[News] Dillon Dube granted indefinite leave of absence for mental health

[bdubbs]

Fans: "Wow, bad look on the Flames, they better address this."
Flames org: "We had no idea at the time the leave was granted."
Fans: "Wow, the flames are lying!! It's a conspiracy for them to cover up Dube's transgressions!!!! I don't BELIEVE them!!!!!!!!"

Smh. Do better.

[Gaskal]

Don't sell your #29 jerseys folks, just duct tape the back and write ENGELLAND on it, simple fix

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Don't sell your #29 jerseys folks, just duct tape the back and write ENGELLAND on it, simple fix

Wrong 29 ...

Missing out on the legend and the name bar is the same length

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by bdubbs

Fans: "Wow, bad look on the Flames, they better address this."
Flames org: "We had no idea at the time the leave was granted."
Fans: "Wow, the flames are lying!! It's a conspiracy for them to cover up Dube's transgressions!!!! I don't BELIEVE them!!!!!!!!"

Smh. Do better.

What’s sad is that 2 separate events could be true. Dube absolutely duped the flames, and the flames could have seen this as another opportunity to score some good will and claim it was mental health. No one forced the flames to play the mental health angle and they did for their own benefit.

I’d tell you to do better yourself but sadly I think you’re already there. You keep doing your best.

[Jiri Hrdina]

You must really think the Flames are idiots and just generally awful people if you think their goal was to generate good will.
Again, I sometimes wonder why people cheer for a team that they think so lowly of.

[iggyloob12]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You mean the speculation in this forum isn't enough for you that you want to hear the local sports guys add in their own speculation that they have likely been warned by management to tread carefully not providing anything that can result in a lawsuit? If it makes you feel better they have spent the last 20 minutes discussing this as I type and just said they will spend more time discussing this later I but I sense that anything short of spending the majority of air time on this will not be enough to satisfy some of you. It's a terrible story but I just don't understand why some of you are directing outrage towards the Flames, 960, etc when we finally have five players implicated. They should be the focus here.

I think it's fair criticism to call out the city's only sports radio station, which devotes almost all its air time to the NHL and the Flames, for avoiding talking about the biggest story in the country. If you're too afraid to report or talk about the news, then drop the Sportsnet brand and call yourself a PR arm of the team.

Similarly, Friedman and other "insiders" have been called out before for not devoting near the same energy at reporting controversial stories, as they do chasing down trades. I don't think I was being unfair.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You must really think the Flames are idiots and just generally awful people if you think their goal was to generate good will.
Again, I sometimes wonder why people cheer for a team that they think so lowly of.

I don’t think the flames are idiots or awful at all, they tried to capitalize on Dubes “mental health leave” to make them look like the mentally proactive champions they were with Kylington.

I firmly believe the flames believed Dube and his claim about leaving for mental health. I also believe the flames post saying Dube was leaving for mental health was to look progressive and being champions for mental health of their players. The flames were under 0 obligation to state Dube’s leave was for mental health. They opted to do so and if you wish to drink the Kool Aid, please do.

[manwiches]

Fwiw. My best friend is a criminal defense attorney

- he says those convicted are staring down the barrel of 5-7 years. His frame of reference is his own 19/20 yo client who got 5.5 for similar.
- if whoever was the pizza guy, would likely not suffer much if any consequences
- those charged, don't necessarily have to have been part of the act, ala pizza guy. They could be charged, and this used as leverage to have them flip on the others
- also, keep in mind. Police lay charges. This isn't trial yet. Prosecutors determine if there is likelihood of conviction. Them being charged has nothing to do with them being found guilty.

And before anybody feels like jumping down my throat, as there seems to be some keyboard warriors on this forum, these facts are directly from my said criminal defense attorney friend.

You got something to say to me or infer an opinion, tell it to someone who gives a crap

Sent from my SM-F946W using Tapatalk

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by iggyloob12

I think it's fair criticism to call out the city's only sports radio station, which devotes almost all its air time to the NHL and the Flames, for avoiding talking about the biggest story in the country. If you're too afraid to report or talk about the news, then drop the Sportsnet brand and call yourself a PR arm of the team.

Similarly, Friedman and other "insiders" have been called out before for not devoting near the same energy at reporting controversial stories, as they do chasing down trades. I don't think I was being unfair.

It's a very dangerous topic to cover. There are real risks in talking about this on the radio. In print, you at least have editors who check before you say something. But on live radio - it's hard. Everyone is being rightfully cautious in this area, not to avoid the topic, but b/c if you say something the wrong way, there are serious implications.

That being said, I've not listened to 960 much in the last few days. Have they touched on it at all? I would think they have had to.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

It's a very dangerous topic to cover. There are real risks in talking about this on the radio. In print, you at least have editors who check before you say something. But on live radio - it's hard.

Absolutely. And the radio news broadcasters who do cover crime A) usually read from scripted stories and B) are trained to take great care in exactly how they speak. Neither of those apply to conversational sports radio broadcasters.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Absolutely. And the radio news broadcasters who do cover crime A) usually read from scripted stories and B) are trained to take great care in exactly how they speak. Neither of those apply to conversational sports radio broadcasters.

It's even riskier when your on-the-air remarks are available permanently in podcast form. It's like having to write an article in one draft, without ever using the DELETE key.

[iggyloob12]

I understand it’s risky but also give a guy like Steinberg credit. He’s a veteran and capable of avoiding pitfalls, especially with careful preparation. No one is suggesting opening the phone or text lines. If the radio is avoiding the topic, it’s a management call. That doesn’t sit right given the size of the story and local impact.

[ben voyonsdonc]

I follow Flames Talk on podcast but I don’t see an edition from yesterday. I was wondering if it was pre-empted. Did it air yesterday? Did they talk at all about Dube?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by iggyloob12

I understand it’s risky but also give a guy like Steinberg credit. He’s a veteran and capable of avoiding pitfalls, especially with careful preparation. No one is suggesting opening the phone or text lines. If the radio is avoiding the topic, it’s a management call. That doesn’t sit right given the size of the story and local impact.

What do you want them to talk about?
What can they actually cover?

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by iggyloob12

I understand it’s risky but also give a guy like Steinberg credit. He’s a veteran and capable of avoiding pitfalls, especially with careful preparation. No one is suggesting opening the phone or text lines. If the radio is avoiding the topic, it’s a management call. That doesn’t sit right given the size of the story and local impact.

Thanks for voicing my exact thoughts.

Jiri is making some fair points but also this isn't amateur hour up here and it kind of is discredit to the ability of those working the station to suggest that they can't handle the sensitive nature of the topic, and they don't deserve to have their hands tied like this with such a huge elephant in the room. These guys are experienced and smart enough that they should be able to navigate around the obvious landmines and handle it with tact.

It's something that needs to be discussed IMO because the culture around hockey needs a change and its less likely that happens if we collectively shy away from the topic. These issues need to be brought even more under the spotlight than they are. Also, it matters. We should do better by people who've been made victims to such behavior than by treating the topic as taboo.

Waiting until verdicts come out in 2026 or beyond to openly discuss it is asinine.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Again what exactly do you want them to discuss?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

I follow Flames Talk on podcast but I don’t see an edition from yesterday. I was wondering if it was pre-empted. Did it air yesterday? Did they talk at all about Dube?

I’m guessing Flames Talk is on a break with the team on break since there hasn’t been an episode this week but there’s a podcast episode tonight about the Lindholm trade uploaded already.

[cam_calderon]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Again what exactly do you want them to discuss?

Well, Kyper and Bourne covered it and someone mentioned the wording of the Dube statement from the Flames, and rightfully so. I don't know why so many are defending the club when they've been made to look stupid by Dube.

It's a PR failure, which is one thing. Bad but not irredeemable by any means. I'd like someone to apply the blowtorch to John Bean, who surely must've known every minute detail of this. His son was on the team, for ####'s sake.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

I’m guessing Flames Talk is on a break with the team on break since there hasn’t been an episode this week but there’s a podcast episode tonight about the Lindholm trade uploaded already.

Pat is on vacation so there is no regularly scheduled Flames Talk this week. I believe he called in to do a special episode after the Lindholm trade last night.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by cam_calderon

Well, Kyper and Bourne covered it and someone mentioned the wording of the Dube statement from the Flames, and rightfully so. I don't know why so many are defending the club when they've been made to look stupid by Dube.



It's a PR failure, which is one thing. Bad but not irredeemable by any means. I'd like someone to apply the blowtorch to John Bean, who surely must've known every minute detail of this. His son was on the team, for ####'s sake.

People are blowing the media release WAY out of proportion. Was it a mis-step? Perhaps, but this is debatable, since we have no idea how this went down behind closed doors. At worst, this is an error that was prompted by a combination of the actual facts the Flames had in hand and were permitted, or obligated, to report, and nothing more. As such, people are understandably happy to move on, because in the grand scheme, this is an idiotic thing to complain about.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk