Injury Nat Fyfe: Not Suffering "serious" back injury. "Ruptured disc" during general training drill.

[not_working]

The 'seriously' injured back stuff is a load of deadset rubbish exaggerated media beat up. Sorry, but you don't have to be a medical expert to work out the if a bloke is running, twisting and doing the things E shed described two weeks after apparently injuring his back it is a very minor back injury at worse. If it was anything remotely near a serious back injury everything he is doing would be in a pool out of sight. Rest is actually the main method of overcoming back injuries without surgery. The idea that we should rest for a year is absurd.

This.

And no offense to the people that can empathise because of their own injuries, I don't think that any experience is very helpful to explain this situation. Back injuries are very complex and even small differences can lead to completely different pain patterns - so it is completely impossible to tell from a distance what the impact will be (unless, apparently, you are Doc Larkins). Secondly, injury treatment for a performance athlete is completely different, with some disadvantages (recovery likely to be tested much more, constant stress on the back) and advantages (one major issue with back injuries is consistent effort in physio, that won't be a problem here). So not really comparable at all ...

 

[Mr Peabody]

Speaking purely mathematically... The question I still have is who comes out of our forward 6 to make room for Fyfe? Walters,Pav,Mayne,Ballaz,Tabs or Griffin?

My starting 6 would be the 5 you've named with Mayne or Taberner competing for the 6th position.
Fyfe as a forward target would provide a quantum leap in itself but when he's not the target our crumbing and defensive capabilities would go up several notches with Fyfe, Mayne, Ballaz and Walters hunting around the feet of the talls. I'd back that lot to cope a whole lot better with any supply issues too.

Bennell is going to help our need for goals but it's not enough. Moving Fyfe forward is the paradigm shift I think we need to at least try and toil with. Of course improving ball movement and the number of inside 50's will provide incremental benefit and maybe the new blood will help with all of that and the skills. The no brainer though is the impact our Nat will make up front.

 

[DannyTheDoorman]

Aii no wonder tommorow time trial somewhere else.

They always have the time trials at McGillvray so media will be there.

 

[Sweetback]

Confused? So our players deliberately didn't kick it inside 50, they just played "keepy off" around the arc? I get what you mean but I am not sure that should impact i50 numbers. I personally see it from the other p.o.v., our forwards must surely have been sick of getting slow and poorly executed "kicks to disadvantage" from our deliverers. The number of times Pav would lead and the kick to him was poorly executed drove me nuts. But I still think it comes down to slow ball movement overall. When the ball moves slowly down the field the deliverer and the receiver will both tend to be under far more pressure. We seemed allergic to uncontested possessions for a large chunk of the season... Great that we are the best at contested football but it'd be nice if we didn't have to work so hard all the time.

Pav dropped a lot of marks last year, especially in the latter half of the season. We had started well but were then found out last year and didn't have a plan B because a plan B would involve having forwards to work with. We haven't had a consistent, reliable marking forward in ages. Enter Fyfe.

 

[meima]

They always have the time trials at McGillvray so media will be there.

OK Danny thanks, I better stop now if not you will hunt me down close the door , I come out with a blue black eye.

 

[Mudd]

Confused? So our players deliberately didn't kick it inside 50, they just played "keepy off" around the arc? I get what you mean but I am not sure that should impact i50 numbers. I personally see it from the other p.o.v., our forwards must surely have been sick of getting slow and poorly executed "kicks to disadvantage" from our deliverers. The number of times Pav would lead and the kick to him was poorly executed drove me nuts. But I still think it comes down to slow ball movement overall. When the ball moves slowly down the field the deliverer and the receiver will both tend to be under far more pressure. We seemed allergic to uncontested possessions for a large chunk of the season... Great that we are the best at contested football but it'd be nice if we didn't have to work so hard all the time.

yep the main thing that changed after our fantastic start for the first 7-8 rounds was the ball movement. Quick ball movement early in the season gave our forwards more room to work with and easily gave us those 2-3 extra goals a game that Ross wanted.

If Fyfe does have back issues I'd rather he replace Mayne in the forward line.

Pav Fyfe Bennell Ballas Walters foward line, that is scary!

 

[wayToGo_]

yep the main thing that changed after our fantastic start for the first 7-8 rounds was the ball movement. Quick ball movement early in the season gave our forwards more room to work with and easily gave us those 2-3 extra goals a game that Ross wanted.

If Fyfe does have back issues I'd rather he replace Mayne in the forward line.

Pav Fyfe Bennell Ballas Walters foward line, that is scary!

I finally managed to track down the "Tackles Inside 50" stats from 2015. Mayne was the number one tackler inside 50 in the league. Cripps from West Coast was almost as good. And the next in line were Puopolo and Rioli from the Hawks and Garlett from Melb. This is a really important stat imo because a tackle inside 50 means not only has the opposition's transition out of defence been stopped and the ball locked inside our forward 50 but it creates a forward line stoppage that we then have a good chance of scoring from. Mayne averaged 2.41 per game. This alone is probably worth at least a goal per game to us. That's why I am so adamant Mayne did enough to secure his spot in our B22 last year. Apart from kicking our third most goals he was also critical at locking the ball inside 50. It's not a widely publicised stat but I assure you the two GF teams benefit a lot from it (pressure on the opposition's backline creates turnovers that you can score from). I can also see Fyfe playing a bit forward this year but I highly doubt it will be at the expense of Mayne.

 

[Freo Dr]

The most important stat in all this though is inside 50 entries. Last season we were pretty ordinary at getting the ball in to the forward 50 (14th in the league) - not even close to Hawthorn and the other attacking teams. Not surprisingly you need to have the ball in the forward line before forwards can score from it no matter how good they are. One thing I think many would be surprised at is that when we did get the ball i50 we weren't actually that bad at scoring from it (still not great but better than most teams). So perhaps our forward line isn't as terrible as many think - it's just they don't get enough supply So I suspect the main problem we really need to address is inside 50s and that has far less to do with our forward line personnel. Once we are getting good supply then if our forwards still aren't kicking winning scores then perhaps the personnel need an overhaul.

A good point, I reckon our structure last year influenced that a lot. We were relying a lot on defensive fast break footy so would slog away to get the ball out of defense (MJ, Dawson and Duffield contributed in different ways to being worse in that) and up to our forwards who had folded back to be in the middle of the ground. If we didn't get a mark there (usually outnumbered in our defense), then it never made it inside 50. If we did the players streaming forward had a good chance of scoring. I reckon we need to reconsider our forward structure - sadly we lack the game breaking big KPFs but many teams leave one actually inside 50 at all times - we didn't. Hawthorn do, just that it isn't always a big KPF but Rioli, Gunston, Poops low etc rotate. It makes the defenders more accountable and exposed if you can get enough penetration out of defense.

 

[estibador]

Cripps from West Coast was almost as good.

Wow... and he was such a seagull when he first joined them too.

 

[Allikat]

I feel like I need to fix the thread title considering how wrong it's turned out to be.

 

[DudleyDocker]

I feel like I need to fix the thread title considering how wrong it's turned out to be.

Yep I just checked with the Channel 7 newsroom.

You can change the title to:

Nat Fyfe: Miraculous recovery from career-ending and life threatening broken back.

 

[Superkoops]

This.

And no offense to the people that can empathise because of their own injuries, I don't think that any experience is very helpful to explain this situation. Back injuries are very complex and even small differences can lead to completely different pain patterns - so it is completely impossible to tell from a distance what the impact will be (unless, apparently, you are Doc Larkins). Secondly, injury treatment for a performance athlete is completely different, with some disadvantages (recovery likely to be tested much more, constant stress on the back) and advantages (one major issue with back injuries is consistent effort in physio, that won't be a problem here). So not really comparable at all ...

Nice summary. Having worked in workers comp for over 16 years you are spot on. I have dealt with a great number of differing back injuries of various severity and the associated treatment.

Fyfe has already received top notch daily physio, undergone an injection 2 weeks ago and is back completing running and agility exercises. He is also very fit and under 25 so don't stress. He will need to manage no doubt but Pilates and structured exercises should keep in check. Also the club has indicated that he will be unlikely to play the first Scratchy, which given is only next month is the way to go.

 

[Bicco]

A good point, I reckon our structure last year influenced that a lot. We were relying a lot on defensive fast break footy so would slog away to get the ball out of defense (MJ, Dawson and Duffield contributed in different ways to being worse in that) and up to our forwards who had folded back to be in the middle of the ground. If we didn't get a mark there (usually outnumbered in our defense), then it never made it inside 50. If we did the players streaming forward had a good chance of scoring. I reckon we need to reconsider our forward structure - sadly we lack the game breaking big KPFs but many teams leave one actually inside 50 at all times - we didn't. Hawthorn do, just that it isn't always a big KPF but Rioli, Gunston, Poops low etc rotate. It makes the defenders more accountable and exposed if you can get enough penetration out of defense.

Great research. IMO you still need to add context. 8 tackles against GWS and Melbourne and none against Hawks and WC still gives a good average.

 

[Scham]

Re fast ball movement into the forward line, there's always an exception to the rule and that was the Richmond game when they beat us, they were like treacle coming out of defence and would only go inside 50 only once the set up was right. The interesting thing was that even though they had an obvious height advantage they rarely bombed it in and instead cleared space for their talls to lead into and our defenders stayed back thinking that they would bomb it but were burnt off on the lead. Even by Vickery.

 

[Halfbaked]

Great research. IMO you still need to add context. 8 tackles against GWS and Melbourne and none against Hawks and WC still gives a good average.

It gives you a even better average if you have 15 tackles against the Hawks and egirls for the season.

 

[wayToGo_]

Re fast ball movement into the forward line, there's always an exception to the rule and that was the Richmond game when they beat us, they were like treacle coming out of defence and would only go inside 50 only once the set up was right. The interesting thing was that even though they had an obvious height advantage they rarely bombed it in and instead cleared space for their talls to lead into and our defenders stayed back thinking that they would bomb it but were burnt off on the lead. Even by Vickery.

I agree, that can work really well for some teams. Not sure it would for us with our current lacking key forward stocks though. If we delayed going i50 until everything was ready and Pav got free from his 2 or 3 defenders we really would be playing "keepy off" around the arc for most of the game. With lots of zippy small forwards I think the speed of our ball movement is an essential ingredient for us scoring. "Effective/efficient" ball movement first priority, "speed" the second priority. What I'd rather we avoided was over using the footy and instead always taking on the game. I'd rather we took some risks and made mistakes than stop and over think our attacking strategy. We have some seriously intuitive players who seem to fail when it's not about instincts. Can still hear the collective groans when we'd decide to kick backwards in order to switch or free up space down the line. Does it ever work with the speed the game is played at these days?

 

[salim malik]

I agree, that can work really well for some teams. Not sure it would for us with our current lacking key forward stocks though. If we delayed going i50 until everything was ready and Pav got free from his 2 or 3 defenders we really would be playing "keepy off" around the arc for most of the game. With lots of zippy small forwards I think the speed of our ball movement is an essential ingredient for us scoring. "Effective/efficient" ball movement first priority, "speed" the second priority. What I'd rather we avoided was over using the footy and instead always taking on the game. I'd rather we took some risks and made mistakes than stop and over think our attacking strategy. We have some seriously intuitive players who seem to fail when it's not about instincts. Can still hear the collective groans when we'd decide to kick backwards in order to switch or free up space down the line. Does it ever work with the speed the game is played at these days?

Keepy off works for the Hawks.

 

[meima]

Keepy off works for the Hawks.

But hawks struggle when port take the game on.

 

[stax on the mull]

The most important stat in all this though is inside 50 entries. Last season we were pretty ordinary at getting the ball in to the forward 50 (14th in the league) - not even close to Hawthorn and the other attacking teams. Not surprisingly you need to have the ball in the forward line before forwards can score from it no matter how good they are. One thing I think many would be surprised at is that when we did get the ball i50 we weren't actually that bad at scoring from it (still not great but better than most teams). So perhaps our forward line isn't as terrible as many think - it's just they don't get enough supply So I suspect the main problem we really need to address is inside 50s and that has far less to do with our forward line personnel. Once we are getting good supply then if our forwards still aren't kicking winning scores then perhaps the personnel need an overhaul.

Inside 50 stats can be misleading if a team trying to attack is making repeat shallow inside 50 entries. We were a stronger defensive team, transitioning well out of defence into our forward line giving us much higher efficiency in scoring which meant our inside 50's count could often be lower when winning games.

We didn't lose to Hawthorn in the Prelim due to inside 50's. The inside 50's in that game were low: 41 Hawthorn 42 Fremantle, and in Tasmania in the earlier game against Hawthorn we dominated inside 50's in the 1st quarter, but were 3 goals down at quarter time.

As another example in Round 8 vs North Melbourne, which supports your point about efficiency, we lost the inside 50's by 1 (46 NM to 45 Fr), yet we won the game scoring 17:13 to 5:12. In contrast against Carlton and GWS later in the year we had inside 50 entries of 61 and 56 and couldn't get over the 100 point mark.

Against Gold Coast we had almost double 53 to 27 inside 50's but the points scored totals at the end of the game were 53pts to 46pts - boosted significantly by a couple of goals Fyfe scored when thrown forward for a spell in the 2nd half.

Quote from Champion Data after Round 15 2015

"The Dockers attack has dried up but it’s the inability to defend when the opposition goes inside 50 that has cost them too. They have conceded the fewest inside 50s but are the easiest side to goal against once inside 50, conceding a major 30.3 per cent of the time."

 

[beetz]

I finally managed to track down the "Tackles Inside 50" stats from 2015. Mayne was the number one tackler inside 50 in the league. Cripps from West Coast was almost as good. And the next in line were Puopolo and Rioli from the Hawks and Garlett from Melb. This is a really important stat imo because a tackle inside 50 means not only has the opposition's transition out of defence been stopped and the ball locked inside our forward 50 but it creates a forward line stoppage that we then have a good chance of scoring from. Mayne averaged 2.41 per game. This alone is probably worth at least a goal per game to us. That's why I am so adamant Mayne did enough to secure his spot in our B22 last year. Apart from kicking our third most goals he was also critical at locking the ball inside 50. It's not a widely publicised stat but I assure you the two GF teams benefit a lot from it (pressure on the opposition's backline creates turnovers that you can score from). I can also see Fyfe playing a bit forward this year but I highly doubt it will be at the expense of Mayne.

No one can question Maynes tackling pressure but that's only part of his role. He needs to get back to kicking 40 goals a season. I am hoping that the drafting of Yarran will light a fire under his arse to get him back to what we know he is capable of.

 

[salim malik]

But hawks struggle when port take the game on.

I'll take the game plan and 3 cups by the Hawks over a perceived struggle against a bottom 8 side any day of the week.

 

[Mr Peabody]

Keepy off works for the Hawks.

So evident in that last Prelim after our early burst. They retained possession and chipped the ball around and then forward in a chain that was many times initiated by or involving Mitchell. They drew our backs out of their forward line up to the wing and opened up space behind them. I was sitting in an uncustomary spot on the scoreboard wing and could see it all unfolding when not holding my head in my hands at our deteriorating disposal during that game. Relived the nightmare on the weekend.

 

[Purple Jesus]

So evident in that last Prelim after our early burst. They retained possession and chipped the ball around and then forward in a chain that was many times initiated by or involving Mitchell. They drew our backs out of their forward line up to the wing and opened up space behind them. I was sitting in an uncustomary spot on the scoreboard wing and could see it all unfolding when not holding my head in my hands at our deteriorating disposal during that game. Relived the nightmare on the weekend.

Soo.. why weren't our backs instructed to hold their positions?

 

[wayToGo_]

Inside 50 stats can be misleading if a team trying to attack is making repeat shallow inside 50 entries. We were a stronger defensive team, transitioning well out of defence into our forward line giving us much higher efficiency in scoring which meant our inside 50's count could often be lower when winning games.

We didn't lose to Hawthorn in the Prelim due to inside 50's. The inside 50's in that game were low: 41 Hawthorn 42 Fremantle, and in Tasmania in the earlier game against Hawthorn we dominated inside 50's in the 1st quarter, but were 3 goals down at quarter time.

As another example in Round 8 vs North Melbourne, which supports your point about efficiency, we lost the inside 50's by 1 (46 NM to 45 Fr), yet we won the game scoring 17:13 to 5:12. In contrast against Carlton and GWS later in the year we had inside 50 entries of 61 and 56 and couldn't get over the 100 point mark.

Against Gold Coast we had almost double 53 to 27 inside 50's but the points scored totals at the end of the game were 53pts to 46pts - boosted significantly by a couple of goals Fyfe scored when thrown forward for a spell in the 2nd half.

Quote from Champion Data after Round 15 2015

"The Dockers attack has dried up but it’s the inability to defend when the opposition goes inside 50 that has cost them too. They have conceded the fewest inside 50s but are the easiest side to goal against once inside 50, conceding a major 30.3 per cent of the time."

Agree but I'd still take aggregate totals and averages over picking and choosing games to base a holistic assessment on any day. Nothing wrong with repeat entries imo - they are all opportunities to score. That's the whole point of statistics - to generate figures from a suitable sample size so outliers don't impact the overall analysis as much. If I was preparing a strategy to just beat Hawthorn then I'd approach it differently. But winning against Hawthorn = 4 points, winning against any other team still = 4 points. As much as we need to do better against the Hawks and we should and will use a specific strategy for that, improving our scoring against all teams is something we also need to do in 2016 (if we don't want to slide) and it should flow on to help our performances against Hawthorn and other top sides as well.

 

[Sweetback]

Considering about a third of the competition's coaches next year come from the Hawthorn FC football factory, we really need to get better at being able to beat that style of game play.