News Time to replace Dr. Nick Riviera, M.D.

[Big Red is back]

Guys I have it on good advice the head of the carlton medical team Dr. Nick Riviera, will be replaced at seasons end.

The club always knew this day would come given he was hired when we didn't have two cents to scratch ourselves, the final nail in his coffin occurred on the weekend.

To set the scence:

- star young ruckman
- coming back from knee reco
- complians of no feeling in the foot pre game
- dead rubber
- Not only plays but is sent back out on the ground several times whilst been barely able to run.

If this was an isolated situation then maybe one could forgive, but when we consider our potential All Australian FB who was sent back out onto the ground whilst also being unable to walk has essentially also missed 8 weeks, one has to ask is it time for a change in the medical team?

Feel free to discuss any other amazing decisions by Dr Nick.

 

[KnobHead]

If he's made a few bad decisions in his time then best we don't renew the contract, if there's someone better to replace him

Don't think it's a necessary easy job, players play with injuries each week - some injuries you can clearly play with, some you clearly can't, it's the injuries in between that make it difficult

However, if his contract isn't renewed don't see why we should pay out on the guy. Bit like paying out on a player who gets delisted

 

[prenticem]

Why the hell would they play Kruezer?. I'm hearing he even had a pre-match injection. Insane.

 

[Poseidon]

Sending out Ed Curnow with his arm immobilised by 20kg of strapping in the first Saints game.

Forcing Jamison to hobble after Kennedy for most of a quarter against the Eagles.

 

[Silvagnis]

If he's made a few bad decisions in his time then best we don't renew the contract, if there's someone better to replace him

Don't think it's a necessary easy job, players play with injuries each week - some injuries you can clearly play with, some you clearly can't, it's the injuries in between that make it difficult

However, if his contract isn't renewed don't see why we should pay out on the guy. Bit like paying out on a player who gets delisted

It's BF.

I don't like that we've sent players back on, but no one holds a gun to their head. It's a bit hard to say that respected doctors were negligent. Whitehead lost his case after he broke down again after being sent back on the ground. Next you'll have someone suing because they were hit in the head by a footy on a worksite.

Thread is more of the usual OTT rants from BRIB.

 

[Big Red is back]

It's BF.[/b]

I don't like that we've sent players back on, but no one holds a gun to their head. It's a bit hard to say that respected doctors were negligent. Whitehead lost his case after he broke down again after being sent back on the ground. Next you'll have someone suing because they were hit in the head by a footy on a worksite.

Thread is more of the usual OTT rants from BRIB.

Ok so you think our management of these players has been good, fair call my feeling is it has been bad.

Having played lots of footy no chance my club would of sent Curnow or Jamo back on that is for sure, let alone Kruz in a dead rubber.

It defies belief we sent these guys back, i remember being at the WC game and everyone was saying WTF is Jamo doing on the ground.

 

[Bluebear]

I'm not going to trot out a half page response here. My comments on this matter are well voiced in other threads.........but I will say this.

The decision to put Curnow, Kreuzer, Jammo, Armifield back onto the field comes down to a few things:

1. Whether or not the player will cause greater injury by being out there.

If the answer is yes then the doctor says I don't think you should go back on.

The player and coach can then trump the doctor/physio and decide to give it a crack.

2. Whether the player needs to play on in some way to benefit the team.

Hands up who thinks being one tall down vs WCE cost us dearly?

The ins and outs of the sub rule come into play here, and not being in the coaches box, I'll play devils advocate rather than state facts......but:

Lets say Kreuzer gets subbed half way through Q1 when he first put his hand up that there was an issue. Now, lets say that someone else does an ankle, or a hammy.

We now go down to 2 rotations for the best part of the game. Players now spend more energy and potentially compromise their "loading" for this week going into next weeks final.

In most cases this year, it could be argued that they didn't want to pull the trigger to early on the sub in case we needed it later.

Case in point was Cameron Ling vs ?Pies earlier this year. I though when he ran off with his arm wrapped in his jumper that he had broken it. 5 mins later he emerges from the rooms and is right to go but has been subbed. Now they have one fit man who can't play.

Injuries can change very quickly.

(did I say half a page )

Kreuzer was reporting numbness by all accounts. If it was exquisite pain then no, he wouldn't have gone back on as they would have been suspecting a stress fracture. Numbness can be transient, for example if a muscle spasms and squeezes the nerve (e.g. piriformis in your butt giving you sciatica). Once they realised it wasn't going they subbed him.


Of course all these cases could be bad calls..........but to state that as fact when you know nothing about the details of each one is stupid at best, and potentially defamatory depending on your choice in language.
For each case I have previously argued what the medico's could have been thinking, and again, in some cases they may well have been over ruled by players/coach.

There is an injury thread. There is and has been other threads discussing this issue.

Is there an award for creating so many "new" threads?

 

[Big Red is back]

Bluebear you might be a physio but with all due respect glad i don't come see you.

It is embarrassing to have players on the ground in a dead rubber who simply cannot run, not only is this a poor medical decision it is a poor coaching decsion.

This is not relevant to the injury thread as this is specifically discussing the key question - wtf is our medical team and / or coaching staff doing.

If do not like the thread do not read it; however a minority of people continue toi try and close down any thread which is anything other than positive.

Crying out loud all the commentators were questioning what are carlton doing so fair enough we do.

Life is about continual improvement, win lose or draw we only improve by reviewing past mistakes and improving... people need to stop being so defensive.

Now back to the issue, I simply cannot believe someone with no feeling in his foot was sent out to play in a dead rubber.

 

[Bluebear]

Bluebear you might be a physio but with all due respect glad i don't come see you.

It is embarrassing to have players on the ground in a dead rubber who simply cannot run, not only is this a poor medical decision it is a poor coaching decsion.

Couldn't run? At which point? I was watching closely while he ran, jumped, kicked a goal with the affected foot.

Please don't overstate the facts to make your "arguement" sound better.

This is not relevant to the injury thread as this is specifically discussing the key question - wtf is our medical team and / or coaching staff doing.

If do not like the thread do not read it; however a minority of people continue toi try and close down any thread which is anything other than positive.

Crying out loud all the commentators were questioning what are carlton doing so fair enough we do.

Oh well fair enough then.

If the commentators were questionning it then who are we to argue.

Life is about continual improvement, win lose or draw we only improve by reviewing past mistakes and improving... people need to stop being so defensive.

Now back to the issue, I simply cannot believe someone with no feeling in his foot was sent out to play in a dead rubber.

Did he have no feeling in all of his foot or just part of it? Were his reflexes in tact? Did he have muscle power? What were his pulses like? Was is loss of sensation to light touch or completely dead?

No I know you well enough to know you wouldn't express such a strong opinion based on speculation and heresay, or voices in your head, or through a desire to be noticed, but generally make well thought out, rational arguements based on solid facts and a background in the given field. I ask you to present the information about the case as outlined above so we all can know the facts that you do and make up our own minds. Fair?

Thanks.


......and with all due respect I'm glad you don't come to me as well.

 

[serenityNow]

i understand why the club do it, sometimes it is worth playing a player on, how many times do you see a player come off badly limping or hurt, only to return moments later fine?

The Curnow one was the one that pissed me off, could clearly see the discomfort the boy was in, he was offering us nothing and was pretty much playing one armed, should've been pulled out of the game sooner.


Couldn't see the Kreuzer one from my end, MMM were saying the medicos were trying to pin point exactly what it was before committing to a sub....which seemed fair enough, as it turns out it wasn't anything serious anyway.

 

[HARKER]

It's somewhat hard to discuss when we haven't all the facts, even though there has been some dubious player management decisions in recent times.

If he is replaced then let's get the best and not the best available.
It's a mantra I like.

 

[pansies]

To set the scence:

- star young ruckman
- coming back from knee reco
- complians of no feeling in the foot pre game
- dead rubber
- Not only plays but is sent back out on the ground several times whilst been barely able to run.

You do realise that his right knee is the one he had the reco and his numb foot on Sat night was the left.

Or maybe you are the infamous Dr. Nick who treated Mr. McGregor the man with a leg for an arm and an arm for a leg.

 

[Big Red is back]

You do realise that his right knee is the one he had the reco and his numb foot on Sat night was the left.

Or maybe you are the infamous Dr. Nick who treated Mr. McGregor the man with a leg for an arm and an arm for a leg.

I do realise that, I am making the point we need to be extra careful with him, the last thing you need is him placing extra strain on his reconstructed leg.

Good discussion gang; enjoying it.

 

[Squida25]

I'm not going to trot out a half page response

woops

if it makes anyone feel any better, it could be worse. Look at Essendon, Fremantle.

Maybe we should send our players of to Arizona mid-season

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Another negative thread started after having a thought, then slagging off at someone with medical knowledge, for offering some insight.

A cyst on an artery. Doctor's knew there was no structural issue with Kreuzer, there was no pain, and they weren't going to sub him off without giving it a chance to get some circulation going in his foot.

Reading like a witchhunt around here lately. Puzzling.

Anyway, problem found, Kreuzer was never in any danger. Doctor's made the right call all round, (almost) everybody happy.

In fact, the whole Nick Riviera jibe without having any evidence or knowledge of what transpired, is completely insulting to our medical staff. Not a whole lot constructive about that kind of criticism.

So, another thread gone, more complaints about freedom of speech being taken away. Such is life.