Quote
PHDram
McVay and the rams have continually said that that Gurley was not "hurt" or "injured" but rather he didn’t do a good enough job getting him him the ball. Are they liars?
Well that;s not all they said.
They also said he had a painful and inflamed knee and had to be sat. That was December. When they talked about that in December, both Gurley and the Rams said also talked about how the same thing had happened in the Oakland game. McVay even called the Oakland game "a similar situation."
They also said there was no structural damage, and that was based on an MRI.
They never reported, or treated, a knee injury per se---meaning, something more than pain and inflammation that can just come from conditions in a surgical knee. To be an injury it would have to be a rip, tear, break, deep bruise, heavy sprain, or something along those lines.
I just think MJD is just using the word "injury" carelessly. There was a problem with TG's knee in Sept--we have known that for months now. They talked about the week 1 issue in December. But if you're going to use the word "injury" with any kind of care, no, he was not INJURED...there was no physical trauma like a rip, tear, break, heavy sprain, etc.
Not unless 2 unlikely things happened. First, that he did have a physical trauma one could rightly call an injury, and the Rams not only didn't report it, they played him anyway--which would be both unethical and negligent. And then, second, in spite of lying about it all season, TG then just up and tells one media guy/former player "the truth" anyway...ripping the veil off the lie, for no good reason.
That combination of "unlikely things" does not compute. I would need a lot more than MJD just apparently misinterpreting things to think that story might be valid.
....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2019 05:58AM by zn.
