Quote
waterfield
there could be no trauma associated "structural damage" such as in a fracture, tear, etc BUT a player, writer, other lay people could easily claim that they have an injury if -whatever it is-simply "flares" up now and then. Sometimes my right knee causes me to limp around in the morning after getting up. When my wife asks what's wrong I've often said it feels like I "injured" it when technically there's been no trauma. That's because it feels "injured". Seems to me that this is a circular "debate" over one word.
Yeah whoever is conflating things is being kind of careless.
Basically, MJD said TG played "with an injury" all year which he got in game one. The way he is saying that it means some kind of physical trauma from some kind of impact. The problem with that is, Rams say that did not happen, that there was no structural issue, and so they did not report it and they did not treat any injury of that sort.
What appears to have ACTUALLY happened is that something with TG's surgical knee flared up once, calmed down, then flared up again. That's just not an "injury" in the usual sense. In fact that can happen with arthritic knees, among other possible conditions.
That is different from "playing with an injury" the usual way that is meant. It's a condition (same thing used to happen to Faulk in fact). It could be arthritic, it could be a couple of other things with a surgical knee. AND---teams are not required to report that.
Now notice what is happening in the discussion. Some actually ARE accepting the idea that TG had some kind of physical trauma, he got it in the Oakland game, it persisted all year, and yes that would be some kind of big sprain, deep bone bruise, rip, tear, or break---the normal "injury" thing. But all indications are nothing like that happened. So now because MJD is misinterpreting this whole thing and saying TG GOT INJURED in the Oakland game, we have a kind of confused discussion in the thread---some saying yes that MUST HAVE happened (why? because ex-jock reporters are never wrong? I don't know why some accept this at face value). some saying maybe the Rams lied, and so on. All because (as I see it) MJD just misspoke.
Distinctions do matter. If I had an arthritic knee and it acted up, and I went to the doctor and said "I have a knee injury," once he got a look at me he would correct my usage. He'd say, no, you did not INJURE your knee, you have an arthritiic condition, it's different. We do not normally call underlying conditions like that "injuries."
....
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2019 07:24AM by zn.
