Guest 1970 Habs Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 NHL hits Niedermayer: The National Hockey League has fined Anaheim defenceman Scott Niedermayer a reported $500,000 for missing training camp last fall. The unprecedented fine was levied despite the fact that the Ducks gave Niedermayer permission to miss camp - and a good portion of the regular season - while he was trying to figure out whether he wanted to continue playing. While the Niedermayer and the Ducks are both crying foul, it seems that the NHL is trying to crack down on the practice of players taking time off at the beginning of the season and coming back to help their teams during playoff drives. No word on whether similar fines are in the works for Teemu Selanne or Peter Forsberg. Source: http://www.canada.com/topics/sports/hockey...f92e&k=7103 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JL Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Excellent decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest feistyboy27 Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Excellent decision. I thought it was very harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GoHabsGo24 Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I think it is harsh as well. I mean 500,000$ is a lot for a hockey player. Im not sure how much Neidermayer makes, but I think he has just a one-year contract, so I dont think it is over 2.5Million. I know it is wrong to do what he did, but still, c'mon. If they want to make a rule like this, do it after the playoffs, not mid-season. Like the Avery rule, sure it is bad, but it was funny as hell while I attended the game, and you should make the rules after the season. Mid-season is like saying Colin Campbell wants the Rangers to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shamrun Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 NHL hits Niedermayer: The National Hockey League has fined Anaheim defenceman Scott Niedermayer a reported $500,000 for missing training camp last fall. The unprecedented fine was levied despite the fact that the Ducks gave Niedermayer permission to miss camp - and a good portion of the regular season - while he was trying to figure out whether he wanted to continue playing. While the Niedermayer and the Ducks are both crying foul, it seems that the NHL is trying to crack down on the practice of players taking time off at the beginning of the season and coming back to help their teams during playoff drives. No word on whether similar fines are in the works for Teemu Selanne or Peter Forsberg. Source: http://www.canada.com/topics/sports/hockey...f92e&k=7103 I agree with that decision, however there should of been forwarning at the very least. And if your doing it to scotty you have to do it to all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JL Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I agree with that decision, however there should of been forwarning at the very least. And if your doing it to scotty you have to do it to all of them. I think it's just the start of it. Others will have to think twice before "taking a few months off" before coming back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmash Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I don't mind the decision, although I'm not sure it was necessary. As far as I know he already lost all the salary for the time he spent suspended. If it were up to me I wouldn't have let him back at all. The situation is already delicate with someone like Selanee, throw in the fact that Niedermayer was under contract and broke that contract by refusing to report, he shouldn't have been allowed to play this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wayne Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 CP TORONTO - Scott Niedermayer's season is over but just how much he will earn in salary remains in question. The Anaheim Ducks star defenceman already lost about US$2 million in wages from his $6.75-million salary for missing the first two months of the season. He was suspended without pay until he returned in mid-December. But in addition, as revealed by the New York Post over the weekend, Niedermayer's salary was also reduced by $500,000 for missing training camp on the basis of a clause in the collective bargaining agreement, However, multiple sources told The Canadian Press on Monday that the NHL and NHL Players' Association are working towards a resolution that would see Niedermayer recoup most, if not all, of the $500,000 and also clarify what implications this has on the Ducks' salary cap. In the meantime, the 34-year-old Niedermayer has yet to decide whether he will return for the last year of a contract that once again pays him $6.75 million next season. The Norris Trophy winner wrestled with the decision before finally coming back in December, only to see his defending Stanley Cup champion team lose to the Dallas Stars in the first round of the playoffs. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=235404 BOB MCKENZIE The NHL has not fined Scott Niedermayer $500,000 for missing training camp, as has been reported, but the Anaheim Ducks have. Confused? That's understandable. As the New York Post reported on Sunday, Niedermayer has indeed been fined $500,000 because he missed training camp, but the fine was levied not by the NHL but the Ducks themselves. And according to the CBA, it is the Ducks who are mandated to fine Niedermayer for his decision to temporarily retire and miss training camp. When a player misses training camp, according to the rules and regulations of the new CBA, the club has two choices: One, they can say, no problem, take training camp off if you like, take as much time as you like to decide whether you want to play again and when you've made up your mind, let us know and we'll welcome you back with open arms, although in the meantime your salary will count against the team's salary cap, even though it's not actually being paid to the player. (Most people would be under the impression that's what the Ducks did, but most people would be wrong. It may have seemed that way because GM Brian Burke was more than happy to await Niedermayer's decision and work to the player's timeline.) Or two, they can say, you take as much time as you need, miss training camp if you like, but understand this: the CBA clearly spells out that if our hockey club is going to get salary cap relief in the amount of your salary and allow us to sign Mathieu Schneider to fill the void created by your soul-searching, we have to suspend you without pay and if we do that and you miss all of training camp, we have no choice but to fine you the $500,000. It was an easy decision for the Ducks. They couldn't afford the first scenario because to do that they would have had to count Niedermayer's salary against their cap, and they wouldn't have been able to sign Schneider, so they had to suspend Niedermayer. The minute they did that, and he missed all of training camp, the $500,000 fine was automatic. Niedermayer didn't have the Ducks' permission to miss training camp. Not at all. That's why he was suspended. It's not discretionary. And Niedermayer and his representatives were made well aware of that by Burke in the discussions prior to the player making the decision to shut it down for awhile. The intent of the rule is fairly obvious - to discourage players under contract, not to be confused with unrestricted free agents such as Teemu Selanne, who can do as they see fit, from doing what Niedermayer did. That is, take off training camp, take off half the season and decide to come back for the stretch drive, all with the seeming blessing of the club. Outside of Anaheim, not many hockey fans or hockey people - read rival GMs - were happy with the Niedermayer situation. They thought the Ducks were getting a soft touch, being able to put Niedermayer in cold storage, take his salary off the cap and use it to sign a replacement like Schneider and then make the necessary adjustments to fit Niedermayer under the cap once he decided to come back. But the entire scenario was conducted to the letter of the CBA law, including the $500,000 fine to Niedermayer. Were the Ducks eager to mete out the $500,000 fine? No, but the rules are the rules. It's all well and good to be critical of the league - let me pull out a hanky for how poor Scott Niedermayer has been treated - but the last time I checked, there are 29 other teams that expect the terms and conditions of the CBA to be met and executed. And let us also remember the NHL Players' Association signed off on this CBA. It's not like someone just made up the rule last week for the hell of it. Which, by the way, is the reason those other 29 teams may not be too happy with the league right now. And rightfully so. Because the league, in concert with the NHL Players' Association, is apparently negotiating to ensure that some or all of Niedermayer's fine doesn't actually have to be paid. I am still trying to understand the rationale on this one. The rules are spelled out clearly. Well, maybe not that clearly - have you read the CBA? - but clear enough that if you read it, Niedermayer should be obliged to pay $500,000 for the right to put his contract on hold until he was good and ready to play. That's certainly the expectation from the other clubs in the league. Sources say the league is treating this Niedermayer situation - the first of its kind - as a one-off conundrum and trying to settle this amicably for all involved. I am all for amicable but exactly how amicable that is for the other 29 teams is open to debate. But sources say that while the league and PA are discussing how to temper or eliminate the penalty to Niedermayer, the rule will remain in place and be enforced to the letter of the law from now on. If there's a reason to be critical of the league, this is it. That's where the righteous indignation should be aimed. Either it's a good rule that should stay or it's a bad rule that should be terminated. Make up your mind. The NHL and the NHLPA need to decide what it's going to be, but it sure doesn't seem that Scott Niedermayer or the Ducks are being unduly punished, not as near as I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mcdonald19 Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I think fines are suitable if the player has no physical reason not to play? Forsberg for example was injured pretty bad. A thought crossed my mind where by all means Niedermeyer could have based his decision on how well the Ducks were doing at the time? Under the current system a player could have said halfwat through the season, "We wont make the playoffs, I'll not bother coming back". I'm not saying that is what he has done by the way, its just under the current system this could happen. I think fines could be a good idea but they need to be careful how they govern it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigsby Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 thanks for the post wayne, that makes a lot more sense to me. i was wondering how the nhl could fine a player for missing camp etc. but yet still allow them to participate in the allstar game; that (still) makes little sense to me. i think if you're going to fine a player for it, meaning consider it an infraction, than why let him take so much time decide? why not minimize the fine, if need be, and move up the deadline by a matter of months? imho, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmash Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I think fines are suitable if the player has no physical reason not to play? Forsberg for example was injured pretty bad. A thought crossed my mind where by all means Niedermeyer could have based his decision on how well the Ducks were doing at the time? Under the current system a player could have said halfwat through the season, "We wont make the playoffs, I'll not bother coming back". I'm not saying that is what he has done by the way, its just under the current system this could happen. I think fines could be a good idea but they need to be careful how they govern it. Another difference is Forserberg was a free agent. Don't confuse the two situations. Each has their own set of problems, but what Nidermayer did was against the rules and a breech of contract, what Selanee and Forseberg (and others) did may not seem fair to fans of other teams, but was 100% legit under the CBA. i think if you're going to fine a player for it, meaning consider it an infraction, than why let him take so much time decide? why not minimize the fine, if need be, and move up the deadline by a matter of months? imho, at least. I wouldn't say the Ducks necessarily did "let him". In public Burke said he was okay with it, likely to keep rlations good so he would eventually return. But the minute they decided to suspend him, they were saying it's not alright. Considering this fine is in the CBA and it's spelled out pretty clearly, he should pay it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigsby Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Another difference is Forserberg was a free agent. Don't confuse the two situations. Each has their own set of problems, but what Nidermayer did was against the rules and a breech of contract, what Selanee and Forseberg (and others) did may not seem fair to fans of other teams, but was 100% legit under the CBA. I wouldn't say the Ducks necessarily did "let him". In public Burke said he was okay with it, likely to keep rlations good so he would eventually return. But the minute they decided to suspend him, they were saying it's not alright. Considering this fine is in the CBA and it's spelled out pretty clearly, he should pay it. that's true. i didn't think of it that way - but management's only means of control over the situation is the fine? hmmmm. considering he still didn't 'decide' for months, that's pretty disrespectful to the team. i thought the team was obligated under nhl rules to suspend him for not attending camp and the beginning of the season and so did it as a matter of course - not to show their disapproval. (not to mention recoup some of the cost of not being able to sign another player to compensate for the loss...but i'm not sure if that was the case.) in any case, i think he should absolutely pay every penny - not only because it's a legit fine but because it's hardly something the league should encourage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vegasrick Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Letting Neidermeyer get away with not paying the fine reminds me of how the reffing is done in the post-CBA NHL. A penalty should be a penalty. The CBA contains the rules that took so long to come to agreement, that we lost a season, right? Now we're not going to follow them? Sorry, Scott, you owe the fine. Pay the two dollars. Next time, just retire.....then come back like Mario did. (Actually, that might not change anything.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest js2 Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 The guy made like $4 million this season so I'm sure it's not going to hurt his pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1970 Habs Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Niedermayer fined by Ducks, not NHL The NHL has not fined Scott Niedermayer $500,000 for missing training camp, as has been reported, but the Anaheim Ducks have. Confused? That's understandable. As the New York Post reported on Sunday, Niedermayer has indeed been fined $500,000 because he missed training camp, but the fine was levied not by the NHL but the Ducks themselves. And according to the CBA, it is the Ducks who are mandated to fine Niedermayer for his decision to temporarily retire and miss training camp. When a player misses training camp, according to the rules and regulations of the new CBA, the club has two choices: One, they can say, no problem, take training camp off if you like, take as much time as you like to decide whether you want to play again and when you've made up your mind, let us know and we'll welcome you back with open arms, although in the meantime your salary will count against the team's salary cap, even though it's not actually being paid to the player. (Most people would be under the impression that's what the Ducks did, but most people would be wrong. It may have seemed that way because GM Brian Burke was more than happy to await Niedermayer's decision and work to the player's timeline.) Or two, they can say, you take as much time as you need, miss training camp if you like, but understand this: the CBA clearly spells out that if our hockey club is going to get salary cap relief in the amount of your salary and allow us to sign Mathieu Schneider to fill the void created by your soul-searching, we have to suspend you without pay and if we do that and you miss all of training camp, we have no choice but to fine you the $500,000. Were the Ducks eager to mete out the $500,000 fine? No, but the rules are the rules. It's all well and good to be critical of the league - let me pull out a hanky for how poor Scott Niedermayer has been treated - but the last time I checked, there are 29 other teams that expect the terms and conditions of the CBA to be met and executed. And let us also remember the NHL Players' Association signed off on this CBA. It's not like someone just made up the rule last week for the hell of it. Which, by the way, is the reason those other 29 teams may not be too happy with the league right now. And rightfully so. Because the league, in concert with the NHL Players' Association, is apparently negotiating to ensure that some or all of Niedermayer's fine doesn't actually have to be paid. Sources say the league is treating this Niedermayer situation - the first of its kind - as a one-off conundrum and trying to settle this amicably for all involved. I am all for amicable but exactly how amicable that is for the other 29 teams is open to debate. But sources say that while the league and PA are discussing how to temper or eliminate the penalty to Niedermayer, the rule will remain in place and be enforced to the letter of the law from now on. If there's a reason to be critical of the league, this is it. That's where the righteous indignation should be aimed. Either it's a good rule that should stay or it's a bad rule that should be terminated. Make up your mind. The NHL and the NHLPA need to decide what it's going to be, but it sure doesn't seem that Scott Niedermayer or the Ducks are being unduly punished, not as near as I can tell. Source: http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie/?id=235405 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chromedome Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Excellent decision. I agree completely JL.But they need to carry through and do the same with Forsberg and Selanne!It might also be a good idea to exact a similar penalty on the team as well.It's about time that professional sports teams are forced to abide by the notion that there is precious little honour in winning the prize with a "ringer"team rather than the one who "brought you to the dance"!!I feel just as strongly against the notion of the rent-a player strategy.I ,for one,would not relish being the one having to forego getting my name on the Cup in order to have my "team"win it with a temporary replacement for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ryanrdt Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Can anyone explain how this would impact Selanne? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wayne Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Can anyone explain how this would impact Selanne?it wouldn't... neither Selanne nor Forsberg nor Curtis Joseph did anything wrong... it's a completely different scenario... those players were FA, they weren't signed to any deals at the start of the season so they could do whatever they wanted... the CBA allows them to sign contracts to play the last half of the year so that's what they did, all above board... Niedermayer, on the other hand, had a binding contract for the year which he wasn't honouring until he felt like it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hatethoseleafs Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 I agree about the fine. Its a shame that the team isnt made responsible (Cap wise) for the full amount of the contract should they decide to allow him to play later on in the season. If this were indeed the case, then no way could the Ducks have afforded to take on that Cap hit and bring back Selanne to boot. Maybe if the player is aware of this in the first place,,, then he doesnt pull this kind of garbage knowing he might not have the option of choosing when to return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hatethoseleafs Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 For what?I don't get why it was such a big deal to him that he needed so long to decide, it's just one season. Or he could have even retired midseason, not the nicest thing to do, but all legit. Even if he just retired, after one year away from the game (the minimum after retiring), he could have returned. I don't really get what he did, especially at a relatively young age. It almost smells of some type of collusion between him and the team. It allowed Anaheim to pretty well keep last years team intact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1970 Habs Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 Another twist to the Saga. Niedermayer fined by Ducks, not NHL Which, by the way, is the reason those other 29 teams may not be too happy with the league right now. And rightfully so. Because the league, in concert with the NHL Players' Association, is apparently negotiating to ensure that some or all of Niedermayer's fine doesn't actually have to be paid. Source: http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie/?id=235405 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmash Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 It almost smells of some type of collusion between him and the team. It allowed Anaheim to pretty well keep last years team intact. I can't say it's impossible, but I honestly don't think there was a conspiracy here, it just happened to benefit the Ducks the way everything played up (except for them losing a promising young player to fit it all under the cap) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.