76ers back to fining Ben Simmons

[CIN-C-STAR]

Ill say this when it comes to him and. seeing Philly's mental health therapist. Whether you believe he is suffering from mental health issues or not.

You would have to handle the situation as he is actually having mental health issues. And with that, ya I cant see how they can force him to see their team doctors. I would think if he is seeing therapists through the NBPA that should be good enough. Because if the whole situation with Philly is what is causing the mental health issues, you cant expect that person to then be forced to go see their therapists if its the team that is causing the issues.

So ya dont see how that would stick if that is the reasons they're fining him again. I assume the NBPA would challenge that real quick and it wouldnt hold up.

My understanding of the issue is he isn't providing them proof that he's actually mentally unfit to play, not that the proof has to come from team doctors.
It's like a doctor's note to have an excused absence from work. It doesn't need to have your entire medical history or even a specific diagnosis, bit it is signed by a medical professional and states you have a legit medical reason to be absent.

[DusterBuster]

And of course my personal pet peeve the many posters who still think its appropriate or informative their non-trained medical opinion from 1000 miles away on his mental health. You don't know. Stop saying you do.

And my personal pet peeve is posters who think the second you dare question something that's seemingly pretty sketchy, they automatically are jumping down other posters necks.

I am EXTREMELY skeptical of his claims of mental illness, but even so, if they are real (and they may be, I'm not saying they aren't, even if the situation and timing which lead to his claims seem extremely questionable), the team should have some guarantees that he's regularly going through treatment with a proper licensed and approved therapist for the issue - and doing so in a good faith effort to get better - if he wants to still get paid.

You shouldn't be able to wave a magic word/phrase around and then be absolved of any and all scrutiny and responsibilities - regardless of what the word/phrase is.

[Nuntius]

Pretty selective reading to stop reading there and ignore the part I underlined. The whole issue is he's not giving the Sixers any information. If he wants a company he doesn't want to perform services for to pay him millions of dollars under this exception he needs to provide more information. If he'd prefer to keep that to himself that's fine but he doesn't get paid, pretty simple.

I ignored that part because I assumed that the "non-mental health related medical services" part above meant that this situation was excluded by the part that you underlined since we are talking about mental health related medical services. If it doesn't exclude it then, yeah, my assumption was wrong. Still, though, the phrasing of it seems quite nebulous. It doesn't make it clear that a player has to provide updates on mental health related medical services if it affect the player's ability to play basketball.

So, I'm really not sure which of the two assumptions here (mine or yours) are ultimately correct. The phrasing is definitely not clear enough.

Well again I think you are missing part of the section, just a different part, here it is again since it got cut off (I added the letters and bolded the part that applies):

"A Player who consults or is treated by (A) a physician (including a psychiatrist) or (B) a professional providing non-mental health related medical services (e.g., chiropractor, physical therapist) other than a physician or other professional designated by the Team shall give notice of such consultation or treatment to the Team and shall provide the Team with all information it may request concerning any condition that in the judgment of the Team’s physician may affect the Player’s ability to play skilled basketball."

Why would the rest of the sentence only apply to (B) but not (A)? What is the point of (A) being there if the rest of the sentence doesn't apply?

If he sees a psychiatrist he clearly has to provide them with that information, at least that's how I read it.

It seems pretty obvious to me that he's withholding the information because this is part of his "plan" to get traded (i.e., be difficult) rather than any distrust of the Sixers' doctors, since again he's had many interactions with them including major surgeries. Like when he got knee surgery after the 2020 season I know for a fact that it was with a doctor in the Philly area with connections with the team. Heck one of the few times he's talked to the team it was to get the trainers to look at this back.

Because a psychiatrist provides mental health related medical services which is already included in B. That's why I read it as that being something that is exempt from disclosure. I could definitely be wrong here, I'm not saying that I'm reading this right. But the fact that it can be read that way does mean that it isn't written clearly enough. So, given this current situation that part of the CBA will have to be revisited and written more clearly when the next negotiations take place.

As for the last paragraph, everyone can have their own opinion on the situation. All I know is that if Simmons does indeed have a mental health issue then the approach that the Sixers have is 100% the wrong one. And they had the same slimy approach with Markelle Fultz as well. I'm not giving them any benefit of the doubt personally. They aren't the good guys here, imo.

[Big J]

Ben likely does have mental health problems, but that doesn't excuse him from being an idiot.

[Texas Chuck]

And of course my personal pet peeve the many posters who still think its appropriate or informative their non-trained medical opinion from 1000 miles away on his mental health. You don't know. Stop saying you do.

And my personal pet peeve is posters who thing the second you dare question something that's seemingly pretty sketchy, they automatically get other posters jumping down their necks.

If you aren't playing doctor, don't get defensive. If you are playing doctor you should feel defensive.

I have said, including directly to you, many times its okay to not believe him. I'm so tired of having to repeat this.

But what shouldn't happen is people stating declaratively I know he's faking because of X, Y, and Z. No you don't know. You aren't in contact with him and you aren't qualified.

So yes, I'm going to continue to say stop playing doctor on the internet and if that offends you, then either you are doing that and so I don't feel bad because you are wrong for doing so. Or you aren't doing it, and thus I'm not referring to you, so again I'm not going to feel bad.

And believe me if I want to jump down your neck, you would know. I made a very tame statement, far far from jumping down a neck.

[Ayt]

I ignored that part because I assumed that the "non-mental health related medical services" part above meant that this situation was excluded by the part that you underlined since we are talking about mental health related medical services. If it doesn't exclude it then, yeah, my assumption was wrong. Still, though, the phrasing of it seems quite nebulous. It doesn't make it clear that a player has to provide updates on mental health related medical services if it affect the player's ability to play basketball.

So, I'm really not sure which of the two assumptions here (mine or yours) are ultimately correct. The phrasing is definitely not clear enough.

Well again I think you are missing part of the section, just a different part, here it is again since it got cut off (I added the letters and bolded the part that applies):

"A Player who consults or is treated by (A) a physician (including a psychiatrist) or (B) a professional providing non-mental health related medical services (e.g., chiropractor, physical therapist) other than a physician or other professional designated by the Team shall give notice of such consultation or treatment to the Team and shall provide the Team with all information it may request concerning any condition that in the judgment of the Team’s physician may affect the Player’s ability to play skilled basketball."

Why would the rest of the sentence only apply to (B) but not (A)? What is the point of (A) being there if the rest of the sentence doesn't apply?

If he sees a psychiatrist he clearly has to provide them with that information, at least that's how I read it.

It seems pretty obvious to me that he's withholding the information because this is part of his "plan" to get traded (i.e., be difficult) rather than any distrust of the Sixers' doctors, since again he's had many interactions with them including major surgeries. Like when he got knee surgery after the 2020 season I know for a fact that it was with a doctor in the Philly area with connections with the team. Heck one of the few times he's talked to the team it was to get the trainers to look at this back.

Because a psychiatrist provides mental health related medical services which is already included in B. That's why I read it as that being something that is exempt from disclosure. I could definitely be wrong here, I'm not saying that I'm reading this right. But the fact that it can be read that way does mean that it isn't written clearly enough. So, given this current situation that part of the CBA will have to be revisited and written more clearly when the next negotiations take place.

As for the last paragraph, everyone can have their own opinion on the situation. All I know is that if Simmons does indeed have a mental health issue then the approach that the Sixers have is 100% the wrong one. And they had the same slimy approach with Markelle Fultz as well. I'm not giving them any benefit of the doubt personally. They aren't the good guys here, imo.

How are they supposed to know if he has a legitimate mental health issue if he's withholding information about it? Simply take his word for it?

[seren]

Mental health is a serious issue. NBPA better not play loose with that. I understand they want to protect the player but it would be a shame if this is not a legit situation and Simmons is just trying to find an excuse

[Nuntius]

The wording is definitely awkward, but by definition a psychiatrist provides mental health care, so mental health related medical services is not exempt. My interpretation of the "professionals providing non-mental health related medical services" is that its there to cover stuff like acupuncture or physical therapy. Now, a therapist isn't a physician but is providing mental health care so there is a bit of a grey area, but the way the excerpt reads It seems to me that the Sixers are well within their rights to request for Ben to substantiate his health.

You could definitely be right in your interpretation and I could definitely be wrong in mine. The fact is that the wording is awkward which can definitely allow loopholes. This situation could very well be such a loophole. So, that part will have to be revisited and expressed more clearly in the next CBA.

As far as the issue of the Sixers leaking and trying to spin any info he gives them, that's honestly a pretty fair worry. But ultimately they are paying him $30 million dollars. If he were to go to a neutral psychiatrist, get a diagnosis to support his claims that he is mentally unable to play and subsequently provide that to the team, there would really be no way for them to spin it in a way that won't make them to look terrible. If this is genuine and not a ploy then Simmons should have no reservations about doing that.

Wouldn't there be a way for the Sixers to spin this, though? I definitely think that there would be a way. Just remember the Markelle Fultz situation. The guy had a legitimate injury that the Magic medical team confirmed after he was traded to them and the Sixers' medical team kept clearing him to play and forced him to go to an independent doctor to finally get the correct diagnosis. The Sixers were trying to portray Fultz as a nutcase instead of a player with a legitimate injury. I quite simply do not expect them to operate in good faith when it comes to these issues which is why I understand Simmons' reluctance to provide that info.

[Yoshun]

I'd like to know what the definition of "basic details" is.

[Nuntius]

Well again I think you are missing part of the section, just a different part, here it is again since it got cut off (I added the letters and bolded the part that applies):



Why would the rest of the sentence only apply to (B) but not (A)? What is the point of (A) being there if the rest of the sentence doesn't apply?

If he sees a psychiatrist he clearly has to provide them with that information, at least that's how I read it.

It seems pretty obvious to me that he's withholding the information because this is part of his "plan" to get traded (i.e., be difficult) rather than any distrust of the Sixers' doctors, since again he's had many interactions with them including major surgeries. Like when he got knee surgery after the 2020 season I know for a fact that it was with a doctor in the Philly area with connections with the team. Heck one of the few times he's talked to the team it was to get the trainers to look at this back.

Because a psychiatrist provides mental health related medical services which is already included in B. That's why I read it as that being something that is exempt from disclosure. I could definitely be wrong here, I'm not saying that I'm reading this right. But the fact that it can be read that way does mean that it isn't written clearly enough. So, given this current situation that part of the CBA will have to be revisited and written more clearly when the next negotiations take place.

As for the last paragraph, everyone can have their own opinion on the situation. All I know is that if Simmons does indeed have a mental health issue then the approach that the Sixers have is 100% the wrong one. And they had the same slimy approach with Markelle Fultz as well. I'm not giving them any benefit of the doubt personally. They aren't the good guys here, imo.

How are they supposed to know if he has a legitimate mental health issue if he's withholding information about it? Simply take his word for it?

I don't know. I don't claim to be an expert when it comes to dealing with mental health. All I know is that disputing whether someone with mental health problems has mental health problems is not the way to go about it.

[Jkam31]

Simmons can go work at a car rental place if he'd like, he can go sell TVs at Best Buy if he'd like. There wouldnt be a league anymore if players could just get up and decide to play for whatever team they want on any given day. There does need to be some kind of structure to make the league work.

And guess what in return for that, players get paid ridiculous amounts of money to play a game. That is a hell of a trade off. If Simmons didnt think the money was worth playing in Philly, no one forced him to sign a contract in Philly where he can get paid 35 million a year. He could've said no I will just take the QO and become a free agent the next summer.

There is nothing racist about this. There isn't something in NBA contracts that allows white players to just get up and move to whatever team they want, whenever they want. But black players cant.

Its pretty simple, Ben Simmons signed a 5 year contract for 177 million dollars to play for Philly. There is nothing racist about this situation.

Watch Kaps Netflix show if you haven't already? I see where you're coming from and generally agree, there does need to be a structure that promotes competition. But that structure needs to consider the very real history that exists within slavery & sport. Right now, it doesnt, but it does more so than it did 10, 20, 50 years ago, etc.

To say "there is nothing racist about this situation" is very black and white/all or nothing thinking. We live in racist and sexist systems, that were part of. So its natural that there will be pieces of it in different places. To denounce it authoritatively and with confidence, when the history is there and the structure isn't currently adequately set up...?

You're trying too hard. Just stop. There's absolutely zero racist undertones in this situation

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

This clown said watch that other clowns show where he says nfl draft combine is the same as slave auction holy ****

[Texas Chuck]

The wording is definitely awkward, but by definition a psychiatrist provides mental health care, so mental health related medical services is not exempt. My interpretation of the "professionals providing non-mental health related medical services" is that its there to cover stuff like acupuncture or physical therapy. Now, a therapist isn't a physician but is providing mental health care so there is a bit of a grey area, but the way the excerpt reads It seems to me that the Sixers are well within their rights to request for Ben to substantiate his health.

I think the question to be answered is how much information has to be shared, right? Like if Simmons's psychiatrist writes the team a letter stating I am treating Ben for X or X and Y or X, Y, and Z is that sufficient? Because surely nothing covered in a therapy session should ever be made available to a team--I can't imagine the players having ever agreed to that.

And if that is what is required, the notification from a doctor and Simmons isn't providing it, then the fine seems reasonable and appropriate. And if that continues to be the case, it does lead more credence to those doubting the veracity if he can't get a doctor to sign off on a clinical diagnosis.

However if the requirements are more invasive, I for one, totally understand why Simmons is loathe to cooperate and doesn't fully trust them.

Which is why absent information we should all acknowledge what we don't know. And not reach the conclusion we want to reach for other reasons.

[Pointgod]

Pretty selective reading to stop reading there and ignore the part I underlined. The whole issue is he's not giving the Sixers any information. If he wants a company he doesn't want to perform services for to pay him millions of dollars under this exception he needs to provide more information. If he'd prefer to keep that to himself that's fine but he doesn't get paid, pretty simple.

I ignored that part because I assumed that the "non-mental health related medical services" part above meant that this situation was excluded by the part that you underlined since we are talking about mental health related medical services. If it doesn't exclude it then, yeah, my assumption was wrong. Still, though, the phrasing of it seems quite nebulous. It doesn't make it clear that a player has to provide updates on mental health related medical services if it affect the player's ability to play basketball.

So, I'm really not sure which of the two assumptions here (mine or yours) are ultimately correct. The phrasing is definitely not clear enough.

Well again I think you are missing part of the section, just a different part, here it is again since it got cut off (I added the letters and bolded the part that applies):

"A Player who consults or is treated by (A) a physician (including a psychiatrist) or (B) a professional providing non-mental health related medical services (e.g., chiropractor, physical therapist) other than a physician or other professional designated by the Team shall give notice of such consultation or treatment to the Team and shall provide the Team with all information it may request concerning any condition that in the judgment of the Team’s physician may affect the Player’s ability to play skilled basketball."

Why would the rest of the sentence only apply to (B) but not (A)? What is the point of (A) being there if the rest of the sentence doesn't apply?

If he sees a psychiatrist he clearly has to provide them with that information, at least that's how I read it.

It seems pretty obvious to me that he's withholding the information because this is part of his "plan" to get traded (i.e., be difficult) rather than any distrust of the Sixers' doctors, since again he's had many interactions with them including major surgeries. Like when he got knee surgery after the 2020 season I know for a fact that it was with a doctor in the Philly area with connections with the team. Heck one of the few times he's talked to the team it was to get the trainers to look at this back.

You bring about a good point about disclosure as per the CBA but the question is what are the Sixers actually getting out of this information? It’s not like Simmons is going to some psychiatrist at the strip mall, it’s through the NBAPA so not sure why they can’t go through other channels to get that info.

From Simmons’ point of view I could see he’s reluctant to disclose too much, especially with the risk of leaks. Not that Morey would leak it, but you never know what could happen,with an organization as large as the Sixers. And from Morey’s perspective his interest is just getting Simmons back on the court, but not sure if he’s going to get the answer to that from therapist notes alone. And I still assume there are still HIPPA rights regarding what can be disclosed. The problem is that neither side trusts the other one so any type of mutual resolution seems far away.

[First Step]

Kawhi Leonard was cleared by the Spurs medical team to play. He refused to play citing a second opinion that he got from an external medical professional. He was not deducted pay by the Spurs for failing to show up. Simmon's mistake was initially trying to strong-arm the Sixers by not showing up — the mental health was only brought up by Simmons when the checks bounced. He played his hand poorly, and now the Sixers have credible suspicion that Ben is fit to play basketball. How do people in this thread defend Simmon's behavior? If you need to take a sabbatical, take one. You are not entitled to the Governor's money without living up to your obligations. I hope Ben does the right thing and goes back to work, and earns his money like a pro.

[MrBigShot]

The wording is definitely awkward, but by definition a psychiatrist provides mental health care, so mental health related medical services is not exempt. My interpretation of the "professionals providing non-mental health related medical services" is that its there to cover stuff like acupuncture or physical therapy. Now, a therapist isn't a physician but is providing mental health care so there is a bit of a grey area, but the way the excerpt reads It seems to me that the Sixers are well within their rights to request for Ben to substantiate his health.

I think the question to be answered is how much information has to be shared, right? Like if Simmons's psychiatrist writes the team a letter stating I am treating Ben for X or X and Y or X, Y, and Z is that sufficient? Because surely nothing covered in a therapy session should ever be made available to a team--I can't imagine the players having ever agreed to that.

And if that is what is required, the notification from a doctor and Simmons isn't providing it, then the fine seems reasonable and appropriate. And if that continues to be the case, it does lead more credence to those doubting the veracity if he can't get a doctor to sign off on a clinical diagnosis.

However if the requirements are more invasive, I for one, totally understand why Simmons is loathe to cooperate and doesn't fully trust them.

Which is why absent information we should all acknowledge what we don't know. And not reach the conclusion we want to reach for other reasons.

Imo what would constitute as reasonable would be, a diagnosis and accompanying sign off that Simmons is undergoing treatment and mentally not ready to play, from a psychiatrist that is not associated with either the Sixers or NBPA. I.e. Ben has generalized anxiety disorder, is unfit to play, and is currently in treatment for it. That's it. The Sixers medical team have their own vested interest in this and he shouldn't be expected to see them, nor should he have to divulge specifics of what he is discussing in therapy.

If he does that, nobody can reasonably question the legitimacy of his health and the Sixers would be out of their minds to continue to fine him.

[Jkam31]

Watch Kaps Netflix show if you haven't already? I see where you're coming from and generally agree, there does need to be a structure that promotes competition. But that structure needs to consider the very real history that exists within slavery & sport. Right now, it doesnt, but it does more so than it did 10, 20, 50 years ago, etc.

To say "there is nothing racist about this situation" is very black and white/all or nothing thinking. We live in racist and sexist systems, that were part of. So its natural that there will be pieces of it in different places. To denounce it authoritatively and with confidence, when the history is there and the structure isn't currently adequately set up...?

This is what I cant stand with this stuff. I cant stand when people look for undertones and things between the lines, when there really is nothing there. Ya I saw parts of Kaepernicks show and thought it was laughably bad. Him trying to draw connections between the NFL combine and a slave auction. Guess what the combine is, its a job interview. Guess what the job is for, an athletic game. Guess what is very important for a professional athletic game, athletic measurements. Guess what is the best way to get get those, to measure their athletic abilities. I also love how the NFL went from being racist for blackballing him, to now the NFL itself is a racist system...

Also the very real history that exists within slavery and sport? Ya back in the days only whites were allowed to play professional sports. But now there is a slavery connection to the basic structure of sports? That makes zero sense. How is the basic structure of the NBA (like playing for a team) have racist undertones when there were no black players in the NBA for the first 4 years of it? Or were the people that created the NBA just so forward thinking that they knew decades down the line the NBA was going to be a majority of black players, so they decided to make a connection between how they created the structure for the league and slavery...

There is nothing racist about a basic contract. Again there is nothing in NBA contract that says a white player can go choose his team whenever he wants but a black player cant. I dont recall people talking about the racist structures of the NBA when JJ Redick came out and was pissed that he asked for a trade and didnt get one, and he wanted to play up in New York and by the time he did get traded it was down to Texas.

Kids of all races and from all over the world dream about being professional athletes. They dream about playing in the NBA or the NFL or whatever league. There are countless stories of players talking about how they were heart broken because they didnt get invited to the NFL combine. These arent racist structures.

You don't (yet) see the racism in these structures, Duke4life831.

It doesn't mean that they aren't there, since systems we live in are inherently designed to benefit a few over the rest, and were building systems on top of said flawed systems (before improving or recreating them).

I thought people would rock with the Kap show, noted that its not for everyone.

When we look back on history, we'll see the facts about these contracts:
We'll see that 50% of NBA profits have gone to 30 NBA owners, and over 75% of those owners are White Males.
What fans are paying to see are the players themselves (lets say 75% Black)

These are relevant facts and stats because we see that race exists in this population, even if you choose to close your eyes to it.

The way we evaluate value add now is different than it will be in... 30-50 years. Im not quite sure what value add these owners have brought beyond dollars, and right now, the league is healthy enough to sustain itself (thus CBA negotiations are gonna be interesting)

You may be inclined to explain why owners are important. I'm saying, in x years, I think that **** will be seen as meaningless, and people will be saying that billionaires/owners are just people who sit around and make money off of peoples backs all day.

Are you dumb the owners make the money cause they own the damn team why does it matter if they’re white my goodness.

[Kampuchea]

I’d bet everything he’s faking it, just wants to get paid and not show up. Should be banned from the league for pretending to have these issues, when people really do have them and he’s making a mockery of it

[Nuntius]

Kawhi Leonard was cleared by the Spurs medical team to play. He refused to play citing a second opinion that he got from an external medical professional. He was not deducted pay by the Spurs for failing to show up. Simmon's mistake was initially trying to strong-arm the Sixers by not showing up — the mental health was only brought up by Simmons when the checks bounced. He played his hand poorly, and now the Sixers have credible suspicion that Ben is fit to play basketball. How do people in this thread defend Simmon's behavior? If you need to take a sabbatical, take one. You are not entitled to the Governor's money without living up to your obligations. I hope Ben does the right thing and goes back to work, and earns his money like a pro.

I'm not sure whether the underlined part is accurate. The reports say that Ben Simmons has been working with mental health professionals through the NBAPA since this summer -> https://www.inquirer.com/sixers/sixers-ben-simmons-mental-health-trade-20211102.html

The disgruntled point guard has been working with mental health professionals through the National Basketball Players Associations instead of Sixers team doctors since this summer.

Therefore, your timeline isn't accurate. He had sought and received mental health help before the Sixers started fining him.

[Sixerscan]

I ignored that part because I assumed that the "non-mental health related medical services" part above meant that this situation was excluded by the part that you underlined since we are talking about mental health related medical services. If it doesn't exclude it then, yeah, my assumption was wrong. Still, though, the phrasing of it seems quite nebulous. It doesn't make it clear that a player has to provide updates on mental health related medical services if it affect the player's ability to play basketball.

So, I'm really not sure which of the two assumptions here (mine or yours) are ultimately correct. The phrasing is definitely not clear enough.

Well again I think you are missing part of the section, just a different part, here it is again since it got cut off (I added the letters and bolded the part that applies):

"A Player who consults or is treated by (A) a physician (including a psychiatrist) or (B) a professional providing non-mental health related medical services (e.g., chiropractor, physical therapist) other than a physician or other professional designated by the Team shall give notice of such consultation or treatment to the Team and shall provide the Team with all information it may request concerning any condition that in the judgment of the Team’s physician may affect the Player’s ability to play skilled basketball."

Why would the rest of the sentence only apply to (B) but not (A)? What is the point of (A) being there if the rest of the sentence doesn't apply?

If he sees a psychiatrist he clearly has to provide them with that information, at least that's how I read it.

It seems pretty obvious to me that he's withholding the information because this is part of his "plan" to get traded (i.e., be difficult) rather than any distrust of the Sixers' doctors, since again he's had many interactions with them including major surgeries. Like when he got knee surgery after the 2020 season I know for a fact that it was with a doctor in the Philly area with connections with the team. Heck one of the few times he's talked to the team it was to get the trainers to look at this back.

Because a psychiatrist provides mental health related medical services which is already included in B. That's why I read it as that being something that is exempt from disclosure. I could definitely be wrong here, I'm not saying that I'm reading this right. But the fact that it can be read that way does mean that it isn't written clearly enough. So, given this current situation that part of the CBA will have to be revisited and written more clearly when the next negotiations take place.

As for the last paragraph, everyone can have their own opinion on the situation. All I know is that if Simmons does indeed have a mental health issue then the approach that the Sixers have is 100% the wrong one. And they had the same slimy approach with Markelle Fultz as well. I'm not giving them any benefit of the doubt personally. They aren't the good guys here, imo.

If they're providing the same thing as (B) what's the point of explicitly calling them out as a separate thing in (A)? (B) is to cover other "professionals", i.e., *not* "physicians (including a psychiatrist)". Like chiropractors and physical therapists as they listed. Doctors such as psychiatrists are included in (A). In fact they explicitly include psychiatrists in (A) to avoid exactly the confusion that you are having.

If there was any question about whether what the Sixers were doing is wrong the Players Association would be all up in arms over this, but notice you don't hear a peep from them, or Rich Paul for that matter.

[First Step]

Kawhi Leonard was cleared by the Spurs medical team to play. He refused to play citing a second opinion that he got from an external medical professional. He was not deducted pay by the Spurs for failing to show up. Simmon's mistake was initially trying to strong-arm the Sixers by not showing up — the mental health was only brought up by Simmons when the checks bounced. He played his hand poorly, and now the Sixers have credible suspicion that Ben is fit to play basketball. How do people in this thread defend Simmon's behavior? If you need to take a sabbatical, take one. You are not entitled to the Governor's money without living up to your obligations. I hope Ben does the right thing and goes back to work, and earns his money like a pro.

I'm not sure whether the underlined part is accurate. The reports say that Ben Simmons has been working with mental health professionals through the NBAPA since this summer -> https://www.inquirer.com/sixers/sixers-ben-simmons-mental-health-trade-20211102.html

The disgruntled point guard has been working with mental health professionals through the National Basketball Players Associations instead of Sixers team doctors since this summer.

Therefore, your timeline isn't accurate. He had sought and received mental health help before the Sixers started fining him.

LOL, you can defend this weasel all you want. He demanded a trade from the Sixers, then didn't report. Whether he saw a therapist or not is irrelevant.