Around the NHL 2023-2024

[Bye Bye Blueston]

You're kind of acting like just because you watch a guy play a sport that you own him and have the right to know everything about his life and what's going on with him, right?

The only thing we have a right to know is what happens on the ice. He was suspended because he broke rules. Voynov was suspended because he broke rules, even though it did not happen on the ice.

Disgree. When player does something that causes him to no longer be eligible to play, I think fans have a right to know why.

 

[Xerloris]

Disgree. When player does something that causes him to no longer be eligible to play, I think fans have a right to know why.

Do we also have the right to know exactly why a player enters the substance abuse program?

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Do we also have the right to know exactly why a player enters the substance abuse program?

If a player voluntarily enters, no. If they are arrested for drugs, then yes. And that is I think key distinction, in one case it's player seeking help which should be lauded and encouraged; in the other case, it's the league (or the law) saying you can't play and in that case I feel we have a right to know.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Disgree. When player does something that causes him to no longer be eligible to play, I think fans have a right to know why.

Right. BECAUSE gambling on the games is legal, information like this needs to be public (why a player was suspended). Potential bettors on the NHL should have that full information when they decide on their wagers.

Furthermore if there was something going on in the league that potentially compromised competitive balance (akin to point shaving or whatever) they better shine light on that FAST.

Regarding the discussion about substance abuse. The player could choose to share the information, but otherwise NO its not our business. If he was mandated to attend as part of a punishment, then yes that should be public (the fact that he was ordered to do so, but the details of why should remain private). If he voluntarily goes, I don't have a problem with the team just saying he is on a leave of absence. His medical privacy has to be respected (legally), so I think you could argue they don't even need to say its for addiction treatment. Maybe say "medical leave" or something.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Right. BECAUSE gambling on the games is legal, information like this needs to be public (why a player was suspended). Potential bettors on the NHL should have that full information when they decide on their wagers.

Furthermore if there was something going on in the league that potentially compromised competitive balance (akin to point shaving or whatever) they better shine light on that FAST.

Regarding the discussion about substance abuse. The player could choose to share the information, but otherwise NO its not our business. If he was mandated to attend as part of a punishment, then yes that should be public (the fact that he was ordered to do so, but the details of why should remain private). If he voluntarily goes, I don't have a problem with the team just saying he is on a leave of absence. His medical privacy has to be respected (legally), so I think you could argue they don't even need to say its for addiction treatment. Maybe say "medical leave" or something.

Further to this, if a player takes a voluntary leave for personal reasons (medical or otherwise) I don't think that we have a right to know. He can choose to share, but shouldn't be obligated to and league and club shouldn't disclose.

When a club suspends a player for a game or 2 for "violation of team rules" I think that is within club's discretion as to whether they disclose reason for suspension. It's a small suspension and for that kind of thing I think it is okay to tell or not tell why.

When the league suspends a player for a significant number of games for an infraction (5+ games?), I feel the league owes that to fans to fully explain why.

 

[Xerloris]

Right. BECAUSE gambling on the games is legal, information like this needs to be public (why a player was suspended). Potential bettors on the NHL should have that full information when they decide on their wagers.

Furthermore if there was something going on in the league that potentially compromised competitive balance (akin to point shaving or whatever) they better shine light on that FAST.

Regarding the discussion about substance abuse. The player could choose to share the information, but otherwise NO its not our business. If he was mandated to attend as part of a punishment, then yes that should be public (the fact that he was ordered to do so, but the details of why should remain private). If he voluntarily goes, I don't have a problem with the team just saying he is on a leave of absence. His medical privacy has to be respected (legally), so I think you could argue they don't even need to say its for addiction treatment. Maybe say "medical leave" or something.

Further to this, if a player takes a voluntary leave for personal reasons (medical or otherwise) I don't think that we have a right to know. He can choose to share, but shouldn't be obligated to and league and club shouldn't disclose.

When a club suspends a player for a game or 2 for "violation of team rules" I think that is within club's discretion as to whether they disclose reason for suspension. It's a small suspension and for that kind of thing I think it is okay to tell or not tell why.

When the league suspends a player for a significant number of games for an infraction (5+ games?), I feel the league owes that to fans to fully explain why.

This is to both of you, I of course really want to know the why's. I would love to know I just don't think that the league is botching the PR on this because IMO at the end of the day I don't think that if it happened off ice we have a right to know full details. If they give them great but a right to know? I disagree. Since betting is legal how ever shouldn't they also have to give more exact details on injuries?

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

This is to both of you, I of course really want to know the why's. I would love to know I just don't think that the league is botching the PR on this because IMO at the end of the day I don't think that if it happened off ice we have a right to know full details. If they give them great but a right to know? I disagree. Since betting is legal how ever shouldn't they also have to give more exact details on injuries?

To your last point, this is a big issue. Accurate injury reports are definitely tied to the gambling. Other leagues (the NFL is the prime example) have pretty strict rules about the level of detail and timing of injury reports. I think there will be increasing pressure on the NHL to amend its policy. The notion that injured players will be targeted is probably not a good enough reason.

Yeah, the current vague injury reporting is an incongruity.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

This is to both of you, I of course really want to know the why's. I would love to know I just don't think that the league is botching the PR on this because IMO at the end of the day I don't think that if it happened off ice we have a right to know full details. If they give them great but a right to know? I disagree. Since betting is legal how ever shouldn't they also have to give more exact details on injuries?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/05/09/nhl-injuries-gambling/

 

[BlueOil]

oilers and flames got shutout 3-0 at their homes home tonight

both starting the season in the bottom 5, oilers worse than blackhawks currently

something'a rotten in alberta this october

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

oilers and flames got shutout 3-0 at their homes home tonight

both starting the season in the bottom 5, oilers worse than blackhawks currently

something'a rotten in alberta this october

The Heritage Classic is shaping up to be a doozy!

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

The Heritage Classic is shaping up to be a doozy!

mcdavid likely out and rasmus anderson suspended to boot.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

All sports leagues have made it abundantly clear that if a player is ineligible to play, for any reason, we get to know the reason why. In some cases, maybe not the complete, specific reason, but at least enough of a reason to know why the player isn't playing. For injuries we get designators and windows of time (Upper body, day to day. Lower body, 3-4 weeks.) If it's criminal related we get to find that out too (Trevor Bauer getting suspended for 2+ years over that whole fiasco). Even if it's mental health/drug related, we find out (They announce when players enter the program, maybe not the specific reason why (Guy was doing 10 lines a night off hookers), but they do announce that they enter and let's be honest, we all just assume it's drug related b/c 99.9% of the time that's what it is). All sports do this for transparency. People want to know if they are paying for tickets who they are going to get to see play. That's a huge draw of sports. They did it for gambling too (duh).

So yes, we should get to find out why he's suspended for legit 1/2 the season, which, as someone else said, it's basically one of the harshest penalties ever given out by the NHL. Especially since gambling is so pushed by the league, to suspend someone for gambling "Not on the NHL," which they themselves have admitted, makes people think the wool is getting pulled over their eyes.

 

[Thallis]

All sports leagues have made it abundantly clear that if a player is ineligible to play, for any reason, we get to know the reason why. In some cases, maybe not the complete, specific reason, but at least enough of a reason to know why the player isn't playing. For injuries we get designators and windows of time (Upper body, day to day. Lower body, 3-4 weeks.) If it's criminal related we get to find that out too (Trevor Bauer getting suspended for 2+ years over that whole fiasco). Even if it's mental health/drug related, we find out (They announce when players enter the program, maybe not the specific reason why (Guy was doing 10 lines a night off hookers), but they do announce that they enter and let's be honest, we all just assume it's drug related b/c 99.9% of the time that's what it is). All sports do this for transparency. People want to know if they are paying for tickets who they are going to get to see play. That's a huge draw of sports. They did it for gambling too (duh).

So yes, we should get to find out why he's suspended for legit 1/2 the season, which, as someone else said, it's basically one of the harshest penalties ever given out by the NHL. Especially since gambling is so pushed by the league, to suspend someone for gambling "Not on the NHL," which they themselves have admitted, makes people think the wool is getting pulled over their eyes.

Apparently the suspension was negotiated with the player himself, so the details not coming out was part of that agreement.

 

[tfriede2]

Apparently the suspension was negotiated with the player himself, so the details not coming out was part of that agreement.

That….seems highly unusual. Was the NHL intent on avoiding a dispute with the NHLPA? Why negotiate with the player when the NHL supposedly should hold all the cards (gambling pun not intended, but it fits)? Maybe the player revealed a larger operation or outed others…that would make sense why the NHL would negotiate.

 

[joe galiba]

the NHL is probably contractually restricted from releasing certain info about union employees (players) without approval from the player

 

[BlueOil]

All sports leagues have made it abundantly clear that if a player is ineligible to play, for any reason, we get to know the reason why. In some cases, maybe not the complete, specific reason, but at least enough of a reason to know why the player isn't playing. For injuries we get designators and windows of time (Upper body, day to day. Lower body, 3-4 weeks.) If it's criminal related we get to find that out too (Trevor Bauer getting suspended for 2+ years over that whole fiasco). Even if it's mental health/drug related, we find out (They announce when players enter the program, maybe not the specific reason why (Guy was doing 10 lines a night off hookers), but they do announce that they enter and let's be honest, we all just assume it's drug related b/c 99.9% of the time that's what it is). All sports do this for transparency. People want to know if they are paying for tickets who they are going to get to see play. That's a huge draw of sports. They did it for gambling too (duh).

So yes, we should get to find out why he's suspended for legit 1/2 the season, which, as someone else said, it's basically one of the harshest penalties ever given out by the NHL. Especially since gambling is so pushed by the league, to suspend someone for gambling "Not on the NHL," which they themselves have admitted, makes people think the wool is getting pulled over their eyes.

we still don't know wtf happened with nichuskin in seattle during the playoffs last year. nhl eventually said he was allowed to play going forward, team said he'd be at training camp, and the rest was swept under the rug all summer

teams can give a vague reason and move on

 

[Xerloris]

All sports leagues have made it abundantly clear that if a player is ineligible to play, for any reason, we get to know the reason why. In some cases, maybe not the complete, specific reason, but at least enough of a reason to know why the player isn't playing. For injuries we get designators and windows of time (Upper body, day to day. Lower body, 3-4 weeks.) If it's criminal related we get to find that out too (Trevor Bauer getting suspended for 2+ years over that whole fiasco). Even if it's mental health/drug related, we find out (They announce when players enter the program, maybe not the specific reason why (Guy was doing 10 lines a night off hookers), but they do announce that they enter and let's be honest, we all just assume it's drug related b/c 99.9% of the time that's what it is). All sports do this for transparency. People want to know if they are paying for tickets who they are going to get to see play. That's a huge draw of sports. They did it for gambling too (duh).

So yes, we should get to find out why he's suspended for legit 1/2 the season, which, as someone else said, it's basically one of the harshest penalties ever given out by the NHL. Especially since gambling is so pushed by the league, to suspend someone for gambling "Not on the NHL," which they themselves have admitted, makes people think the wool is getting pulled over their eyes.

Being told he was suspended for gambling is just as good of a reason as being told "injury, upper body 1-2 weeks"

 

[mk80]

Regarding the Pinto suspension, I do think the league needs to provide more clarity on why he's received 41 games.

The Todd Bertuzzi incident only resulted in him missing 20 NHL games, plus the lockout season. The IIHF tacked on there own discipline, but in terms of the NHL alone, Pinto has been determined to have done something more serious....

 

[Xerloris]

Regarding the Pinto suspension, I do think the league needs to provide more clarity on why he's received 41 games.

The Todd Bertuzzi incident only resulted in him missing 20 NHL games, plus the lockout season. The IIHF tacked on there own discipline, but in terms of the NHL alone, Pinto has been determined to have done something more serious....

He f***ed with their money. That's why it's 41 and not 20.

 

[Brian39]

That….seems highly unusual. Was the NHL intent on avoiding a dispute with the NHLPA? Why negotiate with the player when the NHL supposedly should hold all the cards (gambling pun not intended, but it fits)? Maybe the player revealed a larger operation or outed others…that would make sense why the NHL would negotiate.

The most recent 32 Thoughts goes into detail about it.

Friedman essentially said that the league wanted more than 41 games, but Bettman wanted to avoid an appeal from the PA.

There was also some detail about what Pinto did, although the details were light and Friedman is clearly not 100% on all the details. It sounds like he had an account at a legal sportsbook (which requires you to use your real name), that sportsbook monitored his account closely since he is a pro athlete, the sportsbook believed that he gave another person his log in information, and then the sportsbook alerted the league that a 3rd party was making bets on his behalf.

Friedman made it very clear that no one would confirm or deny if there were any bets on things he shouldn't have bet on.

It sounds very much like he was trying to get around location requirements for gambling. These apps track your location and you can't place a bet if you are located in a jurisdiction that prohibits it. My impression is that he was having a buddy log in to his account at his 'home' location to place bets for him while he was on the road. The sportsbook caught him because his schedule is very public and the league very much wanted to make an example out of a player involving another person in gambling and/or gambling while on a work trip to an area that doesn't allow it.

To add to the complexity, the NHL doesn't have a written gambling policy beyond the fact that you absolutely can't bet on hockey. Friedman said that he is officially suspended under the portion of the CBA that lets the Commissioner issue suspensions for any off ice activity that is damaging to the league. I think the league got caught with their pants down without a detailed gambling policy and was worried that an appeal would drastically bring the number down. And I think Pinto was probably wiling to take a half year to keep his gambling amounts away from the public. He doesn't have a contract at the moment and it didn't look close. He very well might be better off financially just eating 41 games than drawing this out.

The NHL said he didn't bet on NHL games and the players are allowed to bet on other sports. It sounds like the bets were made on his account, so I don't know that there is indication that he had someone else bet on hockey for him. I think half a year is too steep for spoofing your location, but I do get the league's desire to come down hard. I think they need to get a detailed gambling protocol in writing ASAP.

 

[Majorityof1]

The most recent 32 Thoughts goes into detail about it.

Friedman essentially said that the league wanted more than 41 games, but Bettman wanted to avoid an appeal from the PA.

There was also some detail about what Pinto did, although the details were light and Friedman is clearly not 100% on all the details. It sounds like he had an account at a legal sportsbook (which requires you to use your real name), that sportsbook monitored his account closely since he is a pro athlete, the sportsbook believed that he gave another person his log in information, and then the sportsbook alerted the league that a 3rd party was making bets on his behalf.

Friedman made it very clear that no one would confirm or deny if there were any bets on things he shouldn't have bet on.

It sounds very much like he was trying to get around location requirements for gambling. These apps track your location and you can't place a bet if you are located in a jurisdiction that prohibits it. My impression is that he was having a buddy log in to his account at his 'home' location to place bets for him while he was on the road. The sportsbook caught him because his schedule is very public and the league very much wanted to make an example out of a player involving another person in gambling and/or gambling while on a work trip to an area that doesn't allow it.

To add to the complexity, the NHL doesn't have a written gambling policy beyond the fact that you absolutely can't bet on hockey. Friedman said that he is officially suspended under the portion of the CBA that lets the Commissioner issue suspensions for any off ice activity that is damaging to the league. I think the league got caught with their pants down without a detailed gambling policy and was worried that an appeal would drastically bring the number down. And I think Pinto was probably wiling to take a half year to keep his gambling amounts away from the public. He doesn't have a contract at the moment and it didn't look close. He very well might be better off financially just eating 41 games than drawing this out.

The NHL said he didn't bet on NHL games and the players are allowed to bet on other sports. It sounds like the bets were made on his account, so I don't know that there is indication that he had someone else bet on hockey for him. I think half a year is too steep for spoofing your location, but I do get the league's desire to come down hard. I think they need to get a detailed gambling protocol in writing ASAP.

That's way too steep for that. You can try to kill a guy with your stick and get 10 times less. Try to hurt an NHL player.....slap on the wrist. Accidentally hurt the NHL bottom line...watch the f*** out.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

The most recent 32 Thoughts goes into detail about it.

Friedman essentially said that the league wanted more than 41 games, but Bettman wanted to avoid an appeal from the PA.

There was also some detail about what Pinto did, although the details were light and Friedman is clearly not 100% on all the details. It sounds like he had an account at a legal sportsbook (which requires you to use your real name), that sportsbook monitored his account closely since he is a pro athlete, the sportsbook believed that he gave another person his log in information, and then the sportsbook alerted the league that a 3rd party was making bets on his behalf.

Friedman made it very clear that no one would confirm or deny if there were any bets on things he shouldn't have bet on.

It sounds very much like he was trying to get around location requirements for gambling. These apps track your location and you can't place a bet if you are located in a jurisdiction that prohibits it. My impression is that he was having a buddy log in to his account at his 'home' location to place bets for him while he was on the road. The sportsbook caught him because his schedule is very public and the league very much wanted to make an example out of a player involving another person in gambling and/or gambling while on a work trip to an area that doesn't allow it.

To add to the complexity, the NHL doesn't have a written gambling policy beyond the fact that you absolutely can't bet on hockey. Friedman said that he is officially suspended under the portion of the CBA that lets the Commissioner issue suspensions for any off ice activity that is damaging to the league. I think the league got caught with their pants down without a detailed gambling policy and was worried that an appeal would drastically bring the number down. And I think Pinto was probably wiling to take a half year to keep his gambling amounts away from the public. He doesn't have a contract at the moment and it didn't look close. He very well might be better off financially just eating 41 games than drawing this out.

The NHL said he didn't bet on NHL games and the players are allowed to bet on other sports. It sounds like the bets were made on his account, so I don't know that there is indication that he had someone else bet on hockey for him. I think half a year is too steep for spoofing your location, but I do get the league's desire to come down hard. I think they need to get a detailed gambling protocol in writing ASAP.

Listening to 32T pod it was unclear to me whether he let someone else use his account to make their own bets or had them place his bets for reason you described. I was thinking he granted someone else access and they made hockey bets on their own and that is why league wanted to hammer him and he was able to show that he wasn’t physically the one doing it and argue that they weren’t his bets so league and nhlpa cut deal. Don’t know if that is true bc we don’t have full info.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

The most recent 32 Thoughts goes into detail about it.

Friedman essentially said that the league wanted more than 41 games, but Bettman wanted to avoid an appeal from the PA.

There was also some detail about what Pinto did, although the details were light and Friedman is clearly not 100% on all the details. It sounds like he had an account at a legal sportsbook (which requires you to use your real name), that sportsbook monitored his account closely since he is a pro athlete, the sportsbook believed that he gave another person his log in information, and then the sportsbook alerted the league that a 3rd party was making bets on his behalf.

Friedman made it very clear that no one would confirm or deny if there were any bets on things he shouldn't have bet on.

It sounds very much like he was trying to get around location requirements for gambling. These apps track your location and you can't place a bet if you are located in a jurisdiction that prohibits it. My impression is that he was having a buddy log in to his account at his 'home' location to place bets for him while he was on the road. The sportsbook caught him because his schedule is very public and the league very much wanted to make an example out of a player involving another person in gambling and/or gambling while on a work trip to an area that doesn't allow it.

To add to the complexity, the NHL doesn't have a written gambling policy beyond the fact that you absolutely can't bet on hockey. Friedman said that he is officially suspended under the portion of the CBA that lets the Commissioner issue suspensions for any off ice activity that is damaging to the league. I think the league got caught with their pants down without a detailed gambling policy and was worried that an appeal would drastically bring the number down. And I think Pinto was probably wiling to take a half year to keep his gambling amounts away from the public. He doesn't have a contract at the moment and it didn't look close. He very well might be better off financially just eating 41 games than drawing this out.

The NHL said he didn't bet on NHL games and the players are allowed to bet on other sports. It sounds like the bets were made on his account, so I don't know that there is indication that he had someone else bet on hockey for him. I think half a year is too steep for spoofing your location, but I do get the league's desire to come down hard. I think they need to get a detailed gambling protocol in writing ASAP.

For the league to say he "didn't be on NHL game" if a 2nd party bet on NHL games with his account...that's pretty mealy mouthed. Messy situation.

They better get a detailed policy on gambling sorted out. This is only going to grow as an issue in current times.

 

[Klank Loves You]

If he was betting on NHL games, 2nd hand or otherwise, 41 games is a slap on the wrist. I dont care if it's not his own games, that should be a lifetime ban.

 

[DoubleK81]

The only thing I can think of is that he was giving someone else information to bet on his games, but I would think the league would have gone for a permanent ban.