OK, let me use real world examples to help push the point across.
Zac Williams. Long injury history. 2 weeks ago he was injured in the game and subbed out. He was picked last week. He got injured again. Now vossy is saying he'll be right for this week.
Why?
We keep pushing and pushing and we'll eventually break him again. You could argue that if we rested him last week the result would've been different. Do we need to say the same thing after this week? Rest him!
“Resting” Zac won’t improve his ability to stay on the park. He was subbed off for a corked calf one week and a corked glute the next week. Two impact injuries or Zac’s body saying enough is enough?
If we were to “manage” Zac, who comes into the team, Billy Wilson? Perhaps we could play Kennedy in defence and bring back Carroll?
Our situation is nothing like Geelong’s. They have almost a full list to pick from and half a dozen veterans who can benefit from an occasional spell. We have half a dozen players who probably aren’t up to the demands of AFL, several other injured players and no veterans who need an occasional spell.
Sure there is some colision injuries. Sure there is some 'dumb luck' injuries.
But the more fatigued you are, the more likely you are to get injured. Facts.
You can’t rest players who can’t get on the park.
The fact is that we have six senior players who are out injured more often than not. Then there’s the usual run of injuries that most clubs experience.
Replace most or all of those six injury prone players and we could be in a position to better manage the workloads of Cripps, Walsh, McKay, Curnow, Weitering, Newman and the newbies.
The point is, why do we play players until we break them. Yes, some are more fragile then others. Some are taller than others. Some are faster than others. Some are stronger than others.
Find out the attributes of the player and play to their advantages and cover their weaknesses. If a weakness is their longevity, or durability, cover for it. Rest them when you need too.
Both Martin and Marchbank are very good players when they are fit....we just don't see it enough. So rather than keep doing the same thing and expecting different results, change the way we approach them......and everyone.
Doesn't have to be limited to them. Many on here were suggesting we rest cripps a couple years ago when he was clearly injured. But the club kept insisting everything was fine, and we got a half-fit cripps for the whole year, rather than being without him for 2-3.....7 weeks or whatever it needed to be to get him back to a 'fit' level where he could perform.
I've heard Marc Murphy talk about this, and its something he didn't realise until later in his career. Players would have surgery as a 1st call to 'fix' something if it meant they could play a week earlier than had they simply sat out and rested. These surgeries can lead to further issues down the track and potentially do more harm than good in some instances. We are obsessed with getting back and playing THIS WEEK at the expense of next week, next month or next year. Why?
As mentioned, Geelong are leading the pack in this regard. Resting Danger, Hawkins, Cameron, Selwood......hard to find some bigger names in the comp than them, but they find a way to rest them and do ok......most likely because they rest them is why they do ok. So why do we think we know better than them?
Be smarter with how we deal with our players, our seasons depend on it!
That’s all true … but hard to put into practice when a lot of first choice players are out injured.
Geelong has enjoyed an almost injury free season and they can happily rest or freshen up players as necessary.
For whatever reason, we’ve ended up with some very good players who aren’t very durable. That limits our ability to (a) win games and (b) give our elite core group an opportunity to refresh.
I was surprised at how many here had Acres in their votes, I thought he made a lot of mistakes.
I think that there'd be no-one to vote for if mistakes meant disqualification.
I gave Acres a vote because I thought that his hard work far outweighed the times he was caught out ... and some of those were the result of teammates not doing their bit.
We play a fairly high risk, high reward game style and it's inevitable that we'll be caught out and punished. That's OK, provided we can limit how many times it happens.
We have few players who can walk straight back into the firsts. Cerra was clearly underdone last week and may have been better off having a run in the Magoos or as the sub.
Martin is one player who I would bring straight back in. He doesn’t need to get a lot of the ball to have an impact and we do need to get more out of our small forwards.
At the very least, the opposition defenders have to put work into him.
I haven’t seen the game but it seems that Kemp, Binns and Carroll did what players dropped from the firsts should do; show that they’re a class above the VFL blokes.
Not to mention TDK has been a very dangerous addition to the forwardline, and he has been scoring his 1 to 2 goals a game (should have had 3 against the Pies, but missed one that was gettable).
I think we just need to tidy it up a bit, and be a bit smarter and we will be fine. No need to panic, its not a personell issue, its an execution problem.
Yes, one goal in the four games BP and and five in the four WP games is a fair improvement.
I tend to agree that we're not doing too much wrong and a tweak here and there should get us back on the winning list. However, I do think that our personnel comes into it too. We've gone about as far as we can go with the "next man up" and need to start replacing some of those next men with the likes of Martin, McGovern and Motlop.
I lived in a house of serious domestic violence for 22 years. I would love to tell people what I experienced but some might not want to hear the reality of what takes place. How it has a long term effect on children. I am happy to tell the story if people want to hear it first hand. How it was resolved after a further 25 years later.
I'm really sorry to hear that Mantis. It's good to know that it was finally resolved even if it took such a long time.
If you're willing to share your story, I'm sure that many will be interested and willing to learn from your experiences. We probably should start a new thread though. Let me know and I'll split the last few posts.
Had some poor matchups on these players and non existant opponents on Sidebottom and Josh Daicos who just get on their own continually. I reckon we would have learned a lot from previous games and have better plans to curtail their more dangerous players and I think DeGoey is a major out for them that they cant replace in the middle. Being more efficient ourselves is one of our major issues and being able to convert our chances are keys to beating Collingwood as much as worrying about their players imho.
Nailed it EB.
If we can make the most of our midfield dominance and forward 50 entries, we should come away with a good win. Failure to capitalise on our strengths opens the door for Rottingwood.
Media are making this one sound like we will win comfortably. Degoey is a big loss no doubt but we still have troops out in the back half and need to pay very careful attention to Elliott Hill and co. They still have majority of their flag team in and imo this is a 50/50 game and Voss talking tough in the presser and at selection wont count for anything once the ball is bounced.
Reckon they will be loving the underdog tag in this.
Has all the hall marks of a upset and we cannot afford a slow start against this mob.
The footy media is suffering from a bout of puppy love after hearing Vossy's post game response to our Geelong loss. However, Vossy has since made it clear that he changed his assessment of the Geelong game within 48 hours.
We're playing some brilliant footy but only in bursts - perhaps it's not possible to maintain that intensity for a whole game. We could blow Collingwood away with a quarter of our best footy, or we could let them back into the game with some mediocre footy. They're not travelling well and De Goey out is a big loss for them. However, anything less than a four quarter effort from us will simply play them back into form.
According to Matty Kennedy, our players are hurting after the Geelong loss and know what's required to beat Collingwood. Let's hope they are switched on and get the job done.
I'm a bit ambivalent to the Commonwealth Games situation, for me it is a tragedy for the athletes but most of the finger pointing and rhetoric seems to be coming from various hangers on, bureaucrats, supply chain and political aspirants.
As more and more issues surface, it looks to me like another too many fat pigs in the trough scenario that has spoilt things for everybody. All that money, bugger all actually going to the development of the athletes.
That’s what happens when politicians make populist decisions without getting the bean counters involved first. A more modest games utilising existing and slightly upgraded infrastructure could have worked.
It’s interesting to think of the Commonwealth Games in the context of the discussion about the Olympic Games model. Competitors get bugger all while IOC rakes in billions.
A more equitable Commonwealth Games with modest infrastructure requirements could enable the less wealthy countries to have a crack at hosting, particularly if the model moved away from a host city, as the Victorian attempt intended, but probably didn’t go far enough.
I guess the bottom line is whether the broadcast rights will generate sufficient income to pay the athletes a reasonable wage.
I thought that Fantasia could be handy injury cover when we signed him. The injuries to Martin and Motlop created an opportunity for him and he’s made the most of it.
Fantasia is a smart footballer who provides leadership, forward pressure and demands a decent opposition defender. He has missed one game through illness so the MC must be happy with what he’s delivering. I can’t see that changing at least until Motlop and Martin are back.
