A foot fracture wasnt it? Whats that got to do with you speculating he has weak legs that caused his knee injury?
1 Like
This isnât my point. We had a choice to build his physique so that he could reliably withstand senior football, or we could play him every week before doing the strength work. It was an either / or decision. Players struggle to bulk up when playing and recovering from matches each week.
Iâm saying we took a short term approach by fielding him early and sacrificed the strength program that would have helped him this year.
Tsatas I think had hamstring issues.
Again, Iâm not creating this out of thin air. He had a really messed up 2022 and then has broken down as weâve pushed him over the preseason. Ideally we do the 6 week strengthening block before he blew out his knee and risks his career before playing a game. Doing that block after the injury is a pretty good indication there was a problem.
Not really. It is very human to assume that because outcome A occurred, that it was also the most probable result.
1 Like
You are totally making this up!
Tstatas had a foot stress injury last year.
Then got a knock at training on his knee this year⌠Nothing to do with conditioning issues, just bad luck
Essendonâs top draft selection Elijah Tsatas will require surgery on his knee after scans revealed an acute meniscus tear.
The 18-year-old suffered a knock to his knee in a tackling collision at training this week and after seeing a surgeon today, the Club can confirm Tsatas will have surgery in the coming days.
5 Likes
Back stress injuries to thinly built talls didnât surprise anyone. Everyone just reacted along the lines of âyeah, that makes senseâ.
So if none of us are surprised it happened, that really does beg the question of why wasnât it preventable.
1 Like
These highlights would be impressive if he could take contested marks, not much use being 200cm unless you can
Love Benny. Between Russia and Essendon, he has farkin got me.
4 Likes
Because injuries arent always preventable.
1 Like
Because that is terrible logic. Youâre acting like you can be 100% sure you can prevent it. Which you canât. Even if they did everything they could to prevent it, there would still be a probability of it happening which may have occurred.
Without knowing more details you donât know if they did try and prevent it and we got very unlucky, or if they didnât and the likely outcome resulted.
As I said, the fact an event occurred doesnât explain what the probability of it occurring was. And without knowing what EFC did or didnât do, or what their options were, you donât know to what degree theyâd reduced the probability already and got unlucky, or if it was a stuff up.
2 Likes
Perfectly valid that correlation doesnât equal causation and all that.
But I call bullshit. I canât prove it. But it just stinks of shortsighted incompetence.
1 Like
Iâve said it before and I will again, and Iâm sure people will disagree with me again.
I would increase the initial player contract to 3 years. Players are drafted, to then commence a 12 month physical preparedness onboarding at the club that has drafted them. They are able to commence playing 12 months after their initial draft date.
I think the industry should address the issue for player longevity and risk mitigation.
4 Likes
yeh nah. unless you are willing to reduce the draft age by 12 months.
I get the sentiment but clubs can do that now and they do, depending on the player. Other draftees are capable from the get go. Why force them to sit out?
2 Likes
Why? Whatâs the difference if they start playing at 18 or 19? Itâs literally just a number.
That 12 months could be utilised to actually get them ready for a career, instead of the club having to do it on an initial 2 year deal.
Encourages clubs to take a risk on guys less physically developed too, knowing there is a 12 month window to help them get to the point that they can play.
1 Like
Because there also exists a pressure to play a player before they are ready for their âdevelopmentâ because they are on a 2 year contract.
Remove the pressure altogether. If it means Nick Daicos canât play until he is 19, then so be it.
Their is still the excitement of a new draftee, itâs just pushed to the next year.
I reckon youâre breathing air at Mt Everestâs peak, with that assessment
2 Likes
if players arent allowed to play at any level and only strength training, then may as well spend time doing study and other stuff.
Agree its not a fair play ground.
look at Ashcroft / JHF who likely had strngth training for a few years before going into AFL system.
No need to mature age recruits to do that if they have been playing state league and moving across the country for opportunity to play 0 football.
AFL then would also need to expand lists by 6-7 spots which they wouldnât like $$$$ they trying to reduce them.
If doing this then may as well just actually expand list sizes out to 50. And then the more mature players get selected and kids are playing ressies unless ready made stars.
Physical preperadness doesnât just involve strength training. They can still train with the group, they can still run, they can still take part in team meetings and player education programs.
Is it really that outlandish? Young player comes off injury affected junior year, severely injures the same leg that he injured in his junior year. Club responds by putting him on a strength program to prevent him hurting it again.
Is it such a huge leap to ask if that strengthening program could have prevented the injury? Is it outlandish to ask if this could have been predicted?