Quote:
Originally Posted by dustygoon
The longer this drags out, the more ammo the NHLPA has for fighting for more medical rights for players in the next CBA. NHL has to know this. Players never had fans on their sides it seemed in prior lockouts, but they will here. The inherent conflict of interest between a team (get out there and play hurt) vs a player (life after hockey) is laid bare. Teams are going to lose control of treatment if this doesn't get resolved in a reasonable way.
|
I thought the whole Lindros debacle was supposed to change things already for the players when it comes to being able to manage their injuries and prevent teams from having all the power. Was that only specific to head injuries? If so, I agree it is time to change that power imbalance.
I get that there may be situations that arise where a player could abuse it, but I doubt that would be a big problem. These guys want long and lucrative careers.
I could see a situation where if players get unconventional treatments, the onus is on them to get contract insurance. There would be debate about what is considered "unconventional" though, which I think is part of the issue here. At one point, all medical treatments are unproven until they are. It's difficult to draw a clear line there.