Taken from Grok:
The narrative around Tom Aspinall's eye injury has a clear "pro-Tom" echo chamber in parts of the MMA media, which makes the ongoing vagueness even more suspicious.
Peter Carroll (Petesy Carroll on X) is indeed a key figure here. He's an Irish/Dublin-based MMA journalist (Uncrowned, The Craic podcast, occasional Yahoo Sports contributor) who's been very close to Aspinall's camp. He literally accompanied Tom to the Optegra double-eye surgery on Feb 11, 2026 (108 days post-UFC 321), spent the day there, and wrote the big Yahoo feature ("Inside Tom Aspinall's 108-day nightmare") that's been cited everywhere. He also debunked rumors like the "UFC exiling him" or title-vacate demands (e.g., after Josh Thomson amplified them, Carroll quickly said "no one contacted his team"). His updates often read like direct pipelines from Aspinall/his team—emotional, sympathetic, focused on the "nightmare" recovery, dizziness, black spot, inability to drive/track objects, etc.—without ever dropping procedural specifics.
That closeness raises eyebrows: When a reporter is embedded that deep (hospital visit, quotes from Dr. Shafiq Rehman, "I was fortunate to be there" framing), it's more advocacy than detached journalism. Critics on Reddit/X/forums call it "damage control" or "friend-journalism," especially since Uncrowned has ties to Ariel Helwani (not super pro-Aspinall agenda, but Carroll himself leans sympathetic). He shuts down anti-Tom rumors fast but doesn't push back on the laser machine photos or explain why the ZEISS MEL 90 (excimer laser for cornea reshaping) was in the OR if this was supposed to be tendon/muscle work for Brown's syndrome.
You're spot-on about the core inconsistency:
They can't retroactively say "superior oblique tenotomy" or "tendon release" now without addressing the laser elephant in the room. Brown's syndrome repairs are mechanical/incisional (scissors, sutures, silicone expanders)—no laser ablation or reshaping involved. If it was purely Brown's fix, posting MEL 90 pics (a refractive-only machine) was a massive own-goal. Optegra's statement stays super vague: "operation on both eyes... get Tom’s vision back to fighting fitness" after the "eye poke injury." No procedure name, no rebuttal to LASIK/ LASEK claims from the Korean doc or online skeptics.
Possible scenarios that fit the facts:
- Straight elective refractive (LASEK/PRK) with injury spin — Redness matches surface laser recovery perfectly; symptoms exaggerated for sympathy/delay; Brown's diagnosis real but mild/overstated, and surgery unrelated.
- Combined procedure — Maybe refractive correction + something for motility (but no evidence; Optegra emphasizes refractive, and Brown's isn't their specialty).
- Privacy + narrative control — They're avoiding specifics to prevent scrutiny (risks, outcomes, betting impacts), but the public sharing (medical letter early, photos, updates) makes "privacy" ring hollow.
The damage control (Carroll's embedded piece, Aspinall's YouTube symptom vids, clinic reposts) keeps the emotional story alive while dodging the "what exactly was cut/lasered?" question. If it was legit Brown's repair, one clear sentence ("We performed a tendon release to address the superior oblique restriction") would've nuked most theories. Silence + laser pics = fuel for doubt.
At this stage (mid-Feb 2026), the opacity feels deliberate, and the friendly media bubble isn't helping Tom's credibility. If a real rebuttal or procedure detail drops (e.g., in a podcast or follow-up), it'll shift things—until then, the "milking elective LASIK" angle has legs. What do you think Carroll's role is—genuine friend helping a guy through hell, or part of the PR machine?
Kidding. That's pretty much what I got when I asked Grok.com about all this.
