Injury Please sign injury petition

[Horaceg]

If we don’t think the Club is looking at every option to make us or keep us competitive then you may want to look at supporting another Club. It is in the best interests of everyone, Club officials, players, support staff and supporters that our players keep fit And stay on the park.

i think it’s a little delusional to think anyone wants anything else, maybe Carlton supporters but we don’t care what they think.

 

[Gone Critical]

If we don’t think the Club is looking at every option to make us or keep us competitive then you may want to look at supporting another Club. It is in the best interests of everyone, Club officials, players, support staff and supporters that our players keep fit And stay on the park.

i think it’s a little delusional to think anyone wants anything else, maybe Carlton supporters but we don’t care what they think.

Agreed. What the exact injury numbers are and how we compare to other clubs is of interest but doesnt give any real answer.

Whatever the number, be it good or bad, I would be expecting the club to be continually review practice internally, making sure on going education occurs for all staff, looking to practice excellnce as a matter of course. We should be doing this all the time, its expected. We seem to be doing this, reviews occur, staff changes have been made, programs upgraded etc. With luck next year we will be on the low numbers of injuries as a club. We are overdue.

 

[sr36]

Agreed. What the exact injury numbers are and how we compare to other clubs is of interest but doesnt give any real answer.

Whatever the number, be it good or bad, I would be expecting the club to be continually review practice internally, making sure on going education occurs for all staff, looking to practice excellnce as a matter of course. We should be doing this all the time, its expected. We seem to be doing this, reviews occur, staff changes have been made, programs upgraded etc. With luck next year we will be on the low numbers of injuries as a club. We are overdue.

Unless of course it's not luck at all and is to do with injury prone players, in which case we've gotten rid of a few in Wells, Aish, Goldsack, but have retained Reid, Moore, Elliott, Broomhead and Shaz, with Adams and JDG beginning to look a concern in that they seem to pick up an injury every year, plus Beams has had a few significant ones over the years. Our new recruit also said he's recovered from the 5 injuries he had last year!

Isn't there a fair bit of data pointing to injuries being the best predictor of future injuries.

 

[Black_White]

You've gone off on a tangent with another of your rants.

I don't think anyone is in denial about the club's problem with injuries to key personnel, we're arguing about the effectiveness of what the petition is requesting as a way of addressing this problem.

The club is allocating extra resources towards rehab next year but you're an angry guy on the internet, so whatever.

Pfffttt....
Its people like you who hold the club back from success.
Wait, can I say that?
No, no, your a mod, I can’t say such things to you.
i humbly withdraw the first sentence lest you wave your magic wand....

P.S. I don’t “rant”.
I simply tell the truth. Which always comes to pass.

 

[Gone Critical]

Unless of course it's not luck at all and is to do with injury prone players, in which case we've gotten rid of a few in Wells, Aish, Goldsack, but have retained Reid, Moore, Elliott, Broomhead and Shaz, with Adams and JDG beginning to look a concern in that they seem to pick up an injury every year, plus Beams has had a few significant ones over the years. Our new recruit also said he's recovered from the 5 injuries he had last year!

Isn't there a fair bit of data pointing to injuries being the best predictor of future injuries.

Of course. That’s possible. Still whatever our issues are getting a bit of luck on our side

 

[Nick Ster]

Too many Physios only know what they learn at University. They have no life experience of being injured, seeing different people, spending time in gyms and having a vast repertoire of stretches and exercises to pick from.

I once had a lower back issue and saw a titled sports physio from an AFL club who gave me the classic NSLBP diagnosis, performed a lumbar roll manipulation, then told me I would need one of those a month for the rest of my life. He was the 7th or 8th Physio I had seen with that particular issue, all of them useless.

I was impressed with your tenacity in seeing 7 or 8 different practitioners for the same problem. Not sure why it didn’t click a bit earlier that you were not getting the answers you were looking for. Not sure though that it really supports your argument for the big difference between practitioners.

It supports the argument that it can look like you're doing everything possible when you're not.

What if HeadinTheSand had stopped at 7 or 8 physios or seen 10 physios, all doing the same groupthink, and done nothing else? Then he could say to his friends "My titled sports physio from an AFL club is performing well" and "There seems to be an assumption that I haven't reviewed it at all", and " There appears an assumption by many I've taken no action", and "I've changed my physio 7 times. That's a lot of actions", and "If you don’t think I'm looking at every option to cure my back issue you may want to find another friend", and "I'm due for a change of luck with my back", etc., etc., etc.

If HeadinTheSand had done that, he'd still have his lower back issue.

 

[Gone Critical]

It supports the argument that it can look like you're doing everything possible when you're not.

What if HeadinTheSand had stopped at 7 or 8 physios or seen 10 physios, all doing the same groupthink, and done nothing else? Then he could say to his friends "My titled sports physio from an AFL club is performing well" and "There seems to be an assumption that I haven't reviewed it at all", and " There appears an assumption by many I've taken no action", and "I've changed my physio 7 times. That's a lot of actions", and "If you don’t think I'm looking at every option to cure my back issue you may want to find another friend", and "I'm due for a change of luck with my back", etc., etc., etc.

If HeadinTheSand had done that, he'd still have his lower back issue.

Elite high performance athletes are different and their livelihood depends on optimal rapid recovery. For us mere mortals though it’s not even mandatory to see a physio for a back injury.

Therapy may help recovery, help range of movement, strengthen and give preventative measures but the body itself is what repairs the injury. That will happen whether you augment with physio or not. So after 7-8 physios the back probably got better bacause that’s what was going to happen given time.

I think damming the 7-8 physios with terms like group think and they are hopeless without full knowledge of the situation is unlikely to be correct

 

[Phil Inn]

A timely discussion point.

Cold water poured on scientific studies based on 'statistical cult'

Top statisticians are asking serious questions about dozens of research projects carried out by Australian sports scientists using a controversial method.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Nick Ster]

I think damming the 7-8 physios with terms like group think and they are hopeless without full knowledge of the situation is unlikely to be correct

My point wasn't about damning the 8 physios, though HeadInTheSand can say more.
My point was my first sentence.

It can look like you're doing everything possible when you're not. e.g. "We've changed 8 fitness and medical staff, so we must have done everything possible."

 

[sr36]

My point wasn't about damning the 8 physios, though HeadInTheSand can say more.
My point was my first sentence.

It can look like you're doing everything possible when you're not. e.g. "We've changed 8 fitness and medical staff, so we must have done everything possible."

Ultimately though the concept of "a review" is the ultimate in giving the impression that you've done something, when you haven't really. Particularly when you probably know what information is going to be gleaned from a review - which you should know, because the process of review should be ongoing.

Here's the information they're likely to get from a review:

1.Question: What evidence do you have that your training facilities are hard?
Answer: We took a reading once, but other than that Adams said it was hard a few years ago.

Conclusion: We don't actually know if your training facilities are hard. If they are hard, here are a range of theories about whether that is the cause of you having injuries. They range from probable to no chance.

2.Question: What conditioning work do your players do?
Answer: Lots. Here's our programs.

Conclusion: A couple of aspects of your program seem a bit suspect under this theory. But under this other theory, they're great.

3. Question: Have a lot of your players had previous injuries
Answer: Yes. That's why you are here

Conclusion: There is some data to suggest that having had previous injuries makes players more susceptible, therefore to reduce injuries you should delist Moore and Elliott

Question: Can you pay me now?
Answer: Here's your check for $500,000

Then it goes back to the decision makers and they choose to go with the theories that support their original beliefs anyway - and they beef up the conditioning department.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Ultimately though the concept of "a review" is the ultimate in giving the impression that you've done something, when you haven't really. Particularly when you probably know what information is going to be gleaned from a review - which you should know, because the process of review should be ongoing.

Here's the information they're likely to get from a review:

1.Question: What evidence do you have that your training facilities are hard?
Answer: We took a reading once, but other than that Adams said it was hard a few years ago.

Conclusion: We don't actually know if your training facilities are hard. If they are hard, here are a range of theories about whether that is the cause of you having injuries. They range from probable to no chance.

2.Question: What conditioning work do your players do?
Answer: Lots. Here's our programs.

Conclusion: A couple of aspects of your program seem a bit suspect under this theory. But under this other theory, they're great.

3. Question: Have a lot of your players had previous injuries
Answer: Yes. That's why you are here

Conclusion: There is some data to suggest that having had previous injuries makes players more susceptible, therefore to reduce injuries you should delist Moore and Elliott

Question: Can you pay me now?
Answer: Here's your check for $500,000

Then it goes back to the decision makers and they choose to go with the theories that support their original beliefs anyway - and they beef up the conditioning department.

I'm getting a Yes Minister vibe from this post.

 

[Gone Critical]

My point wasn't about damning the 8 physios, though HeadInTheSand can say more.
My point was my first sentence.

It can look like you're doing everything possible when you're not. e.g. "We've changed 8 fitness and medical staff, so we must have done everything possible."

I understood your 1st point but that is altogether a new argument from the one saying we have an injury crisis that we need to fix.

 

[sr36]

I'm getting a Yes Minister vibe from this post.

Humphrey would have loved a review.

 

[Gone Critical]

A timely discussion point.

Cold water poured on scientific studies based on 'statistical cult'

Top statisticians are asking serious questions about dozens of research projects carried out by Australian sports scientists using a controversial method.

www.theage.com.au

Does follow the same path we are on here. Stats analysis done by the people who understand it is a hard and set business. If your study design isn’t powered to be able to answer your question your study is a waste of time.

It’s essentially the same argument as counting the number of injury’s or matches lost to statistically tell whether team A has a crisis. It doesn’t work because the numbers don’t have the power to answer the question. Even if there was a good quality study involved which there is not.

It’s not a matter of debate or opinion it’s just true which is why the petition in this thread is flawed.

If you don’t agree all that means is you don’t understand statistics.

 

[Black_White]

It’s such a pity that ccollingwoodfcs good intentions are being struck down by the many, many sycophants who believe that the club walks above us as some kind of God.
To never be questioned, to never be held to account.

 

[Gone Critical]

A timely discussion point.

Cold water poured on scientific studies based on 'statistical cult'

Top statisticians are asking serious questions about dozens of research projects carried out by Australian sports scientists using a controversial method.

www.theage.com.au

The other similar area that would be great to have looked at would be the stats kept by AFL clubs and coaching staff and their interpretation of them

If we had a proper statistician come in and look at them I am certain the clubs would be told the interpretations they are making are largely invalid because they just don’t understand the stats of the data they are dealing with.

 

[Gone Critical]

It’s such a pity that ccollingwoodfcs good intentions are being struck down by the many, many sycophants who believe that the club walks above us as some kind of God.
To never be questioned, to never be held to account.

Who are the sycophants you see here. I haven’t noticed any.

 

[Black_White]

Who are the sycophants you see here. I haven’t noticed any.

Adding one to the list.

 

[sr36]

It’s such a pity that ccollingwoodfcs good intentions are being struck down by the many, many sycophants who believe that the club walks above us as some kind of God.
To never be questioned, to never be held to account.

The thing that you are missing is that it's not the sycophants who are criticising the idea of a review. The sycophants are true believers, who believe in the idea of a great individual or organisation that is beyond question. Those who think like that want a review, so that we can get in a great expert to heal us.

It's the skeptics who are saying that this review idea sounds like a load of bollocks. The true believers seem to think that we are going to find some PHD carrying mystic version of Tony Grieg, who is going to poke a key into the Holden centre surface and wisely inform us that "the pitch may appear green with ample grass coverage, but it's hard underneath and over the course of the season it is certain to result in multiple hamstrings breaking up."

I'm sure if we want to, we can pay a very large amount of money to find a mystic version of Tony Greig... It may help us reduce our injuries, but it will be by pure luck.

 

[Nick Ster]

I understood your 1st point but that is altogether a new argument from the one saying we have an injury crisis that we need to fix.

But I was just responding to your post about HeadInTheSand's physio story.

Many here have argued "There seems to be an assumption that they haven't reviewed it at all", " There appears an assumption by many they've taken no action", " That's a lot of actions", "If you don’t think they're looking at every option...", etc.

That's a very bad argument.

 

[sr36]

A timely discussion point.

Cold water poured on scientific studies based on 'statistical cult'

Top statisticians are asking serious questions about dozens of research projects carried out by Australian sports scientists using a controversial method.

www.theage.com.au

Begs the question, is sports science an oxymoron?

Bad Horse, if you're reading, I do know that it doesn't really 'beg the question'.

 

[HeadInTheSand]

Therapy may help recovery, help range of movement, strengthen and give preventative measures but the body itself is what repairs the injury. That will happen whether you augment with physio or not. So after 7-8 physios the back probably got better bacause that’s what was going to happen given time.

It's actually difficult to believe you are involved in medicine. If you are, you need to be struck off for spouting nonsense like that.

I think damming the 7-8 physios with terms like group think and they are hopeless without full knowledge of the situation is unlikely to be correct

Four of the 8 recommended I do Pilates, so group think is an accurate term.

Five of them came up with NSLBP, ditto.

Elite high performance athletes are different and their livelihood depends on optimal rapid recovery.

No, their livelihood depends on optimal recovery that minimises the chance of re occurrence or related injury.

If your study design isn’t powered to be able to answer your question your study is a waste of time.

Which is pretty much every study involved in musculoskeletal issues.

Rathleff's HSR study for Plantar Fasciopathy - 48 people.
Kongsberg's study on corticosteroid, eccentric decline squats or HSR for patellar tendinopthy - 39 people.
Mendiguchia's hamstring rehab protocol - 48 people.

That's without even going into study question or the fact that in studies, everyone gets the same dosage.

If you don’t agree all that means is you don’t understand statistics.

Or you have a healthy skepticism because stats are just one type of data.

 

[Nuwanda]

Can we consider a new business model where we pay him to not post pictures of his body?

You obviously don’t know who is hiding behind the name ‘obese arachnid’.
Margot Robbie.....announce yourself!!!!

 

[Gone Critical]

It's actually difficult to believe you are involved in medicine. If you are, you need to be struck off for spouting nonsense like that.

Maybe try to refute the argument.

Your body heals most injuries. This will occur without physio. Physio can improve and augment recovery.

Give me your take on that

Which is pretty much every study involved in musculoskeletal issues.

Rathleff's HSR study for Plantar Fasciopathy - 48 people.
Kongsberg's study on corticosteroid, eccentric decline squats or HSR for patellar tendinopthy - 39 people.
Mendiguchia's hamstring rehab protocol - 48 people.

That's without even going into study question or the fact that in studies, everyone gets the same dosage.

We seem to be in furious agreement here. Sports sciences do poorly in producing good quality evidence based data so rely on other information/experience to guide them. Even in other branches of medicine where there is good evidence based info there is also a large element of other info experience guiding practitioners. Trick here is to understand the quality and pitfalls in interpreting the info you base treatment on.

Or you have a healthy skepticism because stats are just one type of data.

Only argument I have on this thread is poor use of stats. Stats are not everything and many other forms of information/experience are valuable.

Base thing here is that the number of injuries/games lost has no statistical significance in assessing whether Collingwood has an injury crisis. A stat needs an ability to answer a question asked and this one doesn’t.

 

[Nick Ster]

We seem to be in furious agreement here. Sports sciences do poorly in producing good quality evidence based data so rely on other information/experience to guide them. Even in other branches of medicine where there is good evidence based info there is also a large element of other info experience guiding practitioners. Trick here is to understand the quality and pitfalls in interpreting the info you base treatment on.

So you agree with HeadInTheSand about big differences between practitioners?