Injuries-the hidden factor

[Hartijon]

Playing with a painful injury takes a huge mental and physical toll from a player. The compensation needed by the rest of the body sometimes further compounds the problem.Then there is the psychological loss of confidence and the criticism from forums such as this when the injury is "carried" silently.
Watching the pain Tadgh was in last season was not just disturbing it was a case of blatant neglect of player welfare. He should have been getting the necessary surgery immediately.What was gained by him playing the season out? His form was well below his best and does anyone think his inclusion was responsible for us winning one final and if so..so what? If he was a dog or horse the club would have been fined for cruelty! Sure ,he agreed to play but the last person to ask is the player themselves.Of course they will play! They are anxious about their place in the team and young enough not to care about the long term damage they are doing to their bodies.

Did playing Jolly injured in the 2006 GF help us or him? Watching Goodsey getting beaten when injured by opponents of far less talent made me feel sorry for him. I know there are counter claims and maybe for a GF,I would make an exception (Luke Hodges ribs) but during the season an injured player should NOT play until their injury is fixed up and they can play to the level of their talent. This policy would have lost us the services of some of our key players for extended periods but would also have played handsome long term dividends by having a powerful experienced group of reserve players and players with an extra season in them.Maybe even another year out of Tadgh?

[Chilcott]

I agree 100%.

Have raised this topic in the past as it occurred numerous times in 2008.

[bedford]

Every club plays players with injuries right throughout the season, if every club followed your lead there would be no players left.
Do you think Kirk is not injured every week, okay we will leave him out. Imagine telling Kelly or Plugger they wernt playing.
IT IS FOOTY

[Nico]

I can't get this thing about TK playing poorly. His second half of the season was pretty good I thought. He was well ahead of Richards that's for sure not to mention LRT and Malceski. His average stats were pretty good and people seem to base their assessment around the Leo Barry incident and because he couldn't hold onto a tackle. Strewth he's not the best tackler at the best of time.

Craig Bolton was injured and Malceski wasn't fit and was probably carrying the knee, and Leo Barry still had no idea where he was going when he got the pill. Kennelly was the only one who gave us genuine run out of the backline and we got to the semis. Goodes had a a groin for the second half of the season so he was next to useless for backline run.

And another thing; Jolly wasn't injured he was bloody tired because his wife insisted he be at the birth of their child.

[Nico]

Footballers lie to their clubs about injuries and fitness all the time and clubs turn a blind eye to it at times also.

Jude Bolton came out pre season last year and declared that he didn't prepare himself anywhere near good enough in 2007. Is there a rough outside chance that he told a few porkies to the club in 2007? Probably. Did the club question him about his fitness? Perhaps not because maybe he didn't have obvious injuries, maybe they did. Who knows but he kept getting a game.

The whole argument about players carrying injuries is rather nebulous because we will never know as clubs say nothing. A mate of mine is a Hawthorn supporter and he says most Hawthorn supporters say Franklin had more than a thumb injury in the GF. But they put it out that it was a thumb injury.

[reigning premier]

Oh Oh Oh.....

Goody......



Another thread on "duty of care"

Can't wait for this to play out.......

[ROK Lobster]

Oh Oh Oh.....

Goody......



Another thread on "duty of care"

Can't wait for this to play out.......

All I'll say is that I am pretty sure the club would be all over it like a rash. It will happen though when an injured player completely @@@@s themselves because they were "allowed" to play injured.

[SimonH]

Obviously it's a continuum and not a black and white issue.

Exhibit A: Leo Barry, 2005 grand final.

No club in the AFL era ever has, or ever will, have a policy of 'the slightest niggle and you don't play' (with the possible exception of teams down the bottom of the ladder tanking-- sorry, 'developing youth'-- towards the tail end of a season, for whom a cut fingernail is enough reason to rest their stars).

We can (and do) yap as much as we want. But only the medicals, the player and the coaching staff have an opinion (hopefully) informed by all the facts, as to which side of the narrow line a player lies on. We mostly are wise after the event, where they've got it wrong.

[Hartijon]

Drawing the line

I said "they can play to the level of their talent." In other words by all means carry niggles and sore areas.It is ,as Bedford says, "Footy" and by that I think he means it's a tough man's game not for whimps who can't stand a bit of pain.I once played the last 15 minutes of a game with a broken jaw so I think I am qualified to comment on pain and injuries.I still don't think it does anybody,the club,the individual ,the supporters..anybody !! any good when a star player cannot perform at their level.If they cannot perform because of an injury give them time off to get it fixed,if they are not performing for other reasons ,drop them to the B's to have a think about their form. That's all I am saying.

[pjcswan]

I agree with the OP and response from Hartijon on this issue.

A prime example of playing well beyond due fitness was Jared Crouch in 2006. He was playing for a games record. When he finally admitted he could not play we lost him for a long time AND he has not been the same player since.

[dread and might]

F

The whole argument about players carrying injuries is rather nebulous because we will never know as clubs say nothing.

Agreed. I watch a lot of ice hockey and because of the rigorous/ ridiculous regular season schedule, players play with injuries all the time, and, so as not to allow opposition players to target an injury, they release these great statements like:

"Lidstrom probably has a lower body injury"

[Nico]

I agree with the OP and response from Hartijon on this issue.

A prime example of playing well beyond due fitness was Jared Crouch in 2006. He was playing for a games record. When he finally admitted he could not play we lost him for a long time AND he has not been the same player since.

And I do believe his injury was a lot worse for some time, than he was letting on.

[Justice]

Obviously it's a continuum and not a black and white issue.

Exhibit A: Leo Barry, 2005 grand final.

I totally agree. Barry played the whole of the 2005 final series with three fractures in his cheekbone. Jude Bolton played with a dislocated AC joint. They played, were effective and did their job for the team. Both injuries, and I have no doubt there were others, were hidden.

It is when an injured player is not effective and likely not to perform during a matched because of exisiting injury (eg Kennelly - dislocated knee 2007) that the club needs to rule the player out of selection possibility.

Feel like I am stating the obvious.

Cheers

Justice

[connolly]

All I'll say is that I am pretty sure the club would be all over it like a rash. It will happen though when an injured player completely @@@@s themselves because they were "allowed" to play injured.

I remember that Don Scott sued Hawthorn for forcing him to play with injuries. Not sure what the result was. Does anyone recall?

[Dalai Lama]

Does the Rhesus Monkey with the rotor virus get classified as an injury?