Injury 2014 general injury updates - for specific injuries, refer to specific injury thread

[catempire]

Not at all convinced the club will give up on him should he not make it onto the park this year.

That would be an amazing show of faith. I think the best he could hope for would be to be picked up as a rookie.

 

[AM]

That would be an amazing show of faith. I think the best he could hope for would be to be picked up as a rookie.

It would be showing quite some faith CE. That said, we have a record of doing just that. Very much depends on the longer term medical prognosis and how highly we rate him.

 

[catempire]

It would be showing quite some faith CE. That said, we have a record of doing just that. Very much depends on the longer term medical prognosis and how highly we rate him.

Yep. And that prognosis/risk compared with the draftee that could replace him or his teammate that he might be fighting with for a spot.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Yep. And that prognosis/risk compared with the draftee that could replace him or his teammate that he might be fighting with for a spot.

I'm sorry, I don't understand that bit, if he's fighting a teammate for a spot it surely must mean he's fit, and then it's the teammate's look out, isn't it?

 

[catempire]

I'm sorry, I don't understand that bit, if he's fighting a teammate for a spot it surely must mean he's fit, and then it's the teammate's look out, isn't it?

Not necessarily. At best there is likely to remain some risk as to the likelihood of Cowan's body holding up long term even if he is "fit". That risk will need to be weighed against a teammate whose question mark is more about ability than fitness. That might be a difficult call.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Not necessarily. At best there is likely to remain some risk as to the likelihood of Cowan's body holding up long term even if he is "fit". That risk will need to be weighed against a teammate whose question mark is more about ability than fitness. That might be a difficult call.

OK, understand that.

 

[AM]

In fairness to PO, he did start his statement with the word 'think'.......ie it's his opinion, not one expressed on behalf of the club.

Appreciate it was his opinion. No one I'm aware of here speaks for the club. However the opinion runs counter to what is coming from the club as I read it and I was interested in knowing what was the basis for him arriving at that viewpoint.

I guess I have an aversion to players being written off before those who know make that call.

 

[Partridge]

It would be showing quite some faith CE. That said, we have a record of doing just that. Very much depends on the longer term medical prognosis and how highly we rate him.

Presuming they're already going to offer Menzel a rookie spot, that's two rookie selections in the same year for two players that could easily never play another game for Geelong. Can you take that big of a risk?

 

[vinum coupe]

Presuming they're already going to offer Menzel a rookie spot, that's two rookie selections in the same year for two players that could easily never play another game for Geelong. Can you take that big of a risk?

I dont reckon they'll rookie Menzel. They'll keep him on the main list for another year.

 

[Partridge]

I dont reckon they'll rookie Menzel. They'll keep him on the main list for another year.

I could be wrong, but I think that means a new contract. Either way, it's a pretty big risk.

 

[vinum coupe]

I could be wrong, but I think that means a new contract. Either way, it's a pretty big risk.

It would have to be a new contract.
Obviously a lot lower than his current one !

 

[catempire]

I dont reckon they'll rookie Menzel. They'll keep him on the main list for another year.

Agree with this. One year contract extension if both parties agree there's good reason to try again in 2015.

 

[Seeds]

Presuming they're already going to offer Menzel a rookie spot, that's two rookie selections in the same year for two players that could easily never play another game for Geelong. Can you take that big of a risk?

as compared to having them on our main list?

 

[Partridge]

as compared to having them on our main list?

I don't disagree; I'm not arguing for keeping them. I think unfortunately they should cut their losses.

 

[Cataholic]

Appreciate it was his opinion. No one I'm aware of here speaks for the club. However the opinion runs counter to what is coming from the club as I read it and I was interested in knowing what was the basis for him arriving at that viewpoint.

I guess I have an aversion to players being written off before those who know make that call.

I would presume that his basis for forming that personal opinion has been his summation of Cowan's history at the club, his interpretation of the club's needs, list pressures etc.

It is only a personal opinion, but I think you'll find a lot of posters here will agree with his view.

 

[Partridge]

I would presume that his basis for forming that personal opinion has been his summation of Cowan's history at the club, his interpretation of the club's needs, list pressures etc.

It is only a personal opinion, but I think you'll find a lot of posters here will agree with his view.

More than anything else, it's just natural attrition. It isn't a case of someone playing well in the VFL and being ignored. He's been on the list for 5 years (including this one), has only played 3 senior games, with none at all for the last 2 seasons, and it looks pretty likely to become 3. More importantly, he can't even get out there for the reserves. Yet again he is ignored on any injury lists, almost as if they're hoping no one mentions him.

The club has to keep developing the list and must keep recruiting players. I don't see how someone who played as little as he has, and is as injury prone as he is can be retained. No matter how highly they rate him. It would be almost negligent of the club to do so. They've got a tight enough squeeze after this season.

 

[goyoucatters]

More than anything else, it's just natural attrition. It isn't a case of someone playing well in the VFL and being ignored. He's been on the list for 5 years (including this one), has only played 3 senior games, with none at all for the last 2 seasons, and it looks pretty likely to become 3. More importantly, he can't even get out there for the reserves. Yet again he is ignored on any injury lists, almost as if they're hoping no one mentions him.

The club has to keep developing the list and must keep recruiting players. I don't see how someone who played as little as he has, and is as injury prone as he is can be retained. No matter how highly they rate him. It would be almost negligent of the club to do so. They've got a tight enough squeeze after this season.

Can anyone point out any player at any AFL team who has racked up as few appearances (combining both seniors and reserves matches) over such a significant number of years and been retained?

I can't think of one.

Really hope Josh gets on the park and proves his worth/durability (even if it's only in the twos for the rest of 2014).

But even achieving that would leave him long odds to stay on the list in my view.

Nothing against him at all; you would seriously have to be just about an Ablett (of the Gary variety) to stay on a list for that long when playing so little.

And the push to keep Menz (which I'm entirely comfortable with) makes it even harder for him.

Love to see him still at the club next year; if he's not, I don't think he can suggest the club didn't give him every chance.

Would have been gone some time ago at several (probably even 'many') other AFL clubs.

Get back, Josh!

 

[AM]

Presuming they're already going to offer Menzel a rookie spot, that's two rookie selections in the same year for two players that could easily never play another game for Geelong. Can you take that big of a risk?

As has been suggested by others he won't be rookie listed in my view. He'll be re-contracted if he gets ticks from the medicos and list management group.

He wins his own footy, is a good size, is quick, runs hard and has the capability to impact a game. Flexible and with a bit of aggro too.

I know it's an 'if my aunt had........' comment but had he been blessed with a better run with injuries his name would have regularly come up at the selection table well ahead of a few who are rated here.

Thought the comment by CS in his presser today that he was more focussed on where Josh is in 10 weeks than where he presently is was instructive.

 

[Vdubs]

It would have to be a new contract.
Obviously a lot lower than his current one !

Why not rookie, then upgrade if amenable?
Makes much more sense.
Worried we'd lose him?
There has to be some sort of code of ethics, surely.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Where has the club stated that to definitively be the case PO? Let's not write the obituary before the patient is dead.

btw. Not at all convinced the club will give up on him should he not make it onto the park this year.

Of course the club hasn't stated anything, when would they ever talk about players to go during the middle of the season, it would be completely unprofessional. They will be thinking about the numbers though.

I have no inside info, I just think it is likely. The reality is they are likely to keep Menzel on the main list next year (nothing against Cowan who I actually rate but of the category of 'blokes who haven't played for 3 years' one is clearly more talented than the other) and keeping 2 blokes on the main list who haven't played in 3 years, when you have a limited main list size of 38-40 and you need draft turnover, isn't really feasible. It's just the numbers and mechanics of list management.

The best I can see him getting is a delist and re-rookie and even that would really require his body to stand up in the back half of the year.

Also, when forming opinions on such matters I wouldn't place much stock in what CS says at press conferences or club media pieces. You only need to look at how much he praises some young players in pressers vs how much they actually get selected, to realise a lot of it is just chatter that has very little bearing on what will actually happen.

 

[Teriyakicat]

I guess the club would be weighing up the 'letting Player X and Player Y go, to free up 2 places at #78 and #86 in the ND" vs the chance of "Player X and Player Y maybe getting a half dozen games at any level in the latter half of the year".

I don't know if this is how their thinking goes- it's just something random I thought of that might go into their calculations. Assuming, of course, that Players X and Y are of higher ability and/or younger age than Players A, B and C, who have been scratched from the list already through delisting or retirement.

 

[catswhiskers]

Why not rookie, then upgrade if amenable?
Makes much more sense.
Worried we'd lose him?
There has to be some sort of code of ethics, surely.

That's his best chance.
He would have to show a bit by season's end for another club to be interested in any way.
If he does get on the park and show a bit he will probably stay on main list.

Sounds like getting on the ground this year is unlikely though.

 

[Gysenn]

Just had a chat with Joshy Cowan... Probably to be expected but he said there's no timeframe on his return at all at this stage.

 

[JUBJUB]

Just had a chat with Joshy Cowan... Probably to be expected but he said there's no timeframe on his return at all at this stage.

In other words : Season over

 

[Partridge]

In other words : Season over

And at least at Geelong.......career.