Remove this Banner Ad

General AFL thread 2016

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joffaboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
If it continues like this, then questions need to be asked IMO why Essendon weren't taken off the fixture. Not sure why the cheats continue to be rewarded.
The only reaso they were't is because of the tv rights deal requiring 9 games played each week
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The only reaso they were't is because of the tv rights deal requiring 9 games played each week

No reason why they couldn;t have put Essendon yesterday. The biggest marquee match of the H+A season shouldn't be given to an awful team, who is awful through their own cheating.
 
Surprised this hasn't been deleted yet.... ;)
Haha, looks like I might have $10 less in my betting account than I did an hour ago. Collingwood unrecognisable from the team that's been playing for them in recent weeks and Essendon look overawed by the occasion.
 
I look at the Essendon team today and think it's a really good guide to compare where our list is headed compared to theres..

I think if lets say we did what they did in 2012 and all the players on our list in 2012 are unavailable this year.. I think about who we would have playing this year and think we are miles ahead of where they are .. I think if you did the same comparison with other clubs. I.e players on list from beyond 2012.. I think we are in a really good spot!!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Surely you aren't blaming the medical staff for Fyffe's injury?

who else is to blame? why would you play your marque player with a plate still in his leg after a history of stress fractures that turned into a full blown fracture? especially with the severity of what can happen when a fracture occurs again around a plate?
 
I actually liked what I read of Lyon's post match thoughts. Honest, frank and to the point. I thought you could pretty much duplicate what he said for us too.
 
They would have discussed the risks with him at the time of the break and again when putting in the plate. Medical staff don't select the team, Fyfe made the decision to play on and take the risks and the football department selected him to do so.
 
who else is to blame? why would you play your marque player with a plate still in his leg after a history of stress fractures that turned into a full blown fracture? especially with the severity of what can happen when a fracture occurs again around a plate?


But that decision wouldn't be coming from the club. The club employs doctors not specialists and specialists would make that decision. The club have to trust people who know about this sort of stuff and an every day sports doctor wouldn't have a clue no matter if they were the best in the world.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

But that decision wouldn't be coming from the club. The club employs doctors not specialists and specialists would make that decision. The club have to trust people who know about this sort of stuff and an every day sports doctor wouldn't have a clue no matter if they were the best in the world.

why wouldnt the decision be coming from the football club? they are ultimately the decision makers here
 
Most doctors know about the risks of peri-prosthetic fractures.


They certainly do but they aren't the specialists and it would be specialists that decide that. Same with any major operation. They decide if parts are left or not left in the body not a sports doctor.
 
I am a doctor and I can tell you that that decision wouldn't have come unilaterally from the surgeon. He or she would have discussed the risks and benefits of a variety of paths, and Fyfe would have made the final decision, which would have been discussed with the club if Fyfe gave his consent to do so.
 
I am a doctor and I can tell you that that decision wouldn't have come unilaterally from the surgeon. He or she would have discussed the risks and benefits of a variety of paths, and Fyfe would have made the final decision, which would have been discussed with the club if Fyfe gave his consent to do so.


It didn't work like that at the Saints from the experience I had unless maybe around finals time and it might be worth the punt. My experience come from probably 6 or 7 players I know very well and at least at the saints back in Lyon's and Thomas day the doctor would take the advise off the surgeon and then said to the player that he would miss or play. If it was solely up to players then no one would ever hardly miss for concussion for a start but now many miss because the club so there is no way you are playing.

My guess is in this case if Fyffe had pain they would have xrayed it and the surgeon would have said to the club doctor and the player what the risks are. The club doctor would then make a decision in consultation with the player and the coaches who basically wouldn't have much say at all. If the specialist said the rod must come out before he plays again then the rod would come out no matter what the club doctor or player thought because they are the experts. hat is how it worked under Lyon at the Saints anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom