Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
That's not only the worst-case scenario, that's the idiot case scenario. I defy you to find a judge or arbitrator who thinks that the first party to a contract should pay for the asset but not receive it, the second party should receive the payment, and the asset itself should be shipped off to a third party not even involved in the deal.
The intent of the rule in question was to keep teams from burying free agents in European leagues and then calling them back just in time for the playoffs. It dates back to the old ‘Ruotsalainen rule’, named after Reijo Ruotsalainen, the flashy Finnish defenceman who played only 26 regular-season games with the Edmonton Oilers but won two Stanley Cups there. It was never intended to prevent teams from signing RFAs to offer sheets, nor to punish those teams by making them pay the going compensation without even getting the player. Nor was it intended to punish RFAs for signing offer sheets by making them ineligible to play for the rest of the season.
|
Right here. This is it. Other than arguing like we are in court or whatever. It’s an entertainment industry and rules are made so people do not abuse or take advantage of it. This is the absolute best answer and should be used whenever this comes up again.