Flames' Pride Night slotted for March 28 vs. LA

[kipperiggy]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The other poster said he didn't want to get into an argument about it and I don't either, so I'll explain what I meant and hopefully we can just leave it there.

Hopefully that explains my meaning and we can just drop it and return our focus to the NHL's bafflingly stupid decision.

Nothing wrong with respectful, thoughtful discussion so we all learn. appreciate you sharing your thoughts and explanation.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Apparently a NHL team has ordered a whole case of Pride Tape, according to the Athletic.

[Robbob]

Would not surprise me if it was Pittsburgh.

[N-E-B]

No pride tape but our teams can wear gigantic ugly gambling ads on their helmets. That’s appropriate. Kids can’t know gay people exist but we’re cool if they become gambling addicts that help our bottom line.

Is there some way I can contact the Flames to let them know how ridiculous that is? Very disappointed to see those monstrosities on their helmet tonight.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Would not surprise me if it was Pittsburgh.

Because of Burke? He's gone.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

In my view the PA has always incorrectly focused on defending the few instead of the many.
- When a player is suspended for hurting another player, often there is an appeal. Seems to index towards the rights of the offender and not the impacts on the victim
- In this case, they have supported the memo, basically to defend the rights of the bigots amongst their members, such as the Staals. Instead of respecting what seems to be the more prevailing desire to support pride.

You’re assuming the PA is only listening to the players who don’t support pride. But I’d wager there are a lot of players who are happy to wear pride jerseys or tape, but who don’t want to see their teammates publicly shamed.

[KelVarnsen]

It’s 2023. I’m more than ok with shaming bigots. So should the PA.

[The Fonz]

IMO, the positive that will come out of this is all of the focus going forward will be on the supporters when they inevitably break the rule. It will be (or should be) a positive story, focusing on the good, rather than a negative story focusing on the players that don't break the rule (I hope, anyway).

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

You’re assuming the PA is only listening to the players who don’t support pride. But I’d wager there are a lot of players who are happy to wear pride jerseys or tape, but who don’t want to see their teammates publicly shamed.

It's pretty clear this is the issue from the NHL and PA's perspective.

You can't give players "a choice", which, if they choose to not wear the jersey, the player faces media & public ridicule to the point of a significant contingent of media & fans are wanting them removed from the league.

I've long been on the side of removing every theme/support from the ice - stop forcing the entertainers to take a political stance on this side or that side (because everything today is apparently black or white - "you're either with me or you're against me"). I suppose it all boils down to the fans expectations of the NHL - what do expect from them? I expect them to provide entertainment, and nothing more. Some other fans expect them to provide entertainment, as well as to advance social progression. Which is the proper path for this league? Fans will probably not agree on what the expectations should be.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

(because everything today is apparently black or white - "you're either with me or you're against me")

You can see that in the assumption that anyone who supports pride wants to see people who won’t wear pride symbols shamed. But IMHO, that kind of stark judgement is mostly an on-line phenomena. In real life (ie in the NHLPA), I’d wager “supports pride but doesn’t want people who refuse to wear symbols to be called out and shamed” is a more common stance than “supports pride and wants anyone who refuses to wear symbols called out and shamed.”

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

You can see that in the assumption that anyone who supports pride wants to see people who won’t wear pride symbols shamed. But IMHO, that kind of stark judgement is mostly an on-line phenomena. In real life (ie in the NHLPA), I’d wager “supports pride but doesn’t want people who refuse to wear symbols to be called out and shamed” is a more common stance than “supports pride and wants anyone who refuses to wear symbols called out and shamed.”

There is a third option right in the middle:

supports pride but doesn't care if people on the internet are mean to those who refuse.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

There is a third option right in the middle:

supports pride but doesn't care if people on the internet are mean to those who refuse.

No, you must either fully succumb to propagating this dogmatic display of identity politic assimilation or stand righteous and opposed to seeing your brothers victimized by it.

Impossible to just… not care if people you know say stupid things and get flack for it.

[Paulie Walnuts]

You know someone is a scumbag when you support Allan Walsh and what he has to say about this matter.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

You know someone is a scumbag when you support Allan Walsh and what he has to say about this matter.

Yeah...when Allan Walsh is on the right side of things you know something is FUBAR.

[SutterBrother]

Sharks doing it right.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1712214684970209414

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Because of Burke? He's gone.

Dubas has always been a pretty big advocate as well, so this wouldn't shock me, and the Pens have always been pretty supportive overall, so it wouldn't be out of character.


Leafs are another team that I wouldn't be surprised, all of their leaders on the team itself have been supportive and so is Treliving, pretty sure Shanahan has attended Toronto's Pride.


Plus last year when all the controversy started, they played in Columbus on the CBJ's Hockey Is For Everyone night and at least half the Leafs, including Tavares and all the alternate captains, plus Giordano and a few others, used Pride Tape in warm-ups (Marner and I think someone else left it on the grip of their stick for the game too, if I recall correctly)


As the visiting team, in the midst of a controversy over Pride support, they were deliberate in their show of support, so yeah, Leafs wouldn't shock me. Neither would the Flames, honestly.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

As the visiting team, in the midst of a controversy over Pride support, they were deliberate in their show of support, so yeah, Leafs wouldn't shock me. Neither would the Flames, honestly.

Not so fast...

We're going to support Pride any way we can other than the tape,” Flames captain Mikael Backlund said. “We're going to follow the rules and do what we're told.” When asked how he could show Pride allyship without using tape on his stick, Backlund pointed at other initiatives available to players.

[KelVarnsen]

That's incredibly disappointing.

And reaffirms my decision to stop watching hockey.

[kipperiggy]

It's already in the rule book that they can use any tape! This just boggles my mind. Gross.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by kipperiggy

It's already in the rule book that they can use any tape! This just boggles my mind. Gross.

Yeah, it goes beyond being left unaddressed to specifically state that tape of any color can be used anywhere on your stick.