Injury Russell your feathers - discuss all things high performance; injury lists, Marvel surface, curse from the gods and Andrew Russell

[SkyhorseTamer]

SkyhorseTamer so, you think a lack of clarity is the responsibility to the recipient rather than the one making the statement?

Don't think it was unclear at all. Everything said was perfectly obvious.

 

[BlueJet]

Don't think it was unclear at all. Everything said was perfectly obvious.

To each their own but IMO stating that something falls squarely under Russell's portfolio when he actually meant that there were other contributing elements, isn't perfectly clear.
Clarifying the point would have prevented the confusion.
Anyway, not my argument.. play on.

 

[marcmurphy3]

As far as criticism of Austin for injury prone players on the list, I'm not sure it's entirely fair. Firstly, most were brought to the club under SOS not him. Williams the exception. We got desperate and reached there. Cerra was not injury prone at Fremantle.

Second, if we are talking about the re-signings at the back end of last year most of those injury prone players got through and played key roles in our run to the prelim. Would have been brave call to delist them in exchange for late speculative picks in the draft.

Third, we are assuming that High Performance has no input into these re-signing decisions. I would be shocked if they aren't consulted. If Russell says Marchbank and Cunners bodies are stuffed, and they'd be lucky to play 10 games a year from here on out, Austin is not re-signing them. That's not to say List Management doesn't bare part of the accountability. Just that it's naive to think these decisions are made by Austins team alone.

 

[BlueJet]

Austin's team may have inherited them but little has been done to move on from them, either.
There's overlap between Coaching, LM & High Performance as each contributes to a functioning side. Arguments can be made for or against each dependent on how you view things.
Trying to allocate blame to one department without having all appropriate info at hand is a problem IMO.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Austin's team may have inherited them but little has been done to move on from them, either.
There's overlap between Coaching, LM & High Performance as each contributes to a functioning side. Arguments can be made for or against each dependent on how you view things.
Trying to allocate blame to one department without having all appropriate info at hand is a problem IMO.

For sure. If Russell is saying to Austin "I am confident I can get these guys right and you'll be able to rely on them going forward" then they are getting injured again more fault rests with him. If Russell is saying, "I will do my best, but these guys will continue to have issues and miss more games than they play" and Austin is ignoring it, then more fault rests with him.

I doubt the commentary either way is that black and white. Just illustrating the point that it's hard to confidently apportion blame without understanding the dynamics of how the different areas are interacting.

What I can say is the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. On that basis I expect the club will try something different at the end of the year and doubt it will be targeted at one area. Reckon we will see changes across list management and high performance, whether that be personnel, approach or both. How drastic probably depends on how we finish the year.

 

[BlueJet]

For sure. If Russell is saying to Austin "I am confident I can get these guys right and you'll be able to rely on them going forward" then they are getting injured again more fault rests with him. If Russell is saying, "I will do my best, but these guys will continue to have issues and miss more games than they play" and Austin is ignoring it, then more fault rests with him.

I doubt the commentary either way is that black and white. Just illustrating the point that it's hard to confidently apportion blame without understanding the dynamics of how the different areas are interacting.

What I can say is the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. On that basis I expect the club will try something different at the end of the year and doubt it will be targeted at one area. Reckon we will see changes across list management and high performance, whether that be personnel, approach or both. How drastic probably depends on how we finish the year.

I certainly agree mate,
As you've touched on, due to the overlaps there will be points & counterpoints available to paint people/departments in a positive or negative light dependent on the individuals own perspective.
I want our operations reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure best practice.
I've little doubt that we can achieve better outcomes than we are at present, whether that be via change in staff, chain of command or methodology.
I can't see Cook & Sayers not addressing something if it's found to be holding us back.
Unlike some of their no doubt well-intentioned predecessors, I have more confidence in them making the right call.

 

[bigblueboy]

I certainly agree mate,
As you've touched on, due to the overlaps there will be points & counterpoints available to paint people/departments in a positive or negative light dependent on the individuals own perspective.
I want our operations reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure best practice.
I've little doubt that we can achieve better outcomes than we are at present, whether that be via change in staff, chain of command or methodology.
I can't see Cook & Sayers not addressing something if it's found to be holding us back.
Unlike some of their no doubt well-intentioned predecessors, I have more confidence in them making the right call.

There's been almost a rolling review of our S+C approach since Teague was punted. Changes have been made. Outcomes remain poor. More "addressing" ahead.

 

[Arr0w]

There's been almost a rolling review of our S+C approach since Teague was punted. Changes have been made. Outcomes remain poor. More "addressing" ahead.

I think it's great that eyes are still focused on improving outcomes

 

[BlueJet]

There's been almost a rolling review of our S+C approach since Teague was punted. Changes have been made. Outcomes remain poor. More "addressing" ahead.

I would have thought so.

 

[BlueJet]

I think it's great that eyes a still focused on improving outcomes

Yep, I think "review" often has a negative connotation in footy but it needn't be the case, it should be about setting the highest standards achievable.

 

[slashin_velvet]

To each their own but IMO stating that something falls squarely under Russell's portfolio when he actually meant that there were other contributing elements, isn't perfectly clear.
Clarifying the point would have prevented the confusion.
Anyway, not my argument.. play on.

nope - Arr0w quoted my response to someone who said "tackling nothing to do with Russell. That is a mentality thing", and I've demonstrated how Russell himself has publicly declared that mentality and psychology are clear parts of his remit as head of high performance.

There will always be an element of other factors, so assuming I meant Russell had sole responsibility feels like deliberate misinterpretation, and this is exacerbated by the continual barrow pushing of suggesting I was attributing ACL's and contact injuries to Russell.

 

[teddy-hopkins]

Interesting Motlop brought back through the 2s this weekend.

Instead of rushing him back into the 1s after a long lay-off as they did with Cunningham and Martin - who played poorly and then reinjured themselves within a week.

I wonder why the change of approach? Could it be they've received some heat for completely ****ing up the injury management so far this year?

 

[JJBagger]

Interesting Motlop brought back through the 2s this weekend.

Instead of rushing him back into the 1s after a long lay-off as they did with Cunningham and Martin - who played poorly and then reinjured themselves within a week.

I wonder why the change of approach? Could it be they've received some heat for completely ****ing up the injury management so far this year?

Motlop has a long career with us still to come, no need to rush him. Cunners and Martin may not be on the list next year. Also, they are both perpetually injured, so might as well play them in the seniors rather than wasting time being fit in the twos

 

[Osc1]

Interesting Motlop brought back through the 2s this weekend.

Instead of rushing him back into the 1s after a long lay-off as they did with Cunningham and Martin - who played poorly and then reinjured themselves within a week.

I wonder why the change of approach? Could it be they've received some heat for completely ****ing up the injury management so far this year?

Most have been ok returning from injury. I’d say the cautious approach is due to the injuries occurring to players in the forward line. Depth is getting tested. Better to be cautious.

 

[Beyond Blue]

Motlop has a long career with us still to come, no need to rush him. Cunners and Martin may not be on the list next year. Also, they are both perpetually injured, so might as well play them in the seniors rather than wasting time being fit in the twos

I’d be absolutely mortified if contract status had anything to do with how the match committee select the team. Good to see common sense prevailed this time.

Weitering, Walsh, Cripps, McKay, Curnow and Saad are the only players at our club who are good enough to come straight back in after long lay offs.

 

[teddy-hopkins]

Motlop has a long career with us still to come, no need to rush him. Cunners and Martin may not be on the list next year. Also, they are both perpetually injured, so might as well play them in the seniors rather than wasting time being fit in the twos

So if you're older and more injury prone you get a less cautious approach to injury management?

Or they got a bit desperate at the selection table and put the hope of a win in front of proper injury management?

 

[JJBagger]

I’d be absolutely mortified if contract status had anything to do with how the match committee select the team. Good to see common sense prevailed this time.

Weitering, Walsh, Cripps, McKay, Curnow and Saad are the only players at our club who are good enough to come straight back in after long lay offs.

Not about selection, but management. What if they build Cuningham and Martin up at training rather than in the VFL? Mots on the other hand, could use the VFL to get some touch and "match fitness" (I hate that term)

 

[BluStreak]

I wonder why the change of approach? Could it be they've received some heat for completely ****ing up the injury management so far this year?

Maybe Russell said no to the MC?

 

[teddy-hopkins]

Not about selection, but management. What if they build Cuningham and Martin up at training rather than in the VFL? Mots on the other hand, could use the VFL to get some touch and "match fitness" (I hate that term)

The point I'm making is when they bring Motlop back it is to build touch and match fitness - a similar approach was deployed last year with both Martin and Cunners.

This year they decided to throw them straight into an AFL game and they reinjured themselves. It seems to me there's been an acknowledgement that was not clever. Maybe the media scrutiny during the last couple of weeks is having an impact.

 

[Arr0w]

The point I'm making is when they bring Motlop back it is to build touch and match fitness - a similar approach was deployed last year with both Martin and Cunners.

This year they decided to throw them straight into an AFL game and they reinjured themselves. It seems to me there's been an acknowledgement that was not clever. Maybe the media scrutiny during the last couple of weeks is having an impact.

Cuners came back in the AFL, omitted the following, then injured at VFL level a week later

But, both are perennial injury prone, as per that list that was posted not so long ago

Then you have Walsh and Weitering that didn't break down coming back straight into the AFL side

 

[carlton_99]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/afl-2024-carlton-adjusts-program-after-hamstring-calf-injury-flurry/news-story/33d000a1143d21dd36b86b9435cfcbe0

 

[SurreyBlue]

Great question. Other point would be, did we get the training loads wrong, aiming to get through the r2 bye? It's been a nightmare since.

MSN

BANG!

 

[YamandU]

And there we have it. Training loads cocked up.

 

[Beyond Blue]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/afl-2024-carlton-adjusts-program-after-hamstring-calf-injury-flurry/news-story/33d000a1143d21dd36b86b9435cfcbe0

MSN

BANG!

These “revelations” from the review are so simplistic I find them really concerning on a lot of levels.

How do football industry veterans like Russell, Voss, Lloyd and even Cook not know that building training loads in between matches increases the possibility of soft tissue injuries which are typically caused by placing too much stress on tendons?

Why would the club change tack from building players back up by playing games in the lower level, less stressful reserves environment as we did last year with positive effect, to rushing them back into the highest level off a long term injury, a strategy that has failed in the past?

 

[Arr0w]

These “revelations” from the review are so simplistic I find them really concerning on a lot of levels.

How do football industry veterans like Russell, Voss, Lloyd and even Cook not know that building training loads in between matches increases the possibility of soft tissue injuries which are typically caused by placing too much stress on tendons?

Why would the club change tack from building players back up by playing games in the lower level, less stressful reserves environment as we did last year with positive effect, to rushing them back into the highest level off a long term injury, a strategy that has failed in the past?

Not sure I read any of that in that article