Remove this Banner Ad

Certified Legendary Thread Nathan Freeman Updates

  • Thread starter Thread starter SK_MD_#7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Can't wait till we trade in Liam Jones.

He'll add something next year...
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

For those who go, we want updates.

Everybody please don't expect the world from him!
 
Hmm, I can't help but feel that Freeman's inclusion in the senior Sandringham team is a result of the club's hand being forced, what with the development squad having an extended lay off period. I feel like there will be a loser in this situation; either Freeman will have too much demanded of him, or Sandringham will be forced to carry a player who will spend larger periods of time benched. With all due respect to the Zebras, I'm hoping it's the latter.
 
Strahany said:
Hmm, I can't help but feel that Freeman's inclusion in the senior Sandringham team is a result of the club's hand being forced, what with the development squad having an extended lay off period. I feel like there will be a loser in this situation; either Freeman will have too much demanded of him, or Sandringham will be forced to carry a player who will spend larger periods of time benched. With all due respect to the Zebras, I'm hoping it's the latter.
Click to expand...

Lot of long bows drawn there. He will play if he is ready
 
Joffaboy said:
Lot of long bows drawn there. He will play if he is ready
Click to expand...

Not so much a long bow as a statement of fact. Freeman was played in the development squad due to the slower pace, and the ability to play on limited minutes at the discretion of the medical staff. Including him in the senior team eliminates this factor, with the assumption being that anyone who plays in the 1sts is ready to play a proper game; this is not our sinkhole club, but a club within its own rights, and a club that wants to win. As such, I made my comment; either Sandringham will be screwed a bit, because Freeman won't play full minutes/intensity, or Freeman will be pushed too hard for where he is, at this stage in recovery.

A step up to senior level VFL football would be acceptable in your general approach to recovery, however the club is option for a conservative approach with recovery, which would not have him in the senior team, if they had a choice, based on timelines with respect to the healing of soft tissue injuries and what is required to regain and establish the required working capacity.
 
Strahany said:
Not so much a long bow as a statement of fact. Freeman was played in the development squad due to the slower pace, and the ability to play on limited minutes at the discretion of the medical staff. Including him in the senior team eliminates this factor, with the assumption being that anyone who plays in the 1sts is ready to play a proper game; this is not our sinkhole club, but a club within its own rights, and a club that wants to win. As such, I made my comment; either Sandringham will be screwed a bit, because Freeman won't play full minutes/intensity, or Freeman will be pushed too hard for where he is, at this stage in recovery.

A step up to senior level VFL football would be acceptable in your general approach to recovery, however the club is option for a conservative approach with recovery, which would not have him in the senior team, if they had a choice, based on timelines with respect to the healing of soft tissue injuries and what is required to regain and establish the required working capacity.
Click to expand...

How do you know that playing senior VFL footy this week is not the conservative approach?
Nathan played something like 68% of the Dev game, he's pulled up well and is likely to play VFL seniors. Now, if he does play his minutes will naturally increase, not taking into account match day variables he'll be looking at somewhere around 80% match time. Most young St Kilda listed mids don't play much more than 80% game time at Sandy anyway so I don't see how St Kilda, Sandringham and Freezer aren't all winners out of that?
 
Strahany said:
Not so much a long bow as a statement of fact. Freeman was played in the development squad due to the slower pace, and the ability to play on limited minutes at the discretion of the medical staff. Including him in the senior team eliminates this factor, with the assumption being that anyone who plays in the 1sts is ready to play a proper game; this is not our sinkhole club, but a club within its own rights, and a club that wants to win. As such, I made my comment; either Sandringham will be screwed a bit, because Freeman won't play full minutes/intensity, or Freeman will be pushed too hard for where he is, at this stage in recovery.

A step up to senior level VFL football would be acceptable in your general approach to recovery, however the club is option for a conservative approach with recovery, which would not have him in the senior team, if they had a choice, based on timelines with respect to the healing of soft tissue injuries and what is required to regain and establish the required working capacity.
Click to expand...

Really dont know what you are saying? The club is rushing Freeman back?

He has been at full pace training for at least 6-8 weeks, was told to go at 80% in the dev league, was monitored and pulled up with no ill effects, have had two more weeks of training, and may now be ready for VFL.

And VFL is a very big rung below AFL. Also he played 3/4 two weeks ago.Can play four quarters but depends on minutes.

Club has consistency said they will be ultra conservative with Freeman if he is fit, has no ill effects, and his hammies are OK, and the fitness staff, why should he not play? He has to at some time.

Anyway 3/4 of a Freeman will be better than 4 quarters from most of Sandy's mids. Why wouldn't they want him in. Rather him getting 25 touches over 3/4 than some spud getting 15 over four.
 
Moorabbin Ghost said:
How do you know that playing senior VFL footy this week is not the conservative approach?
Nathan played something like 68% of the Dev game, he's pulled up well and is likely to play VFL seniors. Now, if he does play his minutes will naturally increase, not taking into account match day variables he'll be looking at somewhere around 80% match time. Most young St Kilda listed mids don't play much more than 80% game time at Sandy anyway so I don't see how St Kilda, Sandringham and Freezer aren't all winners out of that?
Click to expand...

I probably should make what I said a little less convoluted.

What I meant to say, was that IF Freeman was expected to play full minutes by Sandringham, then there are one of two results. Either Freeman will be forced into playing too much for where he is at in his recovery (based on the principles I know of my physiotherapy management which, granted, is nowhere near the level of expertise that Rors has with recovery and biomechanics) OR Sandringham will be shafted because he will not play as many minutes as they would like.

You basically answered my concerns, though, with pointing out that St Kilda players only play around 80% anyway. Also, I never questioned the judgement of the medical team; I only used the dichotomous outcomes of "being rushed back" and "Sandringham being shafted" since we know the former is absurd, hence I was more or less highlighting the seemingly forced nature of his inclusion (which you have no proven to be an invalid concern, due to the aforementioned 80% game time figure).
 
Strahany said:
I probably should make what I said a little less convoluted.

What I meant to say, was that IF Freeman was expected to play full minutes by Sandringham, then there are one of two results. Either Freeman will be forced into playing too much for where he is at in his recovery (based on the principles I know of my physiotherapy management which, granted, is nowhere near the level of expertise that Rors has with recovery and biomechanics) OR Sandringham will be shafted because he will not play as many minutes as they would like.

You basically answered my concerns, though, with pointing out that St Kilda players only play around 80% anyway. Also, I never questioned the judgement of the medical team; I only used the dichotomous outcomes of "being rushed back" and "Sandringham being shafted" since we know the former is absurd, hence I was more or less highlighting the seemingly forced nature of his inclusion (which you have no proven to be an invalid concern, due to the aforementioned 80% game time figure).
Click to expand...
TBH, I'd wouldn't want him to be playing more than 60% of the game & would have much preferred him to step up to this level without the weeks break for the VFL bye we had. The continuity would have been better IMO, maybe another Dev league game then step up to Seniors next week. But hey, the club medicos are probably more experienced than myself & know what they are doing. Their management of Seb Ross post-hamstring surgery last year was very good so I back them to make the right decision.

Personally though, I would have given him another week of Dev League & put him into the Sandy seniors the following week depending on how he pulled up. My return to playing plan would have been:

wk 1 - Dev league (2/3 of a game),
wk 2 - break,
wk 3 - Dev league again (full game with bench rotations - say 85% game time),
wk 4 - half game Sandy Seniors,
wk 5 - Sandy Seniors (full game with standard StKilda bench rotations ~ 75-80% game time),
wk 6 - break,
wk 7 - Sandy seniors (standard StKilda player minutes),
wk 8 - Sandy seniors (standard Stkilda player minutes),
wk 9 - either another Sandy seniors game or Saints debut depending on form

Of course, this is assuming he doesn't have any niggles
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Strahany said:
I probably should make what I said a little less convoluted.

What I meant to say, was that IF Freeman was expected to play full minutes by Sandringham, then there are one of two results. Either Freeman will be forced into playing too much for where he is at in his recovery (based on the principles I know of my physiotherapy management which, granted, is nowhere near the level of expertise that Rors has with recovery and biomechanics) OR Sandringham will be shafted because he will not play as many minutes as they would like.

You basically answered my concerns, though, with pointing out that St Kilda players only play around 80% anyway. Also, I never questioned the judgement of the medical team; I only used the dichotomous outcomes of "being rushed back" and "Sandringham being shafted" since we know the former is absurd, hence I was more or less highlighting the seemingly forced nature of his inclusion (which you have no proven to be an invalid concern, due to the aforementioned 80% game time figure).
Click to expand...


Don't worry Strahan, the club seemed to say he will be a fair way off senior VFL even because he is in for the long slow rebuilding of his body to then rush him into the side. Either he needs handling carefully or he doesn't. We can only go by what we hear and I thought like you I hope we aren't being forced into getting him in the seniors because the DS has a bye. It's a fair supposition.
 
Rors said:
TBH, I'd wouldn't want him to be playing more than 60% of the game & would have much preferred him to step up to this level without the weeks break for the VFL bye we had. The continuity would have been better IMO, maybe another Dev league game then step up to Seniors next week. But hey, the club medicos are probably more experienced than myself & know what they are doing. Their management of Seb Ross post-hamstring surgery last year was very good so I back them to make the right decision.

Personally though, I would have given him another week of Dev League & put him into the Sandy seniors the following week depending on how he pulled up. My return to playing plan would have been:

wk 1 - Dev league (2/3 of a game),
wk 2 - break,
wk 3 - Dev league again (full game with bench rotations - say 85% game time),
wk 4 - half game Sandy Seniors,
wk 5 - Sandy Seniors (full game with standard StKilda bench rotations ~ 75-80% game time),
wk 6 - break,
wk 7 - Sandy seniors (standard StKilda player minutes),
wk 8 - Sandy seniors (standard Stkilda player minutes),
wk 9 - either another Sandy seniors game or Saints debut depending on form

Of course, this is assuming he doesn't have any niggles
Click to expand...
Pretty sure Dev League has back to back byes.
 
Moorabbin Ghost said:
How do you know that playing senior VFL footy this week is not the conservative approach?
Nathan played something like 68% of the Dev game, he's pulled up well and is likely to play VFL seniors. Now, if he does play his minutes will naturally increase, not taking into account match day variables he'll be looking at somewhere around 80% match time. Most young St Kilda listed mids don't play much more than 80% game time at Sandy anyway so I don't see how St Kilda, Sandringham and Freezer aren't all winners out of that?
Click to expand...
Can I just add something MG. His a fully fit stkilda player. Let's not gloss over this important fact. His preparation at this point in time is no different to a bloke coming back from an acl in terms of game time and quality of team he is selected to play for. He trained for weeks before he played dev league,pulled up fine and is now ready to go again and up the anti. He will play seniors at the zebras for abit. If and only if form warrants a game and im talking 3+ games of high quality footy will they consider him for afl.

What difference is it in risk if he plays sandy seniors or waits another week and then is thrusted into a dev squad game after no game for 2 weeks? He will be better for the run that's it. Also everyone vested in Freeman need to see how he pulls up again in slightly more challenging circumstances. It's another box that needs ticking and believe me he is ready
 
Rors said:
TBH, I'd wouldn't want him to be playing more than 60% of the game & would have much preferred him to step up to this level without the weeks break for the VFL bye we had. The continuity would have been better IMO, maybe another Dev league game then step up to Seniors next week. But hey, the club medicos are probably more experienced than myself & know what they are doing. Their management of Seb Ross post-hamstring surgery last year was very good so I back them to make the right decision.

Personally though, I would have given him another week of Dev League & put him into the Sandy seniors the following week depending on how he pulled up. My return to playing plan would have been:

wk 1 - Dev league (2/3 of a game),
wk 2 - break,
wk 3 - Dev league again (full game with bench rotations - say 85% game time),
wk 4 - half game Sandy Seniors,
wk 5 - Sandy Seniors (full game with standard StKilda bench rotations ~ 75-80% game time),
wk 6 - break,
wk 7 - Sandy seniors (standard StKilda player minutes),
wk 8 - Sandy seniors (standard Stkilda player minutes),
wk 9 - either another Sandy seniors game or Saints debut depending on form

Of course, this is assuming he doesn't have any niggles
Click to expand...
Dev league has a bye this week big fella. Also you don't allow for the fact he was in full training for weeks before he played his first game. Match simulation drills at full speed. He is ready to go
 
stavro#4 said:
Dev league has a bye this week big fella. Also you don't allow for the fact he was in full training for weeks before he played his first game. Match simulation drills at full speed. He is ready to go
Click to expand...
I have no doubts & I trust the club.:thumbsu:
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

stavro#4 said:
I was told yesterday morning and again midday by someone I trust
Click to expand...

I just hope you don't get a call saying he's not playing because of some kind of injury set back.
 
not sure if you guys heard, the gun show is in town and with all this anti gun stuff lately Daniel Andrews wouldn't let it go ahead unless Freezer attended to show his wares and gain a little popular support
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom