Injury All round 22 injury news

[KissStephanie]

Hurt shoulder and strained pec. No tear.

The official injury report is that he has a bruised shoulder, and I haven't seen or heard anything that mentions any pectoral strain except from these unsourced rumours.

As has been siad in another thread, bruised shoulder and strained pec.

I have heard it was a bruised shoulder only. Who said it was a strained pec as well?

May miss Dogs game but would be near certain starter for our next game after that.

Where did you get that info from? He was a chance to play last week from what I've heard, and would have done so if the match had any meaning or if it was a final. I have also heard both Doc Larkins and Scott Cummings say that he will play this week. It seems to me that you're just adding to one of the rumours which is that he will not play next week. What is your source?

 

[Swooop]

The official injury report is that he has a bruised shoulder, and I haven't seen or heard anything that mentions any pectoral strain except from these unsourced rumours.I have heard it was a bruised shoulder only. Who said it was a strained pec as well?

From a medical viewpoint, if he 'strained' the pec muscle, there would likely be a degree of bleeding from the micro tears in the muscle fibres, which may result in the 'secondary' diagnosis of bruising.

Otherwise, bruising may result from a direct blow...did that look possible on the vision of the incident I wonder.

On balance of probabilities, more likely a tearing injury with some bleeding.

Very much doubt he'd have been at training, handballing with a total tear, hence a partial tear, or strain, most likely.

Can anyone put up vision of the incident?

 

[Bay Pie]

Where did you get that info from? He was a chance to play last week from what I've heard, and would have done so if the match had any meaning or if it was a final. I have also heard both Doc Larkins and Scott Cummings say that he will play this week. It seems to me that you're just adding to one of the rumours which is that he will not play next week. What is your source?

Not adding to any rumour. The club has not come out and say he'll definitely play next week, so I think it's safe to assume that he may miss this weeks game also.

The same can be said for both Presti & Johnno that they may miss this week as they haven't proven themselves to be fit yet.

 

[mattys123]

Ben Johnson had a virus for ****s sake, so unless he has the bubonic plague, It's safe to assume he will play.

Stop the rumours, stop the bullshit, no one hear knows any more then anyone else.

Johnson will play.

Leigh Brown will play.

Didak may play.

Presti probably won't.

I think that is all we know, anything else is bullshit.

 

[KissStephanie]

From a medical viewpoint, if he 'strained' the pec muscle, there would likely be a degree of bleeding from the micro tears in the muscle fibres, which may result in the 'secondary' diagnosis of bruising.

I work in the medical field, and I haven't seen or heard anything that suggests that he received anything more than a common bruised shoulder.

Otherwise, bruising may result from a direct blow...did that look possible on the vision of the incident I wonder.

From what I saw, the incident looked like it would result it in a subcutaneous bruised shoulder, as confirmed by Scott Cummings only two days ago when he said that will be available to play this week after speaking to Alan Didak directly.

On balance of probabilities, more likely a tearing injury with some bleeding.

According to whom? A subcutaneous bruised shoulder is more common and more likely than a tearing injury, so in other words, are you trying to say that the less likely outcome is more likely?

Very much doubt he'd have been at training, handballing with a total tear, hence a partial tear, or strain, most likely.

What is your source for this? Again, I have not seen or heard anything that suggests either a partial teat or a strain. The official injury report is that he has a bruised shoulder, which is more common than a strain or tear of any sort. Scott Cummings on 3AW on Saturday said that he spoke to Alan Didak directly in the rooms after the match and looked at the shoulder himself, and although there was bruising, he quashed the rumours of anything more than that and that he will play this week. If that is not correct, then where is your information?

The club has not come out and say he'll definitely play next week, so I think it's safe to assume that he may miss this weeks game also.

Oh my goodness. How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Of course it's not "safe to assume" any such thing. He was listed as being tested last week, so therefore, it's much "safer to assume" that he was close to selection, so therefore he should be even closer to selection next week.

The same can be said for both Presti & Johnno that they may miss this week as they haven't proven themselves to be fit yet.

No, Presti and BJ are more likely to play this week because the club hasn't said they won't. That can work both ways, but you're only looking at it one-dimensionally, and then jumping to an unfounded conclusion.

 

[didaktic]

did anybody else see 'wellingham (ankle) in todays paper? it was in todays west australian under the review of yesterdays game...

 

[mattys123]

did anybody else see 'wellingham (ankle) in todays paper? it was in todays west australian under the review of yesterdays game...

He went straight down the tunnel half way through the last quarter, after rolling his ankle, but 5 minutes later he was back in the middle for a centre bounce.

I noticed someone criticised him this morning for not going to Ellis when he kicked it to Rioli for what was the winning goal, but I guess those "so called experts" didn't know that Sharrod was struggling at the time.

The fact he came back on means it's nothing serious, we would have left him off other wise.

 

[danielnajdek]

He went straight down the tunnel half way through the last quarter, after rolling his ankle, but 5 minutes later he was back in the middle for a centre bounce.

I noticed someone criticised him this morning for not going to Ellis when he kicked it to Rioli for what was the winning goal, but I guess those "so called experts" didn't know that Sharrod was struggling at the time.

The fact he came back on means it's nothing serious, we would have left him off other wise.

It was Nafan Brown

 

[Kirby]

Well, according to Geoff Walsh Didak will play this week. No ifs or buts or tests. He says he'll be playing.

The only one in any doubt is Presti. Walsh says he's on the bike so they seem pretty hopeful.

 

[Bay Pie]

Oh my goodness. How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Of course it's not "safe to assume" any such thing. He was listed as being tested last week, so therefore, it's much "safer to assume" that he was close to selection, so therefore he should be even closer to selection next week.No, Presti and BJ are more likely to play this week because the club hasn't said they won't. That can work both ways, but you're only looking at it one-dimensionally, and then jumping to an unfounded conclusion.

KS, FFS are you just trying to start arguments on here.

Geoff Walsh as now come out and said Didak & Johnno are definite ins and they are hoping Presti will be OK.

You obviously look our injury list when it get's published each week. Brad Dick was listed as 'test' for about 3/4 weeks after the Sydney game. He was then announced season and had a shoulder reco. 'Test' means 'we choose not to disclose'. Rusling had also been listed as test and missed 4 weeks earlier in the year and then again late in the year. I disagree that listing a player as 'test' indicates they are more likely to play then not. It is just as likely as they 'may' not play.

What conclusion am I jumping too? That these guys 'may' not play? At no point have I said they 'won't' play. Until they run out on Saturday, that is still the case. If you choose to say 'likely to play' rather then 'may not play' good for you but is it really worth arguing over.

One person says that they 'may' not play and you say they are wrong but then say they are 'likely' to play. Splitting hairs.

 

[Swooop]

Well i am guilty of postulating, but I thought I probably made that reasonably clear in my comments, that that's what I was doing
If i didn't then apologies.
Given a) we're unlikely to be given the MRI report to peruse, and
b) the club may have a vested interest in keeping the exact nature of the injury quiet and
c) we supporters are all pretty interested to get an idea of the injury
I was merely trying as best i could, to put the pieces together.

I mistakenly thought having worked in the industry for 30 yrs, that I may have some vague idea of the possible causes

However, it would indeed be as fair comment to say keep quiet if you don't have all the facts, but then it would be a pretty quiet forum I guess.

 

[FIGJAM]

No ifs or buts or tests.

Probably a jab though.

 

[Stripes B and W]

Re Matty's comment on Wellingham, did anyone else cringe when the incident occured? Have seen so many of those incidents resulting in a serious knee injury or ankle break if the foot is pinned...
Was so relieved when he came back on the ground a few minutes latter although he didnt quite look 100% favoured it slightly.
Should be no doubts about him playing though, and no real need to rush in or play anyone injured.

 

[Kirby]

Probably a jab though.

no doubt!