Travis Casserly not far off @Dell
Talking about using other terminology… does “return TBC” means he is going to come back with Tom Bellchambers?
If you look at the top post, it says Marty was 10 - 12 weeks away on April 3rd and now on April 17th Marty is 6 - 8 weeks away.
So he is either 6 weeks off a return and 2 weeks ahead of the schedule indicated 2 weeks ago, or he was 10 weeks off 2 weeks ago and he is 8 weeks off now, which matches both schedules albeit different ends of each timeframe.
We need to accept that mental health is a real injury or condition the same way that a hamstring is.
Hiding it, taking it off the list or calling it something more vague like ‘Personal’ doesn’t do anything to help break down the stigma that it’s something we don’t or shouldn’t talk about.
I understand this thinking. Ultimately whether he’s comfortable with it is a question for him and that should be a consideration here.
Without turning this into the mental health thread, that should be the only point. If Francis is comfortable with it being labeled like that in the injury list then it’s fine. Personally it took me 18 months - 2 years of seeing a psych before I even told my parents. And then slowly opening up to friends and people at work in general conversation and just removing the stigma attached to it in my own mind. It really does do wonders just talking about it like normal.
The mental health label shouldn’t be on the injury list as that is no longer the reason Francis is not playing. He’s not playing as he needs to meet some fitness KPIs as he missed a block of training. The correct reason for his absence is now ‘building fitness’ and referring to a past problem, mental or physical, is unnecessary.
Crow doesn’t jump on Bomber TV and say that Azza’s missing because he has a mental health problem. The AFL reporting is just lazy and they should try to catch up.
Further on this issue, as a label ‘mental health’ is so broad it is also close to meaningless in this context. A player might have severe depression, anxiety or just be in need of a break and feeling unable to cope with the pressure of AFL. By throwing 100s of different conditions of enormous variability and severity into one basket for the public and media to dissect, misinterpret and sometimes exaggerate or dismiss, does nobody, including the player any favour.
Not to be overly technical, but I disagree. If a player breaks his leg he will return to running weeks before playing, but the original injury will still be listed.
Mental health is a health issue. The brain is part of the body.
I agree that the most important consideration is the player’s welfare, regardless of injury type.
I’m suggesting in the interests of providing more useful and accurate information that when the player’s broken leg heals, and he no longer is missing games because he has a broken leg, then the injury update should read ‘broken leg fully healed and is now building up his fitness capability’ so that it reflects today and not 4 weeks ago. Of course that is long and cumbersome so ‘building fitness’ would be enough. This only matters if we care as to why a player is not being picked. Usually we probably don’t care, however we very much do in Azza’s case.
edit: your comment dingus that the brain is part of the body sounds simple, but I think it is a more useful way to view illness rather than thinking of ‘the mental being separable from the physical’.
as if our injury updates have ever been completely factually correct, or high on specific detail.
Call it what it is… There is no shame in having a mental illness - It affects many people in many different ways. Nothing good can come of hiding it behind some wiffle waffle word like ‘personal’. Maybe if he had an issue with it being named but his struggle has already been well publicised - no secret to anyone that he is having mental health problems. The more these issues are out in the open the less stigma will be attached.
Why don’t we just go the full SNAG for Azza - his injury designation could be - Mind, Body, Spirit
Sort of in jest, but would probably nail the approach required for his rehab.
In the absence of an EFC injury report, here is Callum Twomey’s update below, the official one is probably soon to appear.
So Joe’s expected return is no longer just after the bye, maybe round 16 to 18, but who knows if he will return at all with no return this year rumoured, but officially we haven’t given up.
My guess is that Joe will be a prospect until we lose 3 to 4 more games and be no hope for making the finals. Mind you we probably won’t have lost 3 games for another 6 weeks or more. So Joe may be in the process of a comeback while we come tantalisingly close to possibly making the finals.
Marty being ready in 2 to 3 weeks could be interesting, with , Ridley, Brown, Francis and Ambrose all lining up for a post in defence which has Hurley, Hooker and Dea appearing a stable combination, it is very easy for us to look a bit tall in defence, but Marty and Riddles probably being more versatile in the size of the forward they can take on.
We got lucky with the timing of the bye and Heppel’s concussion.
No mention of Smith even as a test? He had a limp up when going for his scan yesterday.
Technically Ridley should also be mentioned given he was out injured on the weekend, but they did flag it would be 1 week maximum and identified it as a painful but hopefully innocuous “Baker’s cyst”.
Wouldn’t expect an injury update until late in the week or next as we’ve got the bye and players have a few days off.
Surely injury assessment and rehab don’t get days off?
If they do I would be disappointed, but if the media department are on light duties, I wouldn’t be surprised.
I suppose giving us an update this time next week will be more informative regarding selection for next round, as opposed to doing it now.
Mind you, Callum Twomey could be bothered, why not EFC?
Devon not even mentioned, you know what that means.
RIP in peace, season over for the salami.
I’m goal umpiring at junior footy this weekend