| TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Injury Update http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10730 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Pickle [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Injury Update |
I have a feeling we might keep Waite and Fisher out for the rest of the year. Both have the type of injuries that will have the old '5-7' weeks on them for weeks on end!! It appears as though Coll took this approach last year as well. Don't expect any rookies to be elevated as both probably don't warrant the LTI list. I have no information on this - just speculating! |
|
| Author: | woof [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Injury Update |
Pickle wrote: I have a feeling we might keep Waite and Fisher out for the rest of the year. Both have the type of injuries that will have the old '5-7' weeks on them for weeks on end!! It appears as though Coll took this approach last year as well. Don't expect any rookies to be elevated as both probably don't warrant the LTI list. I have no information on this - just speculating!
We as a club don't have the foresight or courage to something as smart as this. |
|
| Author: | Blue Vain [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fishers injury is being reassessed in a couple of weeks. The surgeon will then decide whether the injury can heal naturally or if surgical intervention is required. |
|
| Author: | SOS [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Remember that we are talking about footballers here. Lazy types would be quite happy to sit on their posteriors for the rest of the year and be paid. But Fisher's preseason last year when he was recovering from a knee reconstruction showed that Fish will bust a gut to be able to play as soon as possible. You can't and shouldn't stop young players from playing. Sticking them on the LTI list would mean they couldn't even play VFL football. We are not talking about veterans here. Both Fish and Waite need to play as much as possible to be able to step up next year. |
|
| Author: | BlueWorld [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
What about Davies? I heard somewhere his back is so bad he can barely walk and is a long way from being able to play. |
|
| Author: | The Duke [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Both these blokes need game time and the team needs to play with them in the structure. You could play JK with a lot more confidence if Waite and Fish were standing on the forward line with them. Our best team has these two in it, and due to an amazing lack of talented depth, we need them both to be competetive. It's amazing, with all the players that we could afford to lose (teague, Chambers, ADL, Prenda etc etc) we have to lose these guys  .
|
|
| Author: | Kouta [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think Cazzesman wrote that we could have a nominated rookie if we wanted, so what's stopping us from upgrading Flint if he's as good as they say 
|
|
| Author: | woof [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JuzzCarlton wrote: I think Cazzesman wrote that we could have a nominated rookie if we wanted, so what's stopping us from upgrading Flint if he's as good as they say
Foresight and logic. |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 2:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
woof wrote: JuzzCarlton wrote: I think Cazzesman wrote that we could have a nominated rookie if we wanted, so what's stopping us from upgrading Flint if he's as good as they say Foresight and logic. Not really. It had a cut off date and we didn't apply before then. |
|
| Author: | Kouta [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
jimmae wrote: woof wrote: JuzzCarlton wrote: I think Cazzesman wrote that we could have a nominated rookie if we wanted, so what's stopping us from upgrading Flint if he's as good as they say Foresight and logic. Not really. It had a cut off date and we didn't apply before then. If that's correct then the rules should be changed so you can upgrade a rookie if you have space for a nominated rookie. I heart the AFL commission. 
|
|
| Author: | ryan2000 [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
05/06/06 Player Injury Return Adam Hartlett hamstring 2 weeks Paul Bower knee 4-6 weeks Jarrad Waite knee 4-6 weeks Brad Fisher shoulder 5-7 weeks Tory Longmuir shoulder to be further assessed Justin Davies back indefinite Took this from the website today. IS THIS RIGHT? Bower was 4 weeks 2 weeks ago.....now his 4-6 weeks? Saw him at trainning last week. (although no doubt on a modified program) Hartlett was running around a week ago, yet is still 2 weeks and Davies should just be on the LTI - i don't know why he isn't? Fisher & Waite i can understand because they are much more difficult injuries to asses. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Trent Sporn - Bruised Shin - 1 week (for about 12 weeks in 2003) 
|
|
| Author: | woof [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
jimmae wrote: woof wrote: JuzzCarlton wrote: I think Cazzesman wrote that we could have a nominated rookie if we wanted, so what's stopping us from upgrading Flint if he's as good as they say Foresight and logic. Not really. It had a cut off date and we didn't apply before then. Why? And are what you are talking about have nothing to do with placing players on LTI lists? |
|
| Author: | budzy [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Everything's a secret!!
Injuries, finances, players, coaches .....it's all a @#$%&! mystery!!! ...it's all a magical mystery tour at Carlton & it's getting very draining!
|
|
| Author: | blu944 [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
there's plenty of time to look at flint and jacko in the reserves; both are doing just fine but are surely not suffering by not playing in the seniors. I think 06 is about finding out which of wiggins, bannister, sporn, livo, prenda etc. should be retained. Wiggins has put his hand up and is genuinely contributing, last year he could have been cut loose as he wasn't progressing that much, but 06 has shown that he's worth keeping. I believe the club will look for that kind of improvement in some of the other fringe players before the hard calls are made come the trade period and list lodgement. |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: Trent Sporn - Bruised Shin - 1 week (for about 12 weeks in 2003)
Turned out to be a twist of the bone and some deep bruising if I remember right. All it means is they get a time frame from the specialist and they write it up. They go back for an assessment and they get a new number. To woof, you'll have a hard time convincing a player to step onto the LTI list if he isn't going to be out for 8 weeks with his injury from then on. We've got blokes currently sitting on 6 and 7 weeks max, then Davies who is indefinite, and no one has any idea what's going on with that. Cazz, mojo? Might all be solved (if we can afford it) because Troy Longmuir might be out for the season. |
|
| Author: | Blue Vain [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
jimmae wrote: To woof, you'll have a hard time convincing a player to step onto the LTI list if he isn't going to be out for 8 weeks with his injury from then on. We've got blokes currently sitting on 6 and 7 weeks max, then Davies who is indefinite, and no one has any idea what's going on with that.
We've got a couple of candidates for the LTI list if we choose to utilise it. They've just chosen not to at the moment. |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So it is finances.
|
|
| Author: | BlueWorld [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Blue Vain wrote: jimmae wrote: To woof, you'll have a hard time convincing a player to step onto the LTI list if he isn't going to be out for 8 weeks with his injury from then on. We've got blokes currently sitting on 6 and 7 weeks max, then Davies who is indefinite, and no one has any idea what's going on with that. We've got a couple of candidates for the LTI list if we choose to utilise it. They've just chosen not to at the moment. So why does Pagan claim we'd love to get Flint onto the list but can't? |
|
| Author: | Blue Vain [ Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
jimmae wrote: So it is finances.
Not neccesarily. Perhaps the MC dont believe there is a suitable candidate. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|