Injury Could Elliott's career be over?

[CFC2010]

I don't think anyone was arguing that it worked. That doesn't mean it wasn't the appropriate treatment to opt for before deciding to go down another path.

Say you are on your way to a job interview. You know that trains leave the station every ten minutes, and the trip takes another ten minutes. There are no buses, and the walk would take you an hour in the heat. You get to the station and in the heat the tracks have just now buckled, trains are to be cancelled. You have the option of calling for a taxi, but are told the wait might be up to an hour, so you walk and are late for your interview and arrive sweaty.

The fact that you were late for the interview is a "failure" but does not mean catching the train was a poor choice. However finding out the train was no longer an option presented you with new information and informed your next decision.


What information were they basing this on, or is it more uninformed speculation validating other uninformed speculation?.

Like I said earlier and you highlighted above it might have been the best option in Jamies instance. It didn't work.
Back to the drawing board. Hopefully for him he only misses a year of Footy.

I was told he was pushed too hard.......I didn't google it if that is what you are implying, and I don't make things up.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Because we've seen them mismanage the injury?

Have we? What did you see?

You think all these medical websites colluded to give misinformation about an injury so that Collingwood supporters on BigFooty had ammunition to denigrate Collingwood medical staff?

Come on dude. Try be a LITTLE more objective than that.

I am the only one being objective here. Medicine is a science, it requires evidence that goes beyond the anecdotal and takes into account each patient's specific make-up and history, which you have given no thought to whatsoever.

Short of some tinfoil hat conspiracy:

1. It seems commonly accepted that the best way to manage this injury is to do NOTHING. Rest. No physically strenuous activity for at least 3 months. Not too sure how many more sources I can find that say that before you kinda have to accept that it's the best way to manage it.

I accept that's one way to manage it. How many of the patients discussed in those articles were elite athletes? How many had access to the resources of a professional sporting club rehab department? How much rest did Jamie have before beginning his modified program? How much rest did he get during his modified program? Has there been a study conducted comparing a graduated, modified training program to complete rest for 3 months in elite athletes prior to return to sport?

Until you can answer these questions, you're pissing in the wind.

2. We already know that that hasn't taken place at Collingwood. We have literally seen Jamie train and have been told on numerous occasions that he's on a modified training program. A modified training program to me, doesn't suggest resting for an extended period.

How much rest did he get from the initial diagnosis, and how much rest did he get as part of his rehab program? You don't know.

3. Jamie's physiology? I mean, we all see the way Jamie plays football no? High impact, high jumping, we've all seen him land flat on his back numerous times. I"m not too sure why you seem to want me to ignore stuff I've seen with my own eyes. You think it's just a coincidence that of all the Collingwood players on our list, it's Jamie that has this injury?

Very funny. You have an in depth understanding of his physiology, bone density, biomechanics, healing rate, compliance with treatment... because you've watched him play football? Just give up.

I'm sorry you feel upset, but as a paying Collingwood member, yeah, I'm f**king pissed that we have such a shitty injury list for 5 years running. Our best players are continually off the park. Maybe we don't have the right people there? I'm sorry, I don't just blindly believe we do everything right and hire all the right people.

I'm upset too, but use of the word "maybe" as a qualifier is the only intelligent thing you've posted on these last few pages.

I mean, the club itself is seeing a NEW specialist, which suggests the OLD specialist didn't work out. So despite them being medical professional, whatever treatment they prescribed didn't work out.

We know it didn't work out. The new specialist may be a specialist in a course of treatment (? surgical intervention) that the old specialist (? conservative management) was not. It tells us nothing about the appropriateness of the initial management, only that it was not successful in Jamie's case.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I was told he was pushed too hard.......I didn't google it if that is what you are implying, and I don't make things up.

Not implying that and not attacking you. I do have doubts about outside opinions by people who may be lay people about what is likely a very comprehensive and individualized rehab plan. If those opinions come from people who do not base their opinions on any form of evidence, as we have seen in this thread, views become skewed.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Very funny. You have an in depth understanding of his physiology, bone density, biomechanics, healing rate, compliance with treatment... because you've watched him play football? Just give up.

Can tell you now champ, I won't be giving up s**t.

You can s**t on my Googlefu all you like but it turned out accurate in this instance. I formed an opinion based on the information I had available to me that Jamie's year could be over. I said "MAY" for the exact reason you're berating me for. I'm not a medical professional. But I am an English speaking human being with at least basic reading comprehension skills. I also happen to have functioning eyeballs.

So, back then, based on all the information I had read, combined with the visual information my eyes had provided me, I hypothesised that I felt Jamie's year COULD be over given all that information available to me. The maybe was an obvious qualifier because I"m not a professional.

But guess what buddy? Jamie's out for the year. So yeah, I'm no medical professional, but maybe my reasoning and logic skills aren't so bad?

Again this isn't about wanting to be right, or "I told you so". This sure as s**t isn't something I'd want to be right about. But this IS a discussion forum. I gave an opinion on something based on information I had on hand. Some chose to rationally debate my conclusion, other chose to attack much like yourself today. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want to discuss properly. I'm MORE than happy to be proven wrong. I've said this before. I like learning new s**t, especially from someone who knows better (like yourself?), but in the end, I never attacked you, so don't attack me. I don't give as s**t if you think I'm talking s**t.

Because ultimately, it turns out my own "shitty" made up diagnosis wasn't too far from the truth.

 

[good4footy]

Can tell you now champ, I won't be giving up s**t.

You can s**t on my Googlefu all you like but it turned out accurate in this instance. I formed an opinion based on the information I had available to me that Jamie's year could be over. I said "MAY" for the exact reason you're berating me for. I'm not a medical professional. But I am an English speaking human being with at least basic reading comprehension skills. I also happen to have functioning eyeballs.

So, back then, based on all the information I had read, combined with the visual information my eyes had provided me, I hypothesised that I felt Jamie's year COULD be over given all that information available to me. The maybe was an obvious qualifier because I"m not a professional.

But guess what buddy? Jamie's out for the year. So yeah, I'm no medical professional, but maybe my reasoning and logic skills aren't so bad?

Again this isn't about wanting to be right, or "I told you so". This sure as s**t isn't something I'd want to be right about. But this IS a discussion forum. I gave an opinion on something based on information I had on hand. Some chose to rationally debate my conclusion, other chose to attack much like yourself today. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want to discuss properly. I'm MORE than happy to be proven wrong. I've said this before. I like learning new s**t, especially from someone who knows better (like yourself?), but in the end, I never attacked you, so don't attack me. I don't give as s**t if you think I'm talking s**t.

Because ultimately, it turns out my own "shitty" made up diagnosis wasn't too far from the truth.

Whatever your opinion or who is right, you are not seriously saying RS is attacking you and not rationally debating. Him challenging your opinion in a rational manner is not attacking you.

 

[Collingwoodity]

It's a no-winner really isn't it, they make an announcement and they cop grief for going early and sparking speculation, they keep it to themselves and they cop grief for not keeping supporters informed.

I think the club did the right thing by being open and honest about it.

I also think that it is fair and reasonable for supporters to discuss what possibilities might exist for Elliott based on the new information.

IMO it is not fair when those supporters are criticized by fellow supporters for opining based on the information received from the club.

 

[CFC2010]

Not implying that and not attacking you. I do have doubts about outside opinions by people who may be lay people about what is likely a very comprehensive and individualized rehab plan. If those opinions come from people who do not base their opinions on any form of evidence, as we have seen in this thread, views become skewed.

I agree with your post

The main thing is they get it right from here on for Elliotts sake!

That is four players now on our long term injury list........don't even get me started on the two druggies we can't elevate this year!

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Can tell you now champ, I won't be giving up s**t.

You can s**t on my Googlefu all you like but it turned out accurate in this instance. I formed an opinion based on the information I had available to me that Jamie's year could be over. I said "MAY" for the exact reason you're berating me for. I'm not a medical professional. But I am an English speaking human being with at least basic reading comprehension skills. I also happen to have functioning eyeballs.

So, back then, based on all the information I had read, combined with the visual information my eyes had provided me, I hypothesised that I felt Jamie's year COULD be over given all that information available to me. The maybe was an obvious qualifier because I"m not a professional.

But guess what buddy? Jamie's out for the year. So yeah, I'm no medical professional, but maybe my reasoning and logic skills aren't so bad?

Again this isn't about wanting to be right, or "I told you so". This sure as s**t isn't something I'd want to be right about. But this IS a discussion forum. I gave an opinion on something based on information I had on hand. Some chose to rationally debate my conclusion, other chose to attack much like yourself today. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want to discuss properly. I'm MORE than happy to be proven wrong. I've said this before. I like learning new s**t, especially from someone who knows better (like yourself?), but in the end, I never attacked you, so don't attack me. I don't give as s**t if you think I'm talking s**t.

Because ultimately, it turns out my own "shitty" made up diagnosis wasn't too far from the truth.

I don't know who you're arguing with here but it isn't me. I'm the one who posted in that thread before you did, to say that barring surgery Elliott will have to manage this condition for the rest of his career. You're like Michael Bublé to my Frank Sinatra.

 

[Collingwoodity]

I don't know who you're arguing with here but it isn't me. I'm the one who posted in that thread before you did, to say that barring surgery Elliott will have to manage this condition for the rest of his career. You're like Michael Bublé to my Frank Sinatra.

I love Michael Bubbles.

 

[Markfs]

http://livehealthy.chron.com/pars-defect-lumbar-spine-1040.html


Anatomy
Each lumbar vertebra has a large, blocky front portion called the "body." The rear portion has several knobby parts that project from it. Two of these project downward, where they form joints with the segment below, and two project upward to form joints with the segment above. The bony bridge that connects the upper and lower projections is the pars interarticularis, and there is one on each side of the vertebra. The pars interarticularis is sometimes just called the pars.

Pars Defects
Pars defects sometimes develop on one side only, but if breaks occur that involve both the right and the left pars, the vertebra becomes separated into two pieces. Proper healing of bone breaks requires that the fracture ends be immobilized in close contact. These conditions are rarely achievable with pars injuries, so the breach fails to mend. This persistent separation is what is called a pars defect. For many years, it was assumed that pars defects were congenital anomalies, or birth defects. Today, we understand that most pars defects are really stress fractures that usually occur in the spines of young people. The presumed cause is repeated hyperextension, or backward bending, of the lumbar spine. Pars defects often affect athletes whose spines are frequently stressed in this manner, such as gymnasts, divers and football linemen.

I'm not sure if it's useful to try to seek explanations outside of BF, although I understand your desire to try to inform us. I know from past injuries that only BF has the knowledge and experience to find the right answer.

 

[Markfs]

I love Michael Bubbles.

i like his wife..

 

[Collingwoodity]

i like his wife..

What a name....Luisana Lopilato

 

[CFC2010]

i like his wife..

Just googled her......you're not wrong Mark!

 

[Sultan]

Jamie's out for the year.

Link?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I love Michael Bubbles.

Sure, he's got a great voice.

 

[The Dawes]

Just googled her......you're not wrong Mark!

View attachment 248075

the bubble boy's done well.

 

[CFC2010]

the bubble boy's done well.

Google her name and check out the pics......."done well" is selling the bloke short!

 

[jackcass]

I think the club did the right thing by being open and honest about it.

I also think that it is fair and reasonable for supporters to discuss what possibilities might exist for Elliott based on the new information.

IMO it is not fair when those supporters are criticized by fellow supporters for opining based on the information received from the club.

Agree, all for rational discussion.

 

[WalterBlaknWhte]

I know from past injuries that only BF has the knowledge and experience to find the right answer.

I remember how worried the BF family was about your mishap.

Amazing what a warm flannel and olive oil can achieve.

 

[The Dawes]

Google her name and check out the pics......."done well" is selling the bloke short!

was just drawing on my inner Slug Jordan.

 

[ppoiter]

I think the club did the right thing by being open and honest about it.

I also think that it is fair and reasonable for supporters to discuss what possibilities might exist for Elliott based on the new information.

IMO it is not fair when those supporters are criticized by fellow supporters for opining based on the information received from the club.

Don't disagree entirely but I have a bit of an issue with this. We aren't talking about two footy fans watching a game and forming different opinions. We're talking about a medical professional and a non-medical professional having a debate about the treatment of a player and whether there was some sort of negligence involved. I don't see why both opinions should be given equal weight

 

[TW Sherrin]

I'm not sure if it's useful to try to seek explanations outside of BF, although I understand your desire to try to inform us. I know from past injuries that only BF has the knowledge and experience to find the right answer.

mate, I had no idea what it was so went looking and found the attached. read it or don't I don't care.

 

[Collingwoodity]

Don't disagree entirely but I have a bit of an issue with this. We aren't talking about two footy fans watching a game and forming different opinions. We're talking about a medical professional and a non-medical professional having a debate about the treatment of a player and whether there was some sort of negligence involved. I don't see why both opinions should be given equal weight

Sure. We trust medical professionals because of their expertise.

They shouldn't be given the same weight. I must have missed where TG contradicted the opinion released by the medical professional.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Don't disagree entirely but I have a bit of an issue with this. We aren't talking about two footy fans watching a game and forming different opinions. We're talking about a medical professional and a non-medical professional having a debate about the treatment of a player and whether there was some sort of negligence involved. I don't see why both opinions should be given equal weight

And just to be clear, I'm not saying there wasn't negligence involved, I'm saying we don't have the information necessary to make that determination.

Sometimes you can make that determination based purely upon the outcome, like when a patient goes in for surgery and comes out with a scalpel left in their abdomen. A patient with a pars defect not recovering fully with initial conservative management, isn't one of those instances.

 

[Markfs]

mate, I had no idea what it was so went looking and found the attached. read it or don't I don't care.

Sorry. I didnt mean to offend. It's just that we're trying to work out whether Elliott's career could be finished and medical mumbo jumbo might complicate the discussion unnecessarily.