How come?

[ScottH]

I said that weeks ago. He didn't take me up on my kind offer.
If he had, we wouldn't be having this discussion!!

Seems to have only happened since his enforced week off.
Might have something to do with the people he met at that game.

Was he trying to run away, with a certain person holding desperately to his leg??

[stellation]

Is there any clear evidence that Roos was aware of the extent of Goodes injury, or indeed that Goodes didn't make the injury worse in the first quarter? The physio ran out to Goodes in front of the race in the first quarter and Goodes was obviously gone from that point on.

Roos would have been advised pre-game by the medicos and Goodes himself. I know the OP, Hammo and others dislike Roos and want to stick it to him, but there is a real chance you are blaming the wrong guy.

I thought the main point of the initial post was on perspective rather than on selection.

[stellation]

He is clearly injured. The plan to play him forward was OK but he needed to have the pill put on his chest. The midfield was under so much pressure this didn't happen.

What a puzzling comment for you to make.

[AnnieH]

Seems to have only happened since his enforced week off.
Might have something to do with the people he met at that game.

Was he trying to run away, with a certain person holding desperately to his leg??

Sheesh.
Even HE can't run AND sign a pre-nup at the same time.

[ernie koala]

goodes should not have played, very poor coaching decision one injured star better than a fit rookie......obviously not! just plain dumb

I see the headline story today reads.."Roos admits playing Goodes last weekend was a mistake"......then he goes on to blame Goodes. He was clearly not right the week before and should of been tested thoroughly during the week, rather than taking his word. It's common knowledge that nearly all players underestimate their own injuries. I suspect Goodesy looked at the injury list last week, and with misguided team spirit, felt like he should play. It's time for Roosy to take responsibility for these types of sellection decisions.

[Mr Magoo]

Its very difficult to tell exactly how a player is really feeling. Goodes problem it seems first became apparent last week and so i imagine Roos would have trusted Goodes and the medical staff to judge as to whether he could play against Adelaide.

One bad game doesnt make a season and you have to put some trust in your key strike weapon if everyone advising is saying he will be okay or even 70%.

It is Goodes fault if he wasnt as good as he made out. Roos HAS acted by now standing him down. Its not as though this has gone on for six weeks.

As for the comparison to Davis. You may as well compare chalk and cheese. Davis never was and never will be in the same league as Goodes and thats why he is (and quite frankly IMO should be) treated differently.