NHL says players in concussion lawsuit should have "put two and two together"

[sureLoss]

http://www.tsn.ca/westhead-nhl-says-...ether-1.140203

After a group of former National Hockey League players went to court and sued the league over how it had handled concussions and head trauma, the league has filed its first significant response to the litigation.
In the initial lawsuit, filed in November 2013, players contended that the NHL did not do enough to protect them from head injuries before creating a committee to study head trauma in 1997. Even after that, the players charge the committee's findings were not adequately shared with players.
The NHL is firing back in a set of legal documents filed in federal court in Minnesota.

The league says that players who were forced to retire early because of concussions and other head injuries ought to have been able to "put two and two together," thanks to a number of newspaper and magazine stories and other news reports.

"Publicly available information related to concussions and their long-term effects, coupled with the events that had transpired – i.e., the players incurring head injuries – should have allowed (players) to put two and two together," the NHL says in its court filings, which were obtained by TSN.
The league also says it should not be required to pay for medical monitoring of former players who say they have symptoms of long-term brain injuries.

"The alleged injuries that form the basis for this suit occurred many years - and even decades – ago," the NHL's motion to dismiss says. "There is no allegation that plaintiffs were not aware of those injuries when they occurred; nor could there be in light of the fact that a physical blow to the head is the opposite of a latent injury."

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Why are the NHL lawyers such dicks?

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

Why are the NHL lawyers such dicks?

I think it is largely a sentiment that trickles down throughout the organization. The NHL seems to be the worst league (company in general) for employer-employee resentment.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

Why are the NHL lawyers such dicks?

Practice?

[Gaudfather]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

Why are the NHL lawyers such dicks?

You could remove the letters NHL and would have your answer.

[Coach]

So a bunch of Canadian farmboys should have put "two and two together" about how playing woozy (ie, not being a p****) could give them long term brain damage by simply researching the affects in the relatively few studies researching it at the time? It's not like these guys had Google Scholar to dig through scientific studies to determine whether or not it was safe for them to keep playing. So where they supposed to dig through some Johns Hopkins research papers in the university library they don't have access to, written in language they likely don't understand all between shifts while their coach is screaming at them to "get back on the ice, you puff!" or they'll lose thier jobs? I'm pretty sure that's what doctors are for.

When finishing highschool in the 70's, my dad had the choice to play for the Saskatoon Blades, or get a full ride to Yale. His parents chose Sask for him because they didn't know what Yale was. That is where most of these guys come from. A lot of them barely got through highschool. To expect them to make intelligent minute-to-minute decisions about their health based on the fact that some research was publically available is pretty ridiculous and almost insulting. If that research was available to joe-blow hockey player, what kind of information was available to the actual doctors employed by the teams that was seemingly ignored by teams? How can someone actually stomach themselves when saying something like that?

So a made up example:

Doc: Well MattyC, doesn't seem to me that your arm is broken and you shouldn't sustain any longterm issues because of it.

MattyC: Ok, you're the guy who went to medical school for a decade.

ten years later I need shoulder surgery and a bone re-break and go back to my doctor to say WTF?

Doc: Well, if you had done your own research you would have found that your arm actually was broken. It's all publically available.

F*** yourself.

[combustiblefuel]

Well mabey the could add up the sums because of concussion issues you pricks.

[Five-hole]

In before overreaction to language in court documents.

Oh wait, too late.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

In before overreaction to language in court documents.

Oh wait, too late.

The NHL trying to pin it on the players due to the fact that information was available is ridiculous no matter what type of language is used to describe the position. If the information was available, it was also available to the teams who employ people who are there specifically to monitor player health (doctors).

If it was all as available as they say, the NHL is either: at least as liable to not only know the information, but act accordingly. Or guilty of purposely withholding information regarding the potential longterm effects of players participating in that state. Either way, it's bad.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by MattyC

The NHL trying to pin it on the players due to the fact that information was available is ridiculous no matter what type of language is used to describe the position. If the information was available, it was also available to the teams who employ people who are there specifically to monitor player health (doctors).

If it was all as available as they say, the NHL is either: at least as liable to not only know the information, but act accordingly. Or guilty of purposely withholding information regarding the potential longterm effects of players participating in that state. Either way, it's bad.

The NHL has faced resistance from the players on both the idea of wearing helmets, and more recently, of wearing visors. But yes, lets be disingenuous and whine about how the big bad NHL is taking advantage of a bunch of dumb, ignorant and helpless farm boys - and their agents. And their union.

You can whine about the language the NHL uses, but the fact is, the players and its union were, at minimum, equally negligent. If not more so given their history of fighting attempts at increasing player safety.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by MattyC

So a bunch of Canadian farmboys should have put "two and two together" about how playing woozy (ie, not being a p****) could give them long term brain damage by simply researching the affects in the relatively few studies researching it at the time? It's not like these guys had Google Scholar to dig through scientific studies to determine whether or not it was safe for them to keep playing. So where they supposed to dig through some Johns Hopkins research papers in the university library they don't have access to, written in language they likely don't understand all between shifts while their coach is screaming at them to "get back on the ice, you puff!" or they'll lose thier jobs? I'm pretty sure that's what doctors are for.

When finishing highschool in the 70's, my dad had the choice to play for the Saskatoon Blades, or get a full ride to Yale. His parents chose Sask for him because they didn't know what Yale was. That is where most of these guys come from. A lot of them barely got through highschool. To expect them to make intelligent minute-to-minute decisions about their health based on the fact that some research was publically available is pretty ridiculous and almost insulting. If that research was available to joe-blow hockey player, what kind of information was available to the actual doctors employed by the teams that was seemingly ignored by teams? How can someone actually stomach themselves when saying something like that?

So a made up example:

Doc: Well MattyC, doesn't seem to me that your arm is broken and you shouldn't sustain any longterm issues because of it.

MattyC: Ok, you're the guy who went to medical school for a decade.

ten years later I need shoulder surgery and a bone re-break and go back to my doctor to say WTF?

Doc: Well, if you had done your own research you would have found that your arm actually was broken. It's all publically available.

F*** yourself.

I'm sort of their but not entirely. If someone is telling you something that common sense should tell you is entirely stupid, credentials or not, you have some responsibility for your own well being.

I don't blame the players themselves entirely at all, but in general, not just in this situation, I have really issue how often people are able to simply point outwardly to other folks and say "I made a bad decision but they should have stopped me so it's there fault". I realize this is no where to this extreme, but it's the same logic that has McDonalds having to remind customers on their cups that coffee is hot. Yah no ####. Far to much lack of responsibility for your own well being going on in society, at some point, you have to accept that you are responsible for yourself and your own well being, no one else is going to do it for you so look out for yourself.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by MattyC

The NHL trying to pin it on the players due to the fact that information was available is ridiculous no matter what type of language is used to describe the position. If the information was available, it was also available to the teams who employ people who are there specifically to monitor player health (doctors).

If it was all as available as they say, the NHL is either: at least as liable to not only know the information, but act accordingly. Or guilty of purposely withholding information regarding the potential longterm effects of players participating in that state. Either way, it's bad.

There's an argument to be made that the guy with subjective knowledge of his concussion symptoms is better positioned to determine that he shouldn't be playing a contact sport.

In any case, my point was that people strongly overreact to, say, statements of defence, because they categorically deny everything and state the strongest possible position for the litigant. Which exactly what they're supposed to do. They're not an attempt at conciliatory "well maybe we played a part, I don't know, why aren't we getting along?" People assume that a statement of defence makes a person (or a league, or a business) a bunch of insensitive jerks, and so are their lawyers, but that stems from a lack of understanding of their role in the litigation process. (And I think you know this, I'm stating it for the purpose of the general discussion.)

[Cali Panthers Fan]

I remember playing a season of high school football, just one, because of the way they wanted us to abuse our bodies.

The defense coaches were teaching us to lead with our head. "Put your helmet in their numbers! Knock him off balance and take him down!" Now I'm not saying that it's not an effective way to take someone off their feet, but there has to be about a thousand ways to tackle someone without destroying your brain, especially for young kids who don't have plans on playing professionally. That was about 20 years ago, so I doubt they would say the same thing now, but it does speak to the culture around sports and coaches where they are willing to forsake the health of their players to win.

There's elements of this same thing in hockey, and players often are told to forsake their health to play with injuries and ruin their bodies (see: Edmonton Oilers). I don't think it's fair to say that the league had no responsibility in these situations. In fact, they probably bear more responsibility as the governing body. I also put quite a bit of blame on the NHLPA for not protecting their players more.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The NHL has faced resistance from the players on both the idea of wearing helmets, and more recently, of wearing visors. But yes, lets be disingenuous and whine about how the big bad NHL is taking advantage of a bunch of dumb, ignorant and helpless farm boys - and their agents. And their union.

You can whine about the language the NHL uses, but the fact is, the players and its union were, at minimum, equally negligent. If not more so given their history of fighting attempts at increasing player safety.

Yeah I don't disagree with any of that, and actually starting a discussion about the lack of cages a week or so ago. But at the end of the day, the doctors cleared these guys to play and had access to all the same, if not more, information about the long term effects of such a thing. If the doctors told them that if they keep playing theyre risking long term brain injury, and the player did anyways thats a different story. But the NHLs statement isnt that they provided their athletes with proper knowledge and were ignored, its that they should have known regardless of what a team employed doctor said. Thats what my issue is.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

You could remove the letters NHL and would have your answer.

As a lawyer, I resemble that remark. That said, this is typical court document/throw the kitchen sink in stuff. A defence starts with a denial that anything even happens and then proceeds to a number of excuses or explanations why the defendant is not at fault. By the time the matter actually gets heard (if it doesn't get settled) only the real arguments are actually argued.

Unfortunately, the requirements of a statement of defence means that you can't or shouldn't make admissions of liability or give up on a legal position at such an early stage.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Yeah I don't disagree with any of that, and actually starting a discussion about the lack of cages a week or so ago. But at the end of the day, the doctors cleared these guys to play and had access to all the same, if not more, information about the long term effects of such a thing. If the doctors told them that if they keep playing theyre risking long term brain injury, and the player did anyways thats a different story. But the NHLs statement isnt that they provided their athletes with proper knowledge and were ignored, its that they should have known regardless of what a team employed doctor said. Thats what my issue is.

Well, my issue is that this is largely driven by lawyers looking to profit by using a group of what is largely career minor leaguers as their patsys, but that is beside the point.

If the doctors clear the players, then that is on the doctors, not the teams. Being employed by the teams or league does not remove those doctors' professional responsibilities of doing what's best for the patient. So why aren't the doctors being sued? Oh, right... they don't have as much money as the league does.