Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum
Ivrnet

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-13-2018, 08:58 AM   #21
dobbles
addition by subtraction
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Exp:
Default

I am not entirely sold on severe work related punishments for non work related crimes. I get in pro sports theres the optics and PR side that players are being poor ambassadors for the league and in a way need to be held accountable, but what Watson did was a legal matter dealt with by the legal system. What does his employer have to do with it?

I work a desk job in marketing; so if I got a DUI, what would that have to do with my job? If I hit my wife, why would work care? If I stole a toothbrush from wal-mart is that problematic in my performing my duties? (and yes, I realize if I was a driver a DUI would matter; if I was a banker theft would matter, etc)

I get it; domestic violence is reprehensible. But I honestly don't think I support any suspension in a situation like this. Heck, if they are worried about optics, all this has done is make the incident that much more visible. I read quite a bit of hockey news, and I had either missed or already forgotten that this was even a thing. So any harm to the leagues reputation was minimal.

I'm sure this opinion won't go over well. I'm all about calling out weirdos like Weinstein et al, but I think we are getting pretty caught up.
dobbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 09:13 AM   #22
Jiri Hrdina
Moderator
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by combustiblefuel View Post
Except it dosen't usually go both ways. .


Not condemning what happened as there seems to be no evidence she assuallted him ( based on this report alone) . We all know your statement is in good intent but rarely is it a 2 way street. Forget on a legal standing just in general theres a feeling theres no reason to hit a woman ..

It seems in this instance it seems deserved . Did she push him at all?? Did she push him and simply not leave as much as a mark? Probably not .

No you absolutely shouldn't assualt your partner . But he plead to no contest which means he admits no guilt or innocence. With out full details its hard to be that harsh on him.


Not saying what he did was right , just asking questions . Not alot of details on what happened......

Not a lot of details so we can only assess based on what we know
- He plead no contest
- The NHL did their own investigation and concluded a 27 game suspension was warranted. I assume they went into a greater level of detail then the summaries that have via reports

I don't really understand what you mean by 'it doesn't usually go both ways'.
Jiri Hrdina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 09:20 AM   #23
Jiri Hrdina
Moderator
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbles View Post
I am not entirely sold on severe work related punishments for non work related crimes. I get in pro sports theres the optics and PR side that players are being poor ambassadors for the league and in a way need to be held accountable, but what Watson did was a legal matter dealt with by the legal system. What does his employer have to do with it?

I work a desk job in marketing; so if I got a DUI, what would that have to do with my job? If I hit my wife, why would work care? If I stole a toothbrush from wal-mart is that problematic in my performing my duties? (and yes, I realize if I was a driver a DUI would matter; if I was a banker theft would matter, etc)

I get it; domestic violence is reprehensible. But I honestly don't think I support any suspension in a situation like this. Heck, if they are worried about optics, all this has done is make the incident that much more visible. I read quite a bit of hockey news, and I had either missed or already forgotten that this was even a thing. So any harm to the leagues reputation was minimal.

I'm sure this opinion won't go over well. I'm all about calling out weirdos like Weinstein et al, but I think we are getting pretty caught up.
Any industry where the employees are in the public light will have a code of conduct. This is no different than entertainers or politicians.
I'm surprised that some people are rushing to defend a dude that admitted to assaulted his partner.
Why he is worthy of your defense?
Are severe consequences to these thing not a good thing?
Jiri Hrdina is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 09:20 AM   #24
Jiggy
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Exp:
Default

If the NHLPA really cared, they would accept the 27 game suspension and find help for Watson.
Jiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 09:25 AM   #25
Pipty
Farm Team Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Exp:
Default

Is this case much different than Voynov?
Pipty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:02 AM   #26
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
Why he is worthy of your defense?
Are severe consequences to these thing not a good thing?
This is just such a weird argument.

You've already said we have limited information. If so, why are you so certain that 27 games are appropriately severe consequences? Do you have that much faith in the NHL's head office to get discipline correct that you'll take it more or less on faith?

An earlier poster said that the punishment seemed harsh in comparison with other punishments that have been meted out in other areas. Your response was effectively, "the punishment SHOULD be harsh". But he was only suggesting that it was TOO harsh - is the degree of harshness not something that can be questioned? Your position here would appear to apply equally had they cut his head off.

Last, asking why people are defending Watson isn't fair. No one is defending his actions. Some are questioning whether the punishment fits the crime. Unless you're taking the position that there is no punishment that could be excessive - and I assume you're not - asking whether this punishment is one of those that should be considered excessive is a reasonable thing to want to discuss, even if your answer is "no, for the following reasons". The issue there is that you haven't really given any reasons other than "this is really bad and he should be punished harshly and I can't believe people are taking his side".

In your view, do we just spin the wheel, land on a suspension number and everyone smiles and nods for fear that asking why that number is appropriate will lead to being accused of defending spousal abuse? Is that how you'd like this to go?
__________________
If you were given the option to pay 45 cents to predict the outcome of a coin flip, and if correct in your prediction you win a dollar, you may lose 45 cents on the first try. You may even lose 90 cents after the second try. But if you keep betting, you'll end up ahead in the long term. This is the value of analytics. They do not describe destiny, only the likeliest result.
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 10:03 AM   #27
dobbles
addition by subtraction
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
Any industry where the employees are in the public light will have a code of conduct. This is no different than entertainers or politicians.
I'm surprised that some people are rushing to defend a dude that admitted to assaulted his partner.
Why he is worthy of your defense?
Are severe consequences to these thing not a good thing?
I'm not rushing to defend a dude. I have no horse in this race. But the perspective I am coming from is that if for some reason I had the same incident where my wife and I had an argument and I did something terrible, I would hope that after taking care of the legal process I would not have to also deal with repercussions from my employer for something that is outside of my work duties.

I certainly acknowledge the public aspect of these athletes. But I just don't agree with such severe consequences for something that has nothing to do with his job. The NHL does plenty to tarnish its own reputation, does this guy really need to miss a third of a season and quite a bit of income because of an event like this? I am not trying to minimize domestic violence, but it is also equally possible to go overboard in light of the 'me too' movement and the increased attention to these topics.

Whats the scale on this? Push a wife and its 5 games? Punch her its 20? Break a bone and its a season? The league has a hard enough time getting consistency on game related discipline. Not sure this is an area they will handle too well either.
dobbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:05 AM   #28
Cali Panthers Fan
Franchise Player
 
Cali Panthers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbles View Post

I get it; domestic violence is reprehensible. But I honestly don't think I support any suspension in a situation like this. Heck, if they are worried about optics, all this has done is make the incident that much more visible. I read quite a bit of hockey news, and I had either missed or already forgotten that this was even a thing. So any harm to the leagues reputation was minimal.

I'm sure this opinion won't go over well. I'm all about calling out weirdos like Weinstein et al, but I think we are getting pretty caught up.
To the bolded....um, good? Domestic violence is drastically under-reported and rarely are charges actually filed. There is a lot of silent violence against women occurring daily, and the more this is in the public eye, the better. Half of all female homicides involve a domestic partner.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...imate-partners

This is also not about the league's reputation for the most part. It is about taking a moral stance on an important issue and letting these players know that this sort of thing simply isn't acceptable. That's coming from a league that deals in regular violence legally allowed in their sport, but the key difference being that those are willing participants. Also, the league has an opportunity to regularly engage with the public, and so they have a responsibility to discipline their players appropriately in an attempt to show the public just how wrong something like this is.

I actually think the punishment isn't harsh enough. I'd like to see half a season for incidents like these.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien View Post
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
Cali Panthers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 10:05 AM   #29
Oling_Roachinen
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
This is just such a weird argument.
His argument is that public figures, like hockey players, should be punished for beating their partners. Seems reasonable to me and not at all weird.
Oling_Roachinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:09 AM   #30
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen View Post
His argument is that public figures, like hockey players, should be punished for beating their partners. Seems reasonable to me and not at all weird.
That may respond to some of what dobbles in particular has said, but isn't an argument against the position that the punishment is too harsh, which is mostly what has been put forward here. And in any case, the "how can you possibly think this guy is worthy of your defense" line is not a reasonable argument.
__________________
If you were given the option to pay 45 cents to predict the outcome of a coin flip, and if correct in your prediction you win a dollar, you may lose 45 cents on the first try. You may even lose 90 cents after the second try. But if you keep betting, you'll end up ahead in the long term. This is the value of analytics. They do not describe destiny, only the likeliest result.
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:10 AM   #31
Cali Panthers Fan
Franchise Player
 
Cali Panthers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbles View Post
I'm not rushing to defend a dude. I have no horse in this race. But the perspective I am coming from is that if for some reason I had the same incident where my wife and I had an argument and I did something terrible, I would hope that after taking care of the legal process I would not have to also deal with repercussions from my employer for something that is outside of my work duties.

I certainly acknowledge the public aspect of these athletes. But I just don't agree with such severe consequences for something that has nothing to do with his job. The NHL does plenty to tarnish its own reputation, does this guy really need to miss a third of a season and quite a bit of income because of an event like this? I am not trying to minimize domestic violence, but it is also equally possible to go overboard in light of the 'me too' movement and the increased attention to these topics.

Whats the scale on this? Push a wife and its 5 games? Punch her its 20? Break a bone and its a season? The league has a hard enough time getting consistency on game related discipline. Not sure this is an area they will handle too well either.
How about zero tolerance? Why do we need a sliding scale depending on the size of the wound?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien View Post
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
Cali Panthers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 10:13 AM   #32
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan View Post
This is also not about the league's reputation for the most part. It is about taking a moral stance on an important issue and letting these players know that this sort of thing simply isn't acceptable. That's coming from a league that deals in regular violence legally allowed in their sport, but the key difference being that those are willing participants. Also, the league has an opportunity to regularly engage with the public, and so they have a responsibility to discipline their players appropriately in an attempt to show the public just how wrong something like this is.
I'm not sure I agree that I want a hockey league attempting to dictate morality to the public or tell the public how "wrong" certain things are. That doesn't seem to me to be its role or something it's particularly well suited to doing. I do think I disagree with Dobbles's position that they shouldn't be punishing for things that are dealt with through law enforcement, though. Of course this is about the league's reputation - they've seen how badly the NFL has come off in this area and have made a conscious decision that they're not going to follow suit. They did it with Voynov and they've done it here. Whether you think the outcome is right or wrong, or whether 27 games is too many or too few, a lot of the motivation for this has to do with protecting the brand.
__________________
If you were given the option to pay 45 cents to predict the outcome of a coin flip, and if correct in your prediction you win a dollar, you may lose 45 cents on the first try. You may even lose 90 cents after the second try. But if you keep betting, you'll end up ahead in the long term. This is the value of analytics. They do not describe destiny, only the likeliest result.
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:17 AM   #33
GordonBlue
Powerplay Quarterback
 
GordonBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan View Post
How about zero tolerance? Why do we need a sliding scale depending on the size of the wound?
I agree that what he appears to have done is worthy of punishment, but I do agree he should be able to appeal, and I think he has grounds to.

a full preseason and 27 game suspension? seems like a suspension number pulled out of a hat.
why this severe, why now? if Crobsy hits his a significant other, is his suspension going to be at least this much, or since he's a HOF player he'll only get 5 games?

can you explain why so many games is a fair punishment, especially in light of suspension time for other transgressions?
GordonBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:18 AM   #34
Cali Panthers Fan
Franchise Player
 
Cali Panthers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
I'm not sure I agree that I want a hockey league attempting to dictate morality to the public or tell the public how "wrong" certain things are. That doesn't seem to me to be its role or something it's particularly well suited to doing. I do think I disagree with Dobbles's position that they shouldn't be punishing for things that are dealt with through law enforcement, though. Of course this is about the league's reputation - they've seen how badly the NFL has come off in this area and have made a conscious decision that they're not going to follow suit. They did it with Voynov and they've done it here. Whether you think the outcome is right or wrong, or whether 27 games is too many or too few, a lot of the motivation for this has to do with protecting the brand.
There is absolutely no reason that any one organization cannot take a stand on a social issue. They are not dictating morals, simply stating their position and letting people know what this particular organization believes to be acceptable. How do you feel about the NHL's "You Can Play" initiative to include LGBTQ peoples? Do you also feel they are dictating morals in that case?

Quite frankly, we could use a lot more corporate responsibility on social issues. Instead of just throwing up their hands and saying "not my business" they can be effective agents for progress and change. They are still made up of people who have hearts and minds. It is not beyond them to create a collective position on a social ill.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien View Post
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
Cali Panthers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 10:20 AM   #35
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonBlue View Post
a full preseason and 27 game suspension? seems like a suspension number pulled out of a hat.
why this severe, why now? if Crobsy hits his a significant other, is his suspension going to be at least this much, or since he's a HOF player he'll only get 5 games?
After thinking about it for a minute, given the lack of precedent, what process would you want them to use such that the outcome doesn't appear random? That is, if you agree a suspension is warranted and it has to be some number of games, how do you get to a number that isn't pulled out of a hat in a case like this? I actually can't think of how I'd want this done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan View Post
There is absolutely no reason that any one organization cannot take a stand on a social issue. They are not dictating morals, simply stating their position and letting people know what this particular organization believes to be acceptable. How do you feel about the NHL's "You Can Play" initiative to include LGBTQ peoples? Do you also feel they are dictating morals in that case?
That's directly to do with participation in the sport. I'm also not totally sure I think they can't put themselves out there as a "morally good" force, in fact a lot of private entities do that for marketing reasons and just because they want to. Kids do look up to hockey players, so there's a sort of inherent responsibility here, and that's part of why I think he should be punished.

However, there is probably a line somewhere, where the league ceases to simply be advertising its own values and effectively usurps the role of actually punishing people for offenses that have nothing directly to do with the game. Dobbles does have a point - that's what law enforcement is for. But I don't know that I could say how many games you have to suspend a guy to get to a point where it crosses that line.

On the other hand, it's a private league. They could ban him forever if they wanted to and simply say "we don't want people like this here". I think you'd still have some people saying that's justified, and some people saying that there should be some understanding of human failings and mistakes, even terrible mistakes, and allow for second chances. Both positions are defensible, which is why my issue here is that one side of the argument is basically acting shocked that the other could possibly take any view other than your "off with his head" sort of righteous anger.
Quote:
Quite frankly, we could use a lot more corporate responsibility on social issues. Instead of just throwing up their hands and saying "not my business" they can be effective agents for progress and change. They are still made up of people who have hearts and minds. It is not beyond them to create a collective position on a social ill.
I just don't necessarily trust the NHL to have any idea what's right in any given case, certainly not any complex issue. I frankly have very little faith that 98% of people are doing anything other than following their gut emotional reaction when addressing this stuff. I generally don't even trust my own intuitions on moral issues, so I certainly don't trust yours, or Gary Bettman's.
__________________
If you were given the option to pay 45 cents to predict the outcome of a coin flip, and if correct in your prediction you win a dollar, you may lose 45 cents on the first try. You may even lose 90 cents after the second try. But if you keep betting, you'll end up ahead in the long term. This is the value of analytics. They do not describe destiny, only the likeliest result.

Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 09-13-2018 at 10:27 AM.
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 10:28 AM   #36
dobbles
addition by subtraction
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan View Post
How about zero tolerance? Why do we need a sliding scale depending on the size of the wound?
So if I slap my wife my career is over? Sounds solid!

Accuse my of hyperbole all you want, but thats what a zero tolerance policy would mean.
dobbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:38 AM   #37
Jiri Hrdina
Moderator
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
This is just such a weird argument.

You've already said we have limited information. If so, why are you so certain that 27 games are appropriately severe consequences? Do you have that much faith in the NHL's head office to get discipline correct that you'll take it more or less on faith?

An earlier poster said that the punishment seemed harsh in comparison with other punishments that have been meted out in other areas. Your response was effectively, "the punishment SHOULD be harsh". But he was only suggesting that it was TOO harsh - is the degree of harshness not something that can be questioned? Your position here would appear to apply equally had they cut his head off.

Last, asking why people are defending Watson isn't fair. No one is defending his actions. Some are questioning whether the punishment fits the crime. Unless you're taking the position that there is no punishment that could be excessive - and I assume you're not - asking whether this punishment is one of those that should be considered excessive is a reasonable thing to want to discuss, even if your answer is "no, for the following reasons". The issue there is that you haven't really given any reasons other than "this is really bad and he should be punished harshly and I can't believe people are taking his side".

In your view, do we just spin the wheel, land on a suspension number and everyone smiles and nods for fear that asking why that number is appropriate will lead to being accused of defending spousal abuse? Is that how you'd like this to go?
I have more confidence that the NHL gathered enough information, more than we have, to make a decision.
So if one is going to question or raise a point about that it is too harsh - there should be a rationale as to why.
What is the downside of having harsh consequences in this area?
Jiri Hrdina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 10:45 AM   #38
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
I have more confidence that the NHL gathered enough information, more than we have, to make a decision.
So if one is going to question or raise a point about that it is too harsh - there should be a rationale as to why.
Well, I suppose first of all, how many suspensions in NHL history have been this long? What sort of behaviour were they for? What sort of punishment is generally meted out by employers in this area? If all of that lines up, you can justify the 27 games.

But I just cannot agree to you that the person asking why this was done the way it was done should be required to first demonstrate that it was done wrongly. It seems to me that the onus is on the NHL (or whoever's supporting their decision) to justify a penalty that it itself imposed. They arrived at that number, presumably for what they feel is a good reason. What was that rationale? As the party with all of that information in their possession they should explain how, and tell us why we should agree with the process and the outcome. That is, of course, assuming that the NHL cares whether the public agrees with the process and the outcome.
Quote:
What is the downside of having harsh consequences in this area?
You've said this a couple of times. As I pointed out, the question is degree. A 27 game suspension seems like a harsh penalty. Being banned from the league also seems like a harsh penalty. Having his eyes burned out with hot pokers also seems like a harsh penalty. The appropriate degree of harshness is precisely what (most) people seem to be debating, and my real issue is you acting as if even raising that as a live matter to be discussed is some horrible affront to morality, amounting to a defense of wife-beating. It's really not.
__________________
If you were given the option to pay 45 cents to predict the outcome of a coin flip, and if correct in your prediction you win a dollar, you may lose 45 cents on the first try. You may even lose 90 cents after the second try. But if you keep betting, you'll end up ahead in the long term. This is the value of analytics. They do not describe destiny, only the likeliest result.
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2018, 11:16 AM   #39
Jiri Hrdina
Moderator
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
Well, I suppose first of all, how many suspensions in NHL history have been this long? What sort of behaviour were they for? What sort of punishment is generally meted out by employers in this area? If all of that lines up, you can justify the 27 games.

But I just cannot agree to you that the person asking why this was done the way it was done should be required to first demonstrate that it was done wrongly. It seems to me that the onus is on the NHL (or whoever's supporting their decision) to justify a penalty that it itself imposed. They arrived at that number, presumably for what they feel is a good reason. What was that rationale? As the party with all of that information in their possession they should explain how, and tell us why we should agree with the process and the outcome. That is, of course, assuming that the NHL cares whether the public agrees with the process and the outcome.

You've said this a couple of times. As I pointed out, the question is degree. A 27 game suspension seems like a harsh penalty. Being banned from the league also seems like a harsh penalty. Having his eyes burned out with hot pokers also seems like a harsh penalty. The appropriate degree of harshness is precisely what (most) people seem to be debating, and my real issue is you acting as if even raising that as a live matter to be discussed is some horrible affront to morality, amounting to a defense of wife-beating. It's really not.
The rationale is he assaulted his wife.
Comparing this to past suspensions isn't relevant. They aren't apples to apples. The only comparison is Voynov I suppose.
So what are you looking for?
Or is this just a classic Corsi being a contrarian thing? In which case I'm happy to move on because otherwise it'll just go around and around.
And to be clear people aren't just asking why this was the suspension they have LITERALLY said that it seems harsh.
Jiri Hrdina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2018, 11:22 AM   #40
FireFly
Franchise Player
 
FireFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/d...-assault-case/

According to this article the things we know are that he left marks on her chest, she admitted he "gets handsy" sometimes. She pleaded with officers to not arrest him for fear it would hurt his NHL career.

More than all of that, he was part of a campaign to end violence against women, meanwhile behind closed doors, he's being violent with his own partner.

IMO, it's the last bit that was his nail in the coffin.

However, if he was found guilty, he would be in jail so yeah, he would've lost a LOT more than the wages from 27 games. He pled no contest to get out of jail time.

As an aside, how is a domestic assault a misdemeanor? That's disgusting.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Then I looked back and they lost in regulation. Oilers gonna Oil.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420 View Post
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.

Last edited by FireFly; 09-13-2018 at 11:25 AM.
FireFly is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FireFly For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:40 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016