"Teamwork bridges AFL fitness, health divide"
Jon Pierik
Published: January 22, 2013 - 3:00AM
AFL Sports Science Association boss Rob Aughey says isolated problems between fitness and conditioning personnel and club doctors have been resolved and he does not expect any trouble this season.
League chief executive Andrew Demetriou last season threatened clubs with heavy fines if it was proven medical staff had been overruled on player health issues by what he cheekily claimed were ''phys-edders''.
This problem was confirmed in an AFL Medical Officers Association survey, which found seven of 14 clubs said ''non-medically qualified personnel exerted undue influence on medical decision making''.
Six also said this had ''adversely affected medical decisions''. Aughey said Demetriou's comments had been aimed broadly and not just at sports science and fitness staff.
''There were some underlying issues in terms of how sports science and medical and physio staff all worked together, nothing really serious,'' he said.
''[There were] some isolated instances which have been resolved. I think it stemmed from that.
''There was also a concern there were not enough doctors actually wanting to work in the AFL.
''Hence, a statement like that, gives some support to doctors indirectly so they feel more comfortable in the sport.''
The report found there was a shortage of suitably qualified medical officers and there had been multiple cases of AFL doctors leaving clubs.
The AFL was also concerned that sports scientists had too much influence on issues such as NAB Cup procedures, the debate over the interchange bench and
when players returned from injury, the latter opening the threat of legal action should the wrong decision be made. The issue had also been raised by AFL Medical Officers Association chief Hugh Seward and senior AFL medico Harry Unglik.
Aughey, who is also a sports scientist with the Western Bulldogs, said the AFL Sports Science Association had since worked together with the medical officers and the physiotherapists association on a ''best practice'' model.
''That was done incredibly collegially, there was no angst or malice or anything. The three groups worked together really, really well,'' he said.
''It [best practice] is not something binding that comes into effect. Again, really there is not a problem out there. I don't think any of the organisations have felt the need to change so much.
''There were some isolated instances, they had largely been dealt with by then [at the time of Demetriou's comments].
''As I say, it wasn't anywhere near as big an issue that was made out.''
The fledgling Sports Science Association, still finalising its governance, plans to hold its next major meeting during the pre-season competition.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/teamwork-bridges-afl-fitness-health-divide-20130121-2d36b.htmlDunno whether it's been posted before but I find that figure of 50% reporting undue influence and almost as many saying it had a bad effect on medical decisions amazing.
So six of 14 club medico's said that their medical decisions were adversely affected.
Yep, no problems with a claim if you're one of those six clubs.