CrypTic
Registered User
- Oct 2, 2013
- 5,069
- 81
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.
Last edited: