Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
While its true that the old rule didn't provide exceptions, the exceptions in the new CBA didn't apply to ROR anyway - he wasn't on Calgary's Reserve or RFA lists. The "ambiguous" provision was in the transition provisions in the MOU.
|
Yes, and I think I can tell you where the ambiguity was:
Quote:
|
This section shall not apply to a Player on the Reserve List or Restricted Free Agent List of an NHL Club
|
Note,
an NHL club. It didn't need to be the club that actually held his rights, just any NHL club. Since he was on Colorado's reserve list, on this construction of the matter, any other team was eligible to sign the player without putting him through waivers, provided they paid the normal compensation.
I believe you will find that these words, immediately following the above, were added (or edited) to remove the ambiguity from the final document:
Quote:
|
with whom the Player is signing an NHL SPC
|
For the avoidance of doubt, the language of the first quote should probably have been altered to ‘
the NHL Club’, emphasizing that one and only one particular club had the right to claim this exception with respect to any given player.
Remember, the original purpose of the rule was to prevent teams from ‘parking’ UFAs in Europe and suddenly signing them to contracts in time for the playoffs. The exception was left out of the 2005 CBA altogether, but when it was put back into the current CBA, it was phrased in terms that might reasonably lead experienced NHL team executives to believe that the clause was thereby restricted to its original function. Not just one, but several teams made efforts to sign O'Reilly on this basis.
When that many experienced and professional people misconstrue a clause in a contract, the fault generally lies with the language of the contract itself.
Now remember that the MOU was the only document available at the time that the Flames (and other teams) were negotiating with O'Reilly, and you have an easy recipe for the goat rope that occurred. It is not necessary to impute gross incompetence to any of the parties.