Autopsy Adelaide d Geelong by 15 points

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Where does the 4 turnovers assumption come from?
down the bottom
526096_951679c000d06987c4809afd6daa63b5.jpg
 
ADELAIDE v GEELONG
9 Rory Laird (ADEL)
5 Rory Sloane (ADEL)
5 Tom Lynch (ADEL)
5 Wayne Milera (ADEL)
3 Joel Selwood (GEEL)
2 Patrick Dangerfield (GEEL)
1 Tom Hawkins (GEEL)
Hawk deserved the 5 more than Lynch imo...
 
ADELAIDE star Bryce Gibbs has earned a reprieve at the AFL Tribunal after being found not guilty of engaging in rough conduct following an off-the-ball incident involving Joel Selwood...

...It had been graded as careless conduct with low impact to the head, though Gibbs' team argued that the contact made did not warrant a rough conduct charge.

They also successfully argued that Selwood initiated the contact with Gibbs, who they said was bracing for contact rather than electing to bump his opponent.

Although a Geelong medical report said Selwood was assessed for a knock to the jaw, Gibbs said he was "shocked" the Cats skipper went to ground as a result of the incident.

So Gibbs got off by arguing it was Selwoods fault and then essentially calling him a diver

Can not wait to play them again - surely we can select a player for the match who can be dispensable for the next couple (or more) matches, whose job is to run through Gibbs

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-17/crows-star-cleared-of-rough-conduct-charge
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So Gibbs got off by arguing it was Selwoods fault and then essentially calling him a diver

Can not wait to play them again - surely we can select a player for the match who can be dispensable for the next couple (or more) matches, whose job is to run through Gibbs

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-17/crows-star-cleared-of-rough-conduct-charge

Didn’t Mitch Duncan get a week last year for exactly the same situation? Very biased interpretations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Didn’t Mitch Duncan get a week last year for exactly the same situation? Very biased interpretations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yes it seems that we are
1. victimized or
2. the test cases which after a review are modified or
3. just to weak to stick up for our players in the media and at the tribunal or
4. just too nice and cop it
 
Didn't look like there was much in it to be honest.

I don't care how much was in the contact - but for the Crows argument to be the it was Selwood's fault is a joke.

Gibbs has come 20m to put a bump on Selwood but successfully argued he was bracing for contact from Selwood? WTF - there is no need to brace for contact if he doesn't choose to come in to bump Selwood in the first place - if they successfully argued it was low impact & body contact then fine, but to successfully argue that the guy on the ground was at fault & took a dive is pretty low.
 
I don't care how much was in the contact - but for the Crows argument to be the it was Selwood's fault is a joke.

Gibbs has come 20m to put a bump on Selwood but successfully argued he was bracing for contact from Selwood? WTF - there is no need to brace for contact if he doesn't choose to come in to bump Selwood in the first place - if they successfully argued it was low impact & body contact then fine, but to successfully argue that the guy on the ground was at fault & took a dive is pretty low.

At the time I was going berko. What is going on in Adel (both teams) play dirty behind the play. Always decking joel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
And therein might lie the problem CS is no genius but what is around him seems ordinary-Scarlett aside, I am not convinced that Enright is a forwards coach


You can have the greatest coaches in the world, but if you don't have your full list to work with, it hinders what the coaches can do tactically.
 
It was not a mistake caused by the Geelong medical staff, it was the result of a Menzel stuff up. The injection was cortisone, which Menzel has had before for his groin injury. Menzel was having treatment for another condition, which Geelong doctor didn't know + from what I can understand, that drug had a bad interaction with the cortisone.


Wouldn't the doctor check Menzel's medical history before administering any injection?

You can't put it on the layman to know everything he has been given. It is up to the doctor to keep a record of it, or to find out about medical history. Menzel wouldn't have known that cortisone and whatever else he was taking would not work.

What if the injection had had worse effects on Menzel, and he had died from it. Would the doctor not knowing that information be good enough?
 
Wouldn't the doctor check Menzel's medical history before administering any injection?

You can't put it on the layman to know everything he has been given. It is up to the doctor to keep a record of it, or to find out about medical history. Menzel wouldn't have known that cortisone and whatever else he was taking would not work.

What if the injection had had worse effects on Menzel, and he had died from it. Would the doctor not knowing that information be good enough?

It would depend how much information the doctor was aware of in terms of other treatments that Menzel was currently receiving - if he was receiving treatment for another condition (and maybe by a different doctor), if he didn't disclose that information to the club doctor/treating professional who was providing the cortisone injection, then that has to be put back on Menzel.

An individuals medical records are not necessarily available to all treating professionals that you see, so if you are receiving treatment from different professionals (doctor, physio, specialists etc), then it is your responsibility to know what medication or treatment you are currently receiving & disclose that information before receiving new treatment incase there is going to be an issue. And if you can't remember what medication you have been given, take it with you or get a medical report from your doctor to take with you to other medical based treatments. Patients can easily get a copy of their basic medical history (major incidents/operations, current & past medications including dates taken, vaccinations etc) from there doctor - no excuse to be ignorant as to you own medical history.

And don't forget that there are people who "doctor shop" to maximise prescription medications - not saying that is what Menzel has done, but we can't just expect that doctors are going to know everything about a patient, especially if there is information that the patient doesn't want the doctor to know.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top