Mis-management of players: Why is this still happening?

Football Discussion Dustin Fletcher Hangar
21
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

Quoted for accuracy!

Ablett excluded… Unless 100% he doesn’t wanna step over the White line … Come at me Gary.

22
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

So if TBC is injured, why was it only when he played his first game “pain free” was when we decided to play a 2nd ruckman? Coincidentally was also the game where TBC actually took a contested mark and kicked a goal?

Zaka, sore knee may miss 1-2 weeks. So far he has missed 4 and looks to be missing another 2.

23
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.


Clubs might risk a player if it’s a BIG game like a final or a game that determines whether the team will make the finals. Clubs might even risk a player that’s 80%+ fit.

Not us. Zaka wasn’t even close to 50% fit. Couldn’t run, couldn’t turn, couldn’t tackle. Was a complete liability in games we shouldn’t have risked him.

And I think you’re missing my MAIN point which is how the docs/medics at our club always take the stupid option for a player to recover from an injury. Instead of putting the player off completely, they try these fancy approaches which ultimatly fail (Hocking) OR risk him in a game which further damages the injury (Zaka/Jobe).

You're not even 10% fit to wipe your own ■■■■, yet you still manage to find the keyboard.

Making huge assumptions and generalisations with zero context is fun, isn’t it?

24
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

So if TBC is injured, why was it only when he played his first game “pain free” was when we decided to play a 2nd ruckman? Coincidentally was also the game where TBC actually took a contested mark and kicked a goal?

Zaka, sore knee may miss 1-2 weeks. So far he has missed 4 and looks to be missing another 2.

And the rest.

If you rule out anyone with a niggle you’ll have about 8 blokes to pick from at this point of the year and none by round 20.

25
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.


Clubs might risk a player if it’s a BIG game like a final or a game that determines whether the team will make the finals. Clubs might even risk a player that’s 80%+ fit.

Not us. Zaka wasn’t even close to 50% fit. Couldn’t run, couldn’t turn, couldn’t tackle. Was a complete liability in games we shouldn’t have risked him.

And I think you’re missing my MAIN point which is how the docs/medics at our club always take the stupid option for a player to recover from an injury. Instead of putting the player off completely, they try these fancy approaches which ultimatly fail (Hocking) OR risk him in a game which further damages the injury (Zaka/Jobe).

You're not even 10% fit to wipe your own ■■■■, yet you still manage to find the keyboard.

Making huge assumptions and generalisations with zero context is fun, isn’t it?

Ahh, the classic 'I don't know what to say so I'll attack the poster personally'.

And you say zero context, yet I’ve used four different scenarios in a space of 9-12 months explaining where I think the Club went wrong.

26
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

So if TBC is injured, why was it only when he played his first game “pain free” was when we decided to play a 2nd ruckman? Coincidentally was also the game where TBC actually took a contested mark and kicked a goal?

Zaka, sore knee may miss 1-2 weeks. So far he has missed 4 and looks to be missing another 2.

And the rest.

If you rule out anyone with a niggle you’ll have about 8 blokes to pick from at this point of the year and none by round 20.


A fracture in a knee is a niggle now??
27

We need more needles. I have heard of a guy does gas some really good stuff and of course it is all legal?

28
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

So if TBC is injured, why was it only when he played his first game “pain free” was when we decided to play a 2nd ruckman? Coincidentally was also the game where TBC actually took a contested mark and kicked a goal?

Zaka, sore knee may miss 1-2 weeks. So far he has missed 4 and looks to be missing another 2.

And the rest.

If you rule out anyone with a niggle you’ll have about 8 blokes to pick from at this point of the year and none by round 20.


A fracture in a knee is a niggle now??

If a fracture behind the kneecap is a niggle then TBC is tougher than we thought. But still, if he is injured, why aren’t we playing a second ruckman? Isn’t this why we recruited them? If we weren’t going to play them when TBC is injured then why pick them?

29
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

So if TBC is injured, why was it only when he played his first game “pain free” was when we decided to play a 2nd ruckman? Coincidentally was also the game where TBC actually took a contested mark and kicked a goal?

Zaka, sore knee may miss 1-2 weeks. So far he has missed 4 and looks to be missing another 2.

And the rest.

If you rule out anyone with a niggle you’ll have about 8 blokes to pick from at this point of the year and none by round 20.


A fracture in a knee is a niggle now??
He was able to run and jump, maybe a few percent off each, but not by much. It clearly wasn't a full fracture or anything likely to do further damage.

So yeah, I’d call that a niggle.

30
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.

So if TBC is injured, why was it only when he played his first game “pain free” was when we decided to play a 2nd ruckman? Coincidentally was also the game where TBC actually took a contested mark and kicked a goal?

Zaka, sore knee may miss 1-2 weeks. So far he has missed 4 and looks to be missing another 2.

And the rest.

If you rule out anyone with a niggle you’ll have about 8 blokes to pick from at this point of the year and none by round 20.


A fracture in a knee is a niggle now??

If a fracture behind the kneecap is a niggle then TBC is tougher than we thought. But still, if he is injured, why aren’t we playing a second ruckman? Isn’t this why we recruited them? If we weren’t going to play them when TBC is injured then why pick them?


Exactly. I actually thought we upgraded McKernan for that reason. The guy precedes to have a very good run of games (in the VFL) finally gets a spot, plays his role, allows Belly to go fwd. All goes well. Then… Dropped.

Baffling.

31

This is a bit over blown. We’ve had a pretty good run with injuries since 2012.

Having said that the Nick Kommer situation ■■■■■■ me off. His energy was contagious. Its a costly balls up losing him

32
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.


Clubs might risk a player if it’s a BIG game like a final or a game that determines whether the team will make the finals. Clubs might even risk a player that’s 80%+ fit.

Not us. Zaka wasn’t even close to 50% fit. Couldn’t run, couldn’t turn, couldn’t tackle. Was a complete liability in games we shouldn’t have risked him.

And I think you’re missing my MAIN point which is how the docs/medics at our club always take the stupid option for a player to recover from an injury. Instead of putting the player off completely, they try these fancy approaches which ultimatly fail (Hocking) OR risk him in a game which further damages the injury (Zaka/Jobe).

You're not even 10% fit to wipe your own ■■■■, yet you still manage to find the keyboard.

Making huge assumptions and generalisations with zero context is fun, isn’t it?

Ahh, the classic 'I don't know what to say so I'll attack the poster personally'.

And you say zero context, yet I’ve used four different scenarios in a space of 9-12 months explaining where I think the Club went wrong.

If you reckon that's an attack...

Your whole whinge post boils down to real people making real decisions about their actual bodies which affects their actual careers not being convenient for you and me.

That’s the context that you miss.
It’d be nice (for us) if Heath booked himself in on day one, but he didn’t. That’s not your call, it’s not his surgeon’s call, it’s not even the club doctor’s call, it’s not the club or coaches’ call, much less yours or mine.

It’s his decision.

If a player wants to try the non-surgical option first, then good luck to them.

And if you think the club is going to put any pressure at all on players about their health, or something they should or shouldn’t put into their bodies - after the last 3 years - then you really haven’t been paying any attention at all.

Tl:dr; wanna know why players didnt go in for surgery earlier? Ask them.

33
Free Spirit I'm definitely in the camp that most/all Blitzers don't know more about strategy/tactics/footy than the club and its footy department in general, and that their incredible inside info of which we collectively have about 1% at most definitely means in a lot of ways it's hard to criticize the coaches and staff. But your incessant shooting down of everyone to ever question anything on here is just ridiculous. It seems like it's only started in the last month or so for some reason. Is everything alright? You're more angry than usual.

And without discussion and differing opinions Blitz might as well not exist. That’s why we come here, to talk footy. Particularly someone like me who is from WA and regularly talks Dons with only one other EFC supporter.

You can imagine given the way we are travelling ATM there would be a few people searching for an answer(s) to the question of why are we where we are?

I think this thread is pretty well justified. We’ve known since forever Zaka cannot carry any sort of injury. Jobe either can, or has never had to before as I haven’t noticed him ever hampered in the past but he’s carrying something and it’s of such severity that it’s seriously impacting his ability to play to his lofty standards (and for some patches to even a plodder’s standards). That much has been evident for a few weeks. The Hocking thing baffled many even before/as it was happening. Probably the Bellchambers point is the only one that is a bit rough on the club IMO.


I’m happy for reasonable debate as I always have been. I’ll continue to defend my team from irrational attacks and always will do. I just don’t see the point in having a team if you don’t stick up for them.
34
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.


Clubs might risk a player if it’s a BIG game like a final or a game that determines whether the team will make the finals. Clubs might even risk a player that’s 80%+ fit.

Not us. Zaka wasn’t even close to 50% fit. Couldn’t run, couldn’t turn, couldn’t tackle. Was a complete liability in games we shouldn’t have risked him.

And I think you’re missing my MAIN point which is how the docs/medics at our club always take the stupid option for a player to recover from an injury. Instead of putting the player off completely, they try these fancy approaches which ultimatly fail (Hocking) OR risk him in a game which further damages the injury (Zaka/Jobe).

You're not even 10% fit to wipe your own ■■■■, yet you still manage to find the keyboard.

Making huge assumptions and generalisations with zero context is fun, isn’t it?

Ahh, the classic 'I don't know what to say so I'll attack the poster personally'.

And you say zero context, yet I’ve used four different scenarios in a space of 9-12 months explaining where I think the Club went wrong.

If you reckon that's an attack...

Your whole whinge post boils down to real people making real decisions about their actual bodies which affects their actual careers not being convenient for you and me.

That’s the context that you miss.
It’d be nice (for us) if Heath booked himself in on day one, but he didn’t. That’s not your call, it’s not his surgeon’s call, it’s not even the club doctor’s call, it’s not the club or coaches’ call, much less yours or mine.

It’s his decision.

If a player wants to try the non-surgical option first, then good luck to them.

And if you think the club is going to put any pressure at all on players about their health, or something they should or shouldn’t put into their bodies - after the last 3 years - then you really haven’t been paying any attention at all.

Tl:dr; wanna know why players didnt go in for surgery earlier? Ask them.

Nah, but sack Quinn, 'K?

35
Free Spirit I'm definitely in the camp that most/all Blitzers don't know more about strategy/tactics/footy than the club and its footy department in general, and that their incredible inside info of which we collectively have about 1% at most definitely means in a lot of ways it's hard to criticize the coaches and staff. But your incessant shooting down of everyone to ever question anything on here is just ridiculous. It seems like it's only started in the last month or so for some reason. Is everything alright? You're more angry than usual.

And without discussion and differing opinions Blitz might as well not exist. That’s why we come here, to talk footy. Particularly someone like me who is from WA and regularly talks Dons with only one other EFC supporter.

You can imagine given the way we are travelling ATM there would be a few people searching for an answer(s) to the question of why are we where we are?

I think this thread is pretty well justified. We’ve known since forever Zaka cannot carry any sort of injury. Jobe either can, or has never had to before as I haven’t noticed him ever hampered in the past but he’s carrying something and it’s of such severity that it’s seriously impacting his ability to play to his lofty standards (and for some patches to even a plodder’s standards). That much has been evident for a few weeks. The Hocking thing baffled many even before/as it was happening. Probably the Bellchambers point is the only one that is a bit rough on the club IMO.


I’m happy for reasonable debate as I always have been. I’ll continue to defend my team from irrational attacks and always will do. I just don’t see the point in having a team if you don’t stick up for them.

Exactly. Thanks, FS

36

I love how as soon you criticise one flaw of the footy club, posters who disgaree, use that as an excuse and make it as if I’m attacking the club. And then go on that I’m whinging and apparently not reasonable discussion.

I simply pointed out elements and processes that I disagreed with. Not sure how that is attacking the club.

37
AFL players play carrying injuries. All of them do it in all teams.

Any rant/question that ignores that basic fact is just silly whinging.


Clubs might risk a player if it’s a BIG game like a final or a game that determines whether the team will make the finals. Clubs might even risk a player that’s 80%+ fit.

Not us. Zaka wasn’t even close to 50% fit. Couldn’t run, couldn’t turn, couldn’t tackle. Was a complete liability in games we shouldn’t have risked him.

And I think you’re missing my MAIN point which is how the docs/medics at our club always take the stupid option for a player to recover from an injury. Instead of putting the player off completely, they try these fancy approaches which ultimatly fail (Hocking) OR risk him in a game which further damages the injury (Zaka/Jobe).

You're not even 10% fit to wipe your own ■■■■, yet you still manage to find the keyboard.

Making huge assumptions and generalisations with zero context is fun, isn’t it?

Ahh, the classic 'I don't know what to say so I'll attack the poster personally'.

And you say zero context, yet I’ve used four different scenarios in a space of 9-12 months explaining where I think the Club went wrong.

If you reckon that's an attack...

Your whole whinge post boils down to real people making real decisions about their actual bodies which affects their actual careers not being convenient for you and me.

That’s the context that you miss.
It’d be nice (for us) if Heath booked himself in on day one, but he didn’t. That’s not your call, it’s not his surgeon’s call, it’s not even the club doctor’s call, it’s not the club or coaches’ call, much less yours or mine.

It’s his decision.

If a player wants to try the non-surgical option first, then good luck to them.

And if you think the club is going to put any pressure at all on players about their health, or something they should or shouldn’t put into their bodies - after the last 3 years - then you really haven’t been paying any attention at all.

Tl:dr; wanna know why players didnt go in for surgery earlier? Ask them.


Are you assuming it’s the players (final) decision or you know for a fact?
38
I love how as soon you criticise one flaw of the footy club, posters who disgaree, use that as an excuse and make it as if I'm attacking the club. And then go on that I'm whinging and apparently not reasonable discussion.

I simply pointed out elements and processes that I disagreed with. Not sure how that is attacking the club.

use the ignore function, it’s the same few posters. it’s the shoot the messenger mentality. they feel they can’t be angry at the club for the current situation, cos it may lessen their perceived support for the club in the eyes of others, so they attack anyone who does, it helps them alleviate their anger cos they are getting it out, but you and others who continue to reply feeling you’ve been wronged just feed the cycle, and end up feeling even more angry.

39

Don’t underestimate the influence of our marketing department. Positive spin doctoring sells more memberships, attracts more sponsors, inflates expectations.

Then there’s possibilities of bonus money for club and players alike if certain KPI’s are met. You know… make the eight, kick x-amount of goals in a season, play x-amount of games in a season, it goes on and on.

I just hope the football department has the final say, but can’t be sure of anything.

40

^ lol stupid.