Its not like Clark hasn't been doing anything during Feb. He's at least a month into pre-season by my count.

Do you guys really think that AFL players are ever 100%?

They all play games with some niggling problem to manage.

You can play through niggles RP. When you have been out for nearly 12 months, you should be 100% ready to go when you return.

As boring and childish this line is, I'm glad some of you aren't coaching.

Edited February 28, 201312 yr by billy2803

We have Dawes, Pedo, Fitzy, Watts (if need be), Sellar.

We don't need to play a tall forward who isn't 100%.

I don't disagree with you Billy, my point wasn't about whether we should... but whether a side at the bottom of the ladder can afford to carry a player who isn't 100% fit better than a top of the ladder side.

Its not like Clark hasn't been doing anything during Feb. He's at least a month into pre-season by my count.

It has been close to bugger all ww.

Sellars is probably 70% the player Clark is. With that in mind, it is smarter/safer to play Sellars at 100%, than Clark at 70%.

billy have you forgotten his efforts in the first 6 weeks of the 2012 season in the forward line.

As a forward he makes a great backman.

Gee, look what I started :-) My comment was relating to aerobic fitness only, but you are all probably right... anyway, this is why I'm not coaching in any form of the game.

Edited February 28, 201312 yr by hardtack

I don't disagree with you Billy, my point wasn't about whether we should... but whether a side at the bottom of the ladder can afford to carry a player who isn't 100% fit better than a top of the ladder side.

There is no way any club at AFL level should play a player that is coming back from a long term injury too early. Ok, I may be a little off when I say he needs to be 100%, but Mitch will be nowhere near 85% by Round 1, so it's too great a risk.

I wouldn't mind betting therie's been confusion (me included) in this thread about personal fitness v match fitness. We play Mitch when his injury is 100%, and he builds up some match fitness through the VFL. He can then go in to the AFL at 85% match fitness.

billy have you forgotten his efforts in the first 6 weeks of the 2012 season in the forward line.

As a forward he makes a great backman.

After being accused of so much hatred toward many people Old, I thought I'd show the sensitive side of me!

Billy, I am actually impressed by the positivity you have been expressing in your posts the last day or two, perhaps we can see if we can get Old Dee on the same page.

Personally can't see Mitch being in the VFL, thought maybe sub for a couple of games

Great thread. Would read again.

Great contribution. Would like.

Billy, I am actually impressed by the positivity you have been expressing in your posts the last day or two, perhaps we can see if we can get Old Dee on the same page.

Personally can't see Mitch being in the VFL, thought maybe sub for a couple of games

Interesting that you're impressed but not surprised. Perhaps you have looked at threads that weren't related to tanking and found that I'm quite a positive person.

Big call playing him in the 1s straight up. Didn't Hawthorn play Hodge at Box Hill after his long absence?

A half fit Mitch would still kick a couple of goals, screw this playing him into fitness through the VFL crap. He's too good for that.

Great thread. Would read again.

Definitely. Lots of great content.

Interesting that you're impressed but not surprised. Perhaps you have looked at threads that weren't related to tanking and found that I'm quite a positive person.

Big call playing him in the 1s straight up. Didn't Hawthorn play Hodge at Box Hill after his long absence?

TBH I don't really care when Mitch comes back this year.... so long as he is fit for a pre-season for next year

and no I am not advocating tanking :D I actually agree that bringing him back early is not what we need.

.... still think you misinterpretted what I was on about before though

Any more comment from anybody who went to training?

You can play through niggles RP. When you have been out for nearly 12 months, you should be 100% ready to go when you return.

He will blow up half way through the second quarter.

He and Trengove will struggle to impact 2013 at all.

And mods - change the name of this thread to 'parking advice and fitness expectations.'

Edited February 28, 201312 yr by Davey's gravy

In my view a player that has done no running for 8 months and has just started doing sprints will not be fully fit for another four months.

You've obviously never done any of the Wattbike sessions that they do. Try it sometime, and see how you go! It's not for nothing that gyms have stationary bikes.

Clark has been working since before Christmas, and is now running alongside one of the best (if not the best?) runners at MFC. Not really fair on Mitch to compare, and would be interesting to see what happened if any of the other big guys on the team were put in the same position.

I don't know that there will be issues with Clark's base fitness by the time Round 1 comes around. On the other hand, getting up to playing speed and playing and kicking with confidence are something else.

I've changed the thread title to accurately reflect what is being discussed. If anyone actually attended training and has something to report, start a new thread.

What's with all this 90%, 100%, 85% malarkey? The guy's not going to play till the coach/s want him to. Simple. Too much maths for my liking here.

I don't know that there will be issues with Clark's base fitness by the time Round 1 comes around. On the other hand, getting up to playing speed and playing and kicking with confidence are something else.

Coming from the Brisbane program I would imagine Clark would've had a better fitness base than many of our team pre David Misson's arrival. I'm sure there would be some lingering effects from the ethic he had previously which was demonstrated in him showing up half our team five minutes after arriving.

lol at the renamed thread's title

So was Trenners working well at training?

Oops, sorry for derailing the thread and being off topic.

Appropriate thread title. So whose up for some misc bickering?

There is no way any club at AFL level should play a player that is coming back from a long term injury too early. Ok, I may be a little off when I say he needs to be 100%, but Mitch will be nowhere near 85% by Round 1, so it's too great a risk.

I wouldn't mind betting therie's been confusion (me included) in this thread about personal fitness v match fitness. We play Mitch when his injury is 100%, and he builds up some match fitness through the VFL. He can then go in to the AFL at 85% match fitness.

After being accused of so much hatred toward many people Old, I thought I'd show the sensitive side of me!

I don't hate you billy

I don't hate anyone on Demonland.

Oh hang there is that ------