News Andrew Russell steps away at season’s end

Remove this Banner Ad






THE Carlton Football Club can confirm that after 26 years within the AFL industry, Director of High Performance Andrew Russell will step away from football at the conclusion of the 2024 AFL season.

Following six seasons at the Blues, in which time he led high performance, Russell will conclude his time at the Club, with his current contract set to expire at season’s end.
 
HPMs - and the clubs - talk themselves up.
Most of the theory behind AFL high performance is incredibly immature in a scientific sense and methods are often try, test and fail.
It’s the area where clubs have most to learn and gain - the first step would be starting to challenge the mythology that exists about those being pedestalled in the industry.


bigblueboy, is this opinion, or evidence based? Do you have a background/job in sport science?

Many if not all of the current AFL HPMs appear to be highly credentialed in exercise science.

In fact our HPM from years gone by, (called the phys eder back when he was employed at Carlton) was very highly credentialed, Peter Schockman. He worked at Carlton and other VFL/AFL clubs alongside David Parkin (Parkin was also very highly regarded in sport science academic circles) from the 80s through to the early 2000s. He is a great family friend of ours. To say such people are witch doctors is an absolute joke!!!

Furthermore, also a great friend of my family was Stan Nicholes. He pioneered weight training for athletes in Australia 70 years ago. He trained numerous VFL/AFL football greats, assisting the Phys Eders/HPMs at numerous clubs. He was so highly regarded that international athletes sought out his coaching when visiting Australia - tennis players such as Boris Becker, Andre Agassi and athletes such as Sergei Bubka, just to name a few. When the top 50 athletes in Australian history was released about 20 years ago, Stan had trained the majority of them. Many of them said that Stan had had a profound impact on their careers. How do I know this, my dad was a great friend of Stan. He was like a father figure to him. He was trained by Stan and worked with him and also trained some of the best VFL players years ago - Kevin Bartlett and Kevin Sheedy. I was trained and inspired by Stan too. Stan was still regarded as a guru in his 80s with AFL HPMs and elite athletes from numerous sports enlisting his help into the early 2000s, until he passed away. Witch doctors 😂😂😂
 
Last edited:
'Poor' for him perhaps... still finished top 10 in the JN medal in both years. And 2020 was a special year anyway, with the shortened matches, and late start to the season.


For the record, here's his JN medal ranking by year:
2014 - (played just 3 matches)
2015 - 1st
2016 - 3rd
2017 - 8th
2018 - 1st
2019 - 1st
2020 - 9th
2021 - 4th
2022 - 1st
2023 - 5th
2024 - 1st

He's been a pretty special player for us. Matthews way out of touch with his remarks. Yes, 2020 wasn't up to us usual standard, but I still wouldn't call it 'poor' maybe just 'ordinary'.
Considering that he played with a fracture in his back which required weekly injections in 2021, finishing 4th in the B&F that year was a Herculean effort!

 

Log in to remove this ad.

I’m pretty circumspect about such things, and have defended Russell in the past. But I know a couple people who would know and both suggested Russell was way off by the end. And both speak glowingly of Innes. Moving players will help, but it seems clear to me now that Russell was part of the problem.
Those all involved in team selection, bringing back injured players that were underdone, had repetitive injuries and long layoffs straight back into the lineup…
 
There’s no hard evidence that the Ikon Park surface is contributing to injury rates - just unsupported speculation.

Marvel, Optus, Gabba … all faced criticism for standard of surface/correlation with injury rates in recent years. Still not sure there’s been a comprehensive study of any validity to confirm issues at these

There’s no hard evidence that the Ikon Park surface is contributing to injury rates - just unsupported speculation.

Marvel, Optus, Gabba … all faced criticism for standard of surface/correlation with injury rates in recent years. Still not sure there’s been a comprehensive study of any validity to confirm issues at these grounds.
I’m happy to stand corrected on the Ikon Park surface. I thought some ‘in the know’ posters here had said that it was found to be a factor in our injuries - fair call bigblueboy. Had read in years gone by that the surface at Marvel felt more solid for players and that they took longer to recover after games. If no scientific evidence, also fair enough. 👍
 
I’m pretty circumspect about such things, and have defended Russell in the past. But I know a couple people who would know and both suggested Russell was way off by the end. And both speak glowingly of Innes. Moving players will help, but it seems clear to me now that Russell was part of the problem.

I've heard stories about Russell from both sides of the fence

A mix of discarding the injury prone and perhaps a different/change strategy, might reap rewards
 
Why not?

The observed data speaks for itself....

The days of blaming the players (..."players who have not been the greatest preparers") are long gone...

These days their farts are measured and analysed! :think::moustache:

If you think all players adhere to any HP program, every minute of the day, I have some spare bridges for sale
 
I’m pretty circumspect about such things, and have defended Russell in the past. But I know a couple people who would know and both suggested Russell was way off by the end. And both speak glowingly of Innes. Moving players will help, but it seems clear to me now that Russell was part of the problem.

I don’t know the answer. Not my expertise. I do believe we hung onto a number of players too long but it’s not the whole story

Regardless, I just want it fixed and I don’t care how. Injuries will cost us a chance at a flag
 
I've heard stories about Russell from both sides of the fence

A mix of discarding the injury prone and perhaps a different/change strategy, might reap rewards
The thing with sport science is that there are often so many factors at play that it's hard to pinpoint success and failure. Players could be putting up PBs in their running (repeat sprints, endurance, 20m etc) and lifting heavier. But it doesn't always correlate to bodies that can hold up to the rigours of an AFL season. There's usually two trains of thought amongst HPMs and that centres around pushing players hard and through minor niggles to condition players bodies to hold up and then there's those that back off and focus more on individualised programs and take a more cautious approach. Push too hard and players can break down. Don't push hard enough and players can fatigue as the season progresses. Focus too much on power and endurance likely suffers. Focus too much on running and power likely suffers. It's a tricky gig and often numbers can be at PB levels but there's a lot of factors at play so it's not easy to pinpoint blame.

Bottom-line is that AR had a lengthy stint with us and it wasn't working whether it was his fault or not. Eventually you have to fall on your own sword, it's the nature of the beast. It was time for a change both in personnel to try new things and philosophy (e.g. parting ways with the perennially injured). Removing extra potential factors like the training surface can't hurt either. People need to temper expectations though because it often takes a few pre-seasons with a new sport scientist/strength and conditioning guy to reap maximum benefits.
 
Those all involved in team selection, bringing back injured players that were underdone, had repetitive injuries and long layoffs straight back into the lineup…
That was the most bewildering decisons this year for me. How they can rush back players who missed large chunks of the season straight back into the seniors without and match fitness? Just terrible.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That was the most bewildering decisons this year for me. How they can rush back players who missed large chunks of the season straight back into the seniors without and match fitness? Just terrible.
Yeah terrible decision, i remember quite a few on here had strong opinions that it was such a desperate reach, plenty of smaller samples throughout the year with rushing players back far too quickly as well..
 
Man, we were bringing blokes back all season straight into the ’s from long term injury…what games were you watching MM?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

All had longlay offs before their returns. Cerra missed 6 with a standard hamstring the 2nd time round. Whether you think they should have built form in the reserves is another matter but thats not really a Russell issue.

I think we can discount that lions final. That was out of the norm. A hail mary. Even then, Doc doesnt play without the medical tick.

Im not saying everyone should have been brought straight into ones. Cottrell in particular should have played reserves. Im just saying there is no evidence of russell being overuled and us rushing back medically unfit players. Theres a difference between medically unfit and needing to get touch back.
 
Last edited:
Andrew Russell seems like a really good person. Happy to hear he has other stuff he’s doing now and in the future.

Couldn’t help but think of Jake Stringer after the “ how much have players matured in the offseason that they come back ready to go?”. In Jake’s case, never. 😂
 
In fairness, I was thinking similar to Matthews.

Cripps decline from 18-19 to 20-21 was as significant as I have seen from a player in his suppossed prime. Looked mentally and physically spent. I dont think Teague and his gameplan helped either.

Would have been almost impossible to imagine Cripps winning 2 of the next 3 brownlow medals. Quite a comeback.

He did have a fractured back in 2021
 

Remove this Banner Ad

News Andrew Russell steps away at season’s end

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top