- Jul 29, 2004
- 22,185
- 364,062
Yeah, personally I'd file that under utter bollocks.The hamstring going. I've seen comments from people saying they heard it which seems crazy to me inside the stadium with all that noise.
Yeah, personally I'd file that under utter bollocks.The hamstring going. I've seen comments from people saying they heard it which seems crazy to me inside the stadium with all that noise.
Were these comments made by Bongo Mist per chance?The hamstring going. I've seen comments from people saying they heard it which seems crazy to me inside the stadium with all that noise.
I'm an acoustician, and that is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.If we get away with a grade 2 tear and not a 3, which would have required surgery and months out, it'll be a win. A grade 1 would be a miracle, given that people in the stadium said it sounded like a gunshot when it happened.
I defer to your sound knowledge but I've heard someone's hamstring snap whilst playing football myself and it was scarily loud. I couldn't believe how loud, actually.I'm an acoustician, and that is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.
First of all, the likelihood that something snapping inside someone's body will be heard by anyone more than a few metres away, is extemely low. Three things will happen:
1. The sound itself will be significantly dampened by the body tissue
2. The already dampened sound will be attenuated by the air, the pitch and the people in the ground, by ~6 dB per doubling of distance.
3. The sound will be masked by the background noise level, which in a football stadium is extremely high.
Now, any sound that is ~10 dB lower than the background noise level will quite simply not be heard unless the sound consists of a completely different set of frequencies. The typical sound level at a football match is around 90 dB, so if we assume a distance of 8 metres to the closest bystanders, the sound source would have to be about as loud as a chainsaw in order to be audible.
It is when you consider who he will likely be replaced by in the interim.I could live with that if it's true. We have an international break in between to factor in, so if he's back Jan/Feb i don't think that's too bad.
I could live with that if it's true. We have an international break in between to factor in, so if he's back Jan/Feb i don't think that's too bad.
It is when you consider who he will likely be replaced by in the interim.
When i say not too bad, i mean in terms of what we all originally thought the length he would be out might look like. It looked really bad at the time.It is when you consider who he will likely be replaced by in the interim.
He seems to specialise in negative, but often correct Spurs news....I'm still holding out until we get official confirmation.
Although Matt law can be pretty spot on
...so Spurs news thenHe seems to specialise in negative, but often correct Spurs news....
Yeah, personally I'd file that under utter bollocks.