Speculation: Evander Kane Signed?

Status
Not open for further replies.

bellagiobob

Registered User
Jul 27, 2006
22,349
51,928
The whole thing was he would of had a negative test but the Canadian border rules is 14 days after a positive test you are NOT allowed to fly, even if you test day 8 as negative you can’t fly for 14 days. So for him to have boarded that plane he would of had to say he didn’t have that positive test.

This is at least based off the info from the website. So he could have a negative test on day 8 but the border rules still would have prohibited it, IF he told the truth.

Was chatting with a travel blogger today, who travels extensively, and is a go to when the papers require a travel expert. I asked about the 72 hour rule, as it's a bit misleading as far testing positive and then negative. He mentioned that the travel industry uses the official rules from each country that are published here: IATA - International Travel Document News . He mentioned that the questionnaire on the Govt Of Canada site is not binding, it's just for guidance. The only official rule is that you can enter if you have a negative test taken within the last 72 hours (and you have no symptoms, of course). One blurb I saw on the Govt Of Canada website was as follows:

Positive results on your pre-entry test

A positive pre-entry test result within 72 hours of your planned entry is not a valid test result for entry to Canada.
Foreign nationals with symptoms or with a positive result from less than 15 days before arriving (starting January 15, 2022, 11 days) will be denied entry.
Canadians: To avoid being fined $5,000 per traveller (plus surcharges), wait to enter Canada until the 15th day (starting January 15, 2022, 11th day) after your positive test result. If you had symptoms without a positive result, wait until the symptoms have ended and you have a valid negative pre-entry test result.
  • Canadians include citizens, people registered under the Indian Act, permanent residents and protected persons (refugee status)
If you have symptoms or a positive result, we recommend postponing your travel until you have:

  • a negative result for a COVID-19 molecular test taken within 72 hours of your scheduled flight to Canada or arriving at the land border; OR
  • a positive result for a COVID-19 molecular test that was taken 15 to 180 days (starting January 15, 2022, between 11 and 180 days) before entering Canada.
They suggest you wait the 15 days, but also say if you have a positive result, that you can travel once you have a negative result within 72 hours of your flight.

It's confusing, but that's the info that was shared to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oilers'72

Smartguy

Registered User
May 3, 2010
4,000
3,247
Edmonton
Bettman is he really going to sign with the Oilers? Yep looks that way. Bettman keep the investigation going
I think it’s 1. They don’t want public scrutiny till people forget his contract was terminated . 2. The Grounds for which is contract were terminated have to be rock solid, the Sharks got out from under an anchor, which I don’t think they are.
 

walktheboulavard

Registered User
Jul 8, 2016
9,152
11,235
I think it’s 1. They don’t want public scrutiny till people forget his contract was terminated . 2. The Grounds for which is contract were terminated have to be rock solid, the Sharks got out from under an anchor, which I don’t think they are.

The NHL already concluded Sharks had grounds to terminate contract and supported their reasoning. Revisiting decision you made based on "facts" you've gathered is amateur and looks terrible on the NHL. Especially considering the magnitude of terminating player contracts.
 

KanesThrowaway

Registered User
Aug 24, 2021
167
402
Nothing new really but here's a note from Kurt Leavins:

upload_2022-1-24_8-28-49.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: oilers'72

Aerchon

Registered User
Jul 20, 2011
10,517
3,708
I think it’s 1. They don’t want public scrutiny till people forget his contract was terminated . 2. The Grounds for which is contract were terminated have to be rock solid, the Sharks got out from under an anchor, which I don’t think they are.

The NHL already concluded Sharks had grounds to terminate contract and supported their reasoning. Revisiting decision you made based on "facts" you've gathered is amateur and looks terrible on the NHL. Especially considering the magnitude of terminating player contracts.

It's hard for me to imagine that this investigation will be complete any time soon. I just imagine every little thing being scrutinized and argued to the extreme.

How does the nhl really rank breaching covid protocols as serious enough to terminate a contract when half the world is getting rid of Covid protocols. Especially when the NHL is likely in the midst of petitioning all covid restrictions be dropped so they can get back to business.

The NHL/Sharks are speaking out of each side of their mouth on this one.

I don't know what exactly he did but if the documented punishment is 5k like some are saying here... The Sharks and NHL are going to have a lot of egg on their face.
 

McJadeddog

Registered User
Sep 25, 2003
20,237
5,173
Regina, Saskatchewan
Can this shit be over with yet?

I want it to last as long as possible, because its just yet another thing you can point to in showing the incompetence of the NHL. It's hilarious to be honest. I don't care if we sign him or not either, if I was the GM, I wouldn't sign him in fact. So I'm not some salty Oilers fan who wants him on my team, I kinda DON'T want him on the team actually. But I do think the NHL is being ridiculous with this review, and that is funny to me.
 

Bryanbryoil

Pray For Ukraine
Sep 13, 2004
86,182
34,588
I'm locking this thing to see if it causes a chain reaction so that the NHL gets their shit together and makes a damn decision. Sort of the same way that while you wait an eternity at a drive through restaurant for the line to move and as soon as you put your vehicle in park the line moves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad