The Strachan Guide to replacement Players

[Tom_Benjamin]

BTW you are wrong on one point - your site is the best blog.

Thank you for the kind comments. There isn't much competition these days.

Tom

 

[fan mao rong]

BASEBALL--baseball failed at impasse and implementation because it was ruled not at impasse. It was not ruled that impasse is impossible for a sports league. They first wanted a hard cap in bargaining, then they moved off of that stance saying they would not impose a cap, bargained with the union on a luxury tax, and then tried to implement a cap. Thus, not at impasse because there was bargaining on going. Judge Sotomayor, in the appeal, said that if in the future they wanted impasse it should be brought to her first. So it appears a sports league can obtain impasse. Baseball tried to implement a cap. This failed because the sides were not at impasse. At no point did they rule a cap non-implementable or illegal.

 

[HF2002]

There's an interesting article in the Ottawa Citizen again! That's 2 in the last two weeks. They must be trying to make a jump to the big leagues. Unfortunately, I can't provide a link because the website requires a subscription.

The article, written by Allan Panzeri, says there's a potential roadblock if the NHL opts for impasse because of the immigration laws in both countries, and it's a huge trump card for the players. Neither country will issue work visas to workers who are coming to take the jobs of those on strike or involved in a labour dispute, including hockey players. This will dramatically eliminate the global pool of players. Only residents of the US may work for US based teams and the same would apply to Canadian based teams. There's even precedent in hockey if it's required. Don Cherry could be getting his wish after all. If that isn't enough to force them back to the table...

The AHL and ECHL players are part of the same union called the Professional Hockey Players Association. They used the immigration laws to their benefit in the summer before 2003/04 season. The ECHL players set a strike in motion, and 8 weeks before the season was to start they were able to get their strike certified. As soon as this happened the borders were closed. In the US, visas weren't issued to those coming in to seek employment as a replacement players, and it even went so far as to remove visas that had already been issued. The article doesn't say if the same thing happened in Canada but I guess it didn't really matter, so long as they could get one country to side with them. This strategy worked for the players and the season opened on time. The players exective director said that they went this route as a way to force the league back to the table.

The interesting angle to this story is that the union covered players in two leagues. The ECHL players were on strike but the AHL players weren't. Anyone who crossed a picket line would then be offending two unions, and if you're trying to move up the ladder to the NHL you're going to be in for a tough time. Players in the ECHL are there because they still want to make the NHL. With fighting in hockey there could be some serious fights if the replacement player somehow made the ECHL team when the regular players returned.

Replacement players are going to be bad enough compared to NHL players, but imagine how weak it would be if Canadians could only play for Canadian based teams and Americans could only play for American based teams. This scenario would be a terrible black eye for the NHL, imo.

Is it just me or does it seem like the only option the owners have is to continue to do nothing? They can say that it's up to the players to decide to come back to the table but to me it seems as though the guy who blinks first right now is going to be the one with the upper hand.

 

[Wetcoaster]

There's an interesting article in the Ottawa Citizen again! That's 2 in the last two weeks. They must be trying to make a jump to the big leagues. Unfortunately, I can't provide a link because the website requires a subscription.

The article, written by Allan Panzeri, says there's a potential roadblock if the NHL opts for impasse because of the immigration laws in both countries, and it's a huge trump card for the players. Neither country will issue work visas to workers who are coming to take the jobs of those on strike or involved in a labour dispute, including hockey players. This will dramatically eliminate the global pool of players. Only residents of the US may work for US based teams and the same would apply to Canadian based teams. There's even precedent in hockey if it's required. Don Cherry could be getting his wish after all. If that isn't enough to force them back to the table...

The AHL and ECHL players are part of the same union called the Professional Hockey Players Association. They used the immigration laws to their benefit in the summer before 2003/04 season. The ECHL players set a strike in motion, and 8 weeks before the season was to start they were able to get their strike certified. As soon as this happened the borders were closed. In the US, visas weren't issued to those coming in to seek employment as a replacement players, and it even went so far as to remove visas that had already been issued. The article doesn't say if the same thing happened in Canada but I guess it didn't really matter, so long as they could get one country to side with them. This strategy worked for the players and the season opened on time. The players exective director said that they went this route as a way to force the league back to the table.

The interesting angle to this story is that the union covered players in two leagues. The ECHL players were on strike but the AHL players weren't. Anyone who crossed a picket line would then be offending two unions, and if you're trying to move up the ladder to the NHL you're going to be in for a tough time. Players in the ECHL are there because they still want to make the NHL. With fighting in hockey there could be some serious fights if the replacement player somehow made the ECHL team when the regular players returned.

Replacement players are going to be bad enough compared to NHL players, but imagine how weak it would be if Canadians could only play for Canadian based teams and Americans could only play for American based teams. This scenario would be a terrible black eye for the NHL, imo.

Is it just me or does it seem like the only option the owners have is to continue to do nothing? They can say that it's up to the players to decide to come back to the table but to me it seems as though the guy who blinks first right now is going to be the one with the upper hand.

The story is available on the open website:
http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawa....html?id=30feae99-17e1-46e8-854a-da48a0aff037

OOPS. The immigration story is by subscription.

But the ECHL and AHL have another problem - the US has reached its visa quota (unlike Canada which does not have quotas). See:
http://www.echl.com/cgi-bin/mpublic.cgi?action=show_news&cat=1&id=3658

 

[grego]

Canada could easily find enough players for our number of teams in the NHL. We only have about 6 teams in the NHL and we are the number one hockey country in the world. IT is under your scenario of them blocking replacements, where the US could find difficulty.

Though really that could be fun to find Canadian teams dominating the NHL since we have the most depth at players.

 

[HF2002]

Canada could easily find enough players for our number of teams in the NHL. We only have about 6 teams in the NHL and we are the number one hockey country in the world. IT is under your scenario of them blocking replacements, where the US could find difficulty.

Though really that could be fun to find Canadian teams dominating the NHL since we have the most depth at players.

Exactly. Since there are 24 US based teams, and only 6 in Canada, the NHL is going to have a serious problem. I wouldn't put much weight into a team with replacement players winning the Cup. Leaf fans might. A win is a win, right? ;-)

 

[HF2002]

But the ECHL and AHL have another problem - the US has reached its visa quota (unlike Canada which does not have quotas). See:
http://www.echl.com/cgi-bin/mpublic.cgi?action=show_news&cat=1&id=3658

I guess it doesn't change much for the NHL right now if the new visas aren't going to be released until October.

As for the ECHL and the AHL, I guess they're all going to have to marry one of their American girlfriends.

 

[thinkwild]

Is it just me or does it seem like the only option the owners have is to continue to do nothing? They can say that it's up to the players to decide to come back to the table but to me it seems as though the guy who blinks first right now is going to be the one with the upper hand.

It seems that way to me to. Bettmans plan doesnt appear to be to use replacement players, its another year or two of no hockey. If fans knew this, i would of thought they wouldnt support the owners in shutting down the game for what Bettman describes as a 2% difference combined with formal rules that they arent allowed to lose money. But they apparently are. There is a lot of precedent unestablished. The 8? owners with basketball teams in their rinks may want to establish the precedents in hockey. Why not push it and see where it goes. No fans are hurt because their owners will still be billionaires, playing hockey is secondary.

I don't think the NHL wants to do that. There are elements they want - early free agency, for example -that fly in the face of their stated objectives. If the players cave, they can pretend they gave up free agency at age 27 because they had to give up something to get what they needed. If they table that directly in a CBA they intend to implement, the fiction they are trying to help small markets can't be sustained.

Its hard to believe the fiction has been maintained at all but here we are. THe uber poodles would still buuy it. When you talked about this a couple years ago, it seemed a funny way to make a point. I dont think they'll care if we think that now, they'll spin it as being necessary for competitive balance.

 

[thinkwild]

Hadnt considered that immigration laws could end up having a big effect on this impasse. Bertuzzi picked a bad time to be having potential problems with them

 

[me2]

There's an interesting article in the Ottawa Citizen again! That's 2 in the last two weeks. They must be trying to make a jump to the big leagues. Unfortunately, I can't provide a link because the website requires a subscription.

Wouldn't a great many of these players already have their work visa to play hockey in the other country? How else would a Canadian or Swede get an AHL contract in the US? Are the US work visa linked to only one company? Bringing players from Europe could be tricky.

I'd be more worried about lesser players not wanting to annoy their unions.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Wouldn't a great many of these players already have their work visa to play hockey in the other country? How else would a Canadian or Swede get an AHL contract in the US? Are the US work visa linked to only one company? Bringing players from Europe could be tricky.

I'd be more worried about lesser players not wanting to annoy their unions.

Different visas in the US depending uon you leage. Minor pro are handled under H-2B visas while the NHL is under a P-1 visa as an elite player. However that is not the real issue.

The problem with that as pointed out today by Alan Panzeris(?) in the Ottawa Citizen since there is an ongoing labour dispute (replacement players are temporary and the dispute continues even with a successful declaration of impasse) so no foreign players allowed.

US immigration laws require that only US citizens and alien residents could play in the US for a US based team without needing a visa. Foreign (non - US) NHL players require a P-1 work visa which is not available if there is a labour dispute in progress. So no Euros or Canadians on US teams.

Canadian immigration law requires non-Canadians and those who are not permanent residents must have a work permit to play for a Canadian team. Under Canadian immigration law work permits cannot be issued where there is a labour dispute in progress. So no Euros or Yanks need apply for any Canadian teams that are able to poerate with replacement players (defintely not Vancouver and likely not the Habs if they take a certification vote). The Ontario government is considering bringing back a ban on replacement workers that the Mike Harris Government removed after the 1994 MLB dispute. In that dispute neither the Jays nor Expos could field replacment teams in their home cities.

This could be interesting - there could be slight problem stocking the US teams even should the NHL get the NLRB to go along with a declaration of impasse.

This may be the best chance the Leafs ever have to win the Stanley Cup.

 

[me2]

So you are saying that NHL teams that have players under contract and already playing in the minors wouldn't be able to promote them? That seems rather odd.