Waived: Sharks Waive Torres

[CrypTic]

The problem here is that you're trying to put relevance on what a doctor needs to certify for a player to go on LTIR when it isn't relevant at all. What is relevant for putting someone on LTIR is whether the Club's physician believes that a player, either through injury or illness, will be unable to play the 24 days and 10 NHL games needed to put someone on LTIR. It literally makes no difference what a physician needs to certify to that end.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Whatever the team's physician needs to certify is what determines whether the player can go on LTIR, right? If the physician won't certify, no LTIR. How can that not make a difference or be irrelevant?

If all the team's physician needs to do is sign a form saying that s/he believes that the player will be unable to play the 24 days or 10 games needed, then that's what s/he needs to certify. The CBA says that the doctor needs to say that the player in question will be unfit to play as a result of an injury or illness. If the form is no more specific than that, it wouldn't be helpful in understanding the LTIR provisions bc it would not provide any new information. But if there is more, it might be helpful in understanding those provisions.

 

[kdb209]

So I tell you what would be a good indication of what that passage means and you say "nothing will [be good enough]"?

I have read the CBA. I probably know more about it than you do. But, sure, laugh at my questions and say that I'm just raising them to complicate things. If you have situations that are similar to Torres's situation, that (along with the actual medical forms that need to be completed for a doctor to certify LTIR, but we are probably not going to get those) would probably be the best support for any interpretation.

I agree with you (and have above) that it is up to the doctor and him/her certifying whatever is on the form(s) that need to be filled out. Neither of us know what those forms say.

It's just a check-box form:

EXHIBIT 25-A
FITNESS TO PLAY DETERMINATION FORM
NHL/NHLPA Fitness to Play Determination Form
(Applicable for Club Physician/Player Physician/ Independent Physician)
Name of Physician: ____________________________
Select one of the following: Club Physician or Player Physician or Independent Physician
Player Name: _____________________________
Club Name: _____________________________
Identify nature of Player's injury, illness, condition or complaint: _____________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Select one of the following:
[ ] It is my determination that as of this day the Player is disabled and unable to
perform his duties as an NHL hockey Player, which duties include playing in
NHL Games.
[ ] It is my determination that as of this day the Player is not disabled and is able to
perform his duties as an NHL hockey Player, which duties include playing in
NHL Games.
Signature of Physician: _____________________________________
Date: ___________________________________________________

edit:

The full process is documented under Article 17.7 ("Procedures for Determining Fitness to Play.").

The League's separate right to "challenge the determination of a Club physician that a Player is unfit to play for purposes of the Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception" is under Article 50.10(d).

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don't understand what you're saying here. Whatever the team's physician needs to certify is what determines whether the player can go on LTIR, right? If the physician won't certify, no LTIR. How can that not make a difference or be irrelevant?

If all the team's physician needs to do is sign a form saying that s/he believes that the player will be unable to play the 24 days or 10 games needed, then that's what s/he needs to certify. The CBA says that the doctor needs to say that the player in question will be unfit to play as a result of an injury or illness. If the form is no more specific than that, it wouldn't be helpful in understanding the LTIR provisions bc it would not provide any new information. But if there is more, it might be helpful in understanding those provisions.

It's merely paperwork after the decision has already been reached. The actual paperwork itself is irrelevant to the decision made as to whether he is unfit to play for that amount of time.

 

[CrypTic]

It's just a check-box form:

Thanks. That is at least somewhat helpful.

Sorry to the rest of the board that I read contracts differently than many of you seem to. That's how I've been reading them for a while. I'm not trying to say that I am definitely correct (bc, as I've said, I think the provision is pretty vague and is capable of being interpreted in different ways) but I'm not trying to read them differently than you do.

 

[210]

It's just a check-box form:

And as I posted in post #125, there's a 25-B and 25-C he can take a look at too.

 

[CrypTic]

It's merely paperwork after the decision has already been reached. The actual paperwork itself is irrelevant to the decision made as to whether he is unfit to play for that amount of time.

thanks for explaining.

I think I understand the disagreement now. I am looking at the paperwork as something that would inform the medical exam, examination of records, etc. E.g., if the doctor needs to certify that the player can't perform his duties as an NHL player, the doctor would somewhat change the nature of what s/he's paying most attention to while examining the records, etc. I also think that what a doctor has to certify is potentially important in understanding what the provision means.

You are looking at it as extra work for the doctor that has nothing to do with what kinds of things the doctor is going to pay attention to, how s/he will approach the exam or examination of the records, what type of questions s/he will ask (either to the patient or to himself when examining the records and conducting the exam, etc.)

I think that's it. I may have misunderstood you. I still don't understand how that makes it irrelevant for understanding the CBA but it's probably miscommunication.

 

[CrypTic]

And as I posted in post #125, there's a 25-B and 25-C he can take a look at too.

Thanks for the reference. As I read those, the physician is determining whether or not the player is fit to be an NHL player, not able to play hockey at any level. They look like the kind of disability certification doctors would use for disability policies that require that the person is no longer able to perform their previous job.

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Thanks for the reference. As I read those, the physician is determining whether or not the player is fit to be an NHL player, not able to play hockey at any level. They look like the kind of disability certification doctors would use for disability policies that require that the person is no longer able to perform their previous job.

Maybe I'm missing something.

Likely just that Torres isn't eligible for LTIR since he's in the AHL right now.

 

[210]

Thanks for the reference. As I read those, the physician is determining whether or not the player is fit to be an NHL player, not able to play hockey at any level. They look like the kind of disability certification doctors would use for disability policies that require that the person is no longer able to perform their previous job.

Maybe I'm missing something.

The forms indicate NHL because it is against the CBA for teams to waive or loan/assign an injured player to the minor leagues. (The exception is a conditioning loan, which the player must agree to).

 

[CrypTic]

The forms indicate NHL because it is against the CBA for teams to waive or loan/assign an injured player to the minor leagues. (The exception is a conditioning loan, which the player must agree to).

Are the forms in Exhibit 25 the only forms that a doctor needs to fill out in order for a player to go on LTIR? kdb said that those were the forms needed. If yes, then it looks like the only thing a doctor needs to say in order for a player to go on LTIR is that he is unable to perform his duties as an NHL hockey player. So being able to "play" very poorly in the AHL should not preclude a doctor from signing that. IMO it would be evidence that he can't play in the NHL.

According to Article 50.10(d), s/he also needs to say that "the Player, owing to either an injury or an illness, will be unfit to play for at least (i) twenty-four (24) calendar days and (ii) ten (10) NHL Regular Season games".

If the Club doctor says that Torres isn't able to be an NHL player due to injury, etc. and is likely to be out for the requisite time, and if Torres agrees, what would stop the Sharks from putting Torres on LTIR?

 

[68 Z-28]

Are the forms in Exhibit 25 the only forms that a doctor needs to fill out in order for a player to go on LTIR? kdb said that those were the forms needed. If yes, then it looks like the only thing a doctor needs to say in order for a player to go on LTIR is that he is unable to perform his duties as an NHL hockey player. So being able to "play" very poorly in the AHL should not preclude a doctor from signing that. IMO it would be evidence that he can't play in the NHL.

According to Article 50.10(d), s/he also needs to say that "the Player, owing to either an injury or an illness, will be unfit to play for at least (i) twenty-four (24) calendar days and (ii) ten (10) NHL Regular Season games".

If the Club doctor says that Torres isn't able to be an NHL player due to injury, etc. and is likely to be out for the requisite time, and if Torres agrees, what would stop the Sharks from putting Torres on LTIR?

The NHL


I can't believe I actually am responding to this. You're seriously trying to split hairs on this.

 

[Limekiller]

The team doctor has cleared him to play. The same doctor that would need to certify that he's too injured to play. What makes you think the doctor would sign off on that, barring some new injury or a re-injury to the same area, given that he's already specifically said Torres is NOT too injured to play? If the Sharks tried to get some other doctor to sign off on it over the opinion of the first one (barring a new diagnosis of some previously missed ailment) and put him on LTIR anyway, the NHLPA and NHL itself would come down on them like a ton of bricks.

Seriously, you are trying to split semantic hairs that simply don't exist. Accept you were wrong, and move on.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Are the forms in Exhibit 25 the only forms that a doctor needs to fill out in order for a player to go on LTIR? kdb said that those were the forms needed. If yes, then it looks like the only thing a doctor needs to say in order for a player to go on LTIR is that he is unable to perform his duties as an NHL hockey player. So being able to "play" very poorly in the AHL should not preclude a doctor from signing that. IMO it would be evidence that he can't play in the NHL.

According to Article 50.10(d), s/he also needs to say that "the Player, owing to either an injury or an illness, will be unfit to play for at least (i) twenty-four (24) calendar days and (ii) ten (10) NHL Regular Season games".

If the Club doctor says that Torres isn't able to be an NHL player due to injury, etc. and is likely to be out for the requisite time, and if Torres agrees, what would stop the Sharks from putting Torres on LTIR?

What specifically stops the Club from saying that Torres isn't able to be an NHL player due to whatever is the fact that he is not an NHL'er right now. He is in the AHL. AHL players as far as I know are not eligible for LTIR.

 

[210]

Are the forms in Exhibit 25 the only forms that a doctor needs to fill out in order for a player to go on LTIR? kdb said that those were the forms needed. If yes, then it looks like the only thing a doctor needs to say in order for a player to go on LTIR is that he is unable to perform his duties as an NHL hockey player. So being able to "play" very poorly in the AHL should not preclude a doctor from signing that. IMO it would be evidence that he can't play in the NHL.

According to Article 50.10(d), s/he also needs to say that "the Player, owing to either an injury or an illness, will be unfit to play for at least (i) twenty-four (24) calendar days and (ii) ten (10) NHL Regular Season games".

If the Club doctor says that Torres isn't able to be an NHL player due to injury, etc. and is likely to be out for the requisite time, and if Torres agrees, what would stop the Sharks from putting Torres on LTIR?

 

[OffSydes]

Just send him to Ting.. dude has ruined his fair share of careers.

 

[DonskoiDonscored]

What specifically stops the Club from saying that Torres isn't able to be an NHL player due to whatever is the fact that he is not an NHL'er right now. He is in the AHL. AHL players as far as I know are not eligible for LTIR.

Well then call him up and LTIR him.

 

[68 Z-28]

Well then call him up and LTIR him.

and the NHL/NHLPA has him checked by a 3rd party and is determined to be fit to play?

 

[Led Zappa]

Well then call him up and LTIR him.

Pretty sure you can't do that. You could bring him up, play him a game and say he's been re-injured. Shaky ground there though. Looks like shenanigans going on.

 

[Fresnel]

As of right now Torres is not eligible for multiple reasons. But most importantly because he has been cleared by the Dr. If Torres were to decide he was done and told the Dr "I have chronic knee pain preventing me from playing" which was information he previously withheld from the Dr because he wanted to play and thought he could ignore the pain. Would that re-qualify him for LTIR? (assuming he was recalled to the nhl for a day)

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Well then call him up and LTIR him.

I don't know of an instance where someone got injured in the AHL then called up to be put on LTIR. It may be possible. I don't know. It'll sound awful shady though.