Player Watch Harry Schoenberg - Ruptured Achilles

Remove this Banner Ad

It was round 24... I suspect if you don't play sore players at that stage of the season then you won't have anyone left to pick from. Everybody is banged up by then - how many players are going out there without any strapping etc that late in the season?

Presumably they didn't think it was that bad. Alternately, if they hadn't played him, how long would the rest period need to be for an injury like that to recover? How long do they get off... 6 weeks? Although they still continue to train themselves in that time. But that might not have been enough - he might well have missed the game only to injure it during preseason anyway when the training loads are pretty enormous. End result being he ends up missing even more of next season.

I suppose a counter to that is the playing surface over in Perth is reputed to be harder than the other states, so perhaps that may have been a contributing factor that should have been taken into account? I'm not sure how much of an impact (if any) that would have on an achilles issue? Perhaps playing him in Perth was a bigger issue than it would have been if the game had been here?
We had ample depth in the SANFL to cover Harry and I would have thought an Achilles is one injury you don’t mess with, especially as you pointed out on the hard deck of Optus.

Look our fitness staff have done an amazing job, but I can’t see the rationale on risking an Achilles on a dead rubber. The coaches would also have had some input, they didn’t have to select him.
 
He will be on a long-term injury list... just a question of how long.
While the long term injury list still exists, it really has no meaning any more. It used to be that players who were put on the LTI list could be replaced by rookies, who were upgraded for the duration of the LTI. However, with rookies no longer having any playing restrictions, the LTI list is now irrelevant.

What matters now is the "inactive list", for which I have never found any documentation on the AFL website. Players who are on the inactive list can be replaced via the MSD or PSSP. However, in order to be placed on the inactive list they need to be out of action (at least not playing in the AFL - lower leagues are OK) until the end of the season.

Given that all of our current long-term injuries (Doedee, Murray, Schoenberg) have expected return dates before the end of the 2024 season, we probably can't be putting any of them on the "inactive list", and thus can replace any of them via the PSSP.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Players play through niggles all the time that could develop into something bigger on game day. He didn't look hampered at all so if it was an issue it probably wasn't that bad or enough to cause concern
Teams also don’t pick some players in the last round dead rubbers
 
ust look at Geelong, sent a heap of players off for early surgery because they didn’t care about a nothing game. Who should we be more like? Geelong or Adelaide?
GEEL & ADEL are chalk & cheese scenarios ....one's building & wanting to get games into youth .....the other is on the slide

GEEL opted to rest their senior players & bring in youth .....they cared about the game, from a rebuilding perspective

1693366735724.png

P.S .....Mengola's inclusion was as a farewell game
 
GEEL & ADEL are chalk & cheese scenarios ....one's building & wanting to get games into youth .....the other is on the slide

GEEL opted to rest their senior players & bring in youth .....they cared about the game, from a rebuilding perspective

View attachment 1790072

P.S .....Mengola's inclusion was as a farewell game
I’m confused, you said we are chalk and cheese, ones building and wanting to get games into youth, the other is on the slide.

The next sentence you state Geelong rested senior players and brought in youth.

You’re all over the place.

As for us, we’ve chosen to play a cooked Sloane over getting games into youth, so even that statement isn’t correct.
 
Players play through niggles all the time that could develop into something bigger on game day. He didn't look hampered at all so if it was an issue it probably wasn't that bad or enough to cause concern
I said he looked proppy very early against Sydney Achilles are nasty bugger, you can warm them up and be ok but when you cool down you can barely walk
 
I’m confused, you said we are chalk and cheese, ones building and wanting to get games into youth, the other is on the slide.

The next sentence you state Geelong rested senior players and brought in youth.

You’re all over the place.

As for us, we’ve chosen to play a cooked Sloane over getting games into youth, so even that statement isn’t correct.
Read again .....where did I say "we" are chalk and cheese
 
No on the day?
Yep after the injury on the day ?

compression bandage post injury over achilles / calf


Edit - sounds like he was struggling with it prior to game


Let’s be honest , every player is carrying an injury by round 23

Also Tex was close to not playing with a quad apparently and ended up kicking 9

Apparently Fog needs a knee replacement given what people have been saying 😆
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Players play through niggles all the time that could develop into something bigger on game day. He didn't look hampered at all so if it was an issue it probably wasn't that bad or enough to cause concern
Agree with this completely re playing with injury

He seemed to not be running on top of ground though and struggled on the night pre the injury , was his worst game since he’s been back
 
Yep after the injury on the day ?

compression bandage post injury over achilles / calf


Edit - sounds like he was struggling with it prior to game


Let’s be honest , every player is carrying an injury by round 23

Also Tex was close to not playing with a quad apparently and ended up kicking 9

Apparently Fog needs a knee replacement given what people have been saying 😆
What’s the time line for a knee replacement nasty things
 
OMG you seriously going down that line? Ok then, of Geelong and Adelaide, the two teams you mentioned, which are building and getting games into youth and which is on the slide?
He is clearly saying Geelong sent older players off for surgery.

Shoenberg is not older and we are putting games into kids. Shoenberg just hit 50 games and has been building. We backed him in to give him continuity.

Different situations. We are hardly send Shoey off for surgery due to a niggle. Niggle just doesn't go to achillies rupture from over use. It would have ruptured anyway in an event with enough force to cause it. If it were more than a niggle and close to a rupture, it would be so painful he couldn't walk.

s**t happens. We didn't rest him. We all move on. It sucks, but he's young and I back him in to work through it.

This entire argument is BS.
 
He is clearly saying Geelong sent older players off for surgery.

Shoenberg is not older and we are putting games into kids. Shoenberg just hit 50 games and has been building. We backed him in to give him continuity.

Different situations. We are hardly send Shoey off for surgery due to a niggle. Niggle just doesn't go to achillies rupture from over use. It would have ruptured anyway in an event with enough force to cause it. If it were more than a niggle and close to a rupture, it would be so painful he couldn't walk.

s**t happens. We didn't rest him. We all move on. It sucks, but he's young and I back him in to work through it.

This entire argument is BS.
So Wayne did phone in a friend.

He said one club is building and playing youth, one is sliding, then goes on to say Geelong rested oldies and played youth, so both played youth, can’t have it both ways.

And the whole we are focused on playing youth is bogus when you consider the number of games Schoenberg played in the seconds whilst Sloane was playing mid and how Sloane was selected over Pedlar.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top