Good run with injury in '09 no accident

[White Winmar]

I've noticed recently that a few posters on here fear that our good run with injury in 2009 won't be replicated in 2010. Many people, both on this forum and in the media have speculated that St.Kilda was fortunate to have a "perfect storm" in terms of injury in 2009, which largely contributed to our outstanding season. Apart from a couple of unavoidable injuries, such as Jarryd Allen's failure to recover from his serious hip injury, and X's unfortunate ACL, the list was remarkably injury free, particularly in the previously crippling area of soft tissue injuries. Contrary to popular belief, this was no accident.

I've no doubt that Dave Misson and his crew are amongst the best recruits we've snared in recent times. It's common knowledge now that RL was appalled at the lack of fitness in our squad when he arrived. It took two solid pre-seasons and the dedication of the players and staff to rectify the situation. I need not remind any saints fan of the frustration of 2004-06, when our very realistic premiership hopes were continually scuttled by an appalling run of injuries. In fairness to the previous administration and GT (this is not designed to incite), they took many steps to try and rectify the situation, from calling for a major study into hamstring injuries by Monash University, to resurfacing Moorabbin! Others blamed our heavy playing schedule over the "car park" at the docklands. The past few seasons have put those theories to rest. Unfortunately, and admittedly with the benefit of hindsight, they were barking up the wrong tree.

The answer to the injury "curse", as it has been for many professional sporting organisations and individuals here and overseas, is relevant, and properly applied, scientific principles. What Dave Misson and his crew have brought to the club is an approach that is both meticulous in detail and risk minimisation. Everything from training loads, recovery strategies, game time and emotional states are taken into consideration. Unlike many other outfits in the AFL, although most are now catching up, absolutely nothing that could potentially affect a player's welfare and ability to perform is left to chance. Even in the area of recruitment, the effect of emotion and arousal and the players ability to deal stress are now taken into account when assessing their propensity for getting injured and their ability to recover.

I am confident that our good run with injury will continue. Although there is nothing that can be done to prevent some injuries, particularly those of the collision-type, the curse of the soft tissue injuries has well and truly been buried. In addition to injury prevention, the other benefit of the current approach is in reduced recovery time, better preparation and therefore better performance. Not only are our players missing fewer games, they are much better prepared to perform at their optimum when they do get out there. To further make the point, the turning point for Geelong at the start of 2007, was the revamp of their training and conditioning programs, and look where it got them. I believe last year we equaled, if not bettered them in this area, even if we didn't manage it on the scoreboard on GF day (Bugger).

[meher baba]

I am confident that our good run with injury will continue. Although there is nothing that can be done to prevent some injuries, particularly those of the collision-type,

It's the collision-type injuries that tend to put your star players out for the rest of the season. The endless popping hamstrings of X Clarke were extremely annoying for fans, the club and for X himself, but it is the collision/awkward landing injuries that do the most damage to a club: Riewoldt in 2005, Kosi in 2005 and 2006, Sam Fisher in 2005, Lenny and Goose in 2006, BJ in 2007, X in 2009.

There is no guarantee that we won't get any more of these season-ending injuries. The AFL-wide average would be higher than one per club. We have had our share and will get more. It is largely a matter of luck (although it is my belief that they are more likely to occur on the Docklands surface than anywhere else, which is bad news for us).

I would accept that Hamill and Ball possibly fall into the category of players who were mismanaged before the arrival of Misson: but I'm not even 100% sure about this. I'd want to know more about their medical histories, the recommended courses of action, etc., etc. I know it's an article of faith among some on here that Ball's OP was exacerbated by his being played too often by GT in the seniors, but is this medically true? Would playing more VFL games have made his OP better? Or is the idea that he should have sat out a couple of seasons (an option that would have gone down well on this forum at the time - not!!)?

If Misson can continue to keep the numbers of hammy problems down a bit, then that's a good result. The rest is largely a matter of luck.

And I promise to be consistent here: if we are hit by a few seriious injuries in 2010, I'm not going to blame Misson for these. I hope others will join me in this.

OK, B4E, it's now time for you to chip in with some of your FACTs (eg, Misson was disgusted when he arrived at the club, GT said that conditioning was overrated, etc.)

[Moods]

I am confident that our good run with injury will continue. Although there is nothing that can be done to prevent some injuries, particularly those of the collision-type,

It's the collision-type injuries that tend to put your star players out for the rest of the season. The endless popping hamstrings of X Clarke were extremely annoying for fans, the club and for X himself, but it is the collision/awkward landing injuries that do the most damage to a club: Riewoldt in 2005, Kosi in 2005 and 2006, Sam Fisher in 2005, Lenny and Goose in 2006, BJ in 2007, X in 2009.

What was Kosi's injury in 05? I know at the end of the year he strained a quad which kept him out from Rd 21 onwards through the finals. Sam Fisher only got injured in a final in 05 so this had limited impact (considering at the time he was very much a fringe player)

I guess you can throw Hamill in there for both soft tissue (constant calf injuries) and collision PCL. His PCL injury in 06 was very frustrating, however not having him available, fit and in form, for the big finals in 04-05 cost us as much as anything else.

I agree re collision injuries, but that's the nature of the sport. However you can only control things that are manageable/preventable (read soft tissue) and in this area it's hard to argue that there hasn't been a MASSIVE improvement in the last 18 months.

[meher baba]

I am confident that our good run with injury will continue. Although there is nothing that can be done to prevent some injuries, particularly those of the collision-type,

It's the collision-type injuries that tend to put your star players out for the rest of the season. The endless popping hamstrings of X Clarke were extremely annoying for fans, the club and for X himself, but it is the collision/awkward landing injuries that do the most damage to a club: Riewoldt in 2005, Kosi in 2005 and 2006, Sam Fisher in 2005, Lenny and Goose in 2006, BJ in 2007, X in 2009.

What was Kosi's injury in 05? I know at the end of the year he strained a
quad which kept him out from Rd 21 onwards through the finals. Sam Fisher only got injured in a final in 05 so this had limited impact (considering at the time he was very much a fringe player)

I guess you can throw Hamill in there for both soft tissue (constant calf injuries) and collision PCL. His PCL injury in 06 was very frustrating, however not having him available, fit and in form, for the big finals in 04-05 cost us as much as anything else.

I agree re collision injuries, but that's the nature of the sport. However you can only control things that are manageable/preventable (read soft tissue) and in this area it's hard to argue that there hasn't been a MASSIVE
improvement in the last 18 months.

I meant Kosi's quad strain: I rate any injury that keeps a player out of finals as being very serious. However, I will accept that quad strains are perhaps the sorts of things that Misson's magic can prevent.

Fisher was no longer a fringe player by the end of 2005: he was at least as important as Zac last year, if not more so.

I hear all the stuff about how wonderful Misson's approach is and can't help remaining a bit sceptical. Larcom's approach to preventing hamstring injuries was supposedly so marvellous and so innovative that it was covered by Catalyst on ABC TV. But Larcom's name is mud on here nowadays, ad would be Misson's if we suddenly get a lot of injuries.

The scientist in me would want to see two contasting approaches to player conditioning to be used consistently for ten years at two clubs with lists of similar average ages and which play and train on the same turf. And then compare the results. The findings of such a study might prove something.

Until then, all the Misson worship is more about faith than about anything else.

But that's just my opinion. I'm not insisting that others agree with me.

[White Winmar]

Just faith MB? Surely the results over the past two years indicate that something is going right. If you speak to DM directly you might be surprised how scientific the approach is. Nothing is left to chance. Blind faith has nothing to do with it. Of course we may still suffer some soft-tissue type injuries, but I'm certain, because of the exacting science involved, that they will be kept to a minimum. Attributing DM's run as good fortune is insulting to the man's professionalism and abilities.

I think the assertion that collision-type injuries are more costly than soft tissue injuries is a generalisation and is an attempt to oversimplify things. Just ask some of the players about the pain, frustration, physical and psychological damage chronic soft tissue injuries cause. There is nothing worse than losing confidence to perform at your optimum level out of fear of re-injuring a hamstring, groin, quad etc. I know one player who severely strained and tore his stomach muscles in 1981. Although he battled on to chalk up over 50 games, it ruined his career, and he still suffers from weakness, pain and soreness.

I know it is hard for saints fans to believe that we will continue to have a good run with injury, mainly because of our past and the fact that the AFL still has catching up to do in the area of injury prevention and management, when compared to the EPL, Bundesliga, NFL and international athletics in general. At least DM and the crew are on the first row of the grid when it comes to the race to be the best in this area. Faith is only ever drawn into an argument when the science is not understood properly. Once "faith" is introduced, all rational arguments are tossed out, e.g, "it must be luck" etc. etc

[PJ]

Interesting read WW but I'm not sure about the following

the effect of emotion and arousal

I know I certainly get a little emotional and aroused at a game but how does this fit into injury prevention?

[saintsRrising]

Just faith MB? Surely the results over the past two years indicate that something is going right.

The baseline is longer as Misson also had a track record with the Swans.

[saintsRrising]

I think the point that is worth noting is that our injury rate does not have remain at last years very low level to be a marked improvement.

Even if it became just AFL average, it would be way above what it used to be.

[White Winmar]

PJ there is now a plethora of solid science that shows people who get aroused (upset) and emotional tend to tense up, and therefore are more susceptible to injury. They also struggle with their rehabilitation as they are more nervous, tense and tend to "catastrophise" (make worse) their actual situation. In the scientific world, arousal stands for excitement and while a certain amount of arousal is necessary for optimal performance, too much leads to a breakdown of cognition (thoughts and beliefs) and hinders the making of appropriate physical responses.

It's a bit of the old "flight and fight syndrome" at work. Once you get past the point of no return in terms of arousal, you are doomed to make mistakes, including poor decisions. Remember Bill Clinton got so over-aroused he placed the security of the free world in jeopardy for the sake of a bl*wj*b? Those who are too excitable have been shown to be poor decision makers, more susceptible to injury and more likely to need longer periods of rehabilitation from injury.

[bergholt]

Attributing DM's run as good fortune is insulting to the man's professionalism and abilities.

that's crap.

in the short term, and in isolation, there's absolutely no way to tell the difference between luck and good management.

even the worst can luck into a couple of good years; and conversely even the best can be unlucky. i'd like to believe that our good run is thanks to his "professionalism and abilities", but to prove that beyond reasonable doubt would require the comparison of his whole career against the careers of everyone else who's been active in injury management in the afl in the past twenty years.

unless you've done that, you're working on blind faith the same as the rest of us.

[meher baba]

Just faith MB? Surely the results over the past two years indicate that something is going right. If you speak to DM directly you might be surprised how scientific the approach is. Nothing is left to chance. Blind faith has nothing to do with it. Of course we may still suffer some soft-tissue type injuries, but I'm certain, because of the exacting science involved, that they will be kept to a minimum. Attributing DM's run as good fortune is insulting to the man's professionalism and abilities.

At least DM and the crew are on the first row of the grid when it comes to the race to be the best in this area. Faith is only ever drawn into an argument when the science is not understood properly. Once "faith" is introduced, all rational arguments are tossed out, e.g, "it must be luck" etc. etc

I don't doubt the experience, knowledge and professionalism of DM, particularly in areas like injury management and rehabilitation: which are aspects of sports medicine where I am far more convinced of the efficacy.

The concept of "injury prevention" through "conditioning", special training and other practices that are supposed to strengthen key parts of the body, etc., strikes me as being far more of a faith-based exercise.

To the extent that this sort of stuff is effective, I suspect it is only effective at the margins. There are just so many ways a footballer can get injured, and there are also trade-offs: eg, if one isn't careful, working to strengthen one part of the body can inadvertently put more strain on another, etc.

At the end of the day, professional football is a game in which players get themselves as fit as they can and then run out a ground for 2 1/2 hours and do all sorts of things that are, in terms of human physiology, at best inadvisable and at worst beyond the level of acceptable risk. Everybody gets injured sooner or later and, across a player's career, the extent to which this mucks them around in a serious way is largely a matter of luck in combination with genes, upbringing and past experience with injury.

Once you bring all those variables into play, it is very hard accurately to assess the effectiveness of injury prevention strategies.

But I certainly hope you are right, and that Misson has some special capabilities lacked by his equivalents at the other clubs and that we are therefore in for a sustained period of experiencing fewer injury problems.

Of course, statistically speaking, the fact that we no longer have the likes of Hamill, Ball, Goose, X and Gehrig at the club put us in a strong starting position for 2010 (notwithstanding the recruitment of Smith).

[DK27]

Our recent good run with injuries I feel is here to stay.

Obviously the team is fitter and the preparation and resting where necessary is handled in a really professional way. Good on you Mr Misson.

The other aspect to less injuries is our new game style. Under Ross Lyon, the corraling rather than attacking the player with the ball means less collisions during a game and less injuries. Also more stoppages means more low impact collisions so again less injuries. Sydney did the same leading up to their premiership year and for years had the lowest injury rate in the AFL. Sydney one year had 18 players play 20 or more games. If you can usually get your best team out on the park, of course you will be successful.

Cheers
DK

[rodgerfox]

Is everyone in agreeance that injuries are what cost us a flag under GT?

Wow, that's a turnaround.

[Saint Bev]

Yes I agree Saintsrising, one of the reasons for sure. We played injured players and made them worse.

Now when ever someone is injured they are straight off and don't come back on unless ok.

The conditioning staff are fantastic. Last year we went into the rooms after the North loss. Not a great experience, however, poor Jason Blake was a mess he could barely move, had welts all over his body where he had been hit. Ice packs everywhere and to be honest it really upset me to see him in such a condition. I thought for sure he would not be playing the following week.

Obviously he didn't have anything to serious as it turns out and he was out there the next week as though nothing had happened. So they did an awesome job of getting him back on the track.

[saintsRrising]

Is everyone in agreeance that injuries are what cost us a flag under GT?

Wow, that's a turnaround.

Yes GT's mismanagement of Player Conditioning, which he demanded responsibility for from the Board, was one of the significant factors that resulted in the Saints not winning flag in that period.

[Mr X from the West]

Is everyone in agreeance that injuries are what cost us a flag under GT?

Wow, that's a turnaround.

Agreeance? You mean "agreement"?

[joffaboy]

Is everyone in agreeance that injuries are what cost us a flag under GT?

Wow, that's a turnaround.

No. I dont agree.

We never had an opportunity to even play for a flag under GT. Injuries may have had a part in us not getting to a Grand Final, but then you have to win it.

As we saw this year, an almost perfect season doesn't produce a flag.

GT's pathetic player management destroyed any chance we had of making a Grand Final.

I never seaid he couldn't coach, and I agree with him and Roos when they say a coach is overrated.

I would preface that however with that a good coach is overrated (I know that doesn't make sense) but a bad coach can cripple a team.

A coach is more a manager and in that case Lyon is a very good coach. Matchday is overrated for a coach.

GT let us al down with his cavilier attitude to player management (wrecked Balls career, and near wrecked Kosi's career, along with a host of others), which makes him a poor coach when it comes to management. His matchday coaching was no better or worse than the vast majority of AFL coaches.

[plugger66]

Is everyone in agreeance that injuries are what cost us a flag under GT?

Wow, that's a turnaround.

No. I dont agree.

We never had an opportunity to even play for a flag under GT. Injuries may have had a part in us not getting to a Grand Final, but then you have to win it.

As we saw this year, an almost perfect season doesn't produce a flag.

GT's pathetic player management destroyed any chance we had of making a Grand Final.

I never seaid he couldn't coach, and I agree with him and Roos when they say a coach is overrated.

I would preface that however with that a good coach is overrated (I know that doesn't make sense) but a bad coach can cripple a team.

A coach is more a manager and in that case Lyon is a very good coach. Matchday is overrated for a coach.

GT let us al down with his cavilier attitude to player management (wrecked Balls career, and near wrecked Kosi's career, along with a host of others), which makes him a poor coach when it comes to management. His matchday coaching was no better or worse than the vast majority of AFL coaches.

Unless you know how much we were able to spend on the footy department back in 2003-06 I dont know how you can say GT wrecked Ball's career. We had Doctors and physios back then but not of the quality of today due to finances and unless you heard GT say I will take no notice of what they say and just play Ball then you are making it up. I certainly dont know what was said between the doctors, physios, Gt and Ball but if you do can you tell me where the direct quotes are. I would be happy to see them.

[joffaboy]

Unless you know how much we were able to spend on the footy department back in 2003-06 I dont know how you can say GT wrecked Ball's career. We had Doctors and physios back then but not of the quality of today due to finances and unless you heard GT say I will take no notice of what they say and just play Ball then you are making it up. I certainly dont know what was said between the doctors, physios, Gt and Ball but if you do can you tell me where the direct quotes are. I would be happy to see them.

Playing players while they are obviously injured needs no direct quote.

How was playing Kosi with a crook back any good for him?

Maybe he should have directed some of the hundreds of thousands of $ he wasted on trips to China and St Africa into getting his football players fit to play.

Also he changed fitness staff just about every year. When Misson got there he was appalled to find no data on players conditioning.

This culminated with the Ross Lyon "meat and potatoes" quote about basic conditioning.

Regardless of the budget or no, basic conditioning of the players was sadly lacking according to Drain and Lyon.

That is NOT MADE UP. IT IS A FACT RECORDED IN VARIOUS MEDIA.

So stop defending the indefensible. Everyone knows that before Lyon got to Moorabbin,the list was a rabble regarding fitness.

[plugger66]

Unless you know how much we were able to spend on the footy department back in 2003-06 I dont know how you can say GT wrecked Ball's career. We had Doctors and physios back then but not of the quality of today due to finances and unless you heard GT say I will take no notice of what they say and just play Ball then you are making it up. I certainly dont know what was said between the doctors, physios, Gt and Ball but if you do can you tell me where the direct quotes are. I would be happy to see them.

Playing players while they are obviously injured needs no direct quote.

How was playing Kosi with a crook back any good for him?

Maybe he should have directed some of the hundreds of thousands of $ he wasted on trips to China and St Africa into getting his football players fit to play.

Also he changed fitness staff just about every year. When Misson got there he was appalled to find no data on players conditioning.

This culminated with the Ross Lyon "meat and potatoes" quote about basic conditioning.

Regardless of the budget or no, basic conditioning of the players was sadly lacking according to Drain and Lyon.

That is NOT MADE UP. IT IS A FACT RECORDED IN VARIOUS MEDIA.

So stop defending the indefensible. Everyone knows that before Lyon got to Moorabbin,the list was a rabble regarding fitness.

The one thing that I do know as fact is that the football department budget was at least one million less that it is today probably a lot more. I also would think GT was in charge of records as RL wouldnt be today. I will continue to defend that side of the club unless you have actual fact that GT didnt take notice of the medical department instead of what people write on here that for some reason then becomes fact.

As for trips away, I have it on good authority that the players class them as great bonding trips and made them work as a team like they didnt previously so I am pretty sure they werent a waste of money.

[Milton66]

The concept of "injury prevention" through "conditioning", special training and other practices that are supposed to strengthen key parts of the body, etc., strikes me as being far more of a faith-based exercise.

To the extent that this sort of stuff is effective, I suspect it is only effective at the margins. There are just so many ways a footballer can get injured, and there are also trade-offs: eg, if one isn't careful, working to strengthen one part of the body can inadvertently put more strain on another, etc.

This is where your argument dies.

Whilst you cannot prevent an injury 100%, it's all about risk management, and risk prevention.

So the better you prepare, the less likely you are to get injured.

[Milton66]

Unless you know how much we were able to spend on the footy department back in 2003-06 I dont know how you can say GT wrecked Ball's career. We had Doctors and physios back then but not of the quality of today due to finances and unless you heard GT say I will take no notice of what they say and just play Ball then you are making it up. I certainly dont know what was said between the doctors, physios, Gt and Ball but if you do can you tell me where the direct quotes are. I would be happy to see them.

Playing players while they are obviously injured needs no direct quote.

How was playing Kosi with a crook back any good for him?

Maybe he should have directed some of the hundreds of thousands of $ he wasted on trips to China and St Africa into getting his football players fit to play.

Also he changed fitness staff just about every year. When Misson got there he was appalled to find no data on players conditioning.

This culminated with the Ross Lyon "meat and potatoes" quote about basic conditioning.

Regardless of the budget or no, basic conditioning of the players was sadly lacking according to Drain and Lyon.

That is NOT MADE UP. IT IS A FACT RECORDED IN VARIOUS MEDIA.

So stop defending the indefensible. Everyone knows that before Lyon got to Moorabbin,the list was a rabble regarding fitness.

The one thing that I do know as fact is that the football department budget was at least one million less that it is today probably a lot more. I also would think GT was in charge of records as RL wouldnt be today. I will continue to defend that side of the club unless you have actual fact that GT didnt take notice of the medical department instead of what people write on here that for some reason then becomes fact.

As for trips away, I have it on good authority that the players class them as great bonding trips and made them work as a team like they didnt previously so I am pretty sure they werent a waste of money.

Perhaps they could have reinvested the funds from those end of season trips into the footy department... or even give GT a paycut that was more consurate with this experience, and use that money also?

The boys could have spent a month at Rosebud and they would have bonded.

[saintsRrising]

To the superstitious crew.

You believe GT was 'unlucky"

If so then good riddance.

You believe RL has been successful due to "luck"

If so then keep him on.

Personally I am of the view that it is due good to improved coaching and management that we are are in an improved position. (ie it was stupidity to not take Drain when offered and not bad luck).

But if you want to believe that GT was some type of Jonas...then go for it.

Anyway, however you want to look at it...we are better off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rodgerfox]

I never seaid he couldn't coach, and I agree with him and Roos when they say a coach is overrated.

I would preface that however with that a good coach is overrated (I know that doesn't make sense) but a bad coach can cripple a team.

A coach is more a manager and in that case Lyon is a very good coach. Matchday is overrated for a coach.

I tend to agree.

Although after GF day, we saw what bad match coaching can do!

[rodgerfox]

(ie it was stupidity to not take Drain when offered and not bad luck).

Yeah, he's been on fire lately hasn't he.