Quote:
Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc
So you don’t know the difference between a diagnosis and a prognosis eh?
Royle never claimed that Zary’s injury was a serious injury…just that the prognosis wasn’t good.
If a player has a serious injury on the last game of the season that is a four month recovery…the diagnosis is likely bad but the prognosis for him as a hockey player is still good as he’ll likely be back for training camp.
Zary may not have an injury that is serious enough that it takes several months to recover from but the prognosis is bad for the player and team during this extremely crucial part of the season.
|
Listen, I'm not getting into a pissing match on an internet forum. But prognosis by definition means
noun
the likely course of a disease or ailment.
"the disease has a poor prognosis"
Meaning the prognosis is what the injury will look like long term. It felt like fear mongering, and a bit sensationalizing.
I also appreciate what the "insiders" do for this site and get as excited as others when Sec posts a gif or Diss gives some info. When information is counter to the eventual outcome, sometimes we need a little accountability.
There are people who would come on here, post fake rumors or pretend to be an insider just to make themselves feel important. I'm not saying that is what Royle is doing, but when something is as counter to the truth of the situation, it seems that maybe the information being distributed or maybe even collected, needs some scrutiny.
If mods, or other have proof that previous claims can be substantiated, I'll happily apologize for questioning. But claiming to have some authority of knowledge should also come with some integrity. Otherwise it could take away from the excitement of those posts. Think Eklund, we know he's sensationalizes and no body take him seriously.
I'm not trolling or trying to create conflict, just when I see misinformation, it warrants some further investigating, so that further information can be taken as truth and we can all properly discuss.