Player willing to pay fine for wearing special event item, team threatened with significant fine

[Moose Head]

Watching a raptors game and all the players on the bench are wearing black history tshirts. Meanwhile in the nhl they’re banning indigenous artwork and rainbow tape. NHL could use some of that progressiveness. No wonder the NBA left the nhl in the dust the last 40 years.

 

[daver]

Watching a raptors game and all the players on the bench are wearing black history tshirts. Meanwhile in the nhl they’re banning indigenous artwork and rainbow tape. NHL could use some of that progressiveness. No wonder the NBA left the nhl in the dust the last 40 years.

Wow, t-shirts. That's really going to move the needle.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Watching a raptors game and all the players on the bench are wearing black history tshirts. Meanwhile in the nhl they’re banning indigenous artwork and rainbow tape. NHL could use some of that progressiveness. No wonder the NBA left the nhl in the dust the last 40 years.

I mean I'm certainly not going to say THAT'S why the NBA is more popular than the NHL.

But yes - the NBA does a much much better job of letting it's p[layers have individual and unique personalities.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Wow, t-shirts. That's really going to move the needle.

If they’re not a big deal, then why were so many opposed to them?

 

[daver]

If they’re not a big deal, then why were so many opposed to them?

There are not a big deal because they don't do anything meaningful for whatever cause is being supported.

Some may oppose them due to this being a somewhat meaningless and artificial gesture by individuals and organizations who are positioned to do a lot more than virtue signal.

If you want to read something else into that, that is your choice.

 

[Krigsgaldr]

I get where the league is coming from in this, even if it doesn’t look great. This case is obviously fine. Start getting into special edition Israel or Palestine equipment, it gets hairy. All or nothing.

This has to be the way folks . I disagree with them fining him for wearing that mask and it’s a cool one I may add . But they can’t let him wear it without consequence then later have something come up later that would be more controversial . It’s unfortunate but it has to be all or nothing and in the world we live in today I’m afraid nothing is the only way to keep things from being a shit storm .

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

These are billionaire owners, there is no such thing as a "significant fine"

There is no realistic fine that an owner is going to give a single f*** about because they are billionaire owners.

 

[Moose Head]

I mean I'm certainly not going to say THAT'S why the NBA is more popular than the NHL.

But yes - the NBA does a much much better job of letting it's p[layers have individual and unique personalities.

No, but the NBA being a much more progressive league is a big reason they are more popular than the NHL. This is just one example. The NHL has has held itself back by being overly cautious and conservative.

 

[Moose Head]

This has to be the way folks . I disagree with them fining him for wearing that mask and it’s a cool one I may add . But they can’t let him wear it without consequence then later have something come up later that would be more controversial . It’s unfortunate but it has to be all or nothing and in the world we live in today I’m afraid nothing is the only way to keep things from being a shit storm .

You decide on a case by case basis. An outright ban is just laziness on the part of the NHL.

 

[daver]

No, but the NBA being a much more progressive league is a big reason they are more popular than the NHL. This is just one example. The NHL has has held itself back by being overly cautious and conservative.

Source? This seems as unprovable as someone saying that leagues were losing popularity because of their "progressiveness".

I would guess the vast majority of sports fans could care less about the "progressiveness" (a loaded term in any event) of their sport.

Most people realize that these are superficial gestures (the team ones at least, not so much Fleury's mask) serving to virtue signal.

 

[Moose Head]

Source? This seems as unprovable as someone saying that leagues were losing popularity because of their "progressiveness".

I would guess the vast majority of sports fans could care less about the "progressiveness" (a loaded term in any event) of their sport.

Most people realize that these are superficial gestures (the team ones at least, not so much Fleury's mask) serving to virtue signal.

I’m talking about progressiveness in how they sell their game

Example the NBA is very aggressive is selling their stars. The world knows who Jordan, Lebron and Magic are. The NBA has made basketball a world game. Only hockey fans know who Crosby, Lemieux and Mcdavid are. Gretzky broke the mold a bit, but there are large parts of world who have no idea who he is.

Another example. The NBA encourages its best players to participate in the Olympics. Pulling teeth is less painful for the NHL.

And yes, the NBA does better with ‘superficial’ gestures than the NHL and that makes their product more appealing to potential new fans.

There was a time when the NHL and NBA were on near equal footing. The NHL is just way to conservative and old school.

 

[daver]

I’m talking about progressiveness in how they sell their game

Example the NBA is very aggressive is selling their stars. The world knows who Jordan, Lebron and Magic are. The NBA has made basketball a world game. Only hockey fans know who Crosby, Lemieux and Mcdavid are. Gretzky broke the mold a bit, but there are large parts of world who have no idea who he is.

Another example. The NBA encourages its best players to participate in the Olympics. Pulling teeth is less painful for the NHL.

And yes, the NBA does better with ‘superficial’ gestures than the NHL and that makes their product more appealing to potential new fans.

There was a time when the NHL and NBA were on near equal footing. The NHL is just way to conservative and old school.

Meh, don't really care about how the league sells itself. Pro sports in general are going down the crapper to keep the attention of people whose attentions spans are 5 seconds.

Pandering towards "social justice" is dumb. Keep politics and sports separate.

Now, athletes dating celebs, that's something I can get behind.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

There are not a big deal because they don't do anything meaningful for whatever cause is being supported.

Some may oppose them due to this being a somewhat meaningless and artificial gesture by individuals and organizations who are positioned to do a lot more than virtue signal.

If you want to read something else into that, that is your choice.

I absolutely guarantee you that nobody was refusing to wear specialty warm-ups because they were too small of a positive message.

 

[daver]

I absolutely guarantee you that nobody was refusing to wear specialty warm-ups because they were too small of a positive message.

I thought you were talking about the fans. The league has gotten to a place where those who want to do something are free to while not forcing others to do it. I.e. "you can do your thing but don't make me also have to do your thing".

I was remarking that these gestures are symbolic at best, superficial at worst. I would rather see players and owners doing something more substantial but the media isn't interested in those stories, they only report on clickbait stories.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

I thought you were talking about the fans. The league has gotten to a place where those who want to do something are free to while not forcing others to also

The situation where we're at now is where something is now banned and the NHL has to overrule itself to not fine people who break the rules. Hardly a good place to be.

Also, I'd likewise bet anything that of the fans upset/annoyed/mad about the specialty jerseys the ratio between people that hated the message to people that were upset that they were too small of a gesture is a very big number to a very small number.

 

[daver]

The situation where we're at now is where something is now banned and the NHL has to overrule itself to not fine people who break the rules. Hardly a good place to be.

Also, I'd likewise bet anything that of the fans upset/annoyed/mad about the specialty jerseys the ratio between people that hated the message to people that were upset that they were too small of a gesture is a very big number to a very small number.

Effectively forcing players to wear the jerseys was a mistake. I believe the league has fixed that now.

Sports should just try to focus on sports and leave politics (and religion) out of it. If a player wants to leverage their public stature for something non-sports related, go for it. They just may have to be aware of league rules.

 

[daver]

Watching a raptors game and all the players on the bench are wearing black history tshirts. Meanwhile in the nhl they’re banning indigenous artwork and rainbow tape. NHL could use some of that progressiveness. No wonder the NBA left the nhl in the dust the last 40 years.

Some would say that there shouldn't be a black history month; that history is just history and doesn't need to be identified by race.

So maybe it is not as "progressive" as you think.

 

[HTFN]

Some would say that there shouldn't be a black history month; that history is just history and doesn't need to be identified by race.

So maybe it is not as "progressive" as you think.

Those people would be wrong, that's what you'd call a "post-racial" tactic that essentially seeks to sweep recognition under the rug now that things are "equal" and tries to immediately play that equality card to avoid acknowledging a role in what is really very recent history.

Effectively forcing players to wear the jerseys was a mistake. I believe the league has fixed that now.

Sports should just try to focus on sports and leave politics (and religion) out of it. If a player wants to leverage their public stature for something non-sports related, go for it. They just may have to be aware of league rules.

"Why won't these people just entertain me without using their earned platform to speak on issues they care about?"

Nobody was "forced", players opted out. The League didn't like the publicity they earned by doing that because it exposed them as, well, assholes in the public landscape who "took a stand" against something a lot of people are currently for. So why can't we say "if a player wants to leverage their public stature for something non-sports related, go for it. They just may have to be aware that it impacts fan perception and makes them a riskier proposition in free agency"?

Because the NHL panicked and decided the best way to fix certain players being under the spotlight was to remove the ability to "virtue signal", which we already know other players would have done willingly, and is it really "virtue signaling" when you actually believe in the thing you're doing?

Was Jesus the ultimate virtue signaler?

 

[BB79]

I would guess the vast majority of sports fans could care less about the "progressiveness" (a loaded term in any event) of their sport.

Most people realize that these are superficial gestures (the team ones at least, not so much Fleury's mask) serving to virtue signal.

Spot on assessment, I couldn't care less and would prefer it not be infused into my sports. I watch sports to watch sports, not be preached to about politics. We already have advertising rammed down our throats, we don't need annoying virtue signaling on top of it.

 

[daver]

Those people would be wrong, that's what you'd call a "post-racial" tactic that essentially seeks to sweep recognition under the rug now that things are "equal" and tries to immediately play that equality card to avoid acknowledging a role in what is really very recent history.

 

[HTFN]

And he was wrong. Pretty sure he's even walked that comment back but not willing to source it because like Jesse Jackson, Morgan Freeman isn't the emperor of black people.

Hiding history instead of understanding it is literally never a good idea.

 

[daver]

Nobody was "forced", players opted out.

I said "effectively forced" given the predictable media backlash and social media blowup when "gasp" someone decided to not wear one.

The League didn't like the publicity they earned by doing that because it exposed them as, well, assholes in the public landscape who "took a stand" against something a lot of people are currently for. So why can't we say "if a player wants to leverage their public stature for something non-sports related, go for it. They just may have to be aware that it impacts fan perception and makes them a riskier proposition in free agency"?

Ah, the good old public denouncing, the tried and tested method in the USSR and China that lead to millions of deaths.

How about this:

"My beliefs are none of your goddam business" and I would sue anyone who denies my right to practice my beliefs, whatever they may be, and hurts me financially.

The mistake the players made was giving a reason why they choose not to wear the jersey. They were well within their rights to not comment on it. I would not have worn the jersey and it would not have been anybody's business why.

They did absolutely nothing discriminatory.

And he was wrong. Pretty sure he's even walked that comment back but not willing to source it because like Jesse Jackson, Morgan Freeman isn't the emperor of black people.

Hiding history instead of understanding it is literally never a good idea.

Who said anything about hiding history?

 

[HTFN]

I said "effectively forced" given the predictable media backlash and social media blowup when "gasp" someone decided to not wear one.



Ah, the good old public denouncing, the tried and tested method in the USSR and China that lead to millions of deaths.

How about this:

"My beliefs are none of your goddam business" and I would sue anyone who denies my right to practice my beliefs, whatever they may be, and hurts me financially.

The mistake the players made was giving a reason why they choose not to wear the jersey. They were well within their rights to not comment on it. I would not have worn the jersey and it would not have been anybody's business why.

They did absolutely nothing discriminatory.



Who said anything about hiding history?

The NHL is an entertainment league. Colin Kaepernick did nothing discriminatory, doesn't mean he wasn't pretty quickly dismissed from professional play for his beliefs.

You have the right to practice your beliefs, there can still be repercussions in an entertainment industry. Teams don't want to field negative PR or lose fans because X, Y, or Z and this could be any of those letters. There are other more severe red flags, like how it's pretty unlikely any of that Canadian 5 will see NHL contracts for quite some time, but this is also totally allowed to be one. Tony DeAngelo has had a weird time getting work, it's not illegal to not want PR headaches.


Here's the real thing though: does this mean you also disagree with the "Hockey is for Everyone" initiative? One can very easily argue that wearing these jerseys is demonstrative of the idea that anyone can and should be welcomed to play or otherwise enjoy the sport. They're not "Gay Marriage" jerseys where the nameplate says "Support Proposition:" and the number is whatever recent thing in the area, it's not really "political" beyond a one night demonstration that those groups are "welcome" (even though we're having this conversation right now which suggests that's less true than it should be).

This is only political if those are your politics.

 

[HTFN]

as far as "hiding history", I said that. This idea that "Black History Month" means all of black history gets relegated to this single time is stupid and false. When you learn about WWII, you're going to get some black history, or at least you should, but that's the problem... sometimes that "slips through the cracks" or "there isn't enough time for the curriculum" and entire contributing parties (or suffering ones) can be ignored.

Some people forget or never learned what the US did to the Japanese living there because it was a footnote in a class that they took for a grade and forgot about. Slavery and Civil Rights seem like "ancient history" because it's taught in history class while there are people who know living people who were around for segregation.

Black History Month isn't and was never the only month to teach it, it was meant to focus on it because despite their vast contributions to the US and the world they can often be footnotes when in reality you could teach entire semesters on it specifically.

14% of the country's population can get .08% of the year.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Ah, the good old public denouncing, the tried and tested method in the USSR and China that lead to millions of deaths.

Holy shit - NHL players facing social media backlash for not wearing pride jerseys is the equaivalent to the USSR and China?

Think about your analogies my friend.