Reply With Quote
So no doctor ever told him he was healed, and nobody told him "you're goo to go". That's what I thought.
And DPG never said they said he was healed. He said they "pretty much" lied to him and said he was healed, which is vague enough to cover what the Argentinians were saying...that they were thumbs up...of course they never gave him approval, because they didn't have the authority to do so, but everything you heard from them leads you to believe that he plays if it was up to them...no... They didn't use the words "good to go". But, I didn't hear a single thing from their side indicating that he would sit out, did you? They, including Manu, said so many positive, affirming things, it shouldn't be hard for you to find all of them...I know you followed every word, and are just playing "gotcha", so you be my research monkey, and find any quotes that indicate they believed he would NOT be healed in time to play and WOULD NOT play: difficulty - hard.
Now, regarding Manu throwing The Spurs team doctors under the bus, yes, I have two quotes from him.
"The doctor said I shouldn't play, but because he's the team's doctor I asked for a second opinion."
BECAUSE HE IS THE TEAM DOCTOR.
"The Spurs definitely did not want me to go because I was injured...That's what the doctor said, but he's the team doctor, so it's obvious which interest is more prevalent for him."
This is a direct insinuation that the doctor would make a diagnosis based upon financial interests rather than his medical opinion. That was a ty thing to say. He could have said something far more neutral and diplomatic. He didn't.
And, there was a third quote about "without a horse in the race", again questioning the ethics of the doctors making the decisions...
He could have gotten these second and third opinions without insinuating the doctors were making diagnoses based upon things other than a difference in medical opinion. Medical opinions can vary without unethical financial motives being behind them. He should have left it at that.
So no doctor ever told him he was healed, and nobody told him "you're goo to go". That's what I thought.
Exactly.
And, then I guess you couldn't find anything where a doctor on their side ever even hinted that he might NOT be able to be ready to play...that's what I thought.
I disagree he should've left it at that. Unfortunately, decisions like that raise alarms and there's always certain media ready to jump on them. Just like your average fan in here would be highly skeptical about what the ARG NT doctor would say.
This isn't Manu's first dance between the Spurs and the NT, he's fairly seasoned in this stuff, thus it's really no surprise he would look for a third party voice on the matter. Even if he trusts the Spurs doctor 100%, it only makes sense from a PR perspective.
BTW, which is a horrible defense of them. You're saying that they were not sure if he was healed, or sure he wasn't healed, but were going to go ahead and put a plan in action to play him anyway.
The NT doctor said he was optimist. That's a far cry from "ready to play"... But this illustrates exactly my previous point. You wouldn't trust a word the ARG NT doctor would say. Conversely, ARG fans wouldn't trust a word of the Spurs doctors.
That's exactly why getting the opinion of a third doctor not involved with either party was exactly the right thing to do.
According to the NT doctor, this isn't the first time Manu played with that injury. Now I couldn't tell you if that was with the NT or the Spurs or both, he didn't say. I think the idea was to try to put him on a training program with low-impact, and try to get him to continue healing while regaining some of his fitness. Obviously, he had that setback with the pain coming back, so that was no longer an option.
The NT doctor certainly has the NT interests front and center. He also said he wouldn't risk a player if they knew they couldn't play. They actually cut Delfino pretty much right away since they couldn't recover him in time.
But there's also always some gray area when it comes to recovery and diagnosis. It's not all black and white. That's why people do seek (and get) second opinions all the time.
Because he just won a championship in the USA. if he says he's too tired to play for his own country after they lost in the world cup, that could have some financial repercussions for him and for the Spurs as well.
Again with the "it's no surprise he would look for a third party..."
how many times can we cede that point? It is not a point of contention. It is a straw man. I don't, and many don't, begrudge him the right, almost a duty to seek multiple medical opinions.
He doesn't have to say it in the way that he did, and he didn't make the same insinuations about the Argentinian doctors when they came back with all of their optimism.
If he makes a statement like: "I will get several opinions to see if there is some sort of medical concensus, and I will move forward from there." He gets his opinions and doesn't sound like he is ting on The Spurs doctors.
Frankenstein's Strawman, Bride of Strawman, The Return of Strawman, Strawman From the Black Lagoon...
I've seen this film before. When did I ever say he couldn't or shouldn't get second opinions? To quote NoNo: "I thought so."
And, I've already said that because medical opinions can differ, so obvious, that is even LESS of a reason for him to attribute it to anything OTHER than that, instead of attributing it to team affiliation.
Yeah, the tests were inconclusive, so we're going to start working you out anyway, as if they were conclusive.
Because looking for a third party doctor is integral to the point. It has as much to do with getting a second opinion as it has to do with removing any skepticism that he was more or less 'trustworthy' of either the Spurs or the NT doctor.
If he didn't feel the exact same way about the NT doctor as he does with the Spurs doctors, he wouldn't need a third party opinion.
As far as what he said, well, I didn't think it was bad at all. If anything, maybe he was being too honest... he didn't feel like the recovery time was right, and said so. Don't get what's the big deal. After all, it is simply an educated guess. Ultimately, the Spurs doctors were certainly spot on and vindicated.
I think you're missing the entire plausible deniability aspect of all this. That's why you think it's a strawman, when it's actually an integral part of it.
Well, doctors do work with players with different types of nagging or not so nagging injuries all the time. You get recovery workout plans involving the pool, etc that are custom made to gain fitness without putting impact in certain areas. That's what doctors in professional sports do, including the Spurs doctors. Players don't just sit out watching TV in their couches when they get some sort of injury. Ultimately, Manu couldn't even practice with the team without the Spurs authorization, so that's moot.
He had to try.
Is this yet ANOTHER post where you tell me getting a third party opinion is a good idea? This is getting downright comical. It's like you're talking to another person, but I know we're the only two in the room. I could have sworn I even said it was almost his DUTY.
And, of course you didn't think it was bad at all, what he said. I don't know that he's ever done wrong in your eyes. However, how do you describe the ire he stirred in so many with his comments and the way he made them, ire in even those that honor him as a local hero, like myself? The answer is because he could have been diplomatic, but was not. Something he has navigated very well his entire career. He's never irked me in the past. This time he did, even if only a little. What has been more irksome is the denials that he behaved out of character.
The fact he sought a 3rd opinion casts doubt on the NT as well...How is that not clear? I understand he didn't make it as blatant but he still obviously had trust issues on both sides. It makes sense to me that he would "throw the Spurs" under the bus more so and not the NT as he wasn't going to play. Tbqh, I for one could give two s and a what he was quoted as saying. It wasn't that bad to me either & I am not a Manu homer. He just voiced what most would & did think. I don't fault a man for honesty.
Um, no, the strawman is you keep saying he needed to get a third party opinion, and I have always said that's always a good idea, and then you say that I don't realize that he needs to get a third party opinion, and I say that's a good idea, and then you say that what I don't understand is that the third party opinion is important...and that I should understand that...and I say I do...and I agree...repeat ad nauseum...
When the whole argument is not that he got the opinion, it's how he went about it and what he said while doing it.
Regarding plausible deniability, I was early on hoping that is what it was all about, but we don't know. I do know he made those unfortunate comments, though. If you tell me they were theatre, scripted by CIA Pop, I'm fine with Manu making them, otherwise, they were still undiplomatic.
No, it doesn't cast the same doubt on the NT because he already dismissed The Spurs diagnosis as biased. He already precluded himself from running to the NT doctor and accepting their diagnosis. He had no other logical choice but to get a third party diagnosis because if nothing else The Spurs would have protested had he attempted to use the Argentine doctor. Good to hear you acknowledge that he was more harsh toward The Spurs, though, which is all I have ever been saying. And, I am glad you don't give two s about any of this, either. We need to save as many s as possible, for when our s are truly needed to be given. If saving two s here can benefit a person, I am a proponent of saving them. I just happen to have an abundance of s. I can give a at a whim, or not give a if I choose. I'm at a wonderful point in life.
It's been pretty clear you're not getting it, that's why I keep trying. Do you understand what happens if he goes to Argentina after the Spurs told him not to play and he just says "The Spurs told me I'm hurt and I can't play"? And then the NT doctor comes out and says "I think we can recover him in time"?
All that has nothing to do with getting a second opinion. It has everything to do putting himself in a pretty uncomfortable position.
Well, he's done wrong here since I didn't want him to play, even before the injury was announced, but that's beside the point. He's ultimately free to think or do whatever he wants, within certain parameters, regardless of how you or I feel about it.
I just think he's been a professional that has played for over a decade at the highest level, so I suspect he might know what he's talking about. I also know he's put his health on the Spurs doctors hands for all that time, so it would be disingenuous to think there's a lack of trust or respect at any level with said doctors. On the other hand, it's plausible that he felt the recovery could've been done quicker (as he stated on his article), and so he tried. Some people will say 'he had to try' as a PR move, some people will say he really had to try because he cares, but that we'll never know.
lol this after the fact meaningless arguing is entertaining
Uh? He made his comments after getting the third party opinion... how's that "already dismissed"?
Of course it casts the same doubt. There's no reason why he couldn't go directly to the NT doctor if he wanted to, and whether the Spurs protest or not is immaterial. He had to present the tests at a later date regardless, and the Spurs had to approve.
But the fact that you're very willingly to cast the ARG NT doctor as some sort of crook, but not necessarily the third party doctor, is exactly why he did that. It's the PR part, not the second opinion part.
If the third party doctor tells him he won't recover in time? Well, then he has a clean out with the Argentina media and everyone else.
I'm giving a about this post, tbh...
Who gives a ? Manu is going to be healthy next year when it all matters..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions