Injury Blue Healers Medical Room - 2023

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomorrow we celebrate a special day, 100 days since our last full injury update. Not just a one or two player update we have had drip out a couple of times over summer.

Let’s hope we can get a full picture again this week, rather than everyone having to continue to guess what has happened and how long the timeline will be.

3F5C2D7B-12C2-4B66-8349-6F31E3AE5E67.png
 
How can you actually determine definite 22 players right now? Are you Michael Voss?

Conveniently ignoring the number of senior games those 4 played last year. What was their VFL/AFL %?

Not ignoring their value, but it is difficult to determine if they would have played if we had a full list to choose from, unless you are Michael Voss?

Some of the pessimism in this joint when things don't play out perfectly or to expectation is staggering.

I mean seriously, using the Tigers injury list of last year, prior to round 1 to strengthen your argument for round 1 this year is truly bizarre
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Maybe, but I prefer to deal with facts rather than hypotheticals.

Fact, we were in a position to make finals despite the injury list.

Fact, we should have made it anyway.

Fact, our players didn’t have the mental fortitude to get us there.

Fact, the injury list alone did not cost us a finals berth.
Cool.


And FACT: it was the biggest single factor. By far.

And FACT: there is no change in the trajectory of the single biggest factor that caused us to miss finals.

I was encouraged early this calendar year to see them modify a lot of guys training for the first time.

Then they decided to slaughter them. Williams did a knee in “the most intense session I’ve been in for years” - player.

Young players all doing soft tissue injuries. Repeatedly. In preseason! It’s incredible.

I’m not sure if I am more stunned at the trend continuing with no changes to personnel- or if I am more stunned at the number of defenders of the so called High Performance team. My question to the defenders is very very simply this (you won’t answer):

What would have to happen for you to believe we should make a chnage to the High Perfomance role? Or is the answer just “nothing, I will leave it to the experts?” And if it is “I’ll leave it to the experts”…..why come on the forum ever at all and express an opinion? Why pick and choose when you rely on the experts Vs express an opinion? Ie: why express an Opinion about selection? Why not say “I’ll leave it to the experts” every week? When a player performs badly wby not just say “coaches know more than me”? Why does anyone say anything in here other than “good job boys” or “bad luck boys” if we are to leave it to the experts?

And presuming those of you who can be bothered being intellectually independent enough to actually reflect on that agree…….that IF you accept this is an opinion forum and there’s no ‘expert’ area we shy away from…..then what on Gods earth do we see as a logical reason to NOT try someone other than Russell?
 
I’m sure both will be gone unless they can manage 16+ games. Philp will go too alongside Dow.

That’s fine but I could say the same about Gov and Martin (Williams I concede we are stuck with for good or bad because of his contract), and therein lies the problem…we have too many injury prone types. If you also include Philp (I could also include Fog, and Boyd but won’t) that’s almost 15% of our list who are barely available to play.

It puts a lot of pressure on the list hence we end up playing Plowman, Owies etc or make decisions like swinging Kemp to the backline after he trained as a forward last year, not to mention reduced competition for spots to keep the the incumbents on their toes. It’s hard to build premiership type cohesion when you have such instability.

Cunners and Marchy were out of contract last year so we could have offloaded them to balance the list. Because we didn’t at the end of this season we now have to consider turning over 8-10 players which is a lot who are either injury prone and/or fringe out of contract players like Gov, Philp, Plowman, Fogarty, Ed Curnow, Dow, Akeui and Honey etc.
 
Not ignoring their value, but it is difficult to determine if they would have played if we had a full list to choose from, unless you are Michael Voss?

Some of the pessimism in this joint when things don't play out perfectly or to expectation is staggering.

I mean seriously, using the Tigers injury list of last year, prior to round 1 to strengthen your argument for round 1 this year is truly bizarre
Okay, compare us to every club over the past 8 years, pre and post Russell. And tell us how we rank overall, annually with players missing games. Bet you we are bottom quartile every years. Thats why everyone is pissed off about this mess.

Last question, if Russell leaves in the next 12 months either by club decision or due to wanting to go study or something. Would you then come around to, he wasn’t great at his job? Or do you standby , we are just really unlucky injury wise
 
And FACT: it was the biggest single factor. By far.
Not a fact.

Our attitude in the Adelaide game, and brain fades in the final two games, we’re far more costly.

And FACT: there is no change in the trajectory of the single biggest factor that caused us to miss finals.
Also not a fact.

We are clearly healthier than last year. It’s also March.
 
Okay, compare us to every club over the past 8 years, pre and post Russell. And tell us how we rank overall, annually with players missing games. Bet you we are bottom quartile every years. Thats why everyone is pissed off about this mess.

Last question, if Russell leaves in the next 12 months either by club decision or due to wanting to go study or something. Would you then come around to, he wasn’t great at his job? Or do you standby , we are just really unlucky injury wise

Past 8 years, while wanting to discuss Russell?

But let's entertain it, if our injuries have been poor for 8 years, would that be Russell or the type of players we have acquired. As we can certainly name a number of players we drafted and or acquired that had prior injury issues

Unless there is new evidence that suggested Russell was poor at his role, I would have no reason to change my view, like any other aspect
 
Not a fact.

Our attitude in the Adelaide game, and brain fades in the final two games, we’re far more costly.


Also not a fact.

We are clearly healthier than last year. It’s also March.
Last point how can you know that? There is no update for 3 months and a lot of players did not play practice games, you are having a guess. And from information available, doesn’t appear that way
 
Past 8 years, while wanting to discuss Russell?

But let's entertain it, if our injuries have been poor for 8 years, would that be Russell or the type of players we have acquired. As we can certainly name a number of players we drafted and or acquired that had prior injury issues

Unless there is new evidence that suggested Russell was poor at his role, I would have no reason to change my view, like any other aspect
Analytically not comparing a large sample of data pre and post a key person change is not a good idea???

It would either determine, things have remained about the same, improved or gone backwards. That’s why you compare before and after.

FYI, I work in finance with a commerce degree, I studied stats and econometrics while at uni. Reason I disclosed that; you need to look into trends, you can’t just say ‘club X is always just unlucky’. You think when super funds decide on portfolio managers they don’t consider their past performance relative to their benchmark? That’s is what needs to be done here
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Two things you can count on.
Carlton with an annual injury list that severely handicaps their chances of improvement.

Which actually didn't handicap us, evident by winning 50% more games
And …
The usual crew of unconditional club defenders here who religiously arrive armed to the teeth with excuses and cop outs for all and sundry involved at the club.

Or the conditional club pessimist who religiously arrives when their unrealistic expectation isn't fulfilled
Accountability, it seems, is unfashionable these days but history tends to show, if nothing changes … nothing changes !!

Happy to back Sayers and Cook, unless they too are part of the unholy alliance too?

Rank and file supporters aren’t privy to the inner workings so don’t have the answers, just the frustration.
Let’s hope someone in a position of influence does …

Now we are talking
 
Analytically not comparing a large sample of data pre and post a key person change is not a good idea???

It would either determine, things have remained about the same, improved or gone backwards. That’s why you compare before and after.

FYI, I work in finance with a commerce degree, I studied stats and econometrics while at uni. Reason I disclosed that; you need to look into trends, you can’t just say ‘club X is always just unlucky’. You think when super funds decide on portfolio managers they don’t consider their past performance relative to their benchmark? That’s is what needs to be done here

So you work in finance not fitness / injury management in a team contact sport
 
Not a fact.

Our attitude in the Adelaide game, and brain fades in the final two games, we’re far more costly.


Also not a fact.

We are clearly healthier than last year. It’s also March.
Our brain Fades happened cause we had duds in place of the good players who weren’t there that’s a fact


I would say our injuries are as bad as last year to start the season
 
It’s frustrating af.

Seeing Cook also sees our injury list as a concern, the coaches, fitness/performance, medical staff have got to come together to identify if our club stats on player injuries is an outlier and if so they need to work out how to reduce injuries. Whether that is through a more thorough medical assessment of players coming into the club or through better management of fitness.
 
Something has to change, we have no issue sacking coach after coach to change things up or continuously turning over the list.

Why not the phys edders?

Last rebuild we took wayyyy too long to move on the recruiters and it completely ****ed us, are we really going to go down this path again?




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
If say 6 of the 8 you mentioned are best 22.

That’s 27% of the ‘best team’ on paper missing, seems pretty bad to me.

Percentage is pretty similar of the entire list, and has been that way for a few years. Someone wrote look at Richmond, last year they were missing 2 players going into round 1.

The club has a serious problem in this area, and it’s not just recruiting injury prone players
Is it players getting injured? Is that it? You may be onto something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top