full use out of the 3 subs he's allowed. And not overdoing training makes sense when there's 2 competitive games most weeks.

Maybe if they trained hard for 120 minutes 90 would be a doddle. What happens if we ever need extra time?

Footballers don't know they're born....blah blah

We're doing better in the league than we have in years so Bates must be doing something right. He's also working alongside Ged who's coached at a decent level.

I suppose it depends on what sort of training the 1 hour 10 minutes involves. I do think having the right backroom staff in place helps though. They have conceded late, but also held on for the points in many games, so don't see any real pattern of failure there. What would be nice is if we could score a few more late on.

Would be interesting to know , how this compares to Harrisons training regime, after all Bates was Harrisons no2.


Maybe we could see a league table of clubs injuries and the amount of time they trained.


I don't think there is much to see here really.

This is a serious issue IMHO. On Saturday, a team of part-timers travelled the full length of the country and still finished stronger than Pools. This was by no means a one off. If our full time players were truly fit, it should be we who are finishing stronger against part-timers.
Alternatively how about seeking out some of these super fit part-timers and save on wages!

ps I am assuming Eastleigh travelled up on the day and didn't stay overnight on Friday as Pools used to do.

Who's to say that these part-timers don't have physically intensive jobs for eight-hours a day...?

There are a fair few occupations out there that will keep you as fit as a fiddle...

Maybe if they trained intensively for 8 hours they'd last the full match and cpould do some lumberjack work or welding post match ...... or just be plain knackered.

Actually they all ran up here along the Pennines and lived on grass and rainwater and ran straight off the pitch after the game and ran straight out of the Vic and headed home like homing pigeons. They all used to come up on a wonky chariot but the donkey died so they've done away with the luxury travel and are all the better for it. They don't even get paid and are given a bag of rotten fish eyes for which they are eternally grateful.
I'm obviously lying, but you appear to believe your fairy tale

Snowy please try and explain how expecting full time professionals to be fitter than part-timers is a fairy tail without resorting to insults and bad language. The latter would prove that you cannot.

There is fitness and there is strength, both mental and physical strength.

So many fucking experts on here

Would gladiators - whose fate rested in the Roman arena - have done an hour or so of light training every day...?

More likely that they'd have been busier than a bunch of pit-yackers in a sister-shagging contest...!

A professional footballer that can't last 90 minutes at this level is not really viable - unless he's got some Paul Gascoigne DNA in him, and can turn a game with a flash of genius after doing nowt for 86 minutes - and makes 'Pools a fortune when he's inevitably bought by a "big" club.

To beat so-called "part-timers", you need to be so much better motivated than them.

Or they will kick your sorry ass...

Don’t see a problem. 1 hour and 10 of intense match style conditions training is probably better than 1 hour 45 of steady pace training.

The article says they do lots of Gym work too. Plus plenty of massages from the physios.

We are getting less injuries than last season and I don’t think we look unfit.

I don’t see the problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Raises hand.

N that’s why I’d trust pools and their qualified coaches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m not going again until pools are gladiators in the Roman arena


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So Football must be entirely based on fitness, it must have absolutely nothing to do with tactics, systems and players producing a bit of quality or making a mistake.

The fittest team always wins.

I’m sick of reading about us facing ‘part timers’ the reality is that only a handful of teams at this level are part time 4 or 5 maybe? They won’t occupy all of the bottom positions. Football is not that simple. At this level at times it benefits to be part time when trying to sign players, but it obviously has its draw backs and full time clubs have other advantages. During the season especially at this stage how much do you think teams work on fitness when they are generally playing three times a week? That groundwork is mainly done before the season. Full time clubs obviously have more time to work on team shape and tactics but most players will take responsibility for there own fitness once the season starts in terms of going to the gym ect. At a full time club those facilities might be on hand after training a part time player might have to do it off his own back after work. A player who has played 11 League Games for Pools will have the same or a similar level of match fitness as a lad playing for Eastleigh.

A part time player maybe has more of an excuse for mental fatigue or general tiredness if they are sharing playing at a decent level with a job but ‘football’ and physical fitness is probably little different to a full timer at the same level. Your opinion seems flawed and misinformed.

I’m sure with all the experience mcnamee, turnbull, Bates, hignett, the s & c coaches, the physio, the teachers at the college between them all have they know how long to train players for.

No offence to any bunker members Like who think they know better


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you trying to suggest that a balanced and fair summary of the standard of Pools training CAN’T be taken from a single quote?

It’s almost as if the outraged people didn’t read this bit

“We have Craig Hubbard who has the lads in the gym - he wants them in there all the time. “He understands that part of the game is important for injury prevention. “We have got a good physio and we have a good relationship with the college who send over students to do massages.”

Hour on the training field
Hour or more in the gym
30 minutes massage n physio/yoga/stretching




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That sounds about right to me. Think the massage bit is more important that people may give it credit for. If I was rich, I would pay for a massage every day , nothing better , great for the body and your mental health.

So it appears that the training regime at Pools has passed with flying colours the scrutiny of the infamous Poolie Bunker.

Of course having the ability to play football well on top of been fit and strong is key. The difference between someone like Vincent Kompany doing said training and someone like Mark Kitching is probably ten fold, so it probably helps if you are to start with naturally well built and fit ,strong and the icing on the cake , a good footballer , both with a footballing brain and good feet , before everything else comes into play.

Why didn't we sign Spartacus when we had the chance?

If I was you, I'd check how many substitutions the opposition make.

Last seen York City away, circa 1995

Nah. Rob McKinnon was Spartacus.