Not be surprised if thats santos done for the season

And fingers crossed on sheehan - we really have been battered with injuries

 

32 minutes ago, Casino said:

Not be surprised if thats santos done for the season

And fingers crossed on sheehan - we really have been battered with injuries

 

You’d hope not on Santos and hopefully as he was able to finish the game it won’t be too bad. Likewise on Josh, he’s so important we can’t afford to lose players now with what’s at stake.

So the same injury and same symptoms at the time as a previous one?

Whilst you can understand them all wanting him to stay on, maybe the bigger picture says get him off?

Guess we'll see.

57 minutes ago, Casino said:

Not be surprised if thats santos done for the season

And fingers crossed on sheehan - we really have been battered with injuries

 

We don’t help ourselves with potential injuries and management needs to take some responsibility. We had Forrester and Taylor on the bench. If there is a hint of injury with Santos, he needs to come off.

Saw the same a couple of games back against Reading when Iredale went down and then they got him up and playing on, hobbling around, before going down again and then being subbed for Forrester.

If a players is injured, go down, get treatment, then if you can’t continue go off. I get that if you have treatment you have to go to the sidelines - which means playing 20 second with 10 men. But they’re risking making the injury worse by playing on.

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by Jol_BWFC

You cant say a game is must win then start taking players off to save em for the next game

24 minutes ago, Casino said:

You cant say a game is must win then start taking players off to save em for the next game

I think we were winning at the time? Could be wrong on that.

It’s not saving him for the next game. IMO, it’s not worth risking our captain playing on an injury if it could mean it puts him out of 4 games and the play offs. We’ve seen from Dan and Vic what a muscle injury can do.

Evatt says “it was getting progressively worse. All we can do is pray to the stars”. Or he could have taken off an injured player and replaced him with one of the two fit centre backs on the bench…

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by Jol_BWFC

We have Forrester, Taylor & Ashworth who can join Toal, Iredale & Jones, even Williams, so if Santos, with his considerable ability but clear weaknesses misses a few we will survive. Possibly even benefit from a speedier build up.

As we have Pompey next up & with the forward who owned Santos in the previous match v. them I'd be disappointed, but not despondent. 

Sheehan would be the bigger miss. Even then with Dempsey waiting to step in we have cover.

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by Dr. Feelgood

We have adequate cover for santos 

1 hour ago, radcliffe white said:

We have adequate cover for santos 

I agree. So why not take him off if he’s injured?

9 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I agree. So why not take him off if he’s injured?

Evatt

Just knew there'd be one final kick in the balls regarding injuries.

Fingers crossed on Sheehan in particular. 

2 hours ago, Casino said:

You cant say a game is must win then start taking players off to save em for the next game

I think you can if you are classing all your remaining games as must win.

And the player is injued.

And the injury is getting worse as he plays longer.

 

In fact, its criminal not to.

20 minutes ago, Greg_BWFC said:

Just knew there'd be one final kick in the balls regarding injuries.

Fingers crossed on Sheehan in particular. 

Sheehan didn’t look as though he was worried to me after the game was smiling clapping the fans and was walking ok so maybe was a precaution 

2 hours ago, Casino said:

You cant say a game is must win then start taking players off to save em for the next game

Yes you can.

If it was getting worse, then he wasn't necessarily at his best neither. If that had cost us a goal, folk would be berating them.

One of those things we'll never know though, so just have to hope he's OK.

23 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I agree. So why not take him off if he’s injured?

Player said he was ok to continue, presumably. So continue he did. 

Had we taken him off when he said he was ok, then conceded, Evatt would be getting absolute pelters. Lose, lose situation for him in either scenario.

At the end of the day, he got through the win and at that moment, winning that game was the most important thing. 

47 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

Player said he was ok to continue, presumably. So continue he did. 

Had we taken him off when he said he was ok, then conceded, Evatt would be getting absolute pelters. Lose, lose situation for him in either scenario.

At the end of the day, he got through the win and at that moment, winning that game was the most important thing. 

He also reported it was getting worse.

Sometimes players aren't fully honest with themselves, let alone others, even if it's inadvertent and with the best of intentions.

1 hour ago, boltonboris said:

winning that game was the most important thing. 

exactly

if we had lost saturday, we wouldnt be bothered about the next 4

if you think play offs is all we can get, then sub him, but don't say its a must win game

An assumption there that the subs wouldn't have been able to do what an injured Santos was doing.

By that token, its better to risk him not being on the pitch for a few minutes, than not being on it for a few games.

12 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

An assumption there that the subs wouldn't have been able to do what an injured Santos was doing.

By that token, its better to risk him not being on the pitch for a few minutes, than not being on it for a few games.

This is where I’m at. Him coming off wouldn’t have meant we drew or lost that game.

Anyway, we could go round in circles on it. Let’s hope it’s not a bad injury and he’s back for the next game - then it’s a moot point. 

2 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

Him coming off wouldn’t have meant we drew or lost that game.

 

supposition, mlud

35 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

He also reported it was getting worse.

Sometimes players aren't fully honest with themselves, let alone others, even if it's inadvertent and with the best of intentions.

When’s the last time a boxer threw the towel in themselves? Something a sports star needs to rely on medical staff to do what’s best by them.

9 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

When’s the last time a boxer threw the towel in themselves? Something a sports star needs to rely on medical staff to do what’s best by them.

It's not as obvious though really. Baxter played on for a match and a bit with an injury that put him out for 2 months. Pain does not always equal injury.

In Boxing, you can see it. Knees gone, or open cuts etc. Players play on with injuries ALL the time. Not many other fans would then pelt their manager for it though

11 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

When’s the last time a boxer threw the towel in themselves? Something a sports star needs to rely on medical staff to do what’s best by them.

I’m just imagining a fucked up boxer wishing he had a towel.

15 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

This is where I’m at. Him coming off wouldn’t have meant we drew or lost that game.

It could have done. Defenders coming on cold when we're under pressure. Slack off on a set piece, or someone's a yard quicker to the ball than you expected them to be as you're not into it yet.. It can happen. Which is the exact reason you never make a defensive sub on a set piece unless you absolutely have to.

It wasn't like Bristol were just chipping balls in to be headed out. They were coming after us on the deck, round the sides and in the air. 

The decision to keep him on was a gamble of course, but if the captain says "I can carry on", then he carries on

22 minutes ago, Casino said:

supposition, mlud

😁 Overruled. Factual statement.

Him coming off wouldn’t have meant we lost or drew. Him coming off could have resulted in a win (or a draw or a loss).