confusing

[txomisc]

i am confused as to why players who were injured during the world cup will be paid by their nhl clubs during the lockout? i can definately see why someone who was injured playing in an nhl game would get paid but the world cup is totally different. anyone have a real explanation of why these guys are going to get paid?

Click to read more...

 

[shveik]

i am confused as to why players who were injured during the world cup will be paid by their nhl clubs during the lockout? i can definately see why someone who was injured playing in an nhl game would get paid but the world cup is totally different. anyone have a real explanation of why these guys are going to get paid?

The World Cup is an NHL event. I admit it doesn't make a lot of sense, but neither do other things. Such as players not being paid for the playoffs. It makes more sense when you consider this: players aren't paid to play in the Cup, NHL collects the gate revenues and TV fees. Maybe it's fair if NHL pays the injured players.

 

[txomisc]

hmm it is an nhl event? what about all the nonnhlers in it
if thats the case and i was a team owner i would not have let any of my guys compete in the thing. that way they couldnt get hurt and i wouldnt have to pay them. Seems like a stupid move to risk a player getting hurt and then having to pay him for a season you knew wasnt gonna happen

 

[tantalum]

Any NHL players under contract before the CBA expired are covered under that CBA until the next CBA is finalized. Under this past CBA all injured and rehab players must be paid their NHL salary until they are medically cleared to play...if a rookie gets called up for one game and gets hurt he gets his NHL salary until he's healed even if he was never going to play another NHL game that year I believe. Even if the contract is insured then the team is on the hook for a portion of the contract (insurance does not kick in until a certain number of games have been missed by the player). Not all contracts are insured. For example Brad Werenka's career was ended to a head injury in the 2000/01 season. He was under contract to the flames for the next couple of years and the contract was not insured so the flames were on the hook for that fairly substantial salary those years. Injured players can also not be released by a team or put on waivers.

As for players hurt during the World Cup...it was a tournament put on by the NHL and NHLPA with the cooperation of the IIHF. NHL players under contract are always covered by the CBA and through the agreements of the NHLPA, NHL and IIHF are allowed to play in international tournaments (Olympics, World Championships, World Junior, World Cuop). Basicallt, the NHLPA and NHL have agreements that players participate in these events as if they are NHL events...a player gets hurt the team honours the CBA. Without these agreements we would never see players under contract allowed to go to these tournaments. It is also the reason you see so many players not under contract decline to participate in these events....they need to personally insure themselves in case of injury and loss of livelihood. For multimillion dollar athletes in a sport where there are plenty of injuries it can be significant money, especially if the player has any injury history whatsoever. The players from other leagues would be protected by their CBA or insurance or whatever the equivalents for their league/the IIHF are.

And it isn't just these tournaments. The CBA of course protects players all year round. Fall off a ladder at home and wreck your back during the summer you still get paid your salary when Oct. 15th rolls around and you still can't play.

There are also some things written into contracts that the player can't participate in high risk activities or they void that CBA clause.

Any player who signs a contract with another team during this lockout and gets hurt I don't think would be covered as it would not be a NHL/NHLPA sanctioned event. They should be covered by that leagues CBA or their own insurance.

It makes sense and it is proper.

While Nolan is hurt he gets paid anyways as his entire contract is guaranteed in case of lockout. With the injury the leafs may actually be better for it as the insurnace may cover more of it.

 

[thinkwild]

It makes sense and it is proper.

While Nolan is hurt he gets paid anyways as his entire contract is guaranteed in case of lockout. With the injury the leafs may actually be better for it as the insurnace may cover more of it.

That does make good sense thanks. It was also NHL rules and refs and i think they actually, gasp, negotiated a split of revenues between NHL and PA. As if they were partners. Kind of ironic eh. They had cost certainty. One of those little insecurities in my arguments ill confess to you. Im still a blind adherent to PA propoganda though.

Im not sure the characterization of the Nolan contract is accurate though. I thought what he had was a deal that if enough games of the season were cancelled, he had the right to add an option year to his contract or something. And the is a couple months deductible on the insurance probably too.