Canadian Government Freezing Hockey Canada Funding- (2018 Canada World Jr Team Alleged Sexual Assault)

Status
Not open for further replies.

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,431
14,827
Vancouver
Too little, too late, by the rape-enablers at Hockey Canada.

After doing their level best to protect rape-enabling culture in hockey for years to decades. No one who wants to see true progress is going to want rapist-enablers involved in begrudgingly fixing their own abhorrent mess.

"Hockey Canada has pledged transparency and accountability in meeting our commitments."

Right. At the same time they tried to bury the 2003 information, only going public when forced to by Westhead or whomever reported to Halifax police.

Rape-enabling. When exposed, pretend to be contrite, make noises about making change.

When caught not making any changes, grudgingly make some changes. Stay in charge.

Hockey Canada. A little bit of rape-enabling is better than none at all.

InformalFlatHogget-max-1mb.gif
 
Last edited:

pcruz

Registered User
Mar 7, 2013
6,433
4,581
Vaughan
:handclap: excellent post. the system is garbage
Not sure it's that accurate though.

There was a civil claim made and it was settled out of court.
Saying that the victim should try again in civil court is just outright illogical - you can't try the same case more than once.

If you could, then people could just chain-sue and settle....

Also, although I believe the punishment in that trois rivieres case was pathetically lenient, the poster glossed over some important factors in that:

The perpetrator pleg guilty and avoided the drawn-out process of forcing the courts to find him guilty.
The perpetrator put himself through a rehabilitation thing - as bullshit as I think that is, rehabilitation is supposed to be one of the core aims of the judicial system.
The perpetrator was drunk at the time and claimed a loss in cognitive reasoning, which the judge used as a mitigation factor in sentencing.


Also, we lived through the arduous case of Depp vs Heard.

Johnny Depp had his career completely derailed due to what were false and misleading claims made by Heard.

Everyone assumed that she was telling the truth because "why would she lie", and it turns out that she did in fact, lie.

The system is not perfect and it never will be.
The system is supposed to be impartial and never assume anything before evidence is brought forth.

In this case (2018 juniors), there is such a dearth of evidence that we don't even know the identities of the players that were supposedly accused of the wrongdoing.
 

Uncle Rotter

Registered User
May 11, 2010
5,976
1,039
Kelowna, B.C.
I think a big issue is just the way Minor and Junior Hockey is set up that makes it very different from other sports.

Minor Hockey at the Bantam and Midget-Minor level is a total circus. (and of course this has a trickle down effect even to Pee Wee), with parents and kids hyper-focused on putting themselves in the best position for their "draft" year (age 15) to get a coveted spot in Major Junior/Junior A/USNDTP/USHL with players bouncing minor clubs to get on the right team that will give them the right amount of ice time to showcase, get invited to camps, etc. with extra powerskating lessons on the side... just an overall hyper-focus on hockey.

The closest parallel I'd say to those age 13-15 hockey years in what you'd see in something like the GTHL in another sport is to the elite AAU circuits (such as the Nike EYBL) for prep basketball. This is also a bit of a circus, as players are all hyper-focused on positioning themselves within their class (similar to Minor Hockey players) and trying to get a coveted college scholarship (or increasingly, other options like G League Ignite are becoming more popular). Even then, I would say there are two crucial difference still - these elite AAU circuits occur at ages 15-17, so you can already push the players ages up a couple years... and an AAU team is never going to be a kid's "primary" team as they will all still play high school basketball where they are still just normal high school students playing with their friends for the joy of representing their school (it can of course still be very serious, but it is not as professional-ized).

So now hockey is the kid's primary focus, making it to Juniors is a big thing in and of itself... and low and behold, they made it. They get drafted into let's say the OHL. There's a draft party or whatever, it's a local news story that you were drafted. So now you become a bit of a minor celebrity. And this is all when you're 15, barely pubescent. So if you aren't super well grounded, if your parents don't do a good job instilling that you're not better than everybody else because you're good at a sport (remember the sport that's consumed you for the last few years to reach this very moment), your ego can grow very big.

And of course, relevant in all of this is, by going to Juniors, you are likely packing up, moving to another city, living away from your family and with a billet family who do not have any parental obligations to you to make sure you grow into a respectable young man. And what I said before about hockey being your whole life? Child's play compared to now, as you are now being asked to play a 68 game schedule with additional practice and dryland time. You are going to take long trips to travel around your league for ordinary league games, and you're even in a differentiated form of schooling catered towards your hockey career. At which point, who knows if you even care about school or have any respect for your teachers or fellow classmates because you're a "hockey player" (who has already forfeited NCAA eligibility if you play Major Junior in Canada) and your goal is to make the NHL, not read some books written by dead authors. One shouldn't overlook the power of a good education in taking kids out of their bubble and exposing them to the happenings of people outside of themselves. I think the focus on obtaining an NCAA scholarship, rather than making it to Major Juniors, is one thing USA Hockey does right. A scholarship is a noble and admirable goal in and of itself in so many ways. It means you get to to college for free and come out with zero debt. It is still a feeder into the NHL so you are not closing any doors but there is a big tangible carrot in and of itself waiting for you while you still remain amateur. Major Junior on the other hand? It's a great feeder for professional hockey. That's it. It is otherwise not super valuable, but the hype and perception built around it creates a distorted viewpoint and worldview for teenage boys.

On the road so often, your "family" becomes your teammates, a group of 17-20 year olds who also grew up in this sort of environment and aren't fully mature and developed themselves. Maybe you get lucky and end up with a great group of veterans, but often times, you're gonna get a bunch of boys that subscribe to groupthink, immature attitudes towards things like drinking and sex and a culture built around hazing because "that's just how it's done" and justified with "we all had to do it".

And all of this happens at age 16. The other big North American sports have nothing like this, as you still remain a normal high school student progressing towards college eligibility (which is a must for most sports), in the vast majority of cases living at home surrounded by family. Hockey is unique in that players truly do enter a "hockey bubble" where it consumes their whole life and everything surrounding them. In basketball for instance, the goal is a college scholarship, so you get that, and then at age 18 or 19 (again older and more mature) you enter as an incoming freshman. Yes, there are some key similarities in that you are now also a local celebrity in your college bubble and many will still be susceptible to growing massive egos and senses of entitlement because they are good at a game. However, you're still also a student at the University surrounded by the remaining incoming freshman class, you live in the dorms, eat at the dining halls, etc. There also continues to be the expectation that you are taking coursework with the goal of progressing towards a degree for as long as you are in school that you can use if you do not play professionally. You also cannot be "traded" (pack your bags 17 year old, you're moving to a new city, to attend a new school and stay with a new billet family), while players may (and increasingly do) freely transfer, they are able to continue to remain at the school if they so choose (4 year guaranteed scholarships are becoming the norm, so long as a player remains academically eligible and is not removed from the team for behavioral reasons). Even then, it is not as professionalized as Junior Hockey.

It's no wonder that without better systems and programs in place that these hockey players get a warped perception of their place within reality and come out of it as 19 and 20 year old shitheads that think the world serves to cater to their needs, after all that is all it has done for the last 7 or so very formative years of their life. Add in the weird hazing culture and "fer da boyz" culture and I guess it's no wonder that gang bangs (consensual or not) because some sort of odd bizarro team-bonding ritual.

The whole system is pretty lousy... all to produce around 30-40 future NHL players per year.
s-l500.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlysonChainz

BadgerBruce

Registered User
Aug 8, 2013
1,559
2,196
Well … here’s a “Please, please, please leave us alone” Hail Mary:


Sigh. Hockey Canada has no governing body authority over CHL or NCAA players. In the case of the CHL, the relationship with Hockey Canada is purely contractual — they are business partners. The players are borrowed. That’s the irony in this alleged sexual assaults mess: the WJC players aren’t even governed by Hockey Canada.
 

Uncle Rotter

Registered User
May 11, 2010
5,976
1,039
Kelowna, B.C.
Well … here’s a “Please, please, please leave us alone” Hail Mary:


Sigh. Hockey Canada has no governing body authority over CHL or NCAA players. In the case of the CHL, the relationship with Hockey Canada is purely contractual — they are business partners. The players are borrowed. That’s the irony in this alleged sexual assaults mess: the WJC players aren’t even governed by Hockey Canada.
They're only governed by them when they're actually on the team during tournaments, but, yeah, you're right.
 

Jeune Poulet

Registered User
Oct 31, 2019
1,681
3,823
I wonder if you have listened to the interview with Greg Gilhooly where he says that it's actually a good thing that an organization such as hockey Canada has a fund for uninsured liabilities like sexual assault given the thousands of volunteers that work under it's umbrella.
With my own business I have insurances. You can also have liability funds, sure. But these would be for extreme cases where you are at fault and not covered.

Sure, there can be a case where an employee drops some machinery and hurts himself, or a representative harasses someone on the job. When an incident happen, the first thing is you try to understand. What happened exactly? Was it on your turf? Who was involved? Was it your responsibility? How? Usually, you may not be 100% in agreement but there is a logical explanation for why your company is responsible. So you may, learn from this and improve practices. And if someone was at fault and grossly negligent or worse, you fire their ass.

If someone dropped by telling me: "three of your employees went to a local bar and raped a woman last night". My immediate reaction would be: holy f***ing shit? Who? Are they arrested? Tell me the names of those people right now so I can immediately suspend their asses. And after all this, I'd ask: can I help you further? Because I didn't rape anybody and my company sure didn't either.

What my reaction would NOT be is: "Oh, so they gang banged someone? You know what? Don't even bother telling me more, it definitely sounds like my guys! Don't bother telling me who those guys are. Lemme go draw a check from my "special liability fund" *wink wink* and I'll be back in 2 minutes so you can tell me who to send it to!".

You constantly pretend this makes total sense. And that a slush fund is fine.

If you really own up and pay, it is to admit fault and do better. There's no universe where I'd pay a cent without knowing who is involved and why it concerns me. I'd want to know what I did wrong, and for that I need to know what happens. "some guys you have ties with" is not a sufficient explanation for me to feel the need to pay.

It's even worse if you are a public-funded entity.
It actually allowed for victims to seek and get civil settlements but you are 100% opposed to the victim and her settlement now maybe?

So that's the problem with pontificating and not seeing the big picture and maybe seeing all of the facts as we know them.
You mean by that, the facts that Hockey Canada pretends not to have?

Hockey Canada didn't own up to anything. They didn't try to understand what exactly happened (or at least that's what they are pretending), or how it was their fault. They did their best to protect the identity of these players and make the accusations disappear.

They're saying they don't know who are the guys and that it is just fine by them.

That's what you'd do if you had a company or association? Someone tells you something may have happened. Some John Does raped a girl outside work and you'd just pay? And you would never try to find their names?

This is vile and corrupt. You can't tell me that's how you want people to act. In a public organization that is involved with thousands of children, no less.

May seems like a nuance but there is a difference between a liability fund and a slush fund. With the latter you handcuff witnesses and victims to protect your assets and make sure you continue operating the same way.

And then, you carefully word it as "the victim chose not to name the rapists".
 

BadgerBruce

Registered User
Aug 8, 2013
1,559
2,196
They're only governed by them when they're actually on the team during tournaments, but, yeah, you're right.
The whole thing really is bizarre. Hockey Canada is going to implement a bunch of new rules and training requirements for coaches and trainers of tyke age kids in response to alleged sexual assaults by 18-20 year old WJC players who are not even participants in Hockey Canada governed leagues.
 

Uncle Rotter

Registered User
May 11, 2010
5,976
1,039
Kelowna, B.C.
The whole thing really is bizarre. Hockey Canada is going to implement a bunch of new rules and training requirements for coaches and trainers of tyke age kids in response to alleged sexual assaults by 18-20 year old WJC players who are not even participants in Hockey Canada governed leagues.
Well, you've gotta...do something.
 

Chileiceman

Registered User
Dec 14, 2004
9,898
747
Toronto
He's not stupid enough to publish names and call those people rapists, while knowing that this likely never gets proven.
He'd open himself to major defamation suits and would likely lose.
Any player who loses a career without being proven to be guilty of this crime, would take Westhead and TSN to the cleaners.
Except journalists have legal protections from libel suits to report facts that they believe to be true that are in the public interest, even if they have damaging affects on someone's reputation. He would not be reporting that player x is a rapist, he would be reporting that player x was the player who text messaged the victim as per the messages shown to him. Remember, Brad Aldrich was never found guilty of anything.

By your logic criminal charges should never be reported in the media because they are not proven convictions, thats absurd.
 

BenningHurtsMySoul

Unfair Huggy Bear
Mar 18, 2008
25,245
10,890
Port Coquitlam, BC
As a partner of someone who has suffered from sexual abuse, and as a former journalist, I can say that Rick Westhead is the single most important figure in sports journalism today.

If there is a reckoning and rebuilding coming to the game we all love so much, he is going to be the main reason why. And he deserves a spot in the Hockey Hall of Fame, but he'll never get it because the powers that be hate his guts.

And I am definitely more emotional about this case than many, because of what's happened in my life and also because of how I was kept out of the sport by my parents. My father was a NCAA calibre player that knew what other players had gone through, and he did not want me to be a part of that culture. I now play in a beer league and started when I was at the ripe old age of 25, which was old enough that I knew what was bullshit and what wasn't.
 
Last edited:

Uncle Rotter

Registered User
May 11, 2010
5,976
1,039
Kelowna, B.C.
With my own business I have insurances. You can also have liability funds, sure. But these would be for extreme cases where you are at fault and not covered.

Sure, there can be a case where an employee drops some machinery and hurts himself, or a representative harasses someone on the job. When an incident happen, the first thing is you try to understand. What happened exactly? Was it on your turf? Who was involved? Was it your responsibility? How? Usually, you may not be 100% in agreement but there is a logical explanation for why your company is responsible. So you may, learn from this and improve practices. And if someone was at fault and grossly negligent or worse, you fire their ass.

If someone dropped by telling me: "three of your employees went to a local bar and raped a woman last night". My immediate reaction would be: holy f***ing shit? Who? Are they arrested? Tell me the names of those people right now so I can immediately suspend their asses. And after all this, I'd ask: can I help you further? Because I didn't rape anybody and my company sure didn't either.

What my reaction would NOT be is: "Oh, so they gang banged someone? You know what? Don't even bother telling me more, it definitely sounds like my guys! Don't bother telling me who those guys are. Lemme go draw a check from my "special liability fund" *wink wink* and I'll be back in 2 minutes so you can tell me who to send it to!".

You constantly pretend this makes total sense. And that a slush fund is fine.

If you really own up and pay, it is to admit fault and do better. There's no universe where I'd pay a cent without knowing who is involved and why it concerns me. I'd want to know what I did wrong, and for that I need to know what happens. "some guys you have ties with" is not a sufficient explanation for me to feel the need to pay.

It's even worse if you are a public-funded entity.

You mean by that, the facts that Hockey Canada pretends not to have?

Hockey Canada didn't own up to anything. They didn't try to understand what exactly happened (or at least that's what they are pretending), or how it was their fault. They did their best to protect the identity of these players and make the accusations disappear.

They're saying they don't know who are the guys and that it is just fine by them.

That's what you'd do if you had a company or association? Someone tells you something may have happened. Some John Does raped a girl outside work and you'd just pay? And you would never try to find their names?

This is vile and corrupt. You can't tell me that's how you want people to act. In a public organization that is involved with thousands of children, no less.

May seems like a nuance but there is a difference between a liability fund and a slush fund. With the latter you handcuff witnesses and victims to protect your assets and make sure you continue operating the same way.

And then, you carefully word it as "the victim chose not to name the rapists".
Four years rather than two minutes.
 

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,431
14,827
Vancouver
The leadership at Hockey Canada needs to be entirely replaced, regardless of whether you dismantle it and start from scratch, or restructure the whole thing.

Look at their latest PR last ditch defense of staying on in the hopes of doing whatever they can for rape-enabling culture.

Please look at it, as I haven't the time to wade through 19 pages to see if I'm mistaken - I bet I'm not, based on the newswire report.

No where do they commit to reopening all investigations from the past however many years. Yeah, I know they encourage anyone – past or present – who feels they are the victim of mistreatment, sexual violence, harassment or abuse by someone affiliated with their organization to report it immediately. But its bullshit, they are still using the same rape-enabling lingo that every rape-enablist is familiar with to stifle people from coming forward. Or if they commit to reopening all investigations, I missed it. Point it out to me.

No where do they commit to providing an accounting - you know, being accountable, being held to account, buzzwords they mouth as platitudes -of the past reports, claims, and secret payouts funded in part by skimming off little kids mandatory hockey fees. They only appear to commit on a go-forward basis. That's bullshit. Or if they did commit to a past accounting, I missed it. Point it out to me.

No where do they commit to going first to the police when informed of rape allegations, instead of to their Risk Manager.

Then their attack dog lawyers.

Then their insurance people.

And finally, once they've got their cover story lined up, going to the police.

See, that's what rape-enablers do when exposed - commit to the bare minimum, in the hopes that people are fooled into thinking that it is adequate, and that the perpetrators should be allowed to continue on.

Did I post that gif already? Whatever, here it is again

InformalFlatHogget-max-1mb.gif
 
Last edited:

Spirits

Avalanche and Vikings
Jul 12, 2014
2,944
2,730
Americans who are members of this forum in particular, will learn about Canadas police apparatus through this case. Let's not forget that in America you have had your Constitution signed into law in 1787, Canada has only had it's Charter of Rights and Freedoms since 1982!
Wow.
This lack of protection of civil liberties (and speaking to lawyers, it's still disregarded regularly) for so long has created a hierarchical system.
No wonder I read some absolutely f***ing stupid hot takes here.
 

joestevens29

Registered User
Apr 30, 2009
52,830
15,518
The whole thing really is bizarre. Hockey Canada is going to implement a bunch of new rules and training requirements for coaches and trainers of tyke age kids in response to alleged sexual assaults by 18-20 year old WJC players who are not even participants in Hockey Canada governed leagues.
The fact that they have to implement anything is quite sad. They should've already had rules and training requirements that evolve with the times. Whether it's sexual assault, verbal assault, physical, racism etc...

Every new employee has to go through a lot of training and there are updates every year that we need to take.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seventieslord

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,431
14,827
Vancouver
Like I said, the bare minimum.

No surprise that rape-enabling leadership would fight a last ditch desparate rear guard action.

Julie Macfarlane, a law professor and Member of the Order of Canada who previously worked as an employment mediator, told CBC Sports in an email that Hockey Canada's plan lacks transparency.

"There is no mention of any qualifications for the ['independent third party'] or the mediator. Often the default is to a lawyer. That may be fine if they have been trained to be a mediator or an investigator — we have no national accreditation for these roles so the training is a bit hit and miss — but there are some reputable programs.

"There is no mention either of whether the ITP/mediator will be trauma-informed and trained to work with victims of abuse," Macfarlane wrote.

Additionally, she said the plan skips information on how outcomes will be communicated to victims and noted the use of non-disclosure agreements as defaults as a "major problem."

"Effectively this means that the outcomes will be just as secret as they have always been. There needs to be a clear commitment to offering victims confidentiality but not requiring them to sign an NDA, which makes their privacy depend on protecting the perpetrators," Macfarlane wrote.


That's Hockey Canada in a nutshell.

Sercecy. Protecting the perpetrators.

No surprise this is their plan.

If I was a rape-enabler in charge of a large organization and was exposed, it's exactly* the plan I would propose to keep my position.

Who am I kidding, my plan would be a helluva lot more devious, and have a far greater chance of keeping my hands on the wheel.
 

Leafsfan74

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
4,968
5,183
Like I said, the bare minimum.

No surprise that rape-enabling leadership would fight a last ditch desparate rear guard action.




That's Hockey Canada in a nutshell.

Sercecy. Protecting the perpetrators.

No surprise this is their plan.

If I was a rape-enabler in charge of a large organization and was exposed, it's exactly* the plan I would propose to keep my position.

Who am I kidding, my plan would be a helluva lot more devious, and have a far greater chance of keeping my hands on the wheel.

Correction, that is Canada in a nutshell.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: MelvinFinklethorpe
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad