Vancouver has filed tampering charges against the Leafs. This comes after Burke mentioned in a LeafsTV interview, that the Canucks had offered Burrows, Bieksa and their own first for Tampas 2nd overall.
Gillis was quick to shoot that one down, argueing it would be rather stupid for a team, that sees itself as a contender, to trade away 2 core players for a draft pick.
After the Leafs (Wilson) publicly stated this summer, that they are interested in the Sedin twins before the became UFAs, it seems the Canucks just had enough now and handed the matter to the league.
The Canucks filed tampering charges over the Wilson thing too, and the league didn't do anything about it. I don't know why LeafsTV aired Burke's trade conversations (seems like a silly thing to do, but they are desperate for viewers), but I doubt anything comes of this either.
Posted on 10/7 7:15 AM | IP: 69.196.186.199
An allegation isn't a conviction Pete. We can hang Burkey & Wilson Mussolini style after the fair trial, no?
Seriously though, I have way more questions than answers.
First and foremost, are the allegations against Wilson and Burke treated as separate and distinct? The acts of Brian Burke having nothing to do with the acts of Ron Wilson? Or; are these acts considered a pattern of conduct by the Toronto Maple Leafs and alleged "individually & jointly" against the Leafs, Burke & Wilson?
While Coach Wilson's radio interview might be viewed as a separate and distinct act, well remember Kevin Lowe. However, there's no way other departments and employees within the Leafs organization weren't involved in the filming, editing, uploading and approval of the Burke video.
If the latter is permissible under NHL rules, that the Nucks can allege a pattern of conduct against the Leafs, Burke & Wilson jointly, they stand a better chance of getting compensated.
Posted on 10/7 8:36 AM | IP: 24.205.180.38
I dont really think the Canucks want any compensation, they just want Burke and Co to shut up.
If any of this can be called tampering, its Wilsons comments regarding the Sedins. Burkes quote is IMO inappropriate and no GM should make comments which players of other teams are mentioned in trade talks.
I am no legal expert so i cant really say if there is a good chance for the Canucks to have success with it, so i just have to wait and see what comes out of it.
Posted on 10/7 10:42 AM | IP: 88.74.171.134
Wrong - they didn't file charges in the Wilson radio interview incident, Gillis simply stated that he didn't think it was right and that he was pissed about it - rightly so.
This is different - Burkie going on tape that he heard this rumour, mentioning names - the guy really is an idiot sometimes.
Posted on 10/7 11:26 AM | IP: 203.18.176.243
Remember the Cogliano/Penner/1st rumour for Heatley? That got out and at least whoever leaked it wasn't stupid enough to go on tape like Burkie the blowhard.
That crushed Cogliano - he admitted it after in interviews. That's why the rule is in place - who would want to go from a team that views themselves as cup contenders to the team that finished 2nd last in the league last year?
Posted on 10/7 11:28 AM | IP: 203.18.176.243
I was positive the NHL was asked to look into the Wilson thing and nothing came of it, but maybe I am remembering wrong.
As for Burke, yes it was a silly thing for Leafs TV to do to air that, but GM's leak trade rumours all the time and nothing is done about it. I can see why Gillis wouldn't want Burrows and Bieksa to know they were almost traded, but Burke did not say he wanted them so he didn't tamper.
According to bylaw 15 tampering is "the making or causing to be made through any medium, public or private, any statement indicating any intention or desire of or interest in acquiring the services (of a player on another club)."
You mentioned Cogliano and Penner already. Kaberle and Kessel's names got let out at the draft, Tampa named Kaberle and Schenn last year, Bobby Clarke named Kaberle, Antropov, and Markov way back during the Lindros fiasco. This stuff happens all the time. It sucks for the players and decency says it shouldn't get out, but it's not tampering.
This post was edited on 10/7 11:39 AM by Groundskeeper Willie
Posted on 10/7 11:38 AM | IP: 69.196.186.199
The NHL didn't wait for a complaint after Ron Wilson spoke out of turn about the Sedins. How do I know you ask?
Did a google search and found Die-Hard's thread on the first page.
the rule is in place as to not hurt players feelings?
Posted on 10/7 3:51 PM | IP: 99.227.212.130
.. don't spill your lattes, Vancouver fans but the league has dismissed it.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=294104
"That while unfortunate and inappropriate, the inclusion of a brief reference to the names of a pair of current Vancouver Canucks players in a television segment that aired once on Leafs TV last week did not constitute a tampering offense under League rules, and that no League action will be taken, or League sanction imposed on the Maple Leafs' organization as a result."
Posted on 10/7 4:38 PM | IP: 99.227.212.130
The whole tampering issue and the definition of tampering is stupid. First this not college, more specific NCAA, where student athletes are protected, these are grown men. As long as the twins didn't break a contract nor sign a new one than "talk", "conversation", "discussion", should be allowed and at any level.
Posted on 10/7 5:31 PM | IP: 66.25.41.122
We've already seen and witnessed Crown Attorney's and DA's pursue criminal complaints against players for on ice behavior.
The NHL is fooling itself if it thinks members won't pursue other remedies and venues if the NHL continues to enforce it's bylaws unevenly and unfairly. We are witnessing right now at this moment the Phoenix Coyotes seeking resolution to it's problems in civil court venue rather than the good offices of the NHL.
I challenge anybody to read Article 15 of the NHL bylaws and provide some rational basis that the Leafs haven't tampered with Ducks and the Nucks, players and contracted employees.
If you do take the challenge pay attention to the operative phrases, "directly or indirectly" communicating via agents, representatives and media.
The NHL is an old boys network operating a kangaroo court and Brian Burke is Bettman's fair haired boy.
Posted on 10/7 6:56 PM | IP: 24.205.180.38
Whoa, back up the truck!!!!
What happens in the war room of a team in preparation for Free Agency or trades is fair game. Making those plans public is an entirely different story. This is less about protecting the interests of the players involved than allowing the negotiation process to perform as intended within the time frame provided. Either there is a contract in place or there isn't. If a player is under contract, hands off. In all honesty, I don't understand how professional athletes with agents need "protection" during negotiations.
How fortunate that the Sedins signed with the Canucks so that Burke and Wilson somehow miss out on being bitch slapped by the League. The question none of us can answer is what influence the comments had on the final negotiations with the Canucks? Did the fact that a team had gone on record with their plans to sign the twins result in more money or longer term in the contract they signed? It's safe to assume that the Sedins and their agent would be comfortable that other contract offers would be forthcoming but to lump the Leaf's actions into that global assumption misses the point.
There is an entirely different standard being applied in the two organizations to the rule that players under contract are NOT to be mentioned by name even though there may be interest. The issue is very specific and has been clouded over by the lack of application of consequence. The Leaf's actions were inappropriate. To open the door for blatant tampering is unbelievable.
The Toronto Sports Network has a vested interest in their relationship with the Leafs so it shouldn't come as a surprise that they would downplay the significance of this issue. The NHL also kowtows to the Leafs so the lack of consequence is hardly a surprise.
An acknowledgment that this shouldn't have happened should have been the minimum. Obviously, that isn't going to happen. To add insult to injury we now have the equivalent of a middle finger salute with the eastern media's comments that the Canucks over reacted or that they were "whining".
I can hardly wait to hear the reaction when the skate is on the other foot.
Posted on 10/7 7:26 PM | IP: 24.71.45.246
Tampering needs to be redefined, now if Burke made them an offer under contract that might be something different, talking is just talk. It's stuff like this that puts the Hockey in "the background" when the game should be the focus. "Tampering" is not hockey it becomes litigation current events. Last time I checked litigation current events is not a sport.
Posted on 10/7 7:41 PM | IP: 66.25.41.122
Here's part of Daly's statement as reported by tsn.ca;
"That Ron Wilson, Head Coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs, violated the provisions of NHL By-Law 15 relating to inappropriate public comments by speaking generally to his Club's potential interest in negotiating with Daniel and Henrik Sedin prior to such time as those players' existing contracts with Vancouver had expired. The League has imposed a fine on the Maple Leafs' organization as a result;....."
Big whoop, richest team in the league gets a modest fine and warned to be more careful in the future. That's like making Jabba the Hut miss a meal. The Leafs next available 2nd round entry draft pick would be more appropriate.
The Nucks did pursue the pattern of conduct argument as I suggested but were denied.
Bylaw 15 states tampering to be: "The making or causing to be made through any medium, public or private, any statement indicating any intention or desire of or interest in acquiring the services (of a player on another club)."
Obvious to me that talking is not just talk when it is in direct contravention of League Rules.
Posted on 10/7 8:08 PM | IP: 24.71.45.246
"inappropriate public comments" did he curse or "slanderize" ? This is idiotcy for a fine, has any other team been fined for verbal comments relating to contracts?
Posted on 10/7 8:09 PM | IP: 66.25.41.122
It has come to what i wanted and what i expected. Although i didnt expect the NHL to rule on this matter that fast, looks a bit suspicios.
Anyways, as long as Burkie has to keep his mouth shout now when it comes to Canucks players i am more than happy, it will be a tough penalty at him anyways.
This post was edited on 10/8 12:33 AM by Peter10
Posted on 10/8 12:32 AM | IP: 88.74.181.153
Not that i know of upice, but usually whenever you hear a GM that has been asked about a certain player of a different team, he will state that he cant talk about this player because of tampering, so i suppose the league has given them some strict rules/guidelines about it.
Posted on 10/8 12:36 AM | IP: 88.74.181.153
To me verbalness isn't part of tampering because the individual(s) aren't actually making any transaction to alter a current contract. It would be almost safe to say it's speculation.
Posted on 10/8 7:29 AM | IP: 66.25.41.122
Selective quoting anybody? You missed the part that the Leafs were fined $25,000 for their actions.
Good on the league. The Leafs got off lightly but Burkie and Wilson are idiots for opening their mouths and an example had to be made.
They really should just concentrate on building a team because they've got their work cut out for them there.
Posted on 10/8 7:44 AM | IP: 203.18.176.243
You know upice, CMIIW, you mentioned that you didn't like the word "tampering" or that the bylaw should be changed. I agree 100%.
One it's inflammatory. Two, "tampering" is a criminal law term as in "witness tampering" "jury tampering" and "product tampering."
In most States and Provinces you can recover damages if somebody interferes with your business relationships. The NHL should call it what it is, "tortuous interference with a business relationship."
Let's say a former girlfriend calls your boss and talks smack about you and your employer takes some adverse action against you. Same thing. Interfering with a business relationship.
So like a scorned woman, who plots some devious plan to get you back, the Leafs are interfering with the Nucks business relationships and should be punished.
Oh, Leafs Nation: Yes I am calling out Burkey for fighting like a girl ;)
Posted on 10/8 8:15 AM | IP: 24.205.180.38
The skate has already been on the other foot Sir - Burkie asked the NHL to intervene when Lowe made a joke about going after Perry - he's allowed to do it but nobody else can.
Burkie won't shut up - he's loves to hear himself speak way too much - but like I said he should just concentrate on building a team, something he looks to be doing a less than satisfactory job at.
Posted on 10/8 8:28 AM | IP: 203.18.176.243
I am still looking forward to the next instance. I do miss Burkie's sound bites in Vancouver. At least when he's done in Leafland, he will make for some interesting television. Maybe take over Don Cherry's spot. Jennifer will have to coordinate his clothes though.
Posted on 10/8 8:33 AM | IP: 24.71.45.246
Thrash....?CMIIW? I understand the ruling, didn't need an interpretation and it's not the same thing. Tampering is an action word; something concretely has to be done. In Burke's case he didn't do any action, he spoke. Burke was't talking smack to anybody's boss. I can handle the girlfriend and the verbage. But if your boss is listening to your girlfriend to make job decision then find a new girlfriend.
Posted on 10/8 8:44 AM | IP: 66.25.41.122
Big deal on the fine. The entire Canuck fan base was calling for far worse. The league can use the $25K to pay the costs for time wasted on this issue.
Two loud guys in a city where every word is fed through a media megaphone the size of the province... it's bound to happen.
Posted on 10/8 9:48 AM | IP: 24.114.255.83
Ian lol
Posted on 10/8 9:55 AM | IP: 66.25.41.122
Oh please. Suddenly because the Leafs did it tampering has become the greatest evil known to mankind.
Wilson was guilty when he made the comments about the Leafs "likely" being interested in the Sedins and the league found as such and fined the team. It was pretty weak tampering given the assumed interest the media had been flogging for weeks and the way he phrased it as a hypothetical, but it was there.
But Burke's comments about the Vancouver offer for Hedman? Anyone who thinks that is tampering is grasping at reasons to slam Burke. It was unprofessional and likely ran counter to the "code" among GM's but in no way violates By Law 15, and yes I read the By Law paying attention to 'directly or indirectly'. (By Law's linked below) What you need to pay attention to is the fact that tampering as defined by the By Laws requires that the offending team is negotiating for or expressing an interest in acquiring the services of the player or employee in question. Burke didn't say he was after the Vancouver players he named. If the Tampa GM gave Burke that list of names and then Burke released it they could charge Tampa with tampering, but not the Leafs.
As for the Anaheim situation, present some evidence. People can argue that the way Burke, Nonis and Allaire ended up in TO would have required that the Leafs interest was communicated while they were still under contract but that isn't evidence.
The reality is that this stuff is going on constantly (some more subtly than others) and no one says boo. We all salivate over trade rumours, but if they have any legitimacy, where do you think they are coming from? Bob MacKenzie isn't talking to team officials to find out his stuff? Yeah, right.
Well said Janus. I don't understand why this is so difficult for others to understand and really it just reeks of a group of posters who have a very big bone to pick with Burke, Wilson and the Leafs who we all get are generally hated outside of Leafs nation. Too bad Leafs nation is so G.D. huge, huh? ;)
The accusation that either guy tampered is such a joke it's not even funny. Tampering involves showing proof that a team is talking to a player while under contract to another team. Talking ABOUT another player on another team is NOT tampering.
Any GM in this league could go out there and talk about another player and it's not tampering. Some play it safe and never do, but others talk about it openly.. Boston is famous for this... other GM's will refer to players mentioned in a deal.. the Bolts did it to Gainey this summer with the Lecavs talk. Obviously the league and the other team does not like it but it is NOT tampering.
Was Burke in Sweden? Yes. Was Burke getting ready to knock on the Sedin's door at 12 noon on July 1? Probably. Is that tampering. FOR FRICK SAKES ITS NOT. There could have been ten GM's camped out across the street from the Sedins house getting ready - that is not tampering. Can 'Nucks fans get it through their Starbucks soaked heads that there is a colossally large difference between what Burke/Wilson said and were doing and what would truly be tampering?
Had someone come out and said Burke or Wilson contacted the Sedins BEFORE noon on July 1 and had proof - then it's tampering.
Can you see the difference? I can see the difference. Not sure why the Vancouver media are as stupid as they are to not see the difference.
The fine was nothing more than to send a message to the Leafs to talk a bit less and yes, they should talk a lot less. In the end, Wilson said one thing on radio four months ago and the producers of Leafs TV left a nugget that was a bit too juicy in the recent show.. it's really not that bad, ok folks?
Posted on 10/8 2:02 PM | IP: 24.114.255.83
Why do I feel like I'm trying to get a conviction of a white guy for a crime committed against a black guy in Mississippi? No way Leafs Nation, and the usually reasonable Janus will agree but here goes. First Burke leaving the Ducks.
Nice try at confusing the issue Janus. Fact is, you're the only one who brought up Nonis & Allaire. I didn't. There was no interference with either and none alleged. Totally irrelevant.
As for Leafs tampering with Ducks and Brian Burke, it's obvious on its face. Look no further than Bylaw 15.1(a)(iii)(2) which states "written permission of the employing club" is required prior to communicating with any GM, Coach, Scout or any of their assistants.
So maybe you can 'splain how the Leafs didn't tamper with Burke when the Ducks have always maintained Leafs never asked for or were granted written permission to offer him a job?
As to your claim that the Leafs posting a video of Burke discussing a rumored trade involving member clubs and naming the players rumored to be involved isn't tampering is laughable.
And to all of Leafs Nation claiming and suggesting the NHL receives the fine, you're all flat out wrong about that as well. Bylaw 15.2(a) specifically directs any fine imposed for tampering the offending party, "be ordered to be paid to any entity other than the league."
Seems to me Leafs have crossed the line from a team with fans to a cult. Is deprogramming covered by that so called "free" health insurance ya got there?
Posted on 10/8 2:36 PM | IP: 24.205.180.38
I wasn't interpreting anything for you. I was stating MY case after agreeing with you that Bylaw 15 is poorly worded. Man, complete a degree and people think you've all sudden got a big head, sheesh.
The girlfriend metaphor was not anything personal pertaining to you. Just a metaphor I used to set up a laugh. Burke does fight like a girl.
Action word? Is that like a verb? Since when is speaking about another team's players not an action? Speaking requires action, first most people think before they speak or post. Then they move their lips or keypunch.
Again, I agree with you "tampering" is poor choice of words. Applying a commonly understood criminal term in a civil context is inflammatory as evidenced by this thread.
Posted on 10/8 4:35 PM | IP: 24.205.180.38
LOL...my bad.
Posted on 10/8 4:55 PM | IP: 66.25.41.122
There are two clauses of significance in Bylaw 15.1: Section 15.1 (a), which states that "no member club or any officer, shareholder, partner, employee, agent or representative thereof shall -- directly or indirectly -- tamper, negotiate with, make an offer to or discuss employment with any player or his agent or representative to whom another club has either the professional rights or the right to negotiate."
This is the clause you appear hung up on. At no point have I argued that the Leafs had any formal negotiations with the twins. If that's your basis for denying that tampering took place, fair enough. That isn't the issue.
Section 15.1 (c) adds that the "making or causing to be made, through any medium, public or private, any statement indicating any intention or desire of or interest in acquiring the services of any person" without the club's permission is against the rules.
This is the point of contention. Whether it's called tampering or interference in the negotiation process is moot. The fact remains that both Wilson and Burke were in breach of this clause. You mentioned the need for proof. For crap sake, they made their comments on camera.
There are two distinct points of view in the posts. To suggest that those of us who have focused on Section 15.1 (c) have a very big bone to pick with Burke, Wilson and the Leafs is demeaning. It's a matter of principle which the League endorsed with the fine being levied.
I have no problem with the Leafs hoping to sign the Sedins. It would be a natural course of action for Burke to fly to Sweden to try and get a leg up on other teams. Could there have been other GMs waiting in the weeds? It seems highly likely. That said, I have no idea why that is thrown out there as it has nothing to do with the central issue.
"Had someone come out and said Burke or Wilson contacted the Sedins BEFORE noon on July 1 and had proof - then it's tampering." Absolutely, but no one has accused them of doing so.
Sorry to disillusion you but not everyone out west has their head soaked in Starbucks. I found it got in the way of expressing an informed opinion. Of course, one can always throw out an insult like the Vancouver media being stupid if the opinions they express are different from your own. One can also gloss over the fact that the NHL agreed with them. Don't confuse the size of the fine with whether or not the Leafs did something wrong.
Can you see the difference? I can see the difference. Not sure why the Leaf's Nation are as stupid as they are to not see the difference. (Sorry, but I couldn't resist and you had that one coming.)
Your final paragraph actually addresses the issue but it also explains why there is such a difference of opinion.
"The fine was nothing more than to send a message to the Leafs to talk a bit less and yes, they should talk a lot less. In the end, Wilson said one thing on radio four months ago and the producers of Leafs TV left a nugget that was a bit too juicy in the recent show.. it's really not that bad, ok folks?"
To expect Burke to talk less is right up there with the expectation of winning the lottery. I have always loved his sound bites and miss hearing them on a more regular basis. It isn't a matter of them talking less but following the League's rules and not going public with their strategies for players under contract. You don't see this as cause for concern and I do.
Posted on 10/8 4:58 PM | IP: 24.71.45.246
Sir Rodney don't you think the article should be redefined....What Burke did was talk, he didn't tamper with a contract.
Posted on 10/8 5:03 PM | IP: 66.25.41.122
Not particularly. Do you really want teams openly and publicly discussing their intentions to go after your players? If you are in negotiations, that player is off limits until one of two things happens: - his rights are acquired through a trade of some sort. - permission is granted for a player's agent to seek alternatives.
When Ohlund became available on July 1st it only took minutes for him to sign a complicated multiyear contract with Tampa Bay. There is no possible way that Tampa spoke to Ohlund or his agent for the first time on July 1st. That was set up behind the scenes and no one really got upset about it which surprised me. We have teams giving draft picks for the rights to a player so that they could hash out a contract before the player goes on the open market. This didn't happen with the Canucks which suggests to me that they had given approval to Tampa but it wasn't made public. Fair enough. That's working within the system.
I think part of the problem is our perception as fans that we have a "right" to know what our teams are going to do. That is the basis for the rumor market that has evolved. It's harmless fun. To have a GM or Coach go public is quite different and has no place in a professional association. The problem with Burkie is that he loves the attention he gets when he says something controversial. If he had kept his mouth shut, we wouldn't be having this debate. He is playing the Toronto media for all its worth and they are gobbling it up. What you should watch carefully is what he does as opposed to what he tries to do.
Posted on 10/8 7:29 PM | IP: 24.71.45.246
You guys really need to stop playing the "Leafs homer fan" card whenever its convenient. Its really a weak way of dismissing our point of view on this.
The Leafs never directly contacted any of the players involved in the discussion... its as simple as that.
It wasn't tampering, it's obvious and no the Leafs don't get favors from the league... see: Jonas Frogren contract situation.
Posted on 10/9 7:07 AM | IP: 24.114.255.83
Who was calling for worse? I'm part of 'the entire Canuck fan base' and I wasn't.
Might want to ease up a bit on painting everybody with the same brush. I think the punishment is fair - they were never going to do anything major about it but at least Burkie has to admit he was wrong.
Posted on 10/9 7:14 AM | IP: 203.18.176.243
Well the league would disagree - the Leafs were fined for their talk about the Sedins - I guess it is tampering after all.
You can have your point of view that it wasn't tampering, fact is, you are incorrect - the league who makes the decision said it was. You can't keep saying it wasn't tampering when the decision has already been handed down - the Leafs tampered.
You can argue that it wasn't bad tampering which I agree with - but you can't say it wasn't tampering.
Now can we move on to something else? I know you can't say anything bad about the Leafs in here without being called a 'Leaf hater' (which is a really weak argument) but enough already.
Posted on 10/9 7:18 AM | IP: 203.18.176.243
If you really believe all what you said you are another brain dead leaf fan.
There was tampering involved plain and simple and the league agreed....
This post was edited on 10/9 8:16 AM by Shark Attack
Posted on 10/9 8:15 AM | IP: 192.146.217.50
Actually you sound more like Marsha Clark trying to get an OJ conviction in Cali. Waving your arms and repeating "But EVERYONE knows he's guilty" won't win you your case...
I assumed Nonis and Allaire were lumped in as well, but Burke probably had that arranged before he took the Leaf job so that couldn't be tampering. . I don't know what the Ducks are claiming now about permission, but based on my recollection and the TSN article linked below Burke resigned as GM and was kept on as a 'special adviser' with the right to negotiate another job - BEFORE getting offered the Leaf job. Did he know the Leafs were interested when he turned down a contract extension? I doubt there were aborigines on remote islands in the South Pacific who didn't know but unless that can be tied to people working for the Leafs you can't rule there was tampering. Blasted insistence on evidence, eh? Sorry Thrash but the glove just don't fit.
Laugh all you want but Burke talking about players Vancouver offered to Tampa (real or imaginary) is not and can not be tampering. Tampering requires that the tamperer is expressing an interest in the assets of the victim. Based on your argument if I said I saw a guy steal an old lady's purse I'm guilty of theft.
And yes, my tax-funded universal health and tax-funded public broadcaster news help protect me from the evil rays being beamed at us from Rupert Murdoch's brainwashing satellites, thank-you very much.
With Nonis and Allaire it wasnt tampering. Nonis had an out clause in his contract and everyone (including the Ducks) knew that he would follow Burke wherever he goes unless he got a GM job. Allaires contract with Anaheim was up if i remember correctly.
As for Burke, it was as obvious as i could get that the Leafs had strong interest in him and he knew it. With the Toronto media, the Leafs didnt even have to talk to him to let it him know, so i dont really think it was tampering.
I also dont believe Toronto was that stupid to contact the Sedins. However under the current rules, no GM, coach or whatever is allowed to express their interest in other teams players who are still under contract. If they do so, its tampering plain and simple.
Had the Leafs talked contract to Daniel and Henrik or their agent, they would have been fined with loss of draft picks and some millions but Wilson just said he would like to have them on his team so its only a $25k fine. Small crime = small fine.
I am still not sure if Burkes talk about Burrows and Bieksa to Tampa is tampering at all but its inappropriate. I dont understand why they did not filter that one out before airing it on LeafsTV, that even said its just 2nd hand information makes it weirder.
Posted on 10/9 8:55 AM | IP: 92.78.5.142
Thanks. You just proved my point.
The league agreed? With a fine? Ummmmmm....
If I am brain dead then you are a mindless prick.
Posted on 10/9 9:10 AM | IP: 24.114.255.83
Inappropriate for Wilson to say what he said and Leafs TV to air what Burke said? 100% agree. Not tampering? 100% agree.
The funny thing is that even though Burke said what he said, it was Leafs TV who chose to air it.. talk like that happens all the time in war rooms across the league... its just never supposed to be aired.
Is Burke responsible? Sure, but as President of the club that is responsible in part for Leafs TV, not as the guy who said what he said.
Posted on 10/9 9:17 AM | IP: 24.114.255.83
Wilsons comments were in fact tampering, eventhough just minor tampering, thats what the league rules say, wether you like it or not Ian.
As i said before, i believe most Canucks fans agree that those comments did not require any fine other than a slap on the wrist - like "shut up" and thats it. No one ever wanted a first rounder or something in compensation only that the Leafs play within the rules. Its debatable if the tampering rules make sense or not but they are there and so they have to be followed and Wilson did not.
I dont know why we are making such a big fuss about it. I am happy with the ruling, its all i wanted. No real harm was done and the Leafs were advised to restrain from stuff like this in the future.
Posted on 10/9 9:33 AM | IP: 92.78.5.142
The Marcia Clark joke is not appreciated. It's insulting.
You claim to have read Bylaw 15. Refer to the heading, Bylaws, Section 15 followed in all caps bold type it states, "TAMPERING or NEGOTIATING WITH PLAYERS AND CERTAIN NON-PLAYING EMPLOYEES OF OTHER CLUBS" on page 46.
Tampering is clearly differentiated from "negotiating with." The broad term, tampering, refers to any interference by a member club with the employer-employee relationship of another club.
When the Leafs posted the video for public consumption of Burke mentioning player's names rumored to be involved in a trade for Tampa Bay's #2 pick, the Leafs were in fact tampering with the employer-employee relationship of another club.
Get it now? The acts, tampering and negotiating with are exclusive.
As to the so-called "thorough investigation" that the NHL purports to have conducted, both the Sedin's and their agent seem confused that the NHL didn't bother to contact them.
The Toronto Maple Leafs, Brian Burke and the NHL have clearly compromised the integrity of the game.
Posted on 10/9 10:03 AM | IP: 24.205.180.38
Wait a minute..... What about Vancouver did they paticipate in the dialouge of the alleged tampering issue, and if so, why didn't they come out with a warning statement that the conversation might be tampering.
Posted on 10/9 10:08 AM | IP: 66.25.41.122
Thrasher as usual you are right on with this and have a very good grasp of he English Language and its nuances......
Posted on 10/9 10:12 AM | IP: 192.146.217.50
Maybe you Pete, but lots of Canucks fans I read and heard from were calling for far more than a slap on the wrist. I think most of the responses on other message boards tell the tale..
.. like some were talking about plans as to what to do with the 1st round pick they would be getting. :)
Posted on 10/9 10:26 AM | IP: 24.114.255.83
You should know by now, that lots of these other boards are crowded by either young kids who still have to learn the game or old idiots and(hopefully) do not represent the majority of Canucks fans.
If you take a look at the bigger picture, there wasnt anything else that could be reasonably expected out of this and although i was really pissed off with Wilson and Burke because of their comments i dont think a stiffer penalty could have been justified. However you have to admit, that if there is a repeat of what has happened, Toronto should be severly fined now that they have been warned.
As rikster said (was it him?), there is a pattern in all of this, as it was the 3rd incident now, although i would give Wilson the benefit of doubt (guys who heard that interview said, he sounded like he had a beer or 2 before it) Burke still seems a bit bitter in regards to the Canucks.
Latest Team Rankings
Mobile
. I don't know what the Ducks are claiming now about permission, but based on my recollection and the TSN article linked below Burke resigned as GM and was kept on as a 'special adviser' with the right to negotiate another job - BEFORE getting offered the Leaf job. Did he know the Leafs were interested when he turned down a contract extension? I doubt there were aborigines on remote islands in the South Pacific who didn't know but unless that can be tied to people working for the Leafs you can't rule there was tampering. Blasted insistence on evidence, eh? Sorry Thrash but the glove just don't fit.