Re: Kevin Pietersen Injury
Thanks for your interesting post.Unfortunately you can't believe what you read in the press. I would suspect the injury may be something he has had for a long time and that he has had a lot of physio etc. on without lasting success.
Now that is not to say that the physio would not have worked in theory but in practice we are dealing with 'professional' sportsmen. That should really be renamed as 'Paid Sportsman' as the concept of looking after their assets, injury prevention, appropriate compliance with advice etc.is often non-existent. Of course I am not directing this at Mr Petersen but one can't know if in reality surgery was the only practical option at this time.
So my comment is that even when we feel we know what works, what we would like our clients to do we all to often find that what they are actually interested in doing is a totally different thing. God love professional sport!
Re: Kevin Pietersen Injury
Mitch, I support and salute you, you have taken the words , almost , out of my mouth. Too much so called "sports medicine " I fear , is undertaken by medical practitioners whose approach is to assume pathology first, neurology last.
It is possible ,that the impetus for this surgery was taken out of the actual physio's hands ( who may well have had a non local solution )by a louder voice with the appearance of verissimilitude and a medical credential. This cricketer is not and will not be the only one to have his/her better interests denied by well meaning , but ultimately sciolistic heavyweights in the sports med fraternity.