Otten hurts knee

[beartoo]

Short anouncement from the club that Otten has a 'minor knee strain' in his left, reconstructed knee.
Hope it is as minor as they say.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

As reports filter back from the club about this I'll keep everyone posted on my heart attack

 

[Mego Red]

Three weeks, according to 3AW twitter.

 

[Footypie32]

****!! Exactly what I didnt want to hear. Even if its only minor, it still stuffs up his preseason and puts him behind the 8 ball.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

This is a worry.

Often our pre-season is perfect until after Australia Day and then the injuries begin.

Last year we were travelling pretty smoothly until Tippett went down in a MM trial match, closely followed by Porplyzia, Davis, Sloane and Stevens.

 

[SugarShane]

From Andy himself on Twitter:

"Scans all clear!!! Dodged a bullet very happy. Few days off to let it settle and back into it next week"

 

[cmndstab]

Hopefully that's the end of it, but I suspect the knee is weak and could go at any time

What caused the injury? Just straining too hard, or an impact?

 

[jenny61_99]

From all accounts (going by the comments from players on twitter after training), this pre-season has been pretty full on - some are even saying harder than previous years. When Sando is focussing on hard, competitive footy, it wouldn't be surprising to see these sort of injuries.

 

[SugarShane]

Hopefully that's the end of it, but I suspect the knee is weak and could go at any time

What caused the injury? Just straining too hard, or an impact?

From the official report it sounds like just a change of direction and he went down.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Despite the opinions of many unqualified observers, there is no evidence to support the contention that the intensity of training correlates with increased or decreased injury rates.

Some people claim that more intense training leads to an increase in "strain" injuries like hamstring strains. In fact the level of hamstring injuries in 2010 was below the 10 year average. (The 2011 AFL Injury Report will be released in May 2012) Would anyone like to argue that training intensity in 2010 was less than the previous ten years?

Collision injuries are totally random but an increase in competitive training is likely to result in an increased rate of collision injuries. However, there has not been any research to test this hypothesis.

Travis Varcoe will be missing the start of the season for the third year in a row, all with different injuries (thumb, shoulder and now foot). Don't underestimate the power of bad luck when it comes to the variation in injury rates from one year to the next or club versus club.

 

[cmndstab]

From the official report it sounds like just a change of direction and he went down.

This is what I'm concerned about. He might have "dodged a bullet" here, but is this something that would have been an issue with someone who never needed a reconstruction to begin with? This kind of thing could happen at any time, and it's completely unavoidable as it is required movement for training and playing.

Fingers crossed it doesn't happen again, but as has been posted here many times, the biggest indicator for injuries is prior injury.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Collision injuries are totally random but an increase in competitive training is likely to result in an increased rate of collision injuries. However, there has not been any research to test this hypothesis.

Does it need to be researched?

 

[cmndstab]

Without knowing the qualifications of AFGM, I doubt very much that no research has been done into it.

 

[Carmo]

Some people claim that more intense training leads to an increase in "strain" injuries like hamstring strains. In fact the level of hamstring injuries in 2010 was below the 10 year average. (The 2011 AFL Injury Report will be released in May 2012) Would anyone like to argue that training intensity in 2010 was less than the previous ten years?

I'm well known for my love of playing devil's advocate.....

Only one year, could be noise in the data...

Alternatively could the explanation for less injuries in 2010 be better player management in terms of recovery...well not even recovery, determining their limits better, though I admit this then becomes a moot point, because that means despite some level of increased intensity, some clubs at least, have found a way of mitigating the impact....

 

[ManInTheArena]

This is what I'm concerned about. He might have "dodged a bullet" here, but is this something that would have been an issue with someone who never needed a reconstruction to begin with? This kind of thing could happen at any time, and it's completely unavoidable as it is required movement for training and playing.

This is my concern - he's got *warning* written all over him and I think he'll do his knee again before years end.

 

[Coopers]

This is what I'm concerned about. He might have "dodged a bullet" here, but is this something that would have been an issue with someone who never needed a reconstruction to begin with? This kind of thing could happen at any time, and it's completely unavoidable as it is required movement for training and playing.

A buddy of mine did his knee changing direction (mixed netball, but... still) and he'd never had an issue before.

 

[cmndstab]

A buddy of mine did his knee changing direction (mixed netball, but... still) and he'd never had an issue before.

Netball is just about the worst sport in the world for doing knees and ankles and the like. Hell, just in the social league I play in I reckon every member of our team has done a knee and/or an ankle in the last couple of years.

 

[mackga]

It is a real concern as he originally damaged the knee in a training drill where he was running by himself and simply went to change direction.....something you would have to do a thousand times in a game.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Without knowing the qualifications of AFGM, I doubt very much that no research has been done into it.

Firstly, I have not been able to find anything published in a reputable journal (i.e. not the Chadvertiser)that addresses this issue.

This is not surprising since sports science at the elite level is a bit like weapons research, your not going to assist your opposition if you think you know more than they do.

The best quality research would look at comparing the impact of the factor(s) you are addressing (e.g. the intensity of training) on a range of initial injuries suffered by players (e.g. hamstring strains, ACLs etc) in carefully matched groups of players, The limited numbers on each AFL list would make a one year study virtually meaningless.I believe we are attempting a pseudo-scientific study this year by comparing a small group of players that are using an altitude room with the rest of our squad. The key to a successful study is the design of the "experiment". If you simply ask who would like to give it a go (vB, Danger and Sloaney put up their hand) and compare their fitness levels to the rest of the squad, I would be very confident that the special group would outperform. Conducting a "controlled experiment" does not fit well in the elite sports environment where every player wants to achieve their maximum potential.

The second alternative is to use a "population study" and try to eliminate the impact of the other factors that might influence the result. Once again the pool of players is quite small (just over 700 players on primary lists this year) and each club is unwilling to share all their training information.

The best available information is published in the AFL Annual Injury Report. All clubs agree to provide all their raw data to the scientists on the proviso that individual club information is not published. Over the last 19 years the reports have identified two main factors that result in higher injury rates.

1) Age; injury rates are higher for players under 20 and over 30.

2) Previous injury; Players that have previously had a particular injury (e.g. hammy, ACL) are more likely to suffer a recurrence.

Despite the claims by "experts" on Bigfooty, it has never been suggested in any of the 19 annual AFL Injury Reports that increased training intensity will result in higher rates of injury. I am not saying that it is not possible, I am just saying that no such relationship has been found as yet. If you believe that this relationship is self evident, then you would expect to see a significant increase in say hamstring injuries as the AFL training intensity increased over the last 10-15 years. You would also expect a lower level of these injuries in say the SANFL and even lower in parkland footy.

 

[The Big Sauce]

Netball is just about the worst sport in the world for doing knees and ankles and the like. Hell, just in the social league I play in I reckon every member of our team has done a knee and/or an ankle in the last couple of years.

Agree never had an knee issue in my life until I started mixed netball in 2010.

More rolled ankles in a 7 person team than an entire season of football as well.

But we were a bit unco

 

[WALL-e]

I just want him to be confident....had none of that last year and it showed.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Despite the claims by "experts" on Bigfooty, it has never been suggested in any of the 19 annual AFL Injury Reports that increased training intensity will result in higher rates of injury. I am not saying that it is not possible, I am just saying that no such relationship has been found as yet.

Intensity is only one factor.

There's also volume, frequency and the type of training. Just to placate me, tell me you're not ignoring those?

 

[Slippery Pete]

If you believe that this relationship is self evident, then you would expect to see a significant increase in say hamstring injuries as the AFL training intensity increased over the last 10-15 years.

Judging by this it appears you are ignoring them.

Until you tell me training type, frequency and volume remained constant in this time frame, this statement means very little.

Did it?

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Intensity is only one factor.

There's also volume, frequency and the type of training. Just to placate me, tell me you're not ignoring those?

Marathon runners don't have many knee problems do they?

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Judging by this it appears you are ignoring them.

Until you tell me training type, frequency and volume remained constant in this time frame, this statement means very little.

Did it?

Regarding the number and severity of injuries, there are many factors that influence these outcomes. It was previously stated as a "fact" by some posters that the increased intensity in the AFC training between 2005 and 2011 resulted in greater injury problems. This was said without benchmarking our "games lost to injury" against the other AFL clubs and without any measurement of "training intensity" compared to other clubs.

I simply made the statement that there has been no published studies confirming this link for AFL football. There is evidence that age and prior injuries does have an effect as outlined in the AFL Annual Injury Reports.

The long term trends have been a reduction in new injuries/season/club and the recurrence rate has also fallen. If there was a simple "cause" and "effect" relationship between the "intensity of training" and the level of injuries then this result would be surprising since no-one disputes that the current AFL player trains for a longer period and at a greater intensity compared to the good old days.

As you stated, things are not this simple, since the increased focus on recovery and the greater access to professional medical assistance within AFL clubs are likely to be key factors in reducing injuries.

Over the last ten years the media and club supporters have often suggested that one club or another has solved the injury puzzle. In the mid 2000's it was suggested that Sydney were the "experts" and in 2009 and 2010 it was Collingwood. In both cases they have obviously "lost" the secret since their run of low injuries has been followed by a bad period. In Collingwood's case it could be argued that it cost them the 2011 Premiership.

If Andy Otten does his knee again, it will have nothing to do with the training regime. I am hopeful for a better run with injuries this year for 2 reasons. Firstly, we have fewer players over 30 or under 20 compared to 2010 and 2011. Secondly we have moved on quite a few players with recurring injury problems. (Stevens, Moran, Davis) not to mention Burton, Hentschell etc at the end of 2010.

We do have to accept that "luck" also plays a part with a significant variation both between clubs and within clubs from one season to another. Interestingly we were very lucky regarding injuries in 2005 and 2006 with injury rates well below average but unfortunately they mostly occurred around finals time. Finally, the number of "games lost to injury" is not the key influence on a teams performance, it is who you lose. Every team has an average of 8 players from their list of 40 unavailable due to injury every week of the season. It would be really good if we could choose which eight.