Injury Rhys Stanley - news post-foot surgery

Remove this Banner Ad

Stanley took no further part in the Port win after going off late in the third term with a foot injury.

"The concern is he's suffered a significant ligament sprain in the mid-foot, which is commonly known as a LisFranc sprain and is notorious for its very slow recovery time," Larkins said.

"Daniel Wells, Mitch Clark and Trent Croad are players who have had this injury in the past, so Geelong will be very cautious with Rhys.

"But I expect he may miss a minimum of a month and perhaps longer depending on the results of scans. In some cases these type of injuries linger for up to three months.

"Hopefully there will be no surgery required."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-06-15/doc-larkins-injury-update-round-11
 

Log in to remove this ad.

s**t - minimum a month? These gambles we take in recruiting injury-prone players - we all saw the brilliance of an on-song Stanley against Port, but the downside can be catastrophic. Our list of fit players is shrinking by the week.

George is getting frustrated!
j8dn.jpg
 
He could well be right, and no offense to Larkins, but I'm baffled as to the amount of weight put in these diagnoses. He presumably hasn't examined Stanley so how good an idea would he really have?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He could well be right, and no offense to Larkins, but I'm baffled as to the amount of weight put in these diagnoses. He presumably hasn't examined Stanley so how good an idea would he really have?
My understanding is he is well connected with the medical staff at Geelong. I can only assume they have told him what he's now reporting.
 
My understanding is he is well connected with the medical staff at Geelong. I can only assume they have told him what he's now reporting.
Yeah, my understanding is he's a Geelong supporter. But as you said, he got Kersten wrong last week and his language here is a bit equivocal. And I guess my point was meant to be a bit broader. Surely unless the doctor in question has physically examined the patient it's speculation.
 
Yeah, my understanding is he's a Geelong supporter. But as you said, he got Kersten wrong last week and his language here is a bit equivocal. And I guess my point was meant to be a bit broader. Surely unless the doctor in question has physically examined the patient it's speculation.
He's definitely a supporter. I see him at games fairly regularly.

But yeah, it is probably speculation but not complete stab-in-the-dark speculation.
 
s**t - minimum a month? These gambles we take in recruiting injury-prone players - we all saw the brilliance of an on-song Stanley against Port, but the downside can be catastrophic. Our list of fit players is shrinking by the week.

Injury prone? The bloke has played 52 games in the previous 3 years before coming here. One year with a couple of hamstring strains and a single shoulder injury in 3 seasons isn't "injury prone".

Not to mention that Selwood came with an injury question mark over him and has barely missed a game through injury in his career. We picked up Lang last year with a broken leg and he played basically a full season last year and hasn't missed a game this year and Cockatoo has only had 1 short-term corkie since we picked him up with a poor injury history. In contrast I don't remember Vardy, Simpson, Cowan, Mitch Brown or Menzel having injury issues when we picked them up. At the moment it seems like you get injured when you come to geelong regardless of whether there's any history of it.
 
That would be a disaster, he was awesome in the first half and in patches he's shown so much as a player for us. The injuries these days seem so innocuous and then players miss so many games I really hope the afl look at expanding the playing lists.
Having an active and inactive list like in the nfl I think would work very well would mean you can continue to give players a chance to recover from injuries but still have enough players to choose from for games.
 
He could well be right, and no offense to Larkins, but I'm baffled as to the amount of weight put in these diagnoses. He presumably hasn't examined Stanley so how good an idea would he really have?
I don't mind reading his updates early in the week- presumably after he's spoken to someone at the club- but I just don't listen to what he says when he's down in the sidelines, diagnosing from 50m away. Yeah, he gets some right and some wrong but I'd prefer to wait for the X-rays and scans, thanks, for confirmation. Though even they're not infallible- Smedts' bruised bone springs to mind here.
 
I'll be pretty disappointed if Larkins has been given info from the club that they haven't released to us yet. It's fine for him to speculate and he may be on the money, but the club should be alerting people on the result of Rhys' scans before they give Larkins the info.

As others have said, he's been wrong before, only a week ago suggesting Kersten would miss 2-3 (he didn't miss any) and that Josh Kennedy, who is leading the Coleman, would be unlikely to play again in 2015.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top