[News] Kings terminate Richards contract. UPD: Kings and Richards reach settlement

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

50?
41 Regular season home games, +? playoVERY FUNNY

I don't think Vulcan was giving them any credit for playoff games. 41 home games plus road games against the other Canadian teams is about 50.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

I don't think Vulcan was giving them any credit for playoff games. 41 home games plus road games against the other Canadian teams is about 50.

AHHH right!

[MisterJoji]

Question: Say Mike Richards is guilty of some sort of drug charge, couldn't his lawyer argue with the United States that not allowing him entry to the country would destroy his chance at earning a living? I mean, it's not like he murdered someone. Bertuzzi, McSorley, MacTavish, Heatley, Byfuglien all were allowed entry into the states despite DUI's, assaults, etc. with 2 of them ending up taking the lives of two people. Richards rumored issue is hardly worse than any of those.

[Resolute 14]

No, being barred from the US would not "destroy his chance at earning a living". It would only destroy his chance of earning a living in the United States, which he does not have a right to do in the first place.

[burn_this_city]

America considers drug crimes to be worse than killing someone.

[FlamesAddiction]

This sort of thing has happened to other types of entertainers in the past. With athletes though, I have some sympathy because many of them get hooked on painkillers that they are originally prescribed by team doctors. If Richards is indeed an addict and it was either the Kings or Flyers that introduced him to oxy, then I think he should at least be given a rehab opportunity and an opportunity to fight the ban from the US before his contract is completely terminated.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

America considers drug crimes to be worse than killing someone.

If that's true, that is so stupid. Still, I don't see how they don't allow Richards when the allowed the likes of:

MacT - vehicular homicide.

Khabibulin - DUI (in one of the states with the harshest punishments for DUI).

Heatley - vehicular homicide.

Probert - drug possession.

Throw into the mix, the dozens of musicians who've had criminal charges yet are still allowed to tour abroad. Seems very hypocritical if Richards isn't allowed to enter. Also, I want to see him allowed to enter so the Kings can't use that excuse to weasel out of their contractual obligations.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If he is refusing treatment ala Fleury, that would constitute a material breach.

You can lead a horse to water...

Exactly, that is what makes the most sense to me. It matters not what he did, but what he didn't do that is specifically defined within the tentacles of the CBA that regulates the contract he signed.

The evidence that can prove this "breach" would be interesting. The words "fail, refuse, or neglect to o[/Bbey" pop out of the CBA, however the "Club's rules" they reference seem intentionally vague, but must be defined somewhere. For a breach to have teeth and hold up in front of an arbitrator, it would need significant evidence of who/what/when/where/why/how a breach was made.

The NHL/NHLPA Substance Abuse and Behavioural Health Program policy does not appear to be publicly available. The CBA references it within the context of testing for performance enhancing drugs, but it does not provide the language and the specifics of the program.

However, the Boogaard / NHL Lawsuit provides some insight into the programs details.

The terms of the SABH Program are set forth in a document that takes the form of an agreement signed by the NHL’s commissioner and the NHLPA’s executive director.

The agreement’s first paragraph states that the SABH Program “is a comprehensive effort to address substance abuse among NHL players and their families, to treat those with a substance abuse problem in a confidential, fair and effective way, and to deter such abuse in the future,” and adds that the Program “has the full support of the League and the Players’ Association and will be incorporated into the Collective Bargaining Agreement.”

The SABH Program “is supposed to operate according to a defined regimen,” under which players are initially placed in “Stage One” and then are demoted to “Stage Two,” “Stage Three,” and “Stage Four,” with progressively more serious penalties at each stage, if they fail to comply with the Program’s requirements.

I think between the Boogaard lawsuit and the recent passing of other former players, the NHL may be taking this program a LOT more seriously, and a failure for a player to meet the contractual requirements of the program will not be taken lightly.

[calumniate]

For what it's worth - I thought this was interesting:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmacr...-his-contract/

[automaton 3]

The league, the NHLPA and the player/his agent's continued silence is interesting.

Wonder what is going on behind the scenes.

[SuperMatt18]

Likely waiting for the RCMP investigation to conclude before they say anything.

[Ice]

PA has to be careful here because of the reason Richards failed to disclose.

[dying4acup]

You are absolutely right here.

Many pro sports franchises, specifically in major media markets like NY and LA, have team policies about disclosing legal issues within 24hours.

It is a reasonable rule considering how much work a team has to do through their communications department, and how stupid a team can be made to look, because of a players actions.

While Richards may never be convicted of any crime (if that is what has happenned), he can easily be in breach of contract, and I would do the same thing.

Whether or not it is an advantage is a factor in an employers decision, but legally it is not.

Legally the question is "breach or no breach"?

[White Out 403]

I hope the Kings get crucified for this bullcrap. I really do.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

They won't, look at the NJ/Kovalchuk situation. Now factor in that this is LA, one of the biggest markets in the league.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

I hope the Kings get crucified for this bullcrap. I really do.

It's looking like they aren't going to be able to weasel out of the contract but I don't think the Kings will face any penalties for giving it the old college try. I'm not sure how much this will affect their image to free agents and the NHLPA going forward but I expect not much given it's a desirable place to play.

[MBates]

I think we should remind ourselves how little we actually know about the specific situation with Richards and the Kings organization...so I am making general comments only and none about who is or is not acting appropriately regarding this.

That said, no matter what the NHL and NHLPA rules / CBA say, players have to deal with the actual immigration laws of Canada and the US.

Examples of players who got around issues before the 'global war on terror' became a thing are basically not relevant...this is not the same border-crossing world that it once was. And just because there are other celebrities or pro athletes that have managed to make their situations workable, doesn't mean all such people can.

Have a read of this page to see the myriad of reasons someone can be declared inadmissible to the US:

http://www.uscis.gov/iframe/ilink/do...-0-0-2006.html

For example, the fact that you are determined to be a drug abuser or addict can on its own make it so the US will never let you into their country.

Also, you certainly do not have to be convicted of anything ever to be ruled inadmissible for criminality. Simply admitting to facts / events that would amount to a violation of drug laws virtually anywhere in the world can make you inadmissible.

(Some posters might want to go back and delete admissions they have made on this forum and other online posts).

If the US "has reason to believe" you are involved in illicit drug trafficking they can deem you inadmissible.

Even being married to or the kid of a person involved in drug trafficking can get you barred...if you get money from them and ought to know where it came from.

Yes there are exceptions and waivers and many opportunities to try and rehabilitate your status with Homeland Security...but just because they exist there is no way to force a country to allow you one.

I don't see why so many seem so unwilling to accept that being unable to come to work to perform your duties could be a legitimate material breach of any employment contract...and that an employer could be entirely justified in terminating the relationship.

If a Canadian who has an oxy problem cannot go to the US when he is employed by a US business, it is not the oxy problem that is the basis for termination...it is the fact that he can't perform his side of the contract in the place where the contract requires him to be.

Ironically, just this week a senior executive outside of the pro sports world is possibly watching her entire career evaporate for a cross-border oxy incident on June 18:

http://business.financialpost.com/ex...one-into-japan

This is not an issue unique to pro athletes by any means...we likely just hear about their cases in the media more often.

[Locke]

The ball is in LA's court at the moment. They want Ricahrds gone and he gave them the opportunity and they've taken it.

I dont think I've ever seen this before, but usually the team wants to keep the player and will go the distance to help them, the total opposite in this case.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Locke

The ball is in LA's court at the moment. They want Ricahrds gone and he gave them the opportunity and they've taken it.

I dont think I've ever seen this before, but usually the team wants to keep the player and will go the distance to help them, the total opposite in this case.

That's debateable he gave them an opportunity as it sounds like he has a problem and they are using that as their hail mary. I don't think they are going to get out of it as he's not listed as a UFA which means he's still a King and will likely remain that way until they swallow the sword like other teams have in their situation and buy him out rather than trying to weasel out of a contract they accepted fully knowing the term and salary cap repercussions. Can't have your cake and eat it too but the Kings tried and likely failed here.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's debateable he gave them an opportunity as it sounds like he has a problem and they are using that as their hail mary. I don't think they are going to get out of it as he's not listed as a UFA which means he's still a King and will likely remain that way until they swallow the sword like other teams have in their situation and buy him out rather than trying to weasel out of a contract they accepted fully knowing the term and salary cap repercussions. Can't have your cake and eat it too but the Kings tried and likely failed here.

You keep saying this, but maybe the first "problem" was addressed by the team in private (NHL Drug Program) and he screwed up again on his last chance, in a very public way that damages the teams reputation. In cases like these it is very important to wait for all the information. If he is being terminated in an illegal way he will win, if he screwed up AGAIN then the Kings will be vindicated.