Do you think Malhotra should be playing?

[lowerlameland]

yes... maybe...

I have, I think, maybe, a unique perspective, in that I've had one eye since I was a baby. I was a good floor/ball hockey player, but wasn't allowed on the ice by my doctors and parents. I played soccer at a pretty high amateur level and never had a problem... So... I'm just not sure... While I do think it would be much harder to adapt after losing an eye as an adult, I just don't think he's at any greater risk of injury than the rest of the players. Is Manny's vision substantially worse than Ohlund's or Berard's? Didn't Berard lose nearly 100% in one eye? Manny obviously wasn't playing well, but I'm willing to bet if he was playing at the same or better level, he'd still be on the ice... Ultimately I think they used an unfortunate and convenient medical excuse to get rid of someone playing poorly, which I don't think is very cool, and I'd think this would be exactly the sort of place the union should poke its nose in, but they've been oddly quiet. And I sort of don't get why he didn't ask for a trade if he really wants to play again and really thinks he's capable.

 

[Tiranis]

Ultimately I think they used an unfortunate and convenient medical excuse to get rid of someone playing poorly, which I don't think is very cool, and I'd think this would be exactly the sort of place the union should poke its nose in, but they've been oddly quiet. And I sort of don't get why he didn't ask for a trade if he really wants to play again and really thinks he's capable.

That makes zero sense. They could've just as easily waived him. They also could've traded him given his limited NTC.

 

[Fat Tony]

And I sort of don't get why he didn't ask for a trade if he really wants to play again and really thinks he's capable.

That ship pretty much sailed when he was put on IR. What team would touch him?

 

[lowerlameland]

That makes zero sense. They could've just as easily waived him. They also could've traded him given his limited NTC.

Yeah, maybe, but I think waiving or trading him while playing poorly after this type of injury might have been a political problem... But maybe you're right. What relief did they get from taking him off the roster? Not cap space? Just the spot for Kesler?

 

[lowerlameland]

That ship pretty much sailed when he was put on IR. What team would touch him?

That's what I meant about the union. Couldn't there be a legal argument that he shouldn't be on IR?

 

[Fat Tony]

That's what I meant about the union. Couldn't there be a legal argument that he shouldn't be on IR?

It's a medical decision. The team doctor has to sign a declaration to put a player on IR. It would be a bold accusation if the union decides to intervene.

 

[Tanevian*]

Alright so we all know Gillis is not letting Malholtra play because of his eye. I miss watching this guy play and it just brings memories back to 2011 anyways do you think he should play yes or no. Also do you think he will have a spot in front office in the future for the Canucks?

After completing an internet optometry degree and reviewing his medical records, I decided it's inconclusive. Then I watched some game tape and realized I wasted 3 hours finishing that course.

 

[Tanevian*]

I have, I think, maybe, a unique perspective, in that I've had one eye since I was a baby. I was a good floor/ball hockey player, but wasn't allowed on the ice by my doctors and parents. I played soccer at a pretty high amateur level and never had a problem... So... I'm just not sure... While I do think it would be much harder to adapt after losing an eye as an adult, I just don't think he's at any greater risk of injury than the rest of the players. Is Manny's vision substantially worse than Ohlund's or Berard's? Didn't Berard lose nearly 100% in one eye? Manny obviously wasn't playing well, but I'm willing to bet if he was playing at the same or better level, he'd still be on the ice... Ultimately I think they used an unfortunate and convenient medical excuse to get rid of someone playing poorly, which I don't think is very cool, and I'd think this would be exactly the sort of place the union should poke its nose in, but they've been oddly quiet. And I sort of don't get why he didn't ask for a trade if he really wants to play again and really thinks he's capable.

I am trying to connect the dots and finding it very difficult.

 

[Verviticus]

That makes zero sense. They could've just as easily waived him. They also could've traded him given his limited NTC.

i'm pretty sure manny actually asked to be moved in response and they said that they wouldn't feel good about letting him just get hurt somewhere else

 

[lowerlameland]

It's a medical decision. The team doctor has to sign a declaration to put a player on IR. It would be a bold accusation if the union decides to intervene.

But when he's able to play and wants to play, it seems to me it could be argued that it's a philosophical decision more than a medical one. The arguing might be shot down by second medical opinions and such, but isn't this exactly what a players' union is for?

 

[Al Swearengen]

As an aside, if you really want to miss Manny Malhotra, watch this.

 

[Fat Tony]

But when he's able to play and wants to play, it seems to me it could be argued that it's a philosophical decision more than a medical one. The arguing might be shot down by second medical opinions and such, but isn't this exactly what a players' union is for?

It's not a philosophical issue. It's either a medical or a CBA issue. It's been over 2 months. Manny hasn't filed a grievance and the PA has not gotten involved.

 

[NYVanfan]

My only question is what are the odds that his being on ltir is one of gillis' tricks up his sleeve, a la ballard in years past, to actually use him inthe POs...?
Im guessing zero, but curious if anyone has an inkling...
Cheers

 

[Tiranis]

My only question is what are the odds that his being on ltir is one of gillis' tricks up his sleeve, a la ballard in years past, to actually use him inthe POs...?
Im guessing zero, but curious if anyone has an inkling...
Cheers

He's not on LTIR.

 

[NYVanfan]

He's not on LTIR.

Ah. So that answers that.
As brutal as manny has been, we could sure use his FOs.
Such a drag. H was in selke contention before that damned bounce against the accursed avalanches.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

As an aside, if you really want to miss Manny Malhotra, watch this.

? Lol that was a 6 min clip that showd Manny for 20 seconds

 

[lowerlameland]

It's not a philosophical issue. It's either a medical or a CBA issue. It's been over 2 months. Manny hasn't filed a grievance and the PA has not gotten involved.

Right, so I'm just trying to get the bottom of, well that's a bit dramatic... I'm just wondering out loud why he hasn't filed a grievance. Maybe he actually believes he isn't ready or capable and this way he's saving face a little? It just doesn't all add up. There have been other players with possibly worse vision problems who have played, so it's just weird...

 

[Tiranis]

Right, so I'm just trying to get the bottom of, well that's a bit dramatic... I'm just wondering out loud why he hasn't filed a grievance. Maybe he actually believes he isn't ready or capable and this way he's saving face a little? It just doesn't all add up. There have been other players with possibly worse vision problems who have played, so it's just weird...

What are you basing it on that his vision is better? Supposedly Malhotra can barely see out of the one eye and it has gotten worse over the past year and a bit.

 

[lowerlameland]

What are you basing it on that his vision is better? Supposedly Malhotra can barely see out of the one eye and it has gotten worse over the past year and a bit.

I don't think I said his vision was better. I think Berard is someone who had worse vision loss. I think? But I might be wrong. I'm just saying that I don't think he's at greater risk of injury than anyone else (even guys with 3 eyes would get creamed once in a while), and it should be up to him, and he probably has reasonable grounds for a grievance because there's the precedence of other players continuing their careers. UNLESS he's really not confident and is ok with the decision deep down... which, the more I think about it, might make the most sense...

 

[lowerlameland]

Last try...

WIN! Anyway, I think I've figured out my thoughts on this and I won't harp on about it anymore after this one. First, if Malhotra played lights out on his return, same injury, he'd still be in the lineup.

Second, and really what I think my point was trying to be maybe, if this is ok with fans, players, league, and union, what's to stop teams from simply dumping players after injuries? I didn't realize they weren't getting any cap relief or whatever... but hypothetically, a guy returns after any kind of injury and isn't quite the same player, what's stopping a team from saying, "we feel he hasn't recovered and this fact is jeopardizing his safety" and just taking him off the roster and maybe even getting LTIR if they needed it? Ok, I'll shut up now...

 

[F A N]

I have, I think, maybe, a unique perspective, in that I've had one eye since I was a baby. I was a good floor/ball hockey player, but wasn't allowed on the ice by my doctors and parents. I played soccer at a pretty high amateur level and never had a problem... So... I'm just not sure... While I do think it would be much harder to adapt after losing an eye as an adult, I just don't think he's at any greater risk of injury than the rest of the players. Is Manny's vision substantially worse than Ohlund's or Berard's? Didn't Berard lose nearly 100% in one eye? Manny obviously wasn't playing well, but I'm willing to bet if he was playing at the same or better level, he'd still be on the ice... Ultimately I think they used an unfortunate and convenient medical excuse to get rid of someone playing poorly, which I don't think is very cool, and I'd think this would be exactly the sort of place the union should poke its nose in, but they've been oddly quiet. And I sort of don't get why he didn't ask for a trade if he really wants to play again and really thinks he's capable.

I think the fact that you weren't allowed on the ice by your doctors says a lot. Soccer and ball hockey simply isn't the same type of contact sport as ice hockey is. Also, ball hockey is a much slower game where guys aren't hitting you at 20-35mph. Most NHL players skate about as fast or faster (with full gear) than Usain Bolt can run (without hockey gear). I also think the fact that you learned how to play sports with the vision that you had is significant. It's like hockey players who never learned how to skate with their head up. It would be very difficult for Malhotra to simply stop relying on his peripheral vision all of a sudden.

It's hard to compare without knowing full details. I think Ohlund's vision is much better. I did a quick google search and it was reported that he had about 70% of his vision and that was before his last surgery. In contrast, Berard needed contacts to meet the league minimum of 20/400 (which is worse than legally blind). Was Malhotra's vision worse than Berard's? Probably not since Malhotra does need to meet the league minimum. Maybe the fact that Malhotra plays forward and Berard plays defense also puts Malhotra in a more dangerous situation. In addition, I think an argument can be made that Berard shouldn't have been playing. I think Berard went against doctor's orders in playing. And coincidence or not, Berard started having back problems (granted it's a common injury) post NHL lockout.

At the end of the day, the player wants to play and I don't blame Malhotra for not feeling like he can still play. But I also don't doubt the fact that Malhotra is in more danger than other players who don't have vision problems.

 

[Wilch]

No. He's been awful since the injury.

His passive play drags the team down and if he plays too aggressively, he'd be exposing himself to too much risk.

 

[Trelin]

I don't think he has a place on the canucks anymore, but I think it should be his decision to be able to play or not and he has said he feels that he could still play.

 

[medhatcanuck]

It should be up to a doctor and Malholtra not Mike Gillis. He handled and situation totally wrong. He seemed to "use" Malholtra this year until Kesler was back. That tryout/testing period speech smelled raw phony.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

It should be up to a doctor and Malholtra not Mike Gillis. He handled and situation totally wrong. He seemed to "use" Malholtra this year until Kesler was back. That tryout/testing period speech smelled raw phony.

False

If Gillis feels that Malholtra's vision issues are a safety issue than he has every right to do what he did. You have to realize that some people need to be protected from themselves. Some people just won't give up, and for the most part that attitude is a very good thing to have. But when it comes to their health sometimes they won't listen. It's such a tough position to be in too. I think there is no right answer on how to handle these situations.

If you feel Gillis "used" Manny then it sounds to me like you feel he's not healthy enough to play.