#6 Joe Daniher - drinkin’ coffee, brewin’ beer, gettin’ injured

even if they did take the cautious approach and brought him back from the 2’s there was always a chance of re injury, there’s no question, for a multitude of reasons, as you mention above being one.

The issue still is, they took the cautious approach in not operating, only to rush him back into the afl straight away, severely underdone, counter intuitive to their cautious approach up until that north game.

1 Like

If my employer started making medical decisions on my behalf, I’d tell them to get ■■■■■■ and that I’d see them in court.

The job is irrelevant. Players get to choose their own treatments, the club can give guidance, but no more than that. I’m sure if a specialist told them surgery was definitely the best option they’d take it. But, I suspect, in all the mentioned cases there was no clear benefit in surgery at the time, so the players opted against it.



There is no way they said they ONLY have to worry about defense and that the forward line was perfect.

Sure they may have said something along the lines of we will concentrate on defense but not what you said.

You are either letting emotion cloud your memory or just outright making stuff up.


If there was no clear benefit then that’s a different matter but if they are suggesting a certain procedure was going to have the best outcome and a player said no based on a bit of pain then I would be asking questions.

Nobody enjoys surgery but if a Dr recommends it as the best outcome for recovery and the best result then you just do it.

Obviously the player is consulted and must assess the information given before the player and the club make the decision. I don’t think one overrides the other. Surgery isn’t ideal but if it’s in the collective best interest surely it must be done? Our club has shown a reluctance to put players in for surgery only to have to do it at a later date anyway so what purpose does that serve?

They would have won by 800+ points had Salmon played.

It’s just not that black and white.

There are different approaches for different issues and many times neither surgery or rest have a definitive or regular outcome.

Surgery is not something you just get done and we will see what happens. It’s a serious business for many reasons and on many occasions isn’t the safest option. Let’s not forget people die on the operating table and Golden Staff is also a very real threat from Operations.

Also we are far from the only club that has given players rest to only have to have surgery later on.

1 Like

Stop with the logic will you, …

1 Like

This is a repeat of recent history! Heath Hocking had a similar issue and the Club put off surgery for over a year and then eventually realised that he needed surgery which he then had. It effectively cost the Club 2 years of Heath’s services!! Not smart decision making Essendon.

1 Like

Understand that and I’m certainly not suggesting everything needs to be fixed with a surgery. In the specific examples I gave (Colyer & Fantasia last year) surgery was likely to alleviate those issues. The decision was made to rest & manage which proved to be an error given both had to have surgery which further delayed their preparation.

In the case of Joe, it was a much more difficult decision, but it’s ultimately ended up at surgery as the treatment. It’s unfortunate for Joe and us all as fans of the club but it was always a possibility given the nature of the injury. In this case, there were many examples of this conservative rest & strengthen path that was taken. Brad Crouch for example went the surgery path and is getting through the work comfortably by all reports. I’ve never intimated that surgery is always the right path but it does seem our club is ever reluctant to take that path in recent times.

Maybe our players don’t have private health insurance?

But the club doesn’t make a call out of the blue. Crow doesn’t have a chat with Doc and they agree let’s not have surgery.

They have scans, mri’s etc and are guided by the specialists. Of course the specialist doesn’t tell them exactly what to do because as i said many of these outcomes are not definitive but surgeons always prefer to go the non operative route if possible because the risks involved in surgery far outweigh any risk in no surgery.

I think it would be highly unlikely that if a specialist told ANY club his recommendation would be rest that they would turn around and say no we will be having surgery.

They do however get second and even third opinions.


They still aren’t even sure what fkn causes it, and judging by ALL literature on it, OUR guys have done it by the book.

If you want to blame anyone,… blame JD for getting the OP, … that makes as much sense as anything else when it comes to this.

Osteitis pubis is a common cause of chronic groin pain, especially in athletes. Although a precise etiology is not defined , it seems to be related to muscular imbalance and pelvic instability . Diagnosis is based on detailed history, clinical evaluation, and imaging, which are crucial for a correct diagnosis and proper management. Many different therapeutic approaches have been proposed for osteitis pubis ; conservative treatment represents the first-line approach and provides good results in most patients, especially if based on an individualized multimodal rehabilitative management. Different surgical options have been also described, but they should be reserved to recalcitrant cases . In this review, a critical analysis of the literature about athletic osteitis pubis is performed, especially focusing on its diagnostic and therapeutic management.



1 Like

…an unfortunate repeat of history. All we can do is hope the specialist surgeon has a good track record.

1 Like

Our rehab group is putting together a pretty handy forward line


Out of curiosity which “literature” are you referring too and when you say “by the book” which book are you referring too?

I would have thought there would be many different methods of treatment.

1 Like

There is,… or have been. Then there’s current best practice based on all accumulated knowledge on the mystery that is OP.

Are you suggesting they would not employ current best practice?

If so, why? Because Essendumb?

I know Justin Crowe, and I can assure you he is a consumate professional in his work.

1 Like

I am suggesting that one club may take a different approach to another based on the success they have had in the past.

If there were one book or common practice as you say then all outcomes would be the same.

Clearly some clubs are better at managing injury that others.