Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
I was asking for YOU to clarify the issue in your "expert" legal opinion. Since you want to be an ass about this and not answer the simple question, maybe you can clarify this.
From section 34.5 Players right to a surgeon of his choice.
In the event that the team physician determines that a surgical procedure is the appropriate course of treatment for the Player, a Player shall have the right to choose the surgeon who will perform the surgical procedure, provided that the surgeon selected by the Player is either on the Second Medical Opinion List, or is approved in writing by the Club (for surgery) prior to such surgery.
That seems to say the NHL and the NHLPA have a list of qualified surgeons for all procedures, and that if a player wants to use a surgeon beyond that list the surgeon must be approved by the team. As well, all rehabilitation is to be under supervision of the team's medical staff as outline in 34.6 (d) and 34.7.
To allow the Club to monitor the Player's condition and progress, the Player and/or the AT shall send periodic status reports to the Club. Following such status reports, the Club may request periodic in-person evaluations of the Player by the Club in the Club's home city (for which the Club will bear reasonable travel-related expenses) if the Club has reasonable grounds to believe that the Player's rehabilitation is not progressing satisfactorily. After such inperson evaluation, if the Club determines that the rehabilitation is not progressing satisfactorily, the Club shall have the right to require the Player to continue his rehabilitation in the Club's home city or such other location as is approved pursuant to subsection (a) above, and shall provide the basis for its decision, in writing, to the Player.
All in-season rehabilitation of Player injuries will be under the supervision and within the sole discretion of the Club's medical staff. A Player may not engage his own independently-sourced rehabilitation program or personnel without prior consultation and approval of the Club's medical staff.
So what is the expert legal opinion? Seems the team, under the direction of the health care professionals as mandated by the CBA, has a lot of control over anything that could affect the health and performance of the player, especially when it comes to surgical procedures. Yes? No?
|
As I said, this is arguably all about what the player can do at the Club’s expense. It doesn’t specifically prohibit anything at the player’s expense. And the Club has to act reasonably (both expressly under the contract and as a matter of common law). Read me the language that says “and the player shall not undertake any procedure not approved by the Club”.
But let’s say it does prohibit it. The damages are not loss of team revenues. In fact, the team would probably have to prove (a) that the procedure failed, (b) their procedure would have succeeded, and (c) they lost the services of the player as a result. The problem is still that they wouldn’t suffer any wage loss due to LTIR.
Teams can’t credibly tie a player to revenue because teams also trade players all the time (sometimes for no comparable player) without a loss of revenue. Eichel could point to the trade attempts for mostly futures.