Daisy charged for striking Laidler! - can accept 1 game suspension

[Thryleon]

Your memory must be faulty Thry.  Indeed, one of Wallsy's comments was about Daisy pulling his head in and setting a better example.

Nah, that's retrospective.

He wasn't a party boy with a bad attitude at Collingwood which is what we are talking about here.  That was the rat pack.  Blokes with tattoos shooting with bikies hits and runs and what not.

Walls was talking about Daisy going down media Street and getting out on the field and letting football do the talking.  Hard to do when your injured.  I think you're mixing up your discussion points a little bit.

Anyway, it's not possible to defend the indefensible and I'm not going to bother to read any more of the lame (sorry about the pun!) justifications for the club recruiting Thomas.  It happened and we're stuck with an overpaid list clogger.  As I've said many times before, I'd love to see him recapture some form but I'm less optimistic of it happening than ever before.

Something I've come around to this year.  But that's the point.  This year.

It's impossible to know what you're going to get until you get it, and what you're really frustrated about was a risk that we didn't need to take that didn't work.

retrospective frustration is fine, but you can't project that back to three years ago based on different opinions it's impossible to know what was right or wrong and the truth was somewhere in between. One of them was going to be right, and in time, both could be.

Daisy is/was cooked.  We have seen him play roughly 15 matches coming into his third year.  We will see but ultimately it doesn't matter.  He will do what he will do, it's not going to effect our flag chances.

[DJC]

We'll have to agree to disagree Thry.

I know that Collingwood was concerned with Daisy's nightclubbing and I know that they were concerned that he would never regain full fitness.  For whatever reason, we chose to ignore those issues and give him a long term contract as the club's highest paid player.

It was a poor decision at the time and it hasn't improved with the passage of time.

[LP]

You either have NFI or an overactive imagination LP, or perhaps both.

I really can't be bothered responding to your ignorant comments so let's just leave it at that.

So again no comments about the skills and training that make McKay's a suitable choice to deal with the technicalities, jargon, pharmacology and therapies relating to injuries, health and fitness as an AFL player. Just an attack on me.

Your bias is transparent, perhaps you'd prefer we replace him with an accountant or librarian!

Until there is some evidence to support your assertions, I'm happy stand by the knowledge that McKay has hard qualifications that cannot be questioned and makes him the ideal person to assess the reports of medical specialists.

[ElwoodBlues1]

I'm not a Doctor or a Vet and have no experience with skeletal science but if you put a football in a players hands and tell him to kick it as far as he can and it goes only 30m
then you have some idea things are not right..
If the coach starts making excuses for the player and gives the impression that said player is still in rehab mode and not to expect too much in his initial season then you know you have a lemon...

[ItsOurTime]

So again no comments about the skills and training that make McKay's a suitable choice to deal with the technicalities, jargon, pharmacology and therapies relating to injuries, health and fitness as an AFL player. Just an attack on me.

Your bias is transparent, perhaps you'd prefer we replace him with an accountant or librarian!

Until there is some evidence to support your assertions, I'm happy stand by the knowledge that McKay has hard qualifications that cannot be questioned and makes him the ideal person to assess the reports of medical specialists.

So the guy whose job isn't to assess medical reports and who isn't qualified to do so is the ideal person to make the call? One of the more out there ideas but would nicely explain this mess.

[flyboy77]

Let's move on ladies....? We can only hope Daisy again becomes something or all of the player he once was....?

Onwards to the game Thursday night.....

[LP]

So the guy whose job isn't to assess medical reports and who isn't qualified to do so is the ideal person to make the call? One of the more out there ideas but would nicely explain this mess.

You don't seriously think the club doctor runs the joint do you?

So then, who else in our club senior administration has enough of the equivalent training in technical aspects of health and injury to make recommendations to the board based on assessment of the specialist reports.

You don't seriously think the board read those reports do you?

It would be very poor governance for the board not to require some form of involvement and feedback from McKay regarding any player welfare issues. Short of actually having a medical doctor on the board, he is the next best option.

[ItsOurTime]

You don't seriously think the club doctor runs the joint do you?

So then, who else in our club senior administration has enough of the equivalent training in technical aspects of health and injury to make recommendations to the board based on assessment of the specialist reports.

You don't seriously think the board read those reports do you?

It would be very poor governance for the board not to require some form of involvement and feedback from McKay regarding any player welfare issues. Short of actually having a medical doctor on the board, he is the next best option.

Not sure what you're arguing. That McKay actively took ownership of the risk that Thomas would never recover and now that it looks like he won't, he shouldn't be held accountable for taking the risk? And all that is fine because he's a vet and vets are better than doctors at assessing medical reports in humans?

Definitely sounds like good governance yo me.

[LP]

Not sure what you're arguing. That McKay actively took ownership of the risk that Thomas would never recover and now that it looks like he won't, he shouldn't be held accountable for taking the risk? And all that is fine because he's a vet and vets are better than doctors at assessing medical reports in humans?

Definitely sounds like good governance yo me.

Posters are calling for McKay's removal based on the assertions / hearsay that our club was told at the time Daisy could never recover from his ankle problems, and that McKay now has ultimate responsibility for Daisy's recruitment. I'm calling those assertions bullcrap!

Rather than offer evidence to support the hearsay posters try to defend their claims by loading derision on McKay's abilities, based on indirect assertions his training "As a Vet" has no value in assisting him to contribute to a decision based on expert medical reports.

These are old claims, that McKay's veterinary training means nothing, that we were told Daisy could not recover and that it's McKay's fault.

But all three assertions are bogus;

- There is no evidence other than hearsay that we were told Daisy could not recover.
  (Are Daisy's current problems related to his ankle?)

- McKay's training does mean he has significant skills to assess a players medical reports.
  (Assuming player / doctor confidentiality has allowed him to actually see them, they must be explicitly released by the player.)

- McKay is not a loan gun in making such decisions.
  (Who else got a vote in this process and did McKay vote Yah or Nay?)

[kruddler]

Question for LP...

What are McKays responsibilities at the club?