Mitch Clark

[Chook 15,012]

Is it just me or do the bones of the human foot look absolutely bizarre? If there's ever been proof of evolution, it's the human foot. No god would be insane enough to create such a thing intentionally.

[Webber 10,454]

If you do a bit of searching, you will find some posts by those who seem to be in the know when it comes to sport injuries of this nature. I think it was Webber who gave a fairly detailed description. If I recall, the general consensus was that if it is corrected, then the injury will not happen again.

As I've stated before, Clarke's Lisfranc injury was a dislocation, not involving a fracture, which statistically makes it very likely he'll play again, for years in fact. Yes, Richo had the same injury. No, Egan's was completely different. Obviously, MC is having some irritation when he pushes weight bearing, which given the time left in the season, doesn't allow him enough time to get match fit once he gets back to full weight bearing, i.e sprinting. This is NOT about instability of the foot structure, just the irritable tissues involved in the area, which makes it very frustrating. Sometimes it just needs time to settle, and given his ongoing value to the club in the coming years when we are better, why risk perpetuating that irritation or have him underdone for a few dead rubber games at the end of this year? If football clubs indulged in some of the impetuous impatient rejections of common sense that some on here have, half the players we see out there would've been cut loose a while ago!

See you next year Mitch.

[Webber 10,454]

Is it just me or do the bones of the human foot look absolutely bizarre? If there's ever been proof of evolution, it's the human foot. No god would be insane enough to create such a thing intentionally.

It may be just you, chook! The foot is a brilliant combination of flexibility when required, and utter rigidity when being pushed off from. Bear in mind that in sprinting it takes 4 to 5 times the body weight in load at push off, and as such must be a completely rigid lever, then softens when not under load to allow conformation to uneven surfaces......bloody miraculous kit it is!

[Wormburner 674]

It may be just you, chook! The foot is a brilliant combination of flexibility when required, and utter rigidity when being pushed off from. Bear in mind that in sprinting it takes 4 to 5 times the body weight in load at push off, and as such must be a completely rigid lever, then softens when not under load to allow conformation to uneven surfaces......bloody miraculous kit it is!

Have you got a foot fettish Webber?

[Webber 10,454]

Have you got a foot fettish Webber?

Depends on the wearer.....

[Wormburner 674]

Depends on the wearer.....

Haha. Well played!

More of a legs and thigh man myself....hmmmm legs and thighs

Oh wait, got of topic - get better Mitchy!!!

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

As I've stated before, Clarke's Lisfranc injury was a dislocation, not involving a fracture, which statistically makes it very likely he'll play again, for years in fact. Yes, Richo had the same injury. No, Egan's was completely different. Obviously, MC is having some irritation when he pushes weight bearing, which given the time left in the season, doesn't allow him enough time to get match fit once he gets back to full weight bearing, i.e sprinting. This is NOT about instability of the foot structure, just the irritable tissues involved in the area, which makes it very frustrating. Sometimes it just needs time to settle, and given his ongoing value to the club in the coming years when we are better, why risk perpetuating that irritation or have him underdone for a few dead rubber games at the end of this year? If football clubs indulged in some of the impetuous impatient rejections of common sense that some on here have, half the players we see out there would've been cut loose a while ago!

See you next year Mitch.

Did he come back to early or was it just pure bad luck in your opinion?

[Longsufferingnomore 1,631]

As I've stated before, Clarke's Lisfranc injury was a dislocation, not involving a fracture, which statistically makes it very likely he'll play again, for years in fact. Yes, Richo had the same injury. No, Egan's was completely different. Obviously, MC is having some irritation when he pushes weight bearing, which given the time left in the season, doesn't allow him enough time to get match fit once he gets back to full weight bearing, i.e sprinting. This is NOT about instability of the foot structure, just the irritable tissues involved in the area, which makes it very frustrating. Sometimes it just needs time to settle, and given his ongoing value to the club in the coming years when we are better, why risk perpetuating that irritation or have him underdone for a few dead rubber games at the end of this year? If football clubs indulged in some of the impetuous impatient rejections of common sense that some on here have, half the players we see out there would've been cut loose a while ago!

See you next year Mitch.

At last someone who actually does know what they are talking about.

[beelzebub 23,313]

As I've stated before, Clarke's Lisfranc injury was a dislocation, not involving a fracture, which statistically makes it very likely he'll play again, for years in fact. Yes, Richo had the same injury. No, Egan's was completely different. Obviously, MC is having some irritation when he pushes weight bearing, which given the time left in the season, doesn't allow him enough time to get match fit once he gets back to full weight bearing, i.e sprinting. This is NOT about instability of the foot structure, just the irritable tissues involved in the area, which makes it very frustrating. Sometimes it just needs time to settle, and given his ongoing value to the club in the coming years when we are better, why risk perpetuating that irritation or have him underdone for a few dead rubber games at the end of this year? If football clubs indulged in some of the impetuous impatient rejections of common sense that some on here have, half the players we see out there would've been cut loose a while ago!

See you next year Mitch.

would you expect the layoff before and up to preseason to be enough time to settle?. That would be ideal I suppose.

Might it take longer , interrupting ? ( preseason )

Statistically likely ? What sort of probability here ( and Im just asking...lol )

Sounds like a rushed and bungled rehab of sorts.

[[email protected] 101]

yeah hirdy went to Germany and got calves blood and god knows what else injected into his system

Well, he is GOOD at getting things injected into his system by his own admission...

[monoccular 17,411]

Can you imagine your foot as a bunch of loose knuclke bones floating in jelly inside a sausage skin.

Actually quite tightly bound and integrated to support his 100 odd kilograms. And that is the issue here - stability.

As I've stated before, Clarke's Lisfranc injury was a dislocation, not involving a fracture, which statistically makes it very likely he'll play again, for years in fact. Yes, Richo had the same injury. No, Egan's was completely different. Obviously, MC is having some irritation when he pushes weight bearing, which given the time left in the season, doesn't allow him enough time to get match fit once he gets back to full weight bearing, i.e sprinting. This is NOT about instability of the foot structure, just the irritable tissues involved in the area, which makes it very frustrating. Sometimes it just needs time to settle, and given his ongoing value to the club in the coming years when we are better, why risk perpetuating that irritation or have him underdone for a few dead rubber games at the end of this year? If football clubs indulged in some of the impetuous impatient rejections of common sense that some on here have, half the players we see out there would've been cut loose a while ago!

See you next year Mitch.

Thanks for that detail. I agree it is absolutely pointless trying to get him back on the field for this long dead season.

IF more rest is going to give him a better chance of recovery, let him have it.

It also gives us a chance to see what alternative forward stuyctures we can arrange: perversely, his injury has given us the opportunity to see just what Fitzy has to offer, which may never have happened had Mitch been up and running. A slightly silver lining to the cloud.

[Webber 10,454]

would you expect the layoff before and up to preseason to be enough time to settle?. That would be ideal I suppose. Might it take longer , interrupting ? ( preseason ) Statistically likely ? What sort of probability here ( and Im just asking...lol ) Sounds like a rushed and bungled rehab of sorts.

Just one of those things. There's no reason to remove the metal fixateurs unless they create a problem, and there's no actual probability they will. If it isn't causing a problem, then don't intervene. I had a patient who just "didn't like the idea" of metal in his leg, despite full function (surf, snowboard), so had it removed, developed an infection in the bone as an unfortunate result of the removal, and spent the next 18 months out of action. In MC's case, he rehabbed well and was all good, so the fact he subsequently got some irritation is just what can POTENTIALLY happen. Not botched or bungled, just life. I have no idea of the stats, and it would be fraught with analytical complexities based on the definition of full recovery, due to differing expectations through the populous. For example, a recent patient is a musician, who likes running. He had a Lisfranc fracture/dislocation, and can run again. Could he sprint/jump repeatedly? Don't know, cos it's not part of his life, so he won't be doing that. A more relevant study would be AFL/VFL players who've had Lisfranc, but it would be a smallish group.

[[email protected] 101]

I'm trying to stay positive with his injury, I can't help but think we made a mistake bringing him back before taking his screw out. Hopefully they can manage this and get it right.

WE made a mistake ?? Never..

[Webber 10,454]

I imagine they have a plan to get him settled to be available for full pre-season. That will be the reason for wiping the possibility of return this season.

[[email protected] 101]

I don't understand why this club has had so many foot injuries. The injury report 3 or so weeks ago had Clarke, Evans, Viney, Jamar and we had Trengrove at the start of preseason (I think there was 1 more but I can't remember who it was).

IMO surely it has to be wrong footwear. I looked at other clubs injury lists and I could see barely any foot injuries - yet how can we have had 5?

They certainly haven't been caused by Kicking the ball... Just saying..

[deanox 9,896]

Webber, from your experience is it possible it will never settle, or will rest and drugs etc always allow recovery?

[beelzebub 23,313]

Just one of those things. There's no reason to remove the metal fixateurs unless they create a problem, and there's no actual probability they will. If it isn't causing a problem, then don't intervene. I had a patient who just "didn't like the idea" of metal in his leg, despite full function (surf, snowboard), so had it removed, developed an infection in the bone as an unfortunate result of the removal, and spent the next 18 months out of action. In MC's case, he rehabbed well and was all good, so the fact he subsequently got some irritation is just what can POTENTIALLY happen. Not botched or bungled, just life. I have no idea of the stats, and it would be fraught with analytical complexities based on the definition of full recovery, due to differing expectations through the populous. For example, a recent patient is a musician, who likes running. He had a Lisfranc fracture/dislocation, and can run again. Could he sprint/jump repeatedly? Don't know, cos it's not part of his life, so he won't be doing that. A more relevant study would be AFL/VFL players who've had Lisfranc, but it would be a smallish group.

interesting. I ask about the probability as you mentioned statistically he ought to come good. was just wondering what that really meant. Ihave an inherent distrust of such things as , and youll well appreciate, every case is somewhat unique.so it might well be just as probable that he will be one of the good ones perhaps as becoming one of the poorer outcomes.

In your experience do these irritations , once settled, remain so or is it just one of those unknowns? i.e just as likely to continually flame ?Not what Mich (or we ) would want at all.

Would the prognosis be , along the lines, of...if it hasnt settled by preseason that its unlikely ever to to the degree necessary in order to compete at this elite level ?

thankyou. Your scribblings probably the most relevant here

[daisycutter 29,600]

bb i think you are asking too much of webber

unless he has up-to-date, accurate and specific info of mitch's particulars he can only generalise and speculate (albeit from a more expert pov)

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,777]

This shatters me. It's like Stephen Tingay all over again.

I hope for his sake they can work out sooner rather than later whether he can come back or whether he should give it away.

So devastating for the bloke.

Tingay,Prympke,Dean,Schwarz,Charles,Jakovitch and Clark.All broke down young.

Help me, I think there are more.

Hawthorn, Sydney, Essendon etc all get 300 games from their stars.

I guess it helps to avoid injury if you're winning games. But it helps to win games when you have experienced stars.

Not only do we lose stars young, but young high draft picks all get injured.(Blease, Strauss, Watts, Taggart, Gawn,Viney,....the list goes on.)

Do all teams have these problems? Do I just notice it in the Demons because I follow them more closely?

[beelzebub 23,313]

bb i think you are asking too much of webber

unless he has up-to-date, accurate and specific info of mitch's particulars he can only generalise and speculate (albeit from a more expert pov)

I am asking for his informed opinion.. Im sure he'll tell me if he cant. As hes about the only bloke here who thoroughly understands the nature of the injury Im very interested in his views.

And am actually only asking for clarification of what he has already spoken of.

[Pates 9,658]

Just one of those things. There's no reason to remove the metal fixateurs unless they create a problem, and there's no actual probability they will. If it isn't causing a problem, then don't intervene. I had a patient who just "didn't like the idea" of metal in his leg, despite full function (surf, snowboard), so had it removed, developed an infection in the bone as an unfortunate result of the removal, and spent the next 18 months out of action. In MC's case, he rehabbed well and was all good, so the fact he subsequently got some irritation is just what can POTENTIALLY happen. Not botched or bungled, just life. I have no idea of the stats, and it would be fraught with analytical complexities based on the definition of full recovery, due to differing expectations through the populous. For example, a recent patient is a musician, who likes running. He had a Lisfranc fracture/dislocation, and can run again. Could he sprint/jump repeatedly? Don't know, cos it's not part of his life, so he won't be doing that. A more relevant study would be AFL/VFL players who've had Lisfranc, but it would be a smallish group.

I remembered hearing Richo talk about his injury which was aparently the same as MC. He spoke about how the doctors and he made a decision to take the screws out before proceeding with getting him to play again. Is this something that is common? From what it sounds like removing them was inevitability with Mitch, but I guess the doctors and physio's can only go on what Mitch is saying and how it looks.

[Webber 10,454]

I am asking for his informed opinion.. Im sure he'll tell me if he cant. As hes about the only bloke here who thoroughly understands the nature of the injury Im very interested in his views. And am actually only asking for clarification of what he has already spoken of.

The simple, and unfortunately unsatisfying answer is that in these situations, as with all orthopaedics, there is never any guarantee. I know that won't satisfy you b59, but that's the logic of it. Every case is different, but the odds are heavily stacked in Mitch's favour.

Just on the footwear issue, and the spate of foot related problems at MFC, the latter is coincidence, and we see them happen at other clubs. The former will be no different than any club. Footwear was not the cause of MC's injury.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

I remembered hearing Richo talk about his injury which was aparently the same as MC. He spoke about how the doctors and he made a decision to take the screws out before proceeding with getting him to play again. Is this something that is common? From what it sounds like removing them was inevitability with Mitch, but I guess the doctors and physio's can only go on what Mitch is saying and how it looks.

The plan was to take the screws out at the end of the season, however they where casing problems so it was decided to take them out early.

[Webber 10,454]

I remembered hearing Richo talk about his injury which was aparently the same as MC. He spoke about how the doctors and he made a decision to take the screws out before proceeding with getting him to play again. Is this something that is common? From what it sounds like removing them was inevitability with Mitch, but I guess the doctors and physio's can only go on what Mitch is saying and how it looks.

Removing the metal is optional, based on whether it is problematic. Richo's may well have been known to cause issue, so requiring removal. Different surgeons, different methods, but before anybody starts questioning MC's surgeon, there is nothing to question. He's as good as it gets.

[Weedster 174]

There is absolutely nothing to be gained by playing him this year.

That said, there should also be no valid reson why he doesn't complete a full pre-season