HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

NHLPA appealing Vermette automatic 10-game suspension UPDATE 2/25 Appeal denied

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-18-2017, 11:51 PM
  #26
dechire
Janmark Enthusiast
 
dechire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: inconnu
Posts: 13,523
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
By the way, that's not what I said...


I expected you to not be surprised that not only could a union "do their job" (as you said) but that a fan could "have an opinion and not care about the NHLPA" (just like the NHLPA doesn't care about the fans)...it was the latter idea (that a fan could have an opinion that didn't support the union's actions) that you didn't seem to understand


I think they have no case (like others), and the likely result regardless of what happens with an arbitrator is the Ducks are probably going to be less likely to "get the calls" - so it is surprising to me they'd appeal it, it seems like a bad idea/a no-win situation (regardless of what the arbitrator decides)
The NHLPA is not independantly appealing it. Vermette is appealing it and the NHLPA is representing him(as their role dictates). So I don't understand your surprise. Vermette doesn't want to lose 100k so he calls up the NHLPA and says "Hey I want to appeal this." The NHLPA says "Okay we'll get the process started for you." The NHL says "Okay we'll prepare for the appeal." All parties are performing their functions. There is nothing to be surprised about beyond wondering why Vermette is even bothering.

As I said in literally my 1st response to you: the NHLPA not representing Vermette in this would be an actual problem. This appeal is not. If you're using it as a judgement on the NHLPA then you might want to check out the relevant part of the CBA(Article 18) in which the NHLPA's role is clearly spelled out re: appeals.

dechire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2017, 11:54 PM
  #27
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
If you want to know more about the process or why these things happen then all means just keep following along. If you have nothing else to add to the discussion then nothing else needs to be said.
I learned the basics decades ago.
If you want to learn what it's about to have an opinion on the process, reread what I've written.



If opinions are so unwelcome, what's the point of the "The Business of Hockey Forum" - to post basic information that anyone can Google on their own? and to repost stories that are published in the news? Are opinions on these things really not wanted?

I seriously and honestly didn't realize that this section on HFBoards was just to regurgitate what already exists elsewhere on the internet (I really thought opinions on the subject matter would be OK to have...apparently not; now I know)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 12:09 AM
  #28
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechire View Post
The NHLPA is not independantly appealing it. Vermette is appealing it and the NHLPA is representing him(as their role dictates). So I don't understand your surprise. Vermette doesn't want to lose 100k so he calls up the NHLPA and says "Hey I want to appeal this." The NHLPA says "Okay we'll get the process started for you." The NHL says "Okay we'll prepare for the appeal." All parties are performing their functions. There is nothing to be surprised about beyond wondering why Vermette is even bothering.

As I said in literally my 1st response to you: the NHLPA not representing Vermette in this would be an actual problem. This appeal is not. If you're using it as a judgement on the NHLPA then you might want to check out the relevant part of the CBA(Article 18) in which the NHLPA's role is clearly spelled out re: appeals.
This is really new to you? You've never before heard of situations where people express surprise/disagreement (opinions!) with the idea of lawyers/unions representing people in appeals in some circumstances? Really? This is really a new idea to you? You think "it's their job to" totally dismisses any validity to the opinion?

Like I said, I really thought opinions on the subject matter would be OK to have...

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 12:11 AM
  #29
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 52,941
vCash: 1020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Thanks for that, I sure needed you to inform me that my opinion isn't worth squat
Your opinion is worth exactly what everyone else's opinion is worth. Which is to say, it value rests on merit.

When a whole room full of people agrees that your opinion is based on an apparently shoddy understanding of the subject, and your response is to double-down on it and accuse everyone else of persecuting you, there is an extremely high likelihood that the roomful of people isn't the problem.

Quote:
and I'm not sure what makes you think you're the arbitrator of the judgments my opinion is based on
I'm simply giving you my opinion of your opinion.

Quote:
I for one am not going to have MY OPINION dictated to me by the NHLPA, the NHL, or HFBoard posters (your inability to understand what an opinion is means what you're saying to me is based on incorrect judgments);
Nobody's dictating anything to you. Just pointing out that you're completely wrong and would have been better off saying "thanks for the info, now I get it!" rather than doubling down on being wrong.

This is not the main board or the trade board. The level of dialogue is higher in here, for one thing, and more importantly the users here are generally quite competent in the topics. If you are new and don't understand why something is happening, ask a question ("Why would they appeal this?") and there are plenty of people here to help. But the approach you're taking right now isn't going to get you very far with this crowd.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 12:17 AM
  #30
dechire
Janmark Enthusiast
 
dechire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: inconnu
Posts: 13,523
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
This is really new to you? You've never before heard of situations where people express surprise/disagreement (opinions!) with the idea of lawyers/unions representing people in appeals in some circumstances? Really? This is really a new idea to you? You think "it's their job to" totally dismisses any validity to the opinion?

Like I said, I really thought opinions on the subject matter would be OK to have...
Did you even read the CBA article I referred you to ? Only the NHLPA is allowed to appeal a suspension. So you might think the NHLPA shouldn't but that is completely baseless. You can say you disagree with the CBA which is fine but your current argument ("It's my opinion that the NHLPA shouldn't represent Vermette because I don't want them to") has no basis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
This is not the main board or the trade board. The level of dialogue is higher in here, for one thing, and more importantly the users here are generally quite competent in the topics. If you are new and don't understand why something is happening, ask a question ("Why would they appeal this?") and there are plenty of people here to help. But the approach you're taking right now isn't going to get you very far with this crowd.
Lol this is why I read all the Arizona threads but never comment. I would look so dumb But I love learning about all these business things that I previously knew nothing about.

dechire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 02:30 AM
  #31
Tom ServoMST3K
PAINT LIVES!
 
Tom ServoMST3K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Just off 75
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,200
vCash: 949
My viceral reaction to this situation was similar to Nino's but then I thought about the opposite situation, and the NHL/NHLPA not allowing an appeal, and realized everything was fine, and working as intended.

I hope he loses and gets it increased to 20 games though.

Tom ServoMST3K is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 03:20 AM
  #32
dechire
Janmark Enthusiast
 
dechire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: inconnu
Posts: 13,523
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom ServoMST3K View Post
My viceral reaction to this situation was similar to Nino's but then I thought about the opposite situation, and the NHL/NHLPA not allowing an appeal, and realized everything was fine, and working as intended.

I hope he loses and gets it increased to 20 games though.
Regarding this and my earlier question on the subject, it does appear that the number of games could be increased. It's spelled out pretty well in the rulebook(quoted below) with a further appeal being covered in 18.13 of the CBA(pg 121)

Quote:
Rulebook 40.5 under Physical Abuse of Officials
After any review as called for hereby, the Commissioner shall
issue an order that:
(i) sustaining the minimum suspension, or
(ii) increasing the number of games within the category, or
(iii) changing to a lower category, or
(iv) changing to a lower category and increasing the number of games
within this category, or
(v) in the case of a Category III suspension only, reducing the number of
games of the suspension.
The penalties imposed under this rule shall not be deemed to limit
the right of the Commissioner with respect to any action that he might
otherwise take pursuant to Article 18 of the CBA.
Vermette's best hope is for it to be downgraded to Category I and having the games reduced to somewhere between 5-9. However based on these criteria I think an appeal could have a worse effect rather than a better one. The Commissioner could keep it as a Category II and still add extra games if he felt it was warranted. But the only way to reduce the games is for the offense to be downgraded to Category I which seems extremely unlikely given the textbook nature of the offense. I'd be surprised if they changed anything on review though.

On a weird note, Category I and II appeals are done in person but Category III may be done over the phone which is the opposite of what I'd expect.

dechire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 03:21 AM
  #33
Deathstroke
Hey kid!
 
Deathstroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 21,974
vCash: 50
I'm not s fan of something black and white like this being appealed. But another thing that doesn't make sense to me is why Vermette has to still sit out while the appeal process is going on. This may not be baseball, but there the player will continue to play during the process.

Deathstroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 08:12 AM
  #34
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechire View Post
Regarding this and my earlier question on the subject, it does appear that the number of games could be increased. It's spelled out pretty well in the rulebook(quoted below) with a further appeal being covered in 18.13 of the CBA(pg 121)



Vermette's best hope is for it to be downgraded to Category I and having the games reduced to somewhere between 5-9. However based on these criteria I think an appeal could have a worse effect rather than a better one. The Commissioner could keep it as a Category II and still add extra games if he felt it was warranted. But the only way to reduce the games is for the offense to be downgraded to Category I which seems extremely unlikely given the textbook nature of the offense. I'd be surprised if they changed anything on review though.

On a weird note, Category I and II appeals are done in person but Category III may be done over the phone which is the opposite of what I'd expect.
Category I is the 20 game suspension. Category III is 3 games

In theory the commissioner could increase the # of games in Category II to be more then 10. In practice I can't imagine that happening. There would have to be some past precedent of a player receiving more then 10 games in a similar situation, and/or the player having a history of issues, which Vermette doesn't.

Can't just tack on extra games because Vermette is exercising his collectively bargained right to appeal the suspension.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 08:30 AM
  #35
swimmer77
No 2nd guess, grind!
 
swimmer77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: in water
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 4,046
vCash: 500
I was about to point out, if I was reading correctly, that the Commissioner could actually tack on games? Somebody beat me to it.

I get that the NHLPA is appealing on behalf of one of its own. But couldn't Vermette and the NHLPA admit some wrongdoing here? Serve the suspension which you may end up serving anyway by the time the process is completed? Oh........you want some of your wages back? Do the right thing and let your suspension money go to its noble cause - NHL Players' Emergency Assistance Fund. It's not like suspension money goes to the NHL administration fund and directly into Bettman's pocket.

This is a rule clearly written in the rule book and Vermette clearly broke it unless my eyes deceived me. Is Vermette going to claim temporary insanity. I'd be inclined to set a new precedence and tack on some game(s) for stupidity. Do players actually read the rule book?

I'm perplexed and if the suspension is reduced I'll be even more perplexed. I'd be more inclined to support and respect the NHLPA and Vermette if they'd just bite the bullet here and learn from the experience, maybe read the rule book.

swimmer77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 08:34 AM
  #36
dechire
Janmark Enthusiast
 
dechire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: inconnu
Posts: 13,523
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
Category I is the 20 game suspension. Category III is 3 games

In theory the commissioner could increase the # of games in Category II to be more then 10. In practice I can't imagine that happening. There would have to be some past precedent of a player receiving more then 10 games in a similar situation, and/or the player having a history of issues, which Vermette doesn't.

Can't just tack on extra games because Vermette is exercising his collectively bargained right to appeal the suspension.
Oops lol that's what happens when you just assume bigger number = worse instead of actually scrolling up and reading that part. That makes a lot more sense then. And I agree that it's extremely unlikely to be increased although in a hypothetical repeat offender situation I could see it happening.

Has a new neutral arbitrator been hired yet ? I know the last one was relieved after the Wideman decision but I haven't seen any new info. That's the next step after the Commissioner appeal so it may become relevant. If Vermette is fully committed to appealing the suspension it will be interesting to see how it plays out compared to the Wideman appeal last year. I'm sure that both the league and the NHLPA weren't expecting to go through this again only a year later.

dechire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 08:43 AM
  #37
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,406
vCash: 500
Yeah, a new impartial arbitrator ruled on the Jared Cowen buyout grievance a couple months ago. Not sure I've seen the arbitrator's name published though.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:16 AM
  #38
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
The level of dialogue is higher in here, for one thing, and more importantly the users here are generally quite competent in the topics.
I see no difference at all in the quality of dialogue & the ability to regurgitate what's already on the internet shows no competency whatsoever

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:19 AM
  #39
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
I see no difference at all in the quality of dialogue & the ability to regurgitate what's already on the internet shows no competency whatsoever

Then please give me an example of the same level of dialogue available by a Google search, on this topic.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:25 AM
  #40
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom ServoMST3K View Post
My viceral reaction to this situation was similar to Nino's but then I thought about the opposite situation, and the NHL/NHLPA not allowing an appeal, and realized everything was fine, and working as intended.

I hope he loses and gets it increased to 20 games though.
Multiple people in the thread had the same reaction

I never implied/stated there shouldn't be an appeal proces, anyone thinking so totally missied my point/doesn't understand what having an opinion about something is; many hope he loses/like the idea of an increase

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:31 AM
  #41
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Then please give me an example of the same level of dialogue available by a Google search, on this topic.
I'm being told or refer to the CBA...you know the CBA's online don't you? I'm having the basics purposes of a union explained to me...you know a Wikipedia article on unions provides the same knowledge don't you?

IMO the "doubling down" is being done by others who simply refuse to understand what an opinion on a business subject is - are you saying that opinions on business subjects aren't allowed? Multiple people in this thread share the same opinion/feelings I've expressed

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:33 AM
  #42
Tom ServoMST3K
PAINT LIVES!
 
Tom ServoMST3K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Just off 75
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,200
vCash: 949
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
Category I is the 20 game suspension. Category III is 3 games

In theory the commissioner could increase the # of games in Category II to be more then 10. In practice I can't imagine that happening. There would have to be some past precedent of a player receiving more then 10 games in a similar situation, and/or the player having a history of issues, which Vermette doesn't.

Can't just tack on extra games because Vermette is exercising his collectively bargained right to appeal the suspension.
No doubt, but I just personally think the suspension should be higher. It would also be funny if the Arbitrator ruled he thought Vermette was trying to injure the referee.

Tom ServoMST3K is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:34 AM
  #43
syc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not Europe
Posts: 3,006
vCash: 500
He's not a star and plays in a small market.

Zero chance this gets shortened.

syc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:37 AM
  #44
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
I'm being told or refer to the CBA...you know the CBA's online don't you? I'm having the basics purposes of a union explained to me...you know a Wikipedia article on unions provides the same knowledge don't you?

IMO the "doubling down" is being done by others who simply refuse to understand what an opinion on a business subject is - are you saying that opinions on business subjects aren't allowed? Multiple people in this thread share the same opinion/feelings I've expressed

No? You can get a copy of the CBA online? Wonders never cease.

That's not what I asked you. I asked you for a LINK to the same level of discussion on this topic. And if you do have a copy of the CBA, you have to read it. As you should know, it gives the players and owners certain rights & protections.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:41 AM
  #45
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Notice the two posters right above yours posted OPINIONS too?
Do you and others now feel a need to point out the CBA doesn't differentiate by player status/market siz?

Multiple people in this thread have posted opinion just like me, in this very thread!

And I provided you what you asked for, there was no "discussion" - just regurgitating what's already out there and commonly known

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 10:43 AM
  #46
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Notice the two posters right above yours posted OPINIONS too?
Do you and others now feel a need to point out the CBA doesn't differentiate by player status/market siz?
Do you want me to keep repeating my request? I would like a link to the high level discussion you claimed you can find on this topic.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 11:08 AM
  #47
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I would like a link to the high level discussion you claimed you can find on this topic.
The word "discussion" was referring to this thread
If you think this thread's included "high level discussion" we'll just have to agree to disagree

I've asked questions too that have gone unanswered - is there a reason you didn't point out that the CBA doesn't differentiate by player status/market size? Or is it in that case you understood an opinion was being stated (while not understanding that's what I was doing, despite my repeatedly saying so!)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 12:12 PM
  #48
Tom ServoMST3K
PAINT LIVES!
 
Tom ServoMST3K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Just off 75
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,200
vCash: 949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
The word "discussion" was referring to this thread
If you think this thread's included "high level discussion" we'll just have to agree to disagree

I've asked questions too that have gone unanswered - is there a reason you didn't point out that the CBA doesn't differentiate by player status/market size? Or is it in that case you understood an opinion was being stated (while not understanding that's what I was doing, despite my repeatedly saying so!)
So IN YOUR OPINION, should the NHLPA be forced not to represent the player in a situation like this? This is the PA's job.

Tom ServoMST3K is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 12:17 PM
  #49
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
The word "discussion" was referring to this thread
If you think this thread's included "high level discussion" we'll just have to agree to disagree

I've asked questions too that have gone unanswered - is there a reason you didn't point out that the CBA doesn't differentiate by player status/market size? Or is it in that case you understood an opinion was being stated (while not understanding that's what I was doing, despite my repeatedly saying so!)
The CBA cannot differentiate by market size. It's the Teams vs the Players. If the teams colluded together, they could be in violation of the antitrust laws in the US, possibly Canada as well. Therefore, they need a CBA.

The teams and players can agree to create classes of players, but it requires both sides to agree, which they actually do with the Rookie, RFA and UFA status. There are some issues that do consider a player's status and games played (regarding one-way and two-way contracts, placement on IR negating ability to move to AHL, etc.). Regarding rules, I think you'd have a hard time convincing either side that a player's age or # of games played, etc, should somehow affect rule enforcement. If anything, it's the league that has been more erratic with the interpretation of some incidents than has the PA. Subjectivity introduced into the rule (intent to injury or not) obviously creates a gray area that either side can "exploit."

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2017, 12:18 PM
  #50
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 67,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
is there a reason you didn't point out that the CBA doesn't differentiate by player status/market size?
The only player differentiation WRT discipline as outlined in the CBA is in regards to a player's history of discipline. (IOW if they have a "history" they can be suspended and salary withheld accrues on a daily basis rather than per game -- which results in more $$ taken from player.)

What would the city the incident occurred or the players' home team have to do with discipline?

Should a pending UFA get different treatment than a rookie on EL contract?

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.