Sven Botman: set to miss 6–9 months with new ACL injury (Official)

[The Butcher]

2 minutes ago, Cf said:

Doesn't sound like a huge deal to me. Sounds like it was somewhat 50/50 whether the surgery was required, medical team erred on the side of caution to get it done, and Botman presented with the options decided he wanted to proceed without. He knows his own body and I'm sure there'll have been scans etc as time went on. 

 

Just yet another injury related issue that's fallen the wrong way for us. 

You don't know your own body when it comes to first time ACL injuries mind.

[Kanji]

Shadow puppets had pretty much told us that specialists also said no surgery needed if he rests and heals up. So that’s what he went with and it didn’t work out.

[Cf]

Just now, The Butcher said:

You don't know your own body when it comes to first time ACL injuries mind.

 

In that sense perhaps not but surgery entails risks. Risks someone might not want to take with their body when some medical experts are telling them they don't think you need it. 

[Kanji]

Just now, Cf said:

 

In that sense perhaps not but surgery entails risks. Risks someone might not want to take with their body when some medical experts are telling them they don't think you need it. 

Are you at all shocked that NO has posters who are appalled the club didn’t MAKE Sven get surgery?

[et tu brute]

What a fucking balls up with this injury. He had a slight tear on his ACL and he's still allowed to play. It's been totally obvious that he was nowhere near ok to play and according to Howe  the medical team advised him to get the surgery. The player should have been told that if he wasn't going to get surgery then he wouldn't be playing. I wonder if Botman would be still wanting to play if a certain tournament wasn't taking place this summer. So now we have had a player totally being sub standard as a result of an injury and is now facing a minimum of 9 months out due to this injury, when he should have been in for surgery when it first occurred. Absolute shambles.

 

 

Edited March 29 by et tu brute

[TRon]

1 hour ago, frankpingel said:

Don't think people are saying we should have physically forced the op but simply have done everything (more) to convince him it was the best and only long term solution.

 

Yep. Feels like we went with the fingers crossed decision rather than than the safest one. Maybe there's some hindsight in there, but given our awful injury situation this season, it feels like we are getting these decisions wrong more often than right.

[madras]

6 minutes ago, Kanji said:

Shadow puppets had pretty much told us that specialists also said no surgery needed if he rests and heals up. So that’s what he went with and it didn’t work out.

But where's the blame ?

[Cf]

Just now, madras said:

But where's the blame ?

 

Not everything needs blame apportioned. 

[Kanji]

Again, the medical team cleared him to play AFTER rest, rehab and regular scans and doctors and the club deemed he had healed. However, his knee failed again. rotten luck, and yeah surgery probably would have been the better bet in hindsight. 
 

^all stuff Shadow Puppets has confirmed before. 

[Kanji]

1 minute ago, madras said:

But where's the blame ?

On Nickson for scouting him obv. 

[Abacus]

1 minute ago, Cf said:

Howe's comments though are a little more fanning the flames than we've come to expect. 

 

"There was conflicting advice from specialists as to whether surgery was required or not. Between the player and our medical team we decided to proceed without and monitor the situation as time went on. In hindsight surgery might have been the better choice but it wasn't a clear cut decision".

 

Done. 

 

If that's what happened, I think that's what Howe has to say rather than keep this in-house. It would only take one specialist or Botman himself to come out and deny this version of events for the whole thing to come tumbling down.

 

I guess the thing here is that, if, with hindsight, it was the wrong call that they do learn from this. Maybe it was a coin toss decision that could have gone the right way and everyone would have been congratulating themselves, but from the outside it does seem a gamble in retrospect.

 

Incidentally, if the advice was to rest to avoid surgery, maybe he should have just actually rested instead of playing professional football repeatedly.

[madras]

1 minute ago, Cf said:

 

Not everything needs blame apportioned. 

Are you new here ?

[TRon]

3 minutes ago, Kanji said:

Again, the medical team cleared him to play AFTER rest, rehab and regular scans and doctors and the club deemed he had healed. However, his knee failed again. rotten luck, and yeah surgery probably would have been the better bet in hindsight. 
 

^all stuff Shadow Puppets has confirmed before. 

 

There were specialists who advised an op immediately and some who didn't. It was diagnosed as a slight tear, which is not like it was just feeling a bit sore. Maybe we should lean more towards the more cautious specialists in future.

[Kanji]

3 minutes ago, Abacus said:

 

If that's what happened, I think that's what Howe has to say rather than keep this in-house. It would only take one specialist or Botman himself to come out and deny this version of events for the whole thing to come tumbling down.

 

I guess the thing here is that, if, with hindsight, it was the wrong call that they do learn from this. Maybe it was a coin toss decision that could have gone the right way and everyone would have been congratulating themselves, but from the outside it does seem a gamble in retrospect.

 

Incidentally, if the advice was to rest to avoid surgery, maybe he should have just actually rested instead of playing professional football repeatedly.

Did you magically forget he was out for some time, resting and rehabbing? People are going on here like he played every single match this season on a torn ACL. 
 

for the millionth time the doctors at club and outside the club cleared him to play. Scans revealed he had healed. 

[Interpolic]

1 minute ago, Cf said:

 

Not everything needs blame apportioned. 

 

[Kanji]

1 minute ago, TRon said:

 

There were specialists who advised an op immediately and some who didn't. It was diagnosed as a slight tear, which is not like it was just feeling a bit sore. Maybe we should lean more towards the more cautious specialists in future.

Again, we all know that. He rested the tear and rehabbed it and the tear healed. Hence why he rejoined the team and played football. 

[et tu brute]

6 minutes ago, Kanji said:

Again, the medical team cleared him to play AFTER rest, rehab and regular scans and doctors and the club deemed he had healed. However, his knee failed again. rotten luck, and yeah surgery probably would have been the better bet in hindsight. 
 

^all stuff Shadow Puppets has confirmed before. 

No the medical team said he needed surgery according to Howe and if it's Botman who insisted he didn't need the surgery, then he should have been told straight that he wasn't playing then.

[Cf]

1 minute ago, Abacus said:

 

If that's what happened, I think that's what Howe has to say rather than keep this in-house. It would only take one specialist or Botman himself to come out and deny this version of events for the whole thing to come tumbling down.

 

I guess the thing here is that, if, with hindsight, it was the wrong call that they do learn from this. Maybe it was a coin toss decision that could have gone the right way and everyone would have been congratulating themselves, but from the outside it does seem a gamble in retrospect.

 

Incidentally, if the advice was to rest to avoid surgery, maybe he should have just actually rested instead of playing professional football repeatedly.

 

The key point for me was yes it was a gamble. But surgery isn't without risks - it also would have been a gamble. 

 

Essentially he didn't get injured enough. Had it been more serious it would have required surgery. 

 

Had it been less serious he'd have just needed some rest and rehab. 

 

As it happens the damage was somewhere in the middle where there wasn't really a correct choice. 

 

If there's lessons to learn then yeah learn them. But the lesson isn't "if in doubt get the surgery". It's far too simplistic and is going to be on a case by case basis. 

 

 

[TRon]

1 minute ago, Kanji said:

Again, we all know that. He rested the tear and rehabbed it and the tear healed. Hence why he rejoined the team and played football. 

 

Well it obviously didn't heal properly.

[Cf]

1 minute ago, et tu brute said:

No the medical team said he needed surgery according to Howe and if it's Botman who insisted he didn't need the surgery, then he should have been told straight that he wasn't playing then.

 

This is where Howe's comments aren't helpful. In reality they'll have all discussed it as a group and as a result of Botman's input of not wanting the surgery will have agreed a plan for how to proceed without. 

 

I don't know what this he's not playing is about. He didn't play whilst he had to rest. Once he's rested and it's seemingly healed why wouldn't Howe play him?

[et tu brute]

Just now, Cf said:

 

This is where Howe's comments aren't helpful. In reality they'll have all discussed it as a group and as a result of Botman's input of not wanting the surgery will have agreed a plan for how to proceed without. 

 

I don't know what this he's not playing is about. He didn't play whilst he had to rest. Once he's rested and it's seemingly healed why wouldn't Howe play him?

He was playing straight after the injury occurred for a start before it became obvious he needed time out. He then returned and it was blatantly obvious that he was still not right. 

[Zero]

I don’t know why, but you sounds like no one has to be blamed for this, and, most importantly, if such event occurs again, another 50/50 situation (which I don’t agree), everyone involved should act the same and take the gamble again.

 

So what’s the lesson learnt?

 

 

[Mike]

Fucking HELL.

[Abacus]

14 minutes ago, Kanji said:

Did you magically forget he was out for some time, resting and rehabbing? People are going on here like he played every single match this season on a torn ACL. 
 

for the millionth time the doctors at club and outside the club cleared him to play. Scans revealed he had healed. 

 

As far as I know, the first injury was pure bad luck, but then it wasn't picked up properly for a couple of games which wasn't great, that's all agreed.

 

There was a period of rest and rehab after what's been described as a marginal call to go that way. And then it was 'healed', but with continuing scans which all said he was OK to carry on playing.

 

So it was presumably just another piece of pure bad luck that he got another completely unrelated injury in the exact same place. If that's what the position is, why has Howe now come out saying the decision for him to play was wrong with hindsight?

 

NB if you think I'm coming at this from a position of complete medical ignorance, you should be aware that in my teens I watched multiple episodes of Dougie Howser MD, and followed this up in later life with a refresher course by watching House, until it got silly.

[Yorkie]

If that's all there is to it (re Howe's quotes) then I'm struggling to see past it being a bit of a shit-show in terms of managing the situation. Doesn't reflect well on wor Eddie imo but hopefully there's more to it than simply letting the player utterly knacker himself.