Jesse wrote:Haha, so let me get this straight. If Pavel Datsyuk skates up to Sidney Crosby before the faceoff of a game and says, "Hey, you're pretty good. Come play for us".
That's tampering?
No. It isn't.
Tampering assumes negotiation. I doubt Babcock offered him a contract in the hand shake line.
Or what if at a celebrity golf tournament Crosby tells Gaborik that they'd be great teammates? Tampering? NNNOOOOO.
It sounds like Brian Burke is rubbing off on some people.
One is a player, the other is a management member of an organization. There is a difference. The thread goes on.
So Babcock was negotiating with Hossa with that statement?
Jesse wrote:Haha, so let me get this straight. If Pavel Datsyuk skates up to Sidney Crosby before the faceoff of a game and says, "Hey, you're pretty good. Come play for us".
That's tampering?
No. It isn't.
Tampering assumes negotiation. I doubt Babcock offered him a contract in the hand shake line.
Or what if at a celebrity golf tournament Crosby tells Gaborik that they'd be great teammates? Tampering? NNNOOOOO.
It sounds like Brian Burke is rubbing off on some people.
Crosby is a player; Babcock is a member of management. Big difference there.
"You should come to Detroit" sure sounds like the opening of a negotiation to me. And the final result sure makes it look like something worth investigating by the NHL. Just my opinion.
Agreed. It's obvious he wasnt talking about coming to Detroit for any other reason. If it was just to visit the wonderful city of Detroit for its beauty and majesty, Hossa likely would have figured THAT aspect of it out with his three recent visits to Detroit surrounding games 1,2 and 5. You are not allowed to IMPLY anything of that nature. It's really that simple.
Babcock has no more to do with contract negotiations that any player does. It's not like Holland, Yzerman, or Devallano said that to Hossa.
If you view Babcock in the same capacity as you'd view a player then We clearly have opposing view points. Babcock is part of management. He's not the GM but the fact is he is still in a management position.
Jesse wrote:Haha, so let me get this straight. If Pavel Datsyuk skates up to Sidney Crosby before the faceoff of a game and says, "Hey, you're pretty good. Come play for us".
That's tampering?
No. It isn't.
Tampering assumes negotiation. I doubt Babcock offered him a contract in the hand shake line.
Or what if at a celebrity golf tournament Crosby tells Gaborik that they'd be great teammates? Tampering? NNNOOOOO.
It sounds like Brian Burke is rubbing off on some people.
One is a player, the other is a management member of an organization. There is a difference. The thread goes on.
So Babcock was negotiating with Hossa with that statement?
It doesn't matter what you think the intent of his statement was. He was not a free agent yet and management of other organizations should not be even hinting of potential employment.
therock48880 wrote:
Or what if at a celebrity golf tournament Crosby tells Gaborik that they'd be great teammates? Tampering? NNNOOOOO.
It sounds like Brian Burke is rubbing off on some people.
Crosby is a player; Babcock is a member of management. Big difference there.
"You should come to Detroit" sure sounds like the opening of a negotiation to me. And the final result sure makes it look like something worth investigating by the NHL. Just my opinion.
Agreed. It's obvious he wasnt talking about coming to Detroit for any other reason. If it was just to visit the wonderful city of Detroit for its beauty and majesty, Hossa likely would have figured THAT aspect of it out with his three recent visits to Detroit surrounding games 1,2 and 5. You are not allowed to IMPLY anything of that nature. It's really that simple.
Babcock has no more to do with contract negotiations that any player does. It's not like Holland, Yzerman, or Devallano said that to Hossa.
If you view Babcock in the same capacity as you'd view a player then We clearly have opposing view points. Babcock is part of management. He's not the GM but the fact is he is still in a management position.
He didn't offer any sort of a contract. Even if he had said, "You know, we have a lot of cap money this year" I can see how some would consider that tampering. But, saying what he said (even though neither Babcock nor Hossa has said he said that, the statement was made by Scotty, who was NOT on the ice) certainly is NOT tampering.
Jesse wrote:Haha, so let me get this straight. If Pavel Datsyuk skates up to Sidney Crosby before the faceoff of a game and says, "Hey, you're pretty good. Come play for us".
That's tampering?
No. It isn't.
Tampering assumes negotiation. I doubt Babcock offered him a contract in the hand shake line.
Or what if at a celebrity golf tournament Crosby tells Gaborik that they'd be great teammates? Tampering? NNNOOOOO.
It sounds like Brian Burke is rubbing off on some people.
One is a player, the other is a management member of an organization. There is a difference. The thread goes on.
So Babcock was negotiating with Hossa with that statement?
It doesn't matter what you think the intent of his statement was. He was not a free agent yet and management of other organizations should not be even hinting of potential employment.
Nor does it matter what you think the intent of Babcock's alleged comments were. It's up to the league and so far not one hint at any website calling this tampering.
Rock, that's because there aren't grounds for a tampering investigation. By no means whatsoever. Confirmed by the written rule itself and the mouth of a person who has a hell of a lot more knowledge on this subject than any of us.
Tico Rick wrote:
Crosby is a player; Babcock is a member of management. Big difference there.
"You should come to Detroit" sure sounds like the opening of a negotiation to me. And the final result sure makes it look like something worth investigating by the NHL. Just my opinion.
Agreed. It's obvious he wasnt talking about coming to Detroit for any other reason. If it was just to visit the wonderful city of Detroit for its beauty and majesty, Hossa likely would have figured THAT aspect of it out with his three recent visits to Detroit surrounding games 1,2 and 5. You are not allowed to IMPLY anything of that nature. It's really that simple.
Babcock has no more to do with contract negotiations that any player does. It's not like Holland, Yzerman, or Devallano said that to Hossa.
If you view Babcock in the same capacity as you'd view a player then We clearly have opposing view points. Babcock is part of management. He's not the GM but the fact is he is still in a management position.
He didn't offer any sort of a contract. Even if he had said, "You know, we have a lot of cap money this year" I can see how some would consider that tampering. But, saying what he said (even though neither Babcock nor Hossa has said he said that, the statement was made by Scotty, who was NOT on the ice) certainly is NOT tampering.
It's subtle but it's indeed tampering. Babcock can't be doing that, oh no no no. What he did was underhanded, Disrespectful to the Pittsburgh organization and unquestionably improper. For the 577 time, he implied that the Wings would like his services, you can't do that. Ray Shero concisely stated that you cannot Suggest such a thing to a player who is under contract with another club. This really isn't as complicated as some make it seem.
This ofcourse is based on the Bowman statements so yes this may or may not be true. I am predicating my comments on it as if it did happen. If it didn't then obviously it wouldn't be tampering.
crzymike wrote:Agreed. It's obvious he wasnt talking about coming to Detroit for any other reason. If it was just to visit the wonderful city of Detroit for its beauty and majesty, Hossa likely would have figured THAT aspect of it out with his three recent visits to Detroit surrounding games 1,2 and 5. You are not allowed to IMPLY anything of that nature. It's really that simple.
Babcock has no more to do with contract negotiations that any player does. It's not like Holland, Yzerman, or Devallano said that to Hossa.
If you view Babcock in the same capacity as you'd view a player then We clearly have opposing view points. Babcock is part of management. He's not the GM but the fact is he is still in a management position.
He didn't offer any sort of a contract. Even if he had said, "You know, we have a lot of cap money this year" I can see how some would consider that tampering. But, saying what he said (even though neither Babcock nor Hossa has said he said that, the statement was made by Scotty, who was NOT on the ice) certainly is NOT tampering.
It's subtle but it's indeed tampering. Babcock can't be doing that, oh no no no. What he did was underhanded, Disrespectful to the Pittsburgh organization and unquestionably improper. For the 577 time, he implied that the Wings would like his services, you can't do that. Ray Shero concisely stated that you cannot Suggest such a thing to a player who is under contract with another club. This really isn't as complicated as some make it seem.
This ofcourse is based on the Bowman statements so yes this may or may not be true. I am predicating my comments on it as if it did happen. If it didn't then obviously it wouldn't be tampering.
So you can tell what Babcock was "implying" by reading what Scotty Bowman said? That's impressive.
Jesse wrote:Rock, that's because there aren't grounds for a tampering investigation. By no means whatsoever. Confirmed by the written rule itself and the mouth of a person who has a hell of a lot more knowledge on this subject than any of us.
Only on this board, as you said.
Of course there aren't grounds. It's a completely ambiguous statement supposedly made by Babcock.However, that doesn't necessarily mean that it wasn't tampering.
If there was any bit of evidence of him actually saying this or him saying "play for detroit." then everybody would be all over it. That's why you need to choose your words wisely.
therock48880 wrote:
Babcock has no more to do with contract negotiations that any player does. It's not like Holland, Yzerman, or Devallano said that to Hossa.
If you view Babcock in the same capacity as you'd view a player then We clearly have opposing view points. Babcock is part of management. He's not the GM but the fact is he is still in a management position.
He didn't offer any sort of a contract. Even if he had said, "You know, we have a lot of cap money this year" I can see how some would consider that tampering. But, saying what he said (even though neither Babcock nor Hossa has said he said that, the statement was made by Scotty, who was NOT on the ice) certainly is NOT tampering.
It's subtle but it's indeed tampering. Babcock can't be doing that, oh no no no. What he did was underhanded, Disrespectful to the Pittsburgh organization and unquestionably improper. For the 577 time, he implied that the Wings would like his services, you can't do that. Ray Shero concisely stated that you cannot Suggest such a thing to a player who is under contract with another club. This really isn't as complicated as some make it seem.
This ofcourse is based on the Bowman statements so yes this may or may not be true. I am predicating my comments on it as if it did happen. If it didn't then obviously it wouldn't be tampering.
So you can tell what Babcock was "implying" by reading what Scotty Bowman said? That's impressive.
If Babcock said that he obviously implied it. I don't believe Bowman is a liar so im inclined to believe it. You are changing your arguement though. You were suggesting that the comments Babcock made werent tampering. Now you are stating the comments made by Bowman may not be true. Ofcourse we don't know for sure. IF he said what is alleged then its tampering, if not it isnt.
crzymike wrote:If you view Babcock in the same capacity as you'd view a player then We clearly have opposing view points. Babcock is part of management. He's not the GM but the fact is he is still in a management position.
He didn't offer any sort of a contract. Even if he had said, "You know, we have a lot of cap money this year" I can see how some would consider that tampering. But, saying what he said (even though neither Babcock nor Hossa has said he said that, the statement was made by Scotty, who was NOT on the ice) certainly is NOT tampering.
It's subtle but it's indeed tampering. Babcock can't be doing that, oh no no no. What he did was underhanded, Disrespectful to the Pittsburgh organization and unquestionably improper. For the 577 time, he implied that the Wings would like his services, you can't do that. Ray Shero concisely stated that you cannot Suggest such a thing to a player who is under contract with another club. This really isn't as complicated as some make it seem.
This ofcourse is based on the Bowman statements so yes this may or may not be true. I am predicating my comments on it as if it did happen. If it didn't then obviously it wouldn't be tampering.
So you can tell what Babcock was "implying" by reading what Scotty Bowman said? That's impressive.
If Babcock said that he obviously implied it. I don't believe Bowman is a liar so im inclined to believe it. You are changing your arguement though. You were suggesting that the comments Babcock made werent tampering. Now you are stating the comments may by Bowman may not be true. Ofcourse we don't know for sure. IF he said what is alleged then its tampering, if not it isnt.
Didn't change my argument at all. He didn't say "play" in Detroit and he certainly didn't negotiate anything. Now, if you are suggesting the Wings be fined for tampering because you feel him "implied" something, you'd be opening up a number of tampering cases. You can't operate on implications. Sorry to break that to you.
Jesse wrote:Rock, that's because there aren't grounds for a tampering investigation. By no means whatsoever. Confirmed by the written rule itself and the mouth of a person who has a hell of a lot more knowledge on this subject than any of us.
Only on this board, as you said.
Of course there aren't grounds. It's a completely ambiguous statement supposedly made by Babcock.However, that doesn't necessarily mean that it wasn't tampering.
therock48880 wrote:
He didn't offer any sort of a contract. Even if he had said, "You know, we have a lot of cap money this year" I can see how some would consider that tampering. But, saying what he said (even though neither Babcock nor Hossa has said he said that, the statement was made by Scotty, who was NOT on the ice) certainly is NOT tampering.
It's subtle but it's indeed tampering. Babcock can't be doing that, oh no no no. What he did was underhanded, Disrespectful to the Pittsburgh organization and unquestionably improper. For the 577 time, he implied that the Wings would like his services, you can't do that. Ray Shero concisely stated that you cannot Suggest such a thing to a player who is under contract with another club. This really isn't as complicated as some make it seem.
This ofcourse is based on the Bowman statements so yes this may or may not be true. I am predicating my comments on it as if it did happen. If it didn't then obviously it wouldn't be tampering.
So you can tell what Babcock was "implying" by reading what Scotty Bowman said? That's impressive.
If Babcock said that he obviously implied it. I don't believe Bowman is a liar so im inclined to believe it. You are changing your arguement though. You were suggesting that the comments Babcock made werent tampering. Now you are stating the comments may by Bowman may not be true. Ofcourse we don't know for sure. IF he said what is alleged then its tampering, if not it isnt.
Didn't change my argument at all. He didn't say "play" in Detroit and he certainly didn't negotiate anything. Now, if you are suggesting the Wings be fined for tampering because you feel him "implied" something, you'd be opening up a number of tampering cases. You can't operate on implications. Sorry to break that to you.
I didnt state there should be an investigation. That doesn't mean it isn't Tampering though. It was subtle but fairly obvious as to what the intentions were.
therock... is this thread referenced at the wings site? Just curious because people here a lot like to post other team's threads when it is as ridiculous as this one is.
bhaw wrote:therock... is this thread referenced at the wings site? Just curious because people here a lot like to post other team's threads when it is as ridiculous as this one is.
bhaw wrote:therock... is this thread referenced at the wings site? Just curious because people here a lot like to post other team's threads when it is as ridiculous as this one is.
I hope it is.
it should be. if its not, i might go post it myself so they can laugh at all of the panty bunching thats going on.
bhaw wrote:therock... is this thread referenced at the wings site? Just curious because people here a lot like to post other team's threads when it is as ridiculous as this one is.
I hope it is.
it should be. if its not, i might go post it myself so they can laugh at all of the panty bunching thats going on.
bhaw wrote:therock... is this thread referenced at the wings site? Just curious because people here a lot like to post other team's threads when it is as ridiculous as this one is.
I posted a similar thread this morning asking what the definition of tampering was. As far as I know, that was the first time the issue had been brought up there or on any of the other sites I visit regularly.