Quote:
Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing
The original memorandum of understanding ("MOU") left it open to interpretation.
In the actual CBA, which was finalised after the offer sheet, the wording changed such that this situation would have resulted in O'Reilly having to clear waivers.
But, that was not the situation going off of the MOU, which was the only document in play at the time.
Working off of the MOU, Calgary's interpretation was valid, such that the worst that likely would have happened is that the offer sheet would have been voided, and there would have been no issue.
Since Colorado matched, it didn't matter, and the wording was firmed up in the actual CBA.
The difference was between "a team's list" and "the team's list".
As O'Reilly was on "a team's list" (Colorado's), the waiver issue did not apply. They changed the wording to "the team's list" in the final CBA, meaning to sign an RFA who played elsewhere after the season started, he had to be on your own team's list (the signing team's), not just a team's list.
|
The thing you're forgetting is that yeah it may have been open to interpretation but all Feaster had to do was phone the NHL for a ruling. That Feaster didn't means he didn't know that ROR had played the two games in the KHL after the agreement and his later claim was trying to save his butt. I don't blame him that much for not knowing about the KHL games, even his agent didn't know but his claim that the ruling would have been in dispute wasn't the main mistake.
In the long run it all worked out, we were terrible and got Monahan and the long awaited rebuild began. I also have no wish to return to the ROR sweepstakes. I don't see us needing another centre as our weakness is on defence and maybe in goal.