Training Pre season. Next up a VFL practice game v Williamstown at Arden St 10.30am Sat 17th Mar.

[Heaps of fun]

LOL, thanks for the advice, but I'm chill. This is a hobby for me, like most others, I suspect.

I actually always get a giggle when people resort to "chill out" as their response, in an attempt to avoid the arguments made that refute their own unsustainable arguments.

If it's so puerile to put injuries down to bad luck, I am staggered that when presented with a list of 19 different injuries, no-one can make an argument that any of those 19 was a result of anything other than bad luck. I mean, surely if you're right in blaming medical staff, you would be able to categorically support that in at least one instance of 19 injuries?

What's really puerile is getting disappointed about results and then going looking for scapegoats and fabricating charges against them.

Finally, what "chronically" injury prone players are you talking about avoiding? Shaun Higgins? Robbie Tarrant? Syd Barker would be rolling in his grave. Twice.

Chill out because I've got no interest in answering your silly question you keep pushing like it's some sort of revelation. Got no interest in justifying my opinions to you.
Also chill out because you keep repeating a word I used back to me which clearly offended you otherwise you have a very affected way of posting and it makes you look quite insecure!
WRT to the chronically injured I'm talking about Daw, Jacobs, Wright, Wood, Anderson, Morgan etc.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

^ LOL

On LG-H990 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[sven_inc]

Not sure where you're going with this. Injuries are generally bad luck, especially contact injuries (which are 100% bad luck). We have had worse than average luck the last two years, but not the two years before that.

Using Spitta as an example of resilience whilst essentially criticising the club for injuries to players is a joke, since injury is what destroyed his career. A bad luck injury - achilles. They happen, and it's nothing to do with training, preparation, injury prevention, etc.

I'm not as pessimistic as most on where we finish. If we have average injury luck, I think we'll finish 8-12. Then well in the 8 in 2019 as the younger players gel better. Of course, if we lose one or more of Cunnington, Ziebell, Brown, Higgins or Tarrant to injury for more than a couple of weeks, then yes, we'll probably finish bottom 4. Which has its upside, as you suggest.

Pardon my intrusion. I mean this with the utmost respect and don't mean to get in the way of this robust discussion but I just wanted to make it clear that almost 100% of injuries are NOT bad luck in day to day life and most likely the AFL.

The problem with any injury is that it always seems random unless you can take a big enough step back to consider what set it up to fail when it did.

ACLs are a prime example where the knee fails often in a very simple situation but we blame bad luck instead of years of likely poor leg mechanics prior - often because things don't hurt or fail until they do.

It's important to note that accidents definitely can and do happen where someone call fall from high enough or get hit hard enough to damage tissue, but the reality is these moments are often left to the truly horrific moments and still thankfully rare in the AFL.

A silly as this may sound even something as obvious as a knee breaking some ribs can potentially be prevented to a point depending on how supple the area is going into the incident. Stiffer ribs = more likely to break than bend when challenged.

It's a hard idea to support unless you delve into specific examples but there's this culture amongst the medical fraternity where the "bad luck" card if used far, far, far too easily. GWS did it last year with their horrid injury issues, Carlton used it with Dochertys ACL, Adelaide used it earlier this year when they copped a heap of hammies, GC trotted out the same line a few years back when Jaegers career was turned upsidedown.

I know being a random opposition supporter whose throwing his 2c into an already heated discussion probably carries no weight but as someone in the sports medicine industry the industry itself hasn't evolved beyond a very narrow focus.

Until they/we broaden our horizons Hammies will still keep getting injured, knees will still give way, shoulders will still pop, ankles will still roll and achilles will still rupture all potentially unnecessarily.

Happy to elaborate if this post isn't too annoying.

 

[sbdan]

True. They always are. How's the weather in FNQ?

The hot hot build up to the wet season. The combination of no football and the troppo effect makes for some unpredictable christmas parties.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

The hot hot build up to the wet season. The combination of no football and the troppo effect makes for some unpredictable christmas parties.

Sounds challenging, but potentially a lot of fun.

On LG-H990 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Psicosis]

There's definitely a middle ground between LTK's "all injuries are footballing injuries and can't be prevented" and Psicosis's "we have no injury prevention" in place. Unfortunately extremes dominate online discussions.

To be honest, I was attempting to find that middle ground - I don't actually believe our whole medical department is rooted. I just think that it requires some improvements, specifically in the prevention side of things.

 

[Twinkletoes]

To be honest, I was attempting to find that middle ground - I don't actually believe our whole medical department is rooted. I just think that it requires some improvements, specifically in the prevention side of things.

If only that was your opening statement. Alas............

.......proctology info and name calling removed. Play on.........and play nice y'all.

 

[kaboom kid]

View attachment 443583 View attachment 443584

You're right though - we are doing everything right. Absolutely no question we are.

Yep. Thought so. No proof whatsoever. In reality, in order to audit our injury prevention program effectively, you'd need to have a medical degree, a sports science degree, unfettered access to our medical records and extensive experience in the industry. I'm fairly confident you don't have any of those things. So, really you're just presenting pure speculation as fact and then expecting everyone else to prove you wrong.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Happy to elaborate if this post isn't too annoying.

You can start by giving me plausible data and not opinion.

 

[sven_inc]

You can start by giving me plausible data and not opinion.

Sure mate, you sound like you're going to be fun to talk to...

Give me the details of an injury from the list above or one suffered by a Roos player last season and I'll tell you whether it's likely to be actual bad luck or whether there's literally something you can do to protect against it.

I'll give you "plausible" answers and not "opinion" as you so warmly put it - based on what's found clinically.

(Sorry if this is derailing the thread)

 

[Snake_Baker]

I'll give you "plausible" answers and not "opinion" as you so warmly put it - based on what's found clinically.

(Sorry if this is derailing the thread)

Not interested in pick and choose reductionism. This is a discussion based on the entire population of our injury list. You're the one that took a position, so you it's up to you back it up with data.

Not interested in "plausible" answers either, as that implies you have an expertise that has not yet been exhibited. Anyone can ram square pegs in to round holes.

My position is that our injury scenario over the last 18 months is just random chance because I have not seen any patterns or data to support anything else. I want data.

If the comparative North and Richmond injury scenarios are a result of inefficient medical department practices by North, then someone is going to have to come up with some solid evidence.

 

[Mav]

You can start by giving me plausible data and not opinion.

Google it. There’s plenty of evidence to show training loads affect injuries.

If injuries are purely bad luck why do we have staff monitoring workloads in order to minimize injuries? Seems like a waste of money and resources!

 

[Snake_Baker]

Google it. There’s plenty of evidence to show training loads affect injuries.

You're making the claim, you google it, and then more importantly, show me how it applies to our situation.

Are you telling me that North had more injuries than Richmond because we trained harder?

If injuries are purely bad luck why do we have staff monitoring workloads in order to minimize injuries? Seems like a waste of money and resources!

Yes. Despite best practice injuries are still random events that inevitably occur in a contact sport.

 

[sven_inc]

You can start by giving me plausible data and not opinion.

Not interested in pick and choose reductionism. This is a discussion based on the entire population of our injury list. You're the one that took a position, so you it's up to you back it up with data.

Not interested in "plausible" answers either, as that implies you have an expertise that has not yet been exhibited. Anyone can ram square pegs in to round holes.

My position is that our injury scenario over the last 18 months is just random chance because I have not seen any patterns or data to support anything else. I want data.

If the comparative North and Richmond injury scenarios are a result of inefficient medical department practices by North, then someone is going to have to come up with some solid evidence.

If that is the way you want to look at this scenario mate then you will forever be woefully unsatisfied. The way the industry is at the moment it is highly unlikely that any data will ever exist on this particular topic - particularly if you are resistant to discussing things with "pick and choose reductionism".

If I was to say to you that a Hamstring will be set up to fail by the presence of X, Y, or Z, there is no guarantee that if you have X, Y, or X that you will ever get injured. It can never be a predictive model. We can only ever talk in likelihoods due an infinite number of variables attached to being a modern day human being. But, if you do injure a Hammy its almost guaranteed that X, Y, or Z will be there in hindsight - if you go looking for it. So clinically its important that although nothing is guaranteed, its still really important to make sure that X, Y, or Z aren't present to the best of the patients ability. Because of that, the "data" you so staunchly need to budge in this discussion may be hard to find. But the fact that X, Y, or Z are present in each individual injury case, its apparent that bad luck is NOT the underlying cause in any, if not all injuries - whether you feel open minded enough to appreciate that or not.

I'm sure I don't have to harp on the idea that every injury has different things that set it up to occur. The overarching things that do apply to everyone like training load, intensity, age, etc aren't relevant in these discussions because they can only realistically expose an issue NOT create one on their own. So by default you can have a discussion about the entire breadth of your injury list but you can't make it meaningful until you discuss the individual cases within.

For the record I only used the word "plausible" because thats what you asked for originally.

Im more than happy to back my position with clinical "data" because I see it every day. My expertise is in finding solutions to patients problems and bad luck is not a concession we generally have to make.

If you are happy for me to elaborate then great, if not best of luck to you. If anyone else would like me to elaborate im more than happy to as I don't want to clog up another teams board unless others are happy.

 

[Snake_Baker]

I already told you that I was not interested in hypotheticals.

 

[Hojuman]

Has alot changed at the club from our seemingly " very few " injury years say ' 14 / 15 to the last year and a half ?
Younger players with less hardened / mature bodies whatever you want to call it, does that make a significant difference ?
Do we need Con & Harry back ?

 

[sven_inc]

I already told you that I was not interested in hypotheticals.

You must be fun at parties.

 

[Snake_Baker]

You must be fun at parties.

This isn't a party.

 

[year of the roo]

This isn't a party.

Speak for yourself.

 

[sven_inc]

Speak for yourself.

 

[Mav]

You're making the claim, you google it, and then more importantly, show me how it applies to our situation.

i dont need to, I know I’m right. Give me evidence that injury occurance is purely a ramdom event. Where is your data set to support your claim?

Are you telling me that North had more injuries than Richmond because we trained harder?

Could be load, it could be how we trained, or when we trained. It could be weights sessions or even the Arden St surface. It might be issues with our warm up, our cool down or our recovery. Or it could be technique issues, or it could be poor diagnosis of a complaint. Every case may be different but they’re not all “bad luck”.

Yes. Despite best practice injuries are still random events that inevitably occur in a contact sport.

You answered my question with yes! That makes no sense at all.

 

[Tas]

Pardon my intrusion. I mean this with the utmost respect and don't mean to get in the way of this robust discussion but I just wanted to make it clear that almost 100% of injuries are NOT bad luck in day to day life and most likely the AFL.

The problem with any injury is that it always seems random unless you can take a big enough step back to consider what set it up to fail when it did.

ACLs are a prime example where the knee fails often in a very simple situation but we blame bad luck instead of years of likely poor leg mechanics prior - often because things don't hurt or fail until they do.

It's important to note that accidents definitely can and do happen where someone call fall from high enough or get hit hard enough to damage tissue, but the reality is these moments are often left to the truly horrific moments and still thankfully rare in the AFL.

A silly as this may sound even something as obvious as a knee breaking some ribs can potentially be prevented to a point depending on how supple the area is going into the incident. Stiffer ribs = more likely to break than bend when challenged.

It's a hard idea to support unless you delve into specific examples but there's this culture amongst the medical fraternity where the "bad luck" card if used far, far, far too easily. GWS did it last year with their horrid injury issues, Carlton used it with Dochertys ACL, Adelaide used it earlier this year when they copped a heap of hammies, GC trotted out the same line a few years back when Jaegers career was turned upsidedown.

I know being a random opposition supporter whose throwing his 2c into an already heated discussion probably carries no weight but as someone in the sports medicine industry the industry itself hasn't evolved beyond a very narrow focus.

Until they/we broaden our horizons Hammies will still keep getting injured, knees will still give way, shoulders will still pop, ankles will still roll and achilles will still rupture all potentially unnecessarily.

Happy to elaborate if this post isn't too annoying.

A few years back we didn't have many serious injuries, last few years it has been a lot worse. Not sure what has change from then to now but we have had some horrific runs with injuries last few years.

 

[Le Grille]

Regardless the amount of injuries that we had and some of which recurring dictates that the medical set up must be investigated with identification, prevention and player evaluation being focuses on


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

The 'lingering' injuries are the ones to be rightfully pissed about.

The impact ones, you just cop as unlucky.

But Jacobs, Wright et al, they need to be questioned.

 

[Psicosis]

We are just a really unlucky club - all our injuries are a result of bad luck...