Speaking of communications, when do we find out which member won the car?

Or have i missed that somewhere.

I've stopped watching Misson's reports as I no longer trust anything he says, so in that sense I would have to agree with you BB.

agreed, haven't watched one for months now

Speaking of communications, when do we find out which member won the car?

Or have i missed that somewhere.

It has caught the Dawes Virus it is out with a broken Cam belt

Should be right in 2 to 3 weeks

I don't think that this year is all that different to previous years.

Footy departments spin.

I can go back to Barrassi's elbow, Schwatz's knee's, Jackovic's back. They often don't know, if they do they often fib sometimes longer sometimes shorter. Often they mislead about what the injury is, corky not hamstring, calf not achilles etc etc. Then you get the Jimmy Stynes effect when experts say he'll be out for a month with a broken wrist/arm and he makes a miraculous recovery and doesn't miss a match.

So just accept the spin as spin and enjoy it when they come back. Go Dees!

I think there are two factors at work here:

(1) With some of our injured players - and particularly the 3 big forwards - Misso et al genuinely don't know when they will return; and

(2) If they told the truth about this in blunt language - "clark, dawes and hogan might not return until the 2nd half of the season, if at all" - you could kiss goodbye to several thousand memberships.

Telling it like it is would have destroyed the momentum and lift we received over the summer, hurting attendances and memberships by stating to all and sundry that we're unlikely to win a game before June or July.

I find it hard to believe that your hopes are raised each week listening to Misso's report; surely you can read between the lines better than that.

This isn't some new phenomenon, and it's not unique to Melbourne.

Whilst it's not unique to Melbourne, the problem as I see it is that the initial assessments of player injuries are routinely so far off the mark that the club has lost credibility with the supporters. In view of Peter Jackson's pronouncement that the club was trying to win back the faith and trust of supporters it has lost in recent years by poor performance on and off the field, this aspect is worrying because it flies in the face of that very proposition. As an existing supporter, I now treat our injury list as nothing more than a joke and you're not going to win back faith if even the faithful have no confidence in what they're being told.

Whilst it's not unique to Melbourne, the problem as I see it is that the initial assessments of player injuries are routinely so far off the mark that the club has lost credibility with the supporters. In view of Peter Jackson's pronouncement that the club was trying to win back the faith and trust of supporters it has lost in recent years by poor performance on and off the field, this aspect is worrying because it flies in the face of that very proposition. As an existing supporter, I now treat our injury list as nothing more than a joke and you're not going to win back faith if even the faithful have no confidence in what they're being told.

I agree with what you're saying broadly, but think an exemption applies when it comes to things like injuries and the conditioning of the players, and most supporters would take all such info with a general helping of salt.

Why on earth would a club that should do anything to get a slight edge, give away information that an opposition would swoop on to gain an advantage.

Remember where us supporter are in the pecking order. Just fodder.

On the one hand, I understand some of the concerns, but such is the way with injuries. I follow other sports as well, and it's the same story, especially in the short term and immediately after matches etc. Phrases like "we'll have to see how it responds to treatment" or "we'll have to wait till the swelling subsides to see where we are" or "s/he's working through a program of rehab and it's looking good" are not unique to MFC. It's not surprising that there are so many injuries that miraculously appear 3 or 4 days after a match. It's not because of any wilful misinformation, it's simply because often it takes that long for bodies to settle down or for that "little knock" that you got in the third quarter to develop into something more serious.

I also feel that some here underestimate the physical strain that players' bodies are under. They're taken right to the edge, and basically held there for the best part of a year, and keeping them just the right side of that line, so they don't break down completely, is no mean feat.

Finally, very physical sport, very hard on bodies. It's no accident that our 2 young crash-bang merchants, Viney and Hogan, are having repeated injury issues, while N Jones and Cross, who play similar games, don't. Grimes was constantly injured in his first couple of years, but has been pretty well injury-free these last two seasons.

My 2c.

I can't find the post, but someone in one of these injury update threads made the point that it was no use to hide that someone might not play on Sunday because the teams have to be announced 4 day before so there was plenty of time for an opposition team to make their plans then. I din't see anyone pointing out the obvious flaw in that argument, so here goes:

He neglected the fact that the both teams have to announce their team at the same time. The opposition will be in a better position to make their team selections if they know about the other team's injuries. So secrecy about the injury status of players is useful to every club.

I'm not saying this in itself justifies the spin we hear.

Why on earth would a club that should do anything to get a slight edge, give away information that an opposition would swoop on to gain an advantage.

Remember where us supporter are in the pecking order. Just fodder.

Shirley, you can't be serious

I think this is one of those things we wouldn't give a stuff about if we were winning games. I follow a few different sporting teams and one of them in particular gives out either no or misleading information on player injuries routinely, but they win a lot so it's more a minor annoyance. I get concerns about credibility and integrity, but the club has been devoid of it for a long time so I'm prepared to give this fitness/comms department time.

My main frustration is that we are copping all these injuries under Misson. The guy had about one total injury in all the years he had at Sydney and St. Kilda. Making up for lost time I guess.

The injury reports are a farce and club members/supporters are again being fed khrap.

I pay my bloody membership rain hail or shine......and I expect far better communications from this club.

I have sensed a slight amount of spin coming into the club. Not like before where we were basically served chicken crap and told it was chicken salad. That's what was so infuriating about the previous regime. Instead of saying that we were in trouble after round two, as was clearly obvious and they didn't even have to use the word 'crisis', we were told that it was something that happened to all good teams. Yeah right.
The stuff with the injury list and not getting a successor in this year were glossed over a bit. (BTW I don't agree with dee-luded that PJ's letter was spin. It was pretty honest. He didn't say we would win the next twenty premierships or buy out the AFL's other clubs. He just said that we had been poor but to give us another chance and if you liked what you saw, consider buying a membership.)

The big thing PJ needs to remember is that he was supposed to be here for 6 months initially before he moved on. I think he needs to re-remind himself that he is not going to be here for the next ten. The second he gets comfortable in the big chair, the more likely it will be that he may want to cling to that and the power it brings. In order to hold power, he may try to cozy up to the old cliques around the club. I don't think he would right now but power and position is like a drink. Few men can handle it and even fewer know when to stop.
In the back of his mind, PJ needs to remind himself that he is an efficiency expert and clean up specialist. The more he reminds himself of this, the less spin we will hear.

How about we look at an example from another club...

Motlop was reported as being given rest over preseason for a dodgy hammy that wasn't coming good, and according to Geelong was "going to see a specialist in London to see what he could do to make it heal quicker."

Then Neil Balme accidentally mentions the word surgery along with Motlop's name when on radio and running through the players currently out injured. The club does an about face and comes clean, letting on that he has had surgery when in London as it was deemed necessary after inspection by the specialist (though not mentioning that it was the plan all along, had been booked in for weeks, and they were trying to hide it, from the media and their supporters).

Can we now just accept that all clubs lie through their teeth about injuries, for a multitude of reasons?

To protect supporter morale in the short term; to maintain a competitive advantage over the opposition; to relieve pressure on the player themselves; and so on...

*might be a groin, not a hamstring. Can't remember. It's not vital to the story though.

The injury reports are a farce and club members/supporters are again being fed khrap.

I pay my bloody membership rain hail or shine......and I expect far better communications from this club.

Your expectations are unrealistic.

You pay your membership to get a seat at the footy, get club emails and the right to vote.

Not to get inside info on the medical records for each player; on that note you get exactly what the media get, and rightly so.

How about we look at an example from another club...

In the end I don't care if I don't know what injury a player has. Is it my business? Where does medical privacy fit in all this?

But I want to be told straight when to expect a player back and playing.

BTW, when did Geelong say Motlop would be back? Let's see if they are spinning rubbish to players. As for your point about "protect supporter morale in the short term" I'd suggest our spin does exactly the opposite.

Don't know when they said he'd be back.

Didn't care, don't really care now.

Are you getting confused between the club selling false hope in regards to performance, and the assumption the club are selling false hope in regards to fitness?

You do realise that when it comes to predicting a player's return date, it is just that? A prediction?

It's a guessing game, albeit an educated one.

And that there can be setbacks when returning from injury?

FFS, it's not rocket science. This has happened for decades.

And I don't know why you think the club is lying to players.

That's a fairly incredulous assertion.

What I just don't get is the incessant grinding of teeth over this.

The players are injured we all know this.

They'll be back when they're back.

What's the bloody problem??

... As for your point about "protect supporter morale in the short term" I'd suggest our spin does exactly the opposite.

The spin may do the opposite to the atypical MFC members who post here, but perhaps marketing gurus at all the clubs, not just us, are of the opinion that for the bulk of less obsessive supporters, the spin works. In which case we should grin and bear it.

Are you responding to me?

I never said that the club is lying to players. As you say that would be absurd.

You don't get it, that's fine.

In the end I don't care if I don't know what injury a player has. Is it my business? Where does medical privacy fit in all this?

But I want to be told straight when to expect a player back and playing.

BTW, when did Geelong say Motlop would be back? Let's see if they are spinning rubbish to players. As for your point about "protect supporter morale in the short term" I'd suggest our spin does exactly the opposite.

I'm not sure I understood the point of the bolded sentence.

Are you responding to me?

I never said that the club is lying to players. As you say that would be absurd.

You don't get it, that's fine.

The players that are injured will be back when they are back.

Why is it so vital for you to accurately know when?

I bet the club's medical staff would love to know as accurately themselves.

Realism has gone out the window in today's world of demanding instant gratification...

I'm not sure I understood the point of the bolded sentence.

Here's what I'm talking about.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-01-24/surgery-sidelines-garland

In an article advising us that Colin Garland was to have an operation. Here is a quote from Mahoney

y having this operation now, it will allow Colin enough time to recover before the start of the season and prevent the potential of it disrupting his season."

Well guess what. I can't recall Misson saying anything during his rehab that said he was doing anything but "flying" but rather than being ready for the beginning of the season it looks like being 3 or 4 games in.

Re you're quote above, I should have said "see if they are spinning rubbish to supporters". My mistake.

The spin may do the opposite to the atypical MFC members who post here, but perhaps marketing gurus at all the clubs, not just us, are of the opinion that for the bulk of less obsessive supporters, the spin works. In which case we should grin and bear it.

Well I'd agree, and the point was that the club does need to sell some hope, to in turn sell memberships.

I'd rather be a little disappointed myself and know the club has sold an extra thousand memberships.

I don't think anyone should feel "cheated" into buying a membership, but that's all based on their own twist on the topic.

I don't think we can afford to be giving out worst-case-scenario return dates from injury for players just to appease some, when it will in al likelihood result in a lower membership tally.

Surely the priority is for the club to be strong going into the future?

That means money from memberships now.

Not being pleasantly surprised a player has come back from injury early in a season where we are looking to emerge from the bottom 4 as a best-case-scenario.