Injury Blue Healers Medical Room - 2023

[Sector 7G]

Think you have to look at the type of injury. A 6ft 6 17 year old forward struggling with stress fractures is not injury prone he's just growing and needs his muscle mass to catch up. A 5ft 11 midfielder who's had 4 hamstring strains in 3 seasons is something else...

SPS is a classic example. As a u17 he had enough zip to be a standout. Soft tissue injuries made him a slow plodder

 

[teddy-hopkins]

From my quick count there are currently 10 players out with calf injuries in the AFL and we've got 4 of them.

Statistically that is 40% of the instances of this injury from 5.5% of the players. On average our players are over 7 times more likely to be currently out with a calf injury.

Does anyone have a clue as to why we keep getting so many calf injuries? It's not like we have an ageing list - the 2 oldest lists in the comp (Rich/Geel) don't have a single calf injury between them.

Are our rehab processes extremely conservative? (Very rarely does a player miss 2 weeks - it's usually 4 or 6 weeks.)

Do we have an issue with how we're training in running techniques / landing / change of direction / etc.?

We also have 3 of 17 foot injuries - meaning we're 3 times as likely to have a player out with a foot right now. We have 2 of 17 hamstrings also which is roughly double the average.

Could this be an overuse issue with a preseason where we over-exerted our playing list?

 

[CJMB]

DC and CM usually account for about 15% of all injuries, to every part of the body, across the league…

 

[F_therest]

Like most I think it's more a list management issue recruiting and retaining too many injury prone players moreso than Russell.

Cunners, Marchbank, Martin, Williams and Gov to start with...if they were never on our list our injury list would look a lot better.

Austin is responsible for 1 of those players, and it was a big contract so that's not looking like a great decision...especially since Williams had obvious history with injuries.

We've had Doc and Charlie come back and perform at their best after serious consecutive injuries that took they out for a few years. Big H has improved on the injury front. It's hard to tell from the outside but the fact Russell survived a few big internal reviews gives me confidence.

 

[Stamos]

DC and CM usually account for about 15% of all injuries, to every part of the body, across the league…

And Jack Martin would account for a significant proportion of all calf injuries in the AFL.

 

[Stamos]

Like most I think it's more a list management issue recruiting and retaining too many injury prone players moreso than Russell.

Cunners, Marchbank, Martin, Williams and Gov to start with...if they were never on our list our injury list would look a lot better.

Austin is responsible for 1 of those players, and it was a big contract so that's not looking like a great decision...especially since Williams had obvious history with injuries.

We've had Doc and Charlie come back and perform at their best after serious consecutive injuries that took they out for a few years. Big H has improved on the injury front. It's hard to tell from the outside but the fact Russell survived a few big internal reviews gives me confidence.

Although Williams had seemed to have gotten right, prior to the ACL.
He might not be in the same basket as the others.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Like most I think it's more a list management issue recruiting and retaining too many injury prone players moreso than Russell.

Cunners, Marchbank, Martin, Williams and Gov to start with...if they were never on our list our injury list would look a lot better.

Austin is responsible for 1 of those players, and it was a big contract so that's not looking like a great decision...especially since Williams had obvious history with injuries.

We've had Doc and Charlie come back and perform at their best after serious consecutive injuries that took they out for a few years. Big H has improved on the injury front. It's hard to tell from the outside but the fact Russell survived a few big internal reviews gives me confidence.

Would certainly be easier to manage the "often injured" absences of Gov and Martin if the "always injured" counterparts Marchbank and Cunners had been replaced with healthy players instead.

Really needs to be one or the other. Either get rid of the always-injured ones so that we can more easily cover the often-injured ones. Or get rid of the often-injured ones so we have the stability to try and get the always-injured ones back to playing condition. Carrying both is too much strain on a 40-man list.

 

[Stamos]

Would certainly be easier to manage the "often injured" absences of Gov and Martin if the "always injured" counterparts Marchbank and Cunners had been replaced with healthy players instead.

Really needs to be one or the other. Either get rid of the always-injured ones so that we can more easily cover the often-injured ones. Or get rid of the often-injured ones so we have the stability to try and get the always-injured ones back to playing condition. Carrying both is too much strain on a 40-man list.

It will happen.
None of them are likely to get new contracts if they don't get fit.

 

[Arr0w]

From my quick count there are currently 10 players out with calf injuries in the AFL and we've got 4 of them.

Statistically that is 40% of the instances of this injury from 5.5% of the players. On average our players are over 7 times more likely to be currently out with a calf injury.

Does anyone have a clue as to why we keep getting so many calf injuries? It's not like we have an ageing list - the 2 oldest lists in the comp (Rich/Geel) don't have a single calf injury between them.

Are our rehab processes extremely conservative? (Very rarely does a player miss 2 weeks - it's usually 4 or 6 weeks.)

Do we have an issue with how we're training in running techniques / landing / change of direction / etc.?

We also have 3 of 17 foot injuries - meaning we're 3 times as likely to have a player out with a foot right now. We have 2 of 17 hamstrings also which is roughly double the average.

Could this be an overuse issue with a preseason where we over-exerted our playing list?

This might be a better starting point

How many are named Gov, Martin, Marchbank, Williams, Philp, Cuners who have had injury concerns since juniors

How many calf/soft tissue complaints do we have after removing those names

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

Internally, they probably are. Externally, it doesn't really need much coverage because the reality is we don't know where the fault lies and as such just end up shouting at clouds.

As inconsistent as we've been over the last few years, the consistent factor has been the length of our injury list. There's a component of "well, we keep recruiting injury-prone players", which is fair - I don't know if there's a sports scientist on the planet who could get Cunners and Marchy to play 20+ games in a season - but I do think that the "whole club" ethos that Cook and Sayers have been pushing would aim to have clear dialogue between Russell's team and Austin's team around who should and should not be persisted with.

I'd hope that the following are "on notice":

- Russell - too many injuries, but it seems to be the same names cropping up all the time. He should be instructed to put together a comprehensive review (by, I dunno, July-ish?) of the list from a fitness perspective - who can be relied on, who is worth persisting with, who should be let go, with all the sports science data to back his views up. If he has genuine and somewhat proven S&C plans that can get guys like Gov and Martin consistently fit then that's fine, but if it's trial and error based on hopes and dreams then he should say so.

- Austin - too many injury prone players on the list, full stop. Not entirely his fault, a lot of them are inherited. In conjuction with Russell detailing the fitness prospects of everyone on the list, Austin should be tasked with putting together his own comprehensive review of how we can move on the dead wood ASAP, replacing them with useful or development-worthy players, and how we can transition away from the "worth persisting with" types inside 12-18 months if necessary.

- Voss - gonna chuck him in here, because ultimately he needs to be across all the above to an extent. I'd also suggest that there needs to be some hard conversations internally about how often we keep turning to oft-injured players when there are seemingly durable options in the reserves. Kemp and Dow played 18 games in the VFL last year, Carroll played a dozen (plus 5 in the seniors), Cincotta (only added to the list this year) played 22. Maybe we need to change our selection philosophy a bit, with a view to achieving maximum consistency in the starting 22, rather than selecting the "most talented" players who seem to miss 50-60% of every season.

TLDR:

- Russell: Clean up our S&C and rehab programs, get realistic about player prospects rather than optimistic.
- Austin: Clean out the injury prone players ASAP, ensure that players we recruit have a history of being durable.
- Voss: Review selection policy and start preferencing guys who can actually build continuity (for their own progression, and for team synergy).

We don't necessarily need to start sacking blokes like Russell or Austin over it, but we do need to make sure that our decision-making processes are robust and realistic, and give us the best chance of success. If individuals can't get on board with the changes, then that's the time to start moving people on.

Bang on

 

[Revenant1965]

Why I don't get stressed about the future of our medical/high performance department...

5 time premiership winning CEO, who wasn't afraid of making changes for improved performance off field and administratively for success, who has only been in the role at CFC for just under 17 months...

 

[Coops93]

From my quick count there are currently 10 players out with calf injuries in the AFL and we've got 4 of them.

Statistically that is 40% of the instances of this injury from 5.5% of the players. On average our players are over 7 times more likely to be currently out with a calf injury.

Does anyone have a clue as to why we keep getting so many calf injuries? It's not like we have an ageing list - the 2 oldest lists in the comp (Rich/Geel) don't have a single calf injury between them.

Are our rehab processes extremely conservative? (Very rarely does a player miss 2 weeks - it's usually 4 or 6 weeks.)

Do we have an issue with how we're training in running techniques / landing / change of direction / etc.?

We also have 3 of 17 foot injuries - meaning we're 3 times as likely to have a player out with a foot right now. We have 2 of 17 hamstrings also which is roughly double the average.

Could this be an overuse issue with a preseason where we over-exerted our playing list?

I think Cuners, Martin & McGov all have history of calves in fairness. It's not as though they're unusual injuries for them. Martin in particular has calves made of paper mache so he shouldn't even be counted as a stat and just taken as red.

 

[Beyond Blue]

We are currently tied with west coast for the most soft tissue injuries in the afl ours in particular to our players with speed.

Also the major foot injuries we’ve had compared to other teams over the last 2/3 years is a major concern.

That along with some strange management of back injuries over the last few years to Walsh Cripps McKay and Hewett who’s was issues were pre-existing it’s making vossys role extremely difficult.

I am curious if Russell has survived because he maybe under a long term contract which when he came over was reportedly on massive money and if we were to move him on our soft cap would take a massive hit.

Difference is with West Coast is that most of their players breaking down with injury are much older than most of our guys…

 

[HarryFlashman]

Any concern with the IKON Park surface? Would imagine it had to have been assessed and cleared as not being a contributory factor.

By all reports it arguably the best surface going around, if anything they should be watering it down & adding detergent to make it more slippery, so the players learn to keep there feet everywhere else

 

[Coops93]

Any concern with the IKON Park surface? Would imagine it had to have been assessed and cleared as not being a contributory factor.

Carlton reviewing medical department following disastrous injury season

Carlton president Luke Sayers said the club is not concerned about the playing surface at IKON Park, but is looking into the medical department.

“That's well and truly outside my (expertise). I'm sure the relevant people have looked at that. We are very blessed to have a great surface here, great facilities all around,” Sayers told the Carlton website.

“I'm led to believe there are a number of other things that've caused the injury challenges over the past 12 months, we've had a look at the high performance area, the medical area (and) we've made some changes in the off-season. None related to turf.

 

[Jimmyonesix]

injury List growing and growing.

at what point does Russell and his team come under scrutiny?

When his contract expires

 

[teddy-hopkins]

I've done it in the past but I don't think it's useful to make the discussion about Russell.

Maybe we've got a gap in our off-field staff around injury management? Are other clubs doing something we're not. Sending them to facilities for treatment that we're not? Are they building their muscle mass in certain areas we're not? Nursing them through preseason in a way we're not?

I don't buy the "we've got injury prone players" argument either. Joe Daniher couldn't get on the park for Essendon - goes to Brisbane and rarely misses a game. There are many other examples.

Saad, Durdin, Honey, Kennedy, Cerra, Boyd, etc. are not necessarily injury prone players - it's not confined to 3 or 4 players. Cotterell definitely not injury prone. I certainly don't think anyone can mount a case that we managed Walsh well this year - on top of the absolute disaster that was the Charlie experience and we lost doc for 2 years also.

Durdin's calf took 6+ weeks to come good. This seems to be the norm for us all of a sudden. Marchbank went down with a calf how many weeks ago now? 7 or 8? Who misses 8 weeks for a regulation calf?

There are ways to manage players with injury problems - and we just don't seem to have the skillset for it.

There is just too much evidence mounting up on both injury prevention and rehabilitation front that we're not getting it right.

 

[teddy-hopkins]

Carlton reviewing medical department following disastrous injury season

Carlton president Luke Sayers said the club is not concerned about the playing surface at IKON Park, but is looking into the medical department.

“That's well and truly outside my (expertise). I'm sure the relevant people have looked at that. We are very blessed to have a great surface here, great facilities all around,” Sayers told the Carlton website.

“I'm led to believe there are a number of other things that've caused the injury challenges over the past 12 months, we've had a look at the high performance area, the medical area (and) we've made some changes in the off-season. None related to turf.

Whatever changes we made to the high performance / medical areas it has made exactly zero difference. If anything it has gotten worse.

 

[Brackets]

From my quick count there are currently 10 players out with calf injuries in the AFL and we've got 4 of them.

Statistically that is 40% of the instances of this injury

In case anyone is doubting this, I double checked the calculation and came up with the same figure.

 

[BRADLESTICKS]

When his contract expires

Does anyone have any information on when his contract does expire ? I’ve had a bit of a look but couldn’t find anything the soft cap would be an issue if we paid him out early.

 

[CJMB]

Does anyone have any information on when his contract does expire ? I’ve had a bit of a look but couldn’t find anything the soft cap would be an issue if we paid him out early.

not that I'm advocating it, especially not mid-season, but soft cap doesn't mean much if you're happy to spend some money. It's only a soft cap; you can go over it, but you get taxed by the AFL for every dollar over the cap.

 

[Stamos]

not that I'm advocating it, especially not mid-season, but soft cap doesn't mean much if you're happy to spend some money. It's only a soft cap; you can go over it, but you get taxed by the AFL for every dollar over the cap.

We're flying financially.
I'd be very surprised if it Russell is kept due to his contract, rather than actually being good at this job.

 

[BRADLESTICKS]

not that I'm advocating it, especially not mid-season, but soft cap doesn't mean much if you're happy to spend some money. It's only a soft cap; you can go over it, but you get taxed by the AFL for every dollar over the cap.

I’m not advocating it either for mid Season we should wait until the end of the year to make a decision that important, but I’m just curious how long he is contracted for and if that’s played a part in him keeping his job, we are successful financially but clubs seem extremely reluctant to go over the soft cap,

 

[teddy-hopkins]

In case anyone is doubting this, I double checked the calculation and came up with the same figure.

Why did you cut off my sentence half way through?
"Statistically that is 40% of the instances of this injury from 5.5% of the players"

 

[Juddernaut08]

not that I'm advocating it, especially not mid-season, but soft cap doesn't mean much if you're happy to spend some money. It's only a soft cap; you can go over it, but you get taxed by the AFL for every dollar over the cap.

Unless we're poaching Brisbane's team, I think that'd be a waste.

I view Russell as one of the better operators in the AFL...not sure most other teams would be able to do any better with our fragile guys.

Brisbane seem to be best in the biz though, so it'd be worth a shot.