The outside world (including anyone considering betting on the game and/or a specific player’s performance) had no idea that Eagles quarterback Jalen Hurts had developed a blood clot in his leg before the team’s Week 5 game in London against the Jaguars. The Eagles and the league knew otherwise.
THE press release released by the Eagles On Thursday, it was made clear that the team was aware of the situation and that the clot was revealed by an ultrasound taken after the team arrived in London. “Throughout our time in London and this week, we have remained in communication with the league office on this matter,” the Eagles said.
Since the Eagles specifically said the team has “remained in communication with the league office,” we asked the league office if they had anything to add – specifically on the question of why Hurts’ status for the game was not changed to “questionable” at any point.
“The team has been in contact with the league throughout the process, including the morning of the game,” an NFL spokesperson said via email Friday morning. “A team should make a public announcement immediately if there was any doubt about his availability or if he would be affected in any way. That was not the case here. We would not want a team to list a player as ‘questionable’ the morning of the game when they know with 100 percent certainty that he will play in the game. . . . Hurts played 100 percent of the snaps on offense during the game and there was no problem.”
That’s good, but wasn’t there, at one point, a question about Hurts’ availability? From the time it was decided to do an ultrasound to the time doctors reviewed and analyzed the results, the question was obvious as to what specific condition caused Hurts to appear on the injury report Friday with a “calf” injury, and whether that condition could keep him from playing.
While Hurts played and took every snap, current league policy (which the Eagles have complied with) creates a hole of inside information that is not shared with the public. Hurts had a blood clot in his leg. This would be relevant information, especially for anyone considering betting some hard-earned money through one of the sportsbooks that sponsor the NFL (and in which any NFL team owner can own up to five percent of the total equity).
Whether the NFL revamps its injury reporting rules itself or the mandate comes from Congress or a regulatory agency, it seems inevitable that more will be needed one of these days. The Eagles’ official injury report didn’t begin to paint a picture of Hurts’ true condition and status.
Given that between Saturday and Tuesday the blood clot moved (making Hurts unavailable for Week 6), it would have been appropriate for the public to know that there was a possibility that between Saturday and the start of Sunday’s game the blood clot would move or that Hurts’ condition would deteriorate.
And yes, it is possible to be genuinely concerned about the health of the player while highlighting the flaws in the current rules which disadvantage the betting public. Any injury necessarily has a negative impact on the player’s health. The question is whether there is enough transparency or not.
The NFL first adopted an injury reporting policy nearly 80 years ago to ensure that “the public will not be in the dark.” If that motivation still exists, the league will significantly raise the bar on what information teams are required to disclose.
Gn sports
