He would have stretched the graph which is pretty easy to do. I’ve done it myself. If he re-tore it then they would have said so imo.
Once its stretched you can’t unstretch it and it means the knee will be less stable regardless of how well you rehab. How bad or how unstable the knee is would have been the main consideration with whether or not you get it done again. For many non pro athletes, you would just continue your rehab and live with it, but they took a long term and conservative view with Nic which makes sense to me.
Also the greatest likelihood is that Martin’s knee went prior to being over the boundary line, at the point of contact between the two players, rather than on landing.
Think this is a bit of a blitz myth based on the talk that he was progressing ahead of schedule.
A couple of weeks ago I checked the timeframes between doing their ACL and their first run since, for somewhere between 6-10 Essendon players who have done an ACL in the past few years (mens + womens teams). From memory, except for one of them who took a little longer, they were all within a 7 day window with one other the same amount of days as Martin and another two just one day extra.
Gen pop is around 10%.
Athletes it’s up around 30%.
Figures do depend a lot on where you draw the line in terms of time eg a “failure” within 12 months probably shouldn’t be considered the same as a “failure” 10 years down the track. From what I gather, the 10% and 30% refer to the latter.
No need to guess Odoyle. You can see the moment his knee buckles and it was 100% definitely inside the boundary line.
And agree, Mansell’s act was a regulation play to force the boundary throw in.
