bing181

In: ANB, Petty, Baker, Smith Out: Keilty, Melk, Lewis, Hibberd

For god's sake. Some of you should spend a week on a cancer ward. The best we can say about medical science and the identification and management of injuries and pathologies is that it's stretching it to even call it a science - informed guesswork would be closer to the mark, though even the "informed" bit gets lost in many cases. I have a heart condition. The doctor who told me 10 years ago that I needed an operation wasn't wrong or incompetent. He was basing his opinion on the information he had in front of him, in comparison to similar cases and outcomes. I still haven't had the op.

All speculation. You have no inside information on even what the specific injuries are, let alone how they presented at the time. Nor do you have any medical expertise yourself. You're also guilty of confirmation bias (though we all are, it's the way our brain works), in that you're citing examples that support your (supposed) case, while ignoring all those that don't. i.e., you're ignoring all the times that players come off with injuries, are then patched up and sent back out - and are fine. Which is the majority of cases.

The mind boggles.

Seriously?

Agree with that - and also the consequences of that further up the ground and the way the ball is being delivered I50. Last year it was simple, just look for Tom. This year, it's more who do I kick it to? And in that moment of hesitation and confusion, everything falls apart, with the ball often being kicked to no-one in particular or kicked without any real conviction.

Er ... where did he say that they hadn't "taken learnings" from the PF? He didn't. On the contrary, the talk of taking Preuss is exactly what you would do if you were examining what went wrong in the PF, and where Max was double-teamed all match.

A finer example of confirmation bias it's hard to imagine. - Oscar's one of the more reliable kicks in the team, as his DE% confirms (e.g. last week, 100%) - He marks when the ball comes near him: last week was in top 10, this week down, but then so was everyone. He took as many marks as Viney and Gawn, who no-one seems to have noticed "barely mark the footy" - Have a look at the 1%'ers. He's so far in front of everyone else in the team it's not funny. Also worth remembering that for his one game back at Casey a couple of weeks back, he managed an in-the-bests performance with a team-high 22 disposals while Petty - who some here seem to see as a preferable alternative even though his one AFL game was a disaster - didn't even manage half of that. Finally, for the last two games we've won not because we kicked thumping scores, but because our defense was miserly. It's not as if we have KPF's kicking buckets of goals on Oscar (or anyone for that matter). But heh, happy for the professionals at the club to decide on whether or not he plays.

Reported as "sore", which judging by past experience would mean one of: - needs a break - is knocked around, so we'd prefer he take a break than risk an injury - is injured, but we're not prepared to say what it is

Because he wasn’t fit. Not enough for AFL, he’s been off/on injured all year. Hopefully ok now.

Regardless of who's out, we have to replace like for like. If it's Lewis and Hibberd, then we've got to find a way of either bringing in two backs, or playing others in those positions. Given that Lever, May and Jetta are already out, the cupboard is getting very very bare. With Hibberd gone, it'll mean that 4 of our first choice back 6 are out.

Apart from the fact that this is all hindsight (bias), it's not even accurate. OMc was tackled by Holman, after Frost dumped him in it (this after Frost's first handball dumped Fritsch in it as well). In the tackle, Oscar's leg/ankle was caught under him, and in the immediate aftermath OMc was on the ground, unable to get up - which is one of the reason GC tried to play on. Play was called back and eventually he gets up, but if you watch on the full video replay, not the edit, OMc could hardly walk at that point. In fact, if you look at him standing on the mark, not only can he not walk and is limping badly, he can hardly stand. And *that's* why Holman took off and ran forward in the first place, he knew that Oscar wouldn't be able to go with him. The person who *should* have gone with Holman as he ran on was Oliver. As Holman was running through after taking the first handball receive, Oliver was in a position to tackle him. Holman handpassed - but then ran around Oliver and kept running to take the receive. Oliver stopped for a second, and it was just enough - he started chasing again, but by that stage, Holman had 10 metres on him. (And re the above, as someone else pointed out in the Changes thread, Oscar was limping at the end of the game.)

Agree - I actually think we're playing much better, and starting to see the Melbourne of last year. Up until we go I50 that is. Tom Mac really down on form/confidence isn't helping - and it isn't helping the players up the field either, because they're not automatically looking for him, thus hesitation, thus the kind of all-over-the-place entries we're seeing.

Not sure that Hunt is a forward. He has the speed but he doesn't know what to do with it, especially up forward where you have to make the play.

From reports, Preuss has had lingering injury problems, thus VFL to get it all sorted. Presumably right for selection next week.

Agree with that. Feel like we're starting to splutter back into life, and there were some good signs last week, but personally I don't think we'll really get going till after the bye.

Viney in for ANB. Settled line up - and suspect that it will more or less stay that way till May, Lever etc. come into the frame. Unless the wheels come off.

Word seems to be that it's not just a simple groin, but OP. Thus the shifting timeline.

You don't get or aggravate OP from a single event. Here: https://physioworks.com.au/injuries-conditions-1/osteitis-pubis

Ah Demonland, don't ever change.

If there's anyone out there about to write up a paper on victim-blaming, plenty of source material in this thread.

Demonland. So many assumptions.

Doesn't get much lower than this: "Ploegmakers, who has a learning disability, told 7NEWS the 34-year-old offender called him a "[censored] and a [censored]"."

If reports are true, the beer-snatching occurred after the Hawks supporter had been verbally abused by the Dees guy. As others have commented, physically attacking someone is unacceptable, and assault is a crime. Equally, calling someone with a disability a r*tard is unacceptable - and is also covered under abuse/offensive language laws.

No. Confirmation bias. You're taking examples that illustrate your point, while ignoring ones that contradict it. Watch the whole game, and assess it in its globality. He had double the number of 1%ers as anyone else, and was in the top half dozen for marks, 3rd for rebound 50's. Sure, he made a couple of mistakes and didn't dominate, but not he's Robinson Crusoe in that regard.