Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
The rule had been in place, yes.
But there was a line in the new agreement that affected that rule. The line was very ambiguously worded, however. And it was that ambiguity that led to this situation and all the subsequent debate.
Feaster and the Flames failed by not clarifying prior. That is indisputable I would think.
However, considering the ambiguity of the wording in the new agreement, there is no way that anyone can state (with accuracy) what the league would have ruled.
It is extremely hard to imagine, IMO, that the league would rule that the Flames lose both the player and the draft picks, considering that it was their own document that was unclear. Seems more likely to me that they would cancel the whole transaction.
|
AND the wording changed from the Memorandum of Understanding to the actual CBA.