Injury Gregson - 4th navicular surgery- Jul 18

[Vdubs]

I delayed surgery for two years and it was the dumbest decision I ever made.

Don't let your "dumbness" cloud your statements about the Geelong FC medical department- there is no relationship.
I understand your thoughts about delaying surgery- am probably doing the same thing, but time will tell.

 

[Vdubs]

There were times when surgery was necessary in all cases and they decided to hold off hoping it would heal on its own and it didn't and thus they did more surgery later. There are other names I can add here too. What the players want is irrelevant as their wants are completely a function of what the doctors tell them is the problem.

The AFL teams have club doctors that are specially trained for what they deal with, and even then, there are surgical opinions, and club doctors do not tell surgeons what to say or do or think.
What makes you say surgery was needed but deferred? And "more" surgery later makes no sense.

 

[Seeds]

As I said and when your conviction was tested you failed, the thought of being cut up is hard to come to terms with,I probable could use some knife work too but just put off even seeing the doctor so I wouldn't be pushing anyone else into something I'm hesitant about myself,I'm sure their is plenty of communication between club and players in this area and in the end it's up to the player to give the consent I should imagine.

yep and its that risk aversion rather than making the rational choice which means more often than not the wrong decision is made to delay and thus why i think its likely he will go under the knife later in the year when it matters.

 

[Ricketz]

There were times when surgery was necessary in all cases and they decided to hold off hoping it would heal on its own and it didn't and thus they did more surgery later. There are other names I can add here too. What the players want is irrelevant as their wants are completely a function of what the doctors tell them is the problem.

Hindsight... where everyone is a medical specialist.

 

[Partridge]

Hindsight... where everyone is a medical specialist.

Depends on which player. Some were called as mistakes before they happened.

 

[Vdubs]

yep and its that risk aversion rather than making the rational choice which means more often than not the wrong decision is made to delay and thus why i think its likely he will go under the knife later in the year when it matters.

You should not make these statements as if they are factual. There is no basis for you saying any ops were delayed for our players, not one. Moreover, clubs are often criticised for doing surgery too early!
There is a well known story about a young player who had a groin condition that his Victorian based club insisted required surgery. He was drafted interstate, never had the op, followed an appropriate rehab/load management plan, and went on to become a star defender.
This is a common scenario.
If any surgery is done at any stage, it will have been well and truly discussed and will be relevant. You can not factually describe one instance to the contrary- it is your opinion.

 

[Vdubs]

Depends on which player. Some were called as mistakes before they happened.

???

 

[Partridge]

???

McIntosh is the obvious one. Clark was another. Delaney was another.

 

[Vdubs]

McIntosh is the obvious one. Clark was another. Delaney was another.

The recruitment of, or their operations?

 

[Partridge]

The recruitment of, or their operations?

Recruitment. In all three cases.

 

[Vdubs]

Recruitment. In all three cases.

Agree, but is that the topic? I'm struggling to understand Seeds' points about so-called delays in surgery.

 

[hbk_aus]

Recruitment. In all three cases.

That isn't what is being debated here though.

 

[Partridge]

Agree, but is that the topic? I'm struggling to understand Seeds' points about so-called delays in surgery.

Mine was in response to the post about calls being made in hindsight. Sometimes they aren't.

 

[Bobby_]

Agree, but is that the topic? I'm struggling to understand Seeds' points about so-called delays in surgery.

Tom Hawkins was not treated all that well.
It was blatantly obvious he could not bend over to try and scoop up the football but the football club persisted with him throughout the year and it was only until the final rounds of the season did he have to miss crucial games.

Jimmy Bartel played an entire 2012 season with a fractured foot and the club knew and they had to manage it. I would assume they are fortunate he did not suffer any long term problems from that.

Matthew Egan tried to persuade the club into getting him back in time for a potential grand final. The medical department agreed and they did everything they could to get him ready and the rest is history.

Travis Varcoe suffered a nasty foot injury in 2012. He made his long awaited return in the reserves of round 21. Only played 60% of the game. He was picked to play the next week against the Dogs and guess what happened to him in the first 15 minutes of that return? Yep, he broke down again but this time it was the other foot. Safe to assume his body was clearly not ready for any competitive sports.

Look, on the most part, the medical staff do a superb job but don't act as though they are squeaky clean and perfect because they certainly are not.

 

[Vdubs]

Tom Hawkins was not treated all that well.
It was blatantly obvious he could not bend over to try and scoop up the football but the football club persisted with him throughout the year and it was only until the final rounds of the season did he have to miss crucial games.

Jimmy Bartel played an entire 2012 season with a fractured foot and the club knew and they had to manage it. I would assume they are fortunate he did not suffer any long term problems from that.

Matthew Egan tried to persuade the club into getting him back in time for a potential grand final. The medical department agreed and they did everything they could to get him ready and the rest is history.

Travis Varcoe suffered a nasty foot injury in 2012. He made his long awaited return in the reserves of round 21. Only played 60% of the game. He was picked to play the next week against the Dogs and guess what happened to him in the first 15 minutes of that return? Yep, he broke down again but this time it was the other foot. Safe to assume his body was clearly not ready for any competitive sports.

Look, on the most part, the medical staff do a superb job but don't act as though they are squeaky clean and perfect because they certainly are not.

Unless you know the details and circumstances, then each of those examples are unfortunate but irrelevant to the original points made by Seeds.
He claims that it is typical of Geelong to be somewhat tardy when surgery is necessary- none oy your example are relevant.
-We all know that Hawkins had a difficult spinal condition that had to be managed- was surgery ever performed? No. Was it needed? Clearly not. Would he have seen a surgeon? Surely yes.
-Varcoe has had significant foot injuries all his career, even before we drafted him. Finally rid of all these, and we swap him for Clark. But no issue about delays in surgery.
- Bartel's foot- don't know a lot about that one, but as you say, no surgery required, and he is still keen to play now. See no dramas here.
- Egan- as you say, and our club and other teams have have been chastened by his outcome. Again, no DELAYS in his surgery, rather the opposite!!

I am not acting as if our med department is squeaky clean- all humans are capable of unforeseen errors when dealing with humans. But the replies were to a completely different argument.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Tom Hawkins was not treated all that well.
It was blatantly obvious he could not bend over to try and scoop up the football but the football club persisted with him throughout the year and it was only until the final rounds of the season did he have to miss crucial games.

Jimmy Bartel played an entire 2012 season with a fractured foot and the club knew and they had to manage it. I would assume they are fortunate he did not suffer any long term problems from that.

Matthew Egan tried to persuade the club into getting him back in time for a potential grand final. The medical department agreed and they did everything they could to get him ready and the rest is history.

Travis Varcoe suffered a nasty foot injury in 2012. He made his long awaited return in the reserves of round 21. Only played 60% of the game. He was picked to play the next week against the Dogs and guess what happened to him in the first 15 minutes of that return? Yep, he broke down again but this time it was the other foot. Safe to assume his body was clearly not ready for any competitive sports.

Look, on the most part, the medical staff do a superb job but don't act as though they are squeaky clean and perfect because they certainly are not.

You're right. They're excellent but not squeaky clean. Obviously I'm not a doctor but everyone could see that Hawkins was handled terribly. Playing him all season then missing the first final was mind boggling. Massive blunder that was obvious to everyone except to those at the club.
Cockatoo last year was also stupid. I find it very hard to believe that it could be positive that he couldn't do any more damage to that knee. The amount of footy he missed I'd say would prove that.
Rushing Henderson back also seemed really dubious to us non experts and he broke down. (In a final)
All those blunders are absolutely ridiculous. You can still have common sense without being a medical professional.

 

[you pick one]

I'm betting in 100% of the cases above the players involved put their hand up and said yep I'M READY TO GO.

 

[hbk_aus]

And I am betting nobody on here has all, or even any of the medical information at hand for each of those cases, nor the medical expertise of the people involved in all of those decisions. But hell, it seems pretty easy to play doctor here so let me try - Menzel should never have gone the LARS option on the 3rd go. What were they thinking?

Am I doing it right?

 

[Partridge]

And I am betting nobody on here has all, or even any of the medical information at hand for each of those cases, nor the medical expertise of the people involved in all of those decisions. But hell, it seems pretty easy to play doctor here so let me try - Menzel should never have gone the LARS option on the 3rd go. What were they thinking?

Am I doing it right?

I'm betting plenty on here think the club should never be questioned either.

When the results of these decisions - most notoriously Hawkins' back - cause players to miss games or even worse finals, those decisions should absolutely be questioned.

Are you saying only those medically qualified can speculate? Cool. Looks like VD is about to become only poster here.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

You're right. They're excellent but not squeaky clean. Obviously I'm not a doctor but everyone could see that Hawkins was handled terribly. Playing him all season then missing the first final was mind boggling. Massive blunder that was obvious to everyone except to those at the club.
Cockatoo last year was also stupid. I find it very hard to believe that it could be positive that he couldn't do any more damage to that knee. The amount of footy he missed I'd say would prove that.
Rushing Henderson back also seemed really dubious to us non experts and he broke down. (In a final)
All those blunders are absolutely ridiculous. You can still have common sense without being a medical professional.

I agree with all of this accept for the Henderson sentence. In the PF he suffered an ankle injury that was totally unrelated to the knee injury that kept him out in the games preceding the PF. There is no way that any body could have foreseen this.

 

[Spazz Cat]

I agree with all of this accept for the Henderson sentence. In the PF he suffered an ankle injury that was totally unrelated to the knee injury that kept him out in the games preceding the PF. There is no way that any body could have foreseen this.

Fair chance they could be related. Especially if it was on the opposite ankle to the knee.

 

[Vdubs]

Fair chance they could be related. Especially if it was on the opposite ankle to the knee.

and on the same body.

 

[you pick one]

and on the same body.

Careful you blokes will create a new injury prone candidate.

 

[mac_cat]

In a week when two studies published in prestigious medical journals showed that up to one third of medical procedures (including surgery) may be unnecessary, and that both doctors and patients tend to overestimate the benefit and underestimate the harm of medical interventions, I'm comfortable that the Geelong medical team have taken a conservative approach with Gregson.

I've personally been on the receiving end of shoulder surgery that had no benefit, but instead caused significant harm. So I personal experience that surgeons can be very gung-ho to operate, but that outcomes can be negative rather than positive.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/t...ary-medicine-doctors-say-20170109-gtofmb.html

http://www.theage.com.au/national/h...harm-of-procedures-drugs-20170110-gtot74.html

 

[Spazz Cat]

and on the same body.

It happens it all the time.
Other ankle is taking all the weight.
With no time to put a bit of strength back into the other leg,
also if the knees a bit sore other leg is still taking more weight injury happens on the other ankle.
I'm hardly stretching.