Roast Shame on some people

[grizzlym]

TAITA you do not count because you are a brother and on top of that you defend players (which I agree with).

This is more the flack I have copped for questioning the club over Buddy, which let's face it was moronic. I am actually glad Buddy is getting a rest, but this does not change the fact that it was an incredibly stupid thing to do.

On top of that I am deeply disturbed at the Hodge situation and at this stage am concerned in how he has been managed.

H2F, I have a differing opinion to you over the Buddy incident. I don't question your right to pose that opinion, nor do I oppose anyone tackling that opinion (or the flipside for that matter), I do take exception when posters personally attack other posters. TAITA is right: we are all Hawthorn, we all bleed for the club, and we're all big enough to discuss the issues without resorting to the personal or questioning other's loyalties.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

H2F, I have a differing opinion to you over the Buddy incident. I don't question your right to pose that opinion, nor do I oppose anyone tackling that opinion (or the flipside for that matter), I do take exception when posters personally attack other posters. TAITA is right: we are all Hawthorn, we all bleed for the club, and we're all big enough to discuss the issues without resorting to the personal or questioning other's loyalties.

I agree Grizz. Well said.

Having said that, I do enjoy the passion. H2F wears his heart on his sleeve as do a few others and you have to admire that. Funny thing is, everyone who has posted in this thread has Hawthorn's best interest at heart. Everyone just expresses it differently.

 

[H2F]

H2F, I have a differing opinion to you over the Buddy incident. I don't question your right to pose that opinion, nor do I oppose anyone tackling that opinion (or the flipside for that matter), I do take exception when posters personally attack other posters. TAITA is right: we are all Hawthorn, we all bleed for the club, and we're all big enough to discuss the issues without resorting to the personal or questioning other's loyalties.

I agree Grizz. Well said.

Having said that, I do enjoy the passion. H2F wears his heart on his sleeve as do a few others and you have to admire that. Funny thing is, everyone who has posted in this thread has Hawthorn's best interest at heart. Everyone just expresses it differently.

I love you both and I know you love me.

I am just grumpy and tired tonight.

 

[TAITA]

TAITA you do not count because you are a brother and on top of that you defend players (which I agree with).

This is more the flack I have copped for questioning the club over Buddy, which let's face it was moronic. I am actually glad Buddy is getting a rest, but this does not change the fact that it was an incredibly stupid thing to do.

On top of that I am deeply disturbed at the Hodge situation and at this stage am concerned in how he has been managed.

I've steered clear of it all in that, for me mate in my ignorant mind, I would not have let him play - simple as that.

For all the window dressing about crowd figures and other bullshit - it came down to Buddy wanted to play and the club let him.

If it was Cyril, who has a long history of hamstring problems I would be swinging from the chandeliars.

However I also understand that hammys aren't necessarily all the same - one of my best mates who played over 450 games of senior footy in the Bendigo League (midfielder btw) had a hammy 'pop' when he had half a season at Balranald early in his career - he missed the rest of that game only, and it was the only time he ever had a hamstring concern in his entire career (because as he constantly pointed out, even his hamstrings where genetically superior to most/all). Given that both he and Buddy have a similar kick on them, I would expect Buddy to have extremely well constructed hamstrings and certainly it all could have amounted to nothing/or maybe a masterstroke if he had got through (in that sitting on your arse is not considered recovery these days).

Probably better to focus on the recovery moreso than the opponent - the 'total waste' is the feeling of angst that I am getting from brothers in that if he had of done it against Collingwood it would have been justified but GWS was not - dunno - he could have done it at training for what it's worth.

We move on.

Re: Hodge - there is still much time but he will be the cream, not the sausage and two veg we have become accustomed too. I'd like to see him pull the pin on the media stuff and just concentrate on footy for the duration - and I know that is an opinion based totally on ignorance and angst, but I'd prefer to see him doing everything possible to make a return to this football side than being reminded of his absence everytime I have the misfortune to tune into C7.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I take it no one saw Piggy on 'the insiders' tonight.

He said the club would do the same thing again, and that Franklins "tightness" was treated no differently than any number of players who report sore spots each week. That being, if a player ticks all the boxes over the week and during recovery, proves their fitness at training(sprints, drills etc), gets the ok from the docs(scans), and reports no ill felling they will be named to play.
Dunstall was also very keen to mention that Franklin wasn't 99% fit, he was without doubt 100% fit.

People seem to forget that Franklin didn't do this injury in the first 5 minutes. He kicked 4, then went off.

 

[H2F]

I've steered clear of it all in that, for me mate in my ignorant mind, I would not have let him play - simple as that.

For all the window dressing about crowd figures and other bullshit - it came down to Buddy wanted to play and the club let him.

If it was Cyril, who has a long history of hamstring problems I would be swinging from the chandeliars.

However I also understand that hammys aren't necessarily all the same - one of my best mates who played over 450 games of senior footy in the Bendigo League (midfielder btw) had a hammy 'pop' when he had half a season at Balranald early in his career - he missed the rest of that game only, and it was the only time he ever had a hamstring concern in his entire career (because as he constantly pointed out, even his hamstrings where genetically superior to most/all). Given that both he and Buddy have a similar kick on them, I would expect Buddy to have extremely well constructed hamstrings and certainly it all could have amounted to nothing/or maybe a masterstroke if he had got through (in that sitting on your arse is not considered recovery these days).

Probably better to focus on the recovery moreso than the opponent - the 'total waste' is the feeling of angst that I am getting from brothers in that if he had of done it against Collingwood it would have been justified but GWS was not - dunno - he could have done it at training for what it's worth.

We move on.

Re: Hodge - there is still much time but he will be the cream, not the sausage and two veg we have become accustomed too. I'd like to see him pull the pin on the media stuff and just concentrate on footy for the duration - and I know that is an opinion based totally on ignorance and angst, but I'd prefer to see him doing everything possible to make a return to this football side than being reminded of his absence everytime I have the misfortune to tune into C7.

TAITA, thank you. I am too tired to post but the above was awesome and I feel better (and agree with everything you said).

Love H2F

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Dunstall's comments do nothing to clear up the situation as they're clearly capable of being interpreted as trying to cover the club's collective backside.

This is where the club's history of opaqueness with injuries suffered by players in the past few years counts against a club's representative like JD because very few supporters will actually believe anything the club says about injuries.

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

I take it no one saw Piggy on 'the insiders' tonight.

He said the club would do the same thing again, and that Franklins "tightness" was treated no differently than any number of players who report sore spots each week. That being, if a player ticks all the boxes over the week and during recovery, proves their fitness at training(sprints, drills etc), gets the ok from the docs(scans), and reports no ill felling they will be named to play.
Dunstall was also very keen to mention that Franklin wasn't 99% fit, he was without doubt 100% fit.

People seem to forget that Franklin didn't do this injury in the first 5 minutes. He kicked 4, then went off.

Good on JD for protecting the club.

 

[TheFourPillars]

So Guys whats been happening why is buddy out?

 

[Maybloomer]

I have absolutely no doubt we can beat Essendon and the Pies without Buddy and when we do, it'll give us a massive amount of confidence coming into September, It'll force us to use other avenues into goal - and we have plenty. That's the beauty of Hawthorn circa 2012 - variety and depth. One soldier goes down, another steps up. 2 or 3 years ago, that soldier was Forrest Gump and he was replaced by Lieutenant Dan. This year we have real quality.

Buddy missing means we have to find an average 4 goals from somewhere. No big deal. That same midfield that kicked it to Buddy will now kick it to someone else - someone who probably isn't double teamed. As H2F said, Buddy gets a nice rest and the likes of Jack, Punky, Hale, Roughy, Poppy etc etc etc get an opportunity to kick goals they might not have got if the big fella was playing.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Dunstall's comments do nothing to clear up the situation as they're clearly capable of being interpreted as trying to cover the club's collective backside.

This is where the club's history of opaqueness with injuries suffered by players in the past few years counts against a club's representative like JD because very few supporters will actually believe anything the club says about injuries.

Ok, I'll ask this question then, DF.

Does anyone here truly think that the club didn't put Franklin through a fitness test? Didn't get scans done?
And that Franklin wasn't proven "fit" for selection?

Because, IMO, if people genuinely believe that he was always carrying something, and that the club just named him regardless or any risk or issue, they have gone passed the point of no-return in regards to faith and trust in the club.

 

[macdaddio]

People do seem to forget that we had our biggest and most embarrassing loss of the year againts the Tigers and that was with Buddy playing..
Him playing or not is not the be all and end all, but it does make it that little bit harder to beat the Scums and Pies and even the Cats if he is still missing.
My only beef with the whole situation is that last season they found it ok to rest Buddy on more than one occassion with his ankle becasue of the traveling involved and that was agiants alot stiffer competion than the easy beats in GWS.
Why did they want to play him at all regardless if he pull up ok or not.
Anyway he is gone for 3 weeks now so time to move and look at winning our next 3 games with out him...

 

[J0NNY B]

Ok, I'll ask this question then, DF.

Does anyone here truly think that the club didn't put Franklin through a fitness test? Didn't get scans done?
And that Franklin wasn't proven "fit" for selection?

Because, IMO, if people genuinely believe that he was always carrying something, and that the club just named him regardless or any risk or issue, they have gone passed the point of no-return in regards to faith and trust in the club.

In regard to every player on our list, would you select any player that needs to endure a fitness test to lineup against GWS? Sometimes the club does not have the luxury to rest players that have 'slight' soft tissue strains but against GWS....with inexperienced players on our list that could be required in September (Wanganeen, Schneider)....

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Ok, I'll ask this question then, DF.

Does anyone here truly think that the club didn't put Franklin through a fitness test? Didn't get scans done?
And that Franklin wasn't proven "fit" for selection?

Because, IMO, if people genuinely believe that he was always carrying something, and that the club just named him regardless or any risk or issue, they have gone passed the point of no-return in regards to faith and trust in the club.

The club doesn't help itself when, for whatever reason, it chooses to be less than transparent about injuries players suffer.

The club's past history of treating supporters like mushrooms means that it's inevitable supporters will question the club's management of a key player when that player apparently suffers hamstring tightness the previous week then suffers a hamstring injury nine days later.

I happily accept that the club put Franklin through all the medical tests deemed necessary to clear him to play, and I'll accept that if a player passes those tests then he is available to play. But given the nature of the opposition Hawthorn played on Sunday, there's prudent player management considerations.

 

[Pessimistic]

If you guys are so adamant the club speaks crap on injuries, why are you so fixated on the three weeks off ?

Surely that's 'crap' too ?

 

[MinerBoy]

Ok, I'll ask this question then, DF.

Does anyone here truly think that the club didn't put Franklin through a fitness test? Didn't get scans done?
And that Franklin wasn't proven "fit" for selection?

Because, IMO, if people genuinely believe that he was always carrying something, and that the club just named him regardless or any risk or issue, they have gone passed the point of no-return in regards to faith and trust in the club.

This sums it up for me.

 

[Henry Jr]

Ok, I'll ask this question then, DF.

Does anyone here truly think that the club didn't put Franklin through a fitness test? Didn't get scans done?
And that Franklin wasn't proven "fit" for selection?

Because, IMO, if people genuinely believe that he was always carrying something, and that the club just named him regardless or any risk or issue, they have gone passed the point of no-return in regards to faith and trust in the club.

You got two out of three right.

Its hard to believe anything that they say anymore with regards to injuries. Its not just this year either mate, they have a track record with regards to this.

 

[go hawks!!!]

You got two out of three right.

Its hard to believe anything that they say anymore with regards to injuries. Its not just this year either mate, they have a track record with regards to this.

Are we the only club who lies about injuries? i'd say no

 

[grizzlym]

You got two out of three right.

Its hard to believe anything that they say anymore with regards to injuries. Its not just this year either mate, they have a track record with regards to this.

I just want to be completely straight where you're coming from. Are you contending that:

A. The club didn't conduct the necessary scans and/or tests
B. They conducted the tests and played him when they knew he wasn't fit
C. They conducted the necessary tests, but should have been more prudent re selecting him

 

[Dinner Plate]

I happily accept that the club put Franklin through all the medical tests deemed necessary to clear him to play, and I'll accept that if a player passes those tests then he is available to play. But given the nature of the opposition Hawthorn played on Sunday, there's prudent player management considerations.

I'm in complete agreement with DF. The Hodge injury leaves doubt in Hawthorn fans' minds about how injuries are being reported and handled, rightly or wrongly. This is exacerbated by the apparent risk taken by playing Buddy against weak opposition.

If there was no risk assessed in playing him, and he was 100% fit, why didn't he train? It raises legitimate questions about Hawthorn's player injury assessments.

If there was a risk as calculated by the club, why was he played? What was the possible upside? No valid upside in my opinion, given the now-realised consequences.

Because, IMO, if people genuinely believe that he was always carrying something, and that the club just named him regardless or any risk or issue, they have gone passed the point of no-return in regards to faith and trust in the club.

Again, questioning other fans' commitment to the Hawks is below the belt. This whole thread, and the ad hominem attacks on other posters are unnecessary and undermine the arguments of those with differing views.

"Past" the point of no return? Please.

 

[Pessimistic]

Just wanted to point out that I aimed this thread at those who vented early before knowing much detail.

But it does seem that when more detail surfaces - eg Dunstalls comments, that these are dismissed by many as a cover up any way.

I know which person I'd rather believe, but that's just my opinion

 

[Gralin]

As an outsider to what goes on at the club I think playing Buddy against GWS was stupid, of course if he hadn't done a Hammy I wouldn't have thought twice about it, and the only reason I think it was stupid is because he had tightness the week before.

The reality is that very few footballers at this part of the season would be niggle free, most are played if they are fit enough or if the injury is not one that can be made worse by playing/better by rest.

A lot of players have shoulder probs etc that are managed throughout the season in the hope that they can get through the year without surgery, ala Buddy in 2008.

I still have faith that the club are doing the best they can to make sure the players are there come September. Knee's are tricky and people make mistakes, hey we are all human. I don't think any club is super transparent on the whole injury thing, maybe we are worse than some, I don't know I only care about this clubs injuries.

Mark Evans has at least mentioned that he is embarrassed they keep saying Hodge is 2 weeks away, IMHO they should list him as TBA/TBC until he is ready, of course then people would complain their is no timetable on his return, I think its pretty much a lose/lose position for them on trying to predict recovery..

 

[macdaddio]

I just want to be completely straight where you're coming from. Are you contending that:

A. The club didn't conduct the necessary scans and/or tests
B. They conducted the tests and played him when they knew he wasn't fit
C. They conducted the necessary tests, but should have been more prudent re selecting him

I'm Picking C because it was a gimme game and he should not have played regardless if was cleared to be fit or not. And remember that we rest 9 payers last season to play GCS...
The Club can chose to rest players if they felt that there is no need to risk any player getting an injury in a game that had no significance to us winning because we would of won this game with BHH playing..

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

You got two out of three right.

I just want to be completely straight where you're coming from. Are you contending that:

A. The club didn't conduct the necessary scans and/or tests
B. They conducted the tests and played him when they knew he wasn't fit
C. They conducted the necessary tests, but should have been more prudent re selecting him

Let's have your answer then, HJ.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Again, questioning other fans' commitment to the Hawks is below the belt. This whole thread, and the ad hominem attacks on other posters are unnecessary and undermine the arguments of those with differing views.

"Past" the point of no return? Please.

I'm not questioning fans commitment, I'm simply stating that if you truly believe that the club would play Franklin regardless of if they thought he was fit or not, then your faith and trust in the club is completely and utterly shot.