Gram?

matrix · Post: # 925275Post **matrix** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:10am

ask plugger
he seems to always be right

plugger66 · Post: # 925277Post **plugger66** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:12am

matrix wrote:ask plugger
he seems to always be right

It has nothing to do with being right but plenty to do with thinking our medical staff know what they doing. Sorry if you rate posters opinions of injuries from afar over people who know what they are doing at the club. It makes sense.

matrix · Post: # 925278Post **matrix** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:14am

he DID not look right from the start

simple

and was played

whats that tell ya???

you think HE makes the decision whether he plays????

saintnick12 · Mon 17 May 2010 11:19am

I think he has a big say in it as only he knows how he really feels. But he can be over ruled by the fitness staff and wasn't.

plugger66 · Post: # 925282Post **plugger66** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:19am

matrix wrote:he DID not look right from the start

simple

and was played

whats that tell ya???

you think HE makes the decision whether he plays????

I take it you were watching on TV. Looked fine to me at the ground until he tackled someone right in front of the Moorabbin wing. Obviously hurt himself in the tackle. So you are saying it is his sole decision well sorry I disagree. It would be a combination and obviously both parties decided he was right and as I said both parties have a lot more idea than posters on here.

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Mon 17 May 2010 11:19am

This all sounds very similar to what happened when Roo did his hammy.
Had another injury earlier in the game, but they chose to roll the dice and let him play on and bang, hammy. Our staff may be "experts", but that certainly doesn't mean they can't pull the wrong string, especially when things are getting "desperate". I hope they didn't, or that if they did that they learn from it.
He certainly didn't look to be his usual self to me, early in the game.

matrix · Post: # 925286Post **matrix** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:22am

lmfao
i asked if you thought is was his decision to play??

i didnt say iit was his decision
i actually think he gets f*** all of a say to be honest

and when numerous peeps say at the ground he did not look right and was with physios and he's been out for a few weeks and looked proppy the other game what ya reckon??

that he is fit?
pull the other one
he should nOT have been allowed to play imo

bad move
happy to be wrong but f*** me he looks nowhere near at full capacity (from last week and the 2 secs he was on the ground for)

jonesy · Post: # 925288Post **jonesy** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:25am

Unfortunatly I don't think we'll ever see the best of Grammy. Has been on modified programs most of his career that has hampered his ability to perform.

At the start of the year he actually looked the sharpest he ever had,and I thought maybe this was where he was going to break out,but he's only lasted a few weeks again,and now has had two seperate soft tissues

plugger66 · Post: # 925291Post **plugger66** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:28am

matrix wrote:lmfao
i asked if you thought is was his decision to play??

i didnt say iit was his decision
i actually think he gets f*** all of a say to be honest

and when numerous peeps say at the ground he did not look right and was with physios and he's been out for a few weeks and looked proppy the other game what ya reckon??

that he is fit?
pull the other one
he should nOT have been allowed to play imo

bad move
happy to be wrong but f*** me he looks nowhere near at full capacity (from last week and the 2 secs he was on the ground for)

Well you must think we have very poor medical staff because if he was no good before the game they can only be described as useless. Anyway we agree to disagree.

saintnick12 · Mon 17 May 2010 11:34am

I think he was borderline and they all agreed he should play- it would have been a decision between them all, but ultimately the fitness staff would have the final say. Then he injured the hamstring - don't even think it was the same injury - think the hamstring in the game was a new injury and the issue before the game was groin related as he has been having problems. From listening to the radio at the game, he was off and down the race a couple of times in the first qtr for treatment. Never got going at any stage.

FWIW - I honestly believe that Roo's injury was also not helped by playing on with other injuries earlier in the game. But they can't pull every player off everytime they have a niggle, or there would never be anyone out there. It happens and has happened.

matrix · Post: # 925300Post **matrix** » Mon 17 May 2010 11:35am

i did not say we have poor medical staff
i do not think we have poor medical staff

i think the wrong decision was made.

it can be that simple you know...sometimes

probability says that even the greatest medical staff in the entire flipping world...might make a poor decision once in a while

nothing is ever 100%

like i said
happy to be wrong but even last week he did not look right imo
look like he did not really want to go into a contest

mehhhh
now he's injuried, out for god knows how long
brilliant

DWOODROW · Post: # 925332Post **DWOODROW** » Mon 17 May 2010 12:14pm

I still don't think he was 100% against Carlton either but Plugger if you know better I will accept that you think he was right, but I don't

SainterK · Post: # 925363Post **SainterK** » Mon 17 May 2010 12:54pm

It's hard to tell if he is right or not, he has been running like he is in discomfort for over a year now....

Bernard Shakey · Mon 17 May 2010 1:28pm

Report in the Age today says Gram injured his left hamstring during the warm up.

Let's face facts, the fitness staff stuffed up.

It's probably the first time in 2 years, but it is a major stuff up.

The fact that Gram is always playing under duress may have influenced their decision.

They got it wrong this time.

saintsRrising · Mon 17 May 2010 1:30pm

Bernard Shakey wrote:Report in the Age today says Gram injured his left hamstring during the warm up.

Let's face facts, the fitness staff stuffed up.

It's probably the first time in 2 years, but it is a major stuff up.

The fact that Gram is always playing under duress may have influenced their decision.

They got it wrong this time.

Agree with this and Matrix

Early in the game it was evident that he could not run at any pace.

Gram's run is vital to us. But no point playing him if he is not right.

3:16 · Post: # 926053Post **3:16** » Tue 18 May 2010 12:32pm

As I've said for weeks now, Grammy has OP, club "offical line" is hip, but it is OP!!!!! This can also cause "hamstring tightness" if ya know what I mean!!!!!

Don't expect to see much of Jason for a while and if ya do, don't expect much run and carry from him!!!!!

dcstkfc · Post: # 926057Post **dcstkfc** » Tue 18 May 2010 12:35pm

saint75 wrote:
Saint_Ash wrote:
saint75 wrote:Unfortunately, because he participated in the warm up, they were unable to replace him with one of the emergencies. Obviously Gram felt that he was fine to play as our medical staff don't usually let our players back on at all in this situation.
In the past players have been replaced after participating in the warm up.

As far as I understand it, and as long as the rules haven't changed. Once the team sheets have been submitted a player can only be replaced if an injury occurs at any time up until the first bounce.
So obviously it was an insignifcant injury prior to the match, yet he could hardly run and didn't make an appearance until late in the first quarter and was iced up and finished after the second?

The fitness staff are not known for allowing players to go and play injured under this regime, so can we explain why we didn't replace him with an emergency?

Yes if this is true it seems to be highly baffling.

Gram?

Re: Gram?