View Single Post
Old 03-01-2013, 02:13 PM   #699
dissentowner
Franchise Player
 
dissentowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by polak View Post
First it was the exemption that was being argued.

Now we are arguing a rule that has been in place for 9 years and has been used in the Radulov case.

I understand that the courts can restructure the rule but the Flames would need to convince them that their interpretation is legitimate. I'd love to see how they could put together such an argument.

"Well, we didn't know that he's no longer a restricted free agent once we signed him to a contract after the avalanche didn't match the offer sheet?"

Obviously this team has qualified and traded for the rights of plenty of restricted free agents in the past. I just can't see anyone, even a small child being convinced otherwise.
Sigh. There is an exemption for players who are signed that are on a club's RFA list. The key word to argue here is "a". So if the Av's can match the offer sheet and therefore bring O'Reilly in without having to go throuh waivers because he was on their offer sheet why would that not be the same for the Flames? The argument the Flames have is he was on "a" clubs RFA list. It does not specify it has to be the players current club, just that he is exempt if he is on "a" RFA list.

Last edited by dissentowner; 03-01-2013 at 02:16 PM.
dissentowner is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post: