Traded #13: Orazio Fantasia - Off to Carlton as a delisted free agent, scored a 2 year deal?

Would you take Razzle Dazzle back at the Hangar?


  • Total voters
    86
This really sucks badly. It will be made worse if they replace him with Baguley instead of Begley/Laverde/etc...
I doubt Laverde would play. Hopefully Begley does, he's just about there I reckon.
 
Jul 15, 2008
10,248
17,186
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Celtics, Colts, Renegades
I doubt Laverde would play. Hopefully Begley does, he's just about there I reckon.
I don’t even care if it’s Mossie/Houlahan/Gown/Langford/Long or McNeice replacing Fanta, let’s just stop doing the same s**t expecting a different result. Same goes for Myers and Zaharakis.
 
Oct 12, 2012
3,154
5,704
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Celtics

giphy.gif
 
This is why they were so careful bringing him back from illness. You are much more prone to injury and this guy has a horrendous run with them.
Still didn't help but maybe a little reminder that the experts at the club know more than supporters and aren't using illness to hide injuries.
 
Oct 22, 2008
17,318
19,550
Geelong
AFL Club
Essendon
Well it reminded me of a post I'd just read by a Hawthorn supporter on the Burton trade. One poster had criticised the way it was handled, another had backed it up and then the humorous post was that Burton was to blame because his contract demands weren't in line with a typical Hawthorn third year player. Club infallible and "facts" framed around an opinion rather than framing an opinion based around facts.
 
This is why they were so careful bringing him back from illness. You are much more prone to injury and this guy has a horrendous run with them.
Still didn't help but maybe a little reminder that the experts at the club know more than supporters and aren't using illness to hide injuries.
The experts are the ones who bought him back for him to do a soft tissue.

Maybe our experts aren't the experts you believe them to be
 
Well it reminded me of a post I'd just read by a Hawthorn supporter on the Burton trade. One poster had criticised the way it was handled, another had backed it up and then the humorous post was that Burton was to blame because his contract demands weren't in line with a typical Hawthorn third year player. Club infallible and "facts" framed around an opinion rather than framing an opinion based around facts.

More just pointing out we had so many conspiracies going around that the club was lying, it's just an illness if it's just illness he should be playing, so it must be more the club's lying to us.
This is exactly why they kept him out. People get injured when they are sick.

I'm not claiming the club are infallible, I actually think we should revamp our fitness department. I'm simply pointing out that general practice around illness is that injuries occur more often during or after periods of illness.

Obviously he still got injured so it's neither here nor there but it's not exactly surprising when you look at his history. Off limited training he gets injured and when his loads are too high he gets injured. He's been injured first game back from illness. No conspiracy, just standard management of a injury prone player.

Is anything I said particularly wrong? Delusional? Not supported by fact?

Please point it out to me.
 
The experts are the ones who bought him back for him to do a soft tissue.

Maybe our experts aren't the experts you believe them to be

I believe they know more than most on here because they spend time with the players. Know their stats and treat them.

In the absence of these things I trust them because I'm not arrogant to think that I know best without all the information.

It is also general knowledge that you are more susceptible to injury off illness. No conspiracies.

Or is this just another thing we can bag the club on? Is that all we do here? Criticize the coach the players and the club? Dream up fanciful conspiracies?
Sure knock yourselves out.
 
Back