[bluejays]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I have no idea if they are but on the balance of probabilities, I think it is reasonable to say probably not. I don't know if the NHL has many people who personally object or don't want to personally wear military gear on those nights. The same goes for Hockey Fights Cancer, Black History etc.

I just think that there is a small but probably larger than anticipated group of male NHL hockey players who personally would rather not wear the jersey. Some people agree with it and other's don't. It's just the way it is. Your never going to have 100% buy in on everything from everybody.

In his article, 32 thoughts, Friedman says the following

"It’s fair to wonder if more online “culture war” topics will spill into hockey. As former mayor of Boston and U.S. Secretary of Labor, Walsh recognizes that no matter what he says, people are going to dislike it"

It's sports and politics, people don't always agree and that's ok. I think sometimes people forget that. People can generally be very respectful of others but may prefer to not partake in other aspects. Not everybody is going to always be on board with everything, even within a community.

I think the NHL's intension might have been in the right place with the messaging and the gesture, in some ways I have always argued things like this and other social issues in sports might just be pacifying the public in a lot of ways. I don't know if the NHL thought this through with some of the pushback, with some teams potentially making it not quite mandatory but vocal about doing it. Other teams might have taken a hands off approach too.

Other things that need to be worked on is the power dynamic and how thing play out over the longer term for players and different caliber of players. Some people may object now or in the future. Sure some elite superstars may not be on board and can "survive" some of the backlash they may get if things change, but what about 4th line grinder bubble players? The NHLPA is required to address their concerns since its taking money off their chq.

What happens if a player other than a white player makes a decision to not participate in the future? Are we suspending and financially penalizing black, brown, Asian, Native, Christian, Muslim, Hindu and other visible minority players under the banner of "hockey is for everybody? What message does that send?

I don't have any answers but I assume these are part of the questions and discussions being had. Maybe they have to grandfather these things into contracts, perhaps other sports leagues are or are not on board.

Life's really easy when it's easy but when it's not as easy, it get's complicated

Thank you. Logical understanding that it’s complicated. Nobody should be bullied into this. It hasn’t been fully thought out. Like you said it’s possibly appeasing the public. Anyway, I think everything you said was right.