Quote:
Originally Posted by OptimalTates
These were options available to the Flames:
- File a grievance with the league that he has breached contract due to misconduct. Almost certainly results in a lawsuit, especially as it would have occurred before the contract was signed (although undisclosed). Fair enough, I don't really expect a business to do this but it was available to them.
- Publicly announce that the Flames will scratch him until they do their own investigation that proves he was not involved - may open them up to a lawsuit given outcomes but I would respect them for it.
- Simply scratch him without saying anything. They can do it for any reason. Just the #### up and have him as a healthy scratch like they did for Kylington. Let the NHLPA file a grievance that wouldn't go anywhere and make the NHLPA defend the accused rapist.
- Play him until he steps away from the team, then simply release a statement saying he has taken a leave from the team and no further comment will be made.
- Play him until he steps away from the team because he is about to be charged, then release a statement saying he is doing so for mental health reasons because you did the same with Kylington and made good-will.
- Argue he should not be suspended by the league.
It's a problem that they took one of those bottom steps.
"It's a business what do you expect?" Okay, but then let's not claim any moral high ground. |
The first 2 “actions” are both specious…each would likely result in an expensive lawsuit (more than the contract was worth).
The next 2 are just stupid. Player is under contract and has neither been accused of, or charged with, anything AT THE TIME. At best, he was indicated as a possible party to an event. Period.
That leaves 5 and 6. They chose 5, which, arguably, was closest to the reality. You’d be pretty useless in that circumstance, too, I’d guess.
But please, maintain your narrative for the enjoyment of all here. Flames bad. Management bad. Money bad. Dube bad. Everyone bad. OpTates good!