Blackhawks sued (again) by teammate of Kyle Beach for sexual assault

[Voight]

The players WERE aware. They made fun of Beach. Quennville was aware.

They werent aware at the time. Sopel claimed they were but couldn't back it up when interviewed.

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Sopel definitely thinks everyone knew. So does Boyton. Quenneville definitely knew.

I can't say for certain what the players knew, but I have a hard time believe they didn't know at least something. Its really hard to crucify someone without knowing for certain.

Beach stated that teammates used slurs and taunted him with references to Aldrich during practices.

 

[hawksrule]

Oh no, you see, a competitive advantage isn't preventing a disadvantage. As long as the rest of the NHL has video coaches, there was nothing wrong with continuing to employ Aldrich until the playoffs were over. Every team had the same advantage, you see. Other than the fact that the other video coaches, as far as we know, weren't at a risk to sexually assault the players but that's semantics when you really think about it.

Not Chicago's fault the NHL Constitution sucks, move on stop talking about it, check out this Bedard highlight. Things are great!

An unfair competitive advantage implies an uneven playing field. On the ice it was a level playing field, no matter how much you wish it wasn’t.

 

[TLEH]

Beach stated that teammates used slurs and taunted him with references to Aldrich during practices.

I know. I saw it. I believe him. I'm saying I don't know who he was referring to. Who said it. Who knew.

Court of public opinion isn't always right. I'm not going to sit up here and sewer someone without knowing for sure.

 

[Romang67]

If USC had to vacate their college football title for a non-criminal infraction, then tye same should be done for the 2010 Stanley Cup.

Following in the footsteps of the NCAA is literally never a good idea.

 

[Jugitsu]

Never going to see an organization lose picks for criminal stuff. Someone hits their wife it’s a 3rd. Sexual assault a 1st. Murder multiple 1sts?

Slippery slope they’ll never start.


This isn’t anything new. Another player from the report is suing. But you wouldn’t know.

I don’t think it’s a slippery slope at all. If an organization hides the fact that one of their employee committed a murder then f*** yeah they should lose picks and more. The nature of the crime in itself isn’t why Chicago should suffer more, but how they handled it.

 

[Romang67]

Doesnt change my point. You cover up a sex crime to not distract from your effort to win a sports championship, you lose your precious title.

Okay. The Chicago Blackhawks now have 5 Stanley Cup wins. Now what?

Who was the 2005 Heisman winner?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Who was the 2005 Heisman winner?

 

[HanSolo]

An unfair competitive advantage implies an uneven playing field. On the ice it was a level playing field, no matter how much you wish it wasn’t.

Except that Aldrich should have been suspended immediately pending the investigation into the matter and it should have been reported to the police. If that means emergency hiring a new video coach or having one of the assistant coaches assume double duties while the team internally investigates (e.g. Taking claims of sexual assault seriously in the interest of protecting the players from additional future harm) with interviews that may be a distraction to the players, you take with it the decline in the team's video review and distractions about the ongoing employ of a sexual predator on the staff.

Your team forewent these actions in the interest of preserving the even playing field for themselves and continued to put the team at risk by waiting until after the playoffs were over to remove Aldrich from the locker room. Foregoing the safety of your employees for the interest of a business gain is hardly maintaining a fair competitive playing field. It's reckless and callous negligence, reprehensible, and morally bankrupt.

A 2 million dollar fine and some firings doesn't even come close to matching their wrongdoing. But keep going to bat against some who dare suggest that supplemental punishment should exceed the bounds of the NHL Constitution which was, demonstrably, less than a pittance.

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

I know. I saw it. I believe him. I'm saying I don't know who he was referring to. Who said it. Who knew.

Court of public opinion isn't always right. I'm not going to sit up here and sewer someone without knowing for sure.

We’ll never know those exact details, but it’s not a good look on the leadership of the team that stuff like that was apparently openly said during practices and seemingly nothing was done to stop it from continuing.

 

[hawksrule]

Except that Aldrich should have been suspended immediately pending the investigation into the matter and it should have been reported to the police. If that means emergency hiring a new video coach or having one of the assistant coaches assume double duties while the team internally investigates (e.g. Taking claims of sexual assault seriously in the interest of protecting the players from additional future harm) with interviews that may be a distraction to the players, you take with it the decline in the team's video review and distractions about the ongoing employ of a sexual predator on the staff.

Your team forewent these actions in the interest of preserving the even playing field for themselves and continued to put the team at risk by waiting until after the playoffs were over to remove Aldrich from the locker room. Foregoing the safety of your employees for the interest of a business gain is hardly maintaining a fair competitive playing field. It's reckless and callous negligence, reprehensible, and morally bankrupt.

A 2 million dollar fine and some firings doesn't even come close to matching their wrongdoing. But keep going to bat against some who dare suggest that supplemental punishment should exceed the bounds of the NHL Constitution which was, demonstrably, less than a pittance.

I don’t disagree with any of it, except for the bolded, which is really the only thing we were discussing. Foregoing the safety of the Blackhawks own employees and thereby putting them at risk (more or less quoting your words) provided them no advantage over other teams they played in the playoffs.

 

[HTFN]

Except that Aldrich should have been suspended immediately pending the investigation into the matter and it should have been reported to the police. If that means emergency hiring a new video coach or having one of the assistant coaches assume double duties while the team internally investigates (e.g. Taking claims of sexual assault seriously in the interest of protecting the players from additional future harm) with interviews that may be a distraction to the players, you take with it the decline in the team's video review and distractions about the ongoing employ of a sexual predator on the staff.

Your team forewent these actions in the interest of preserving the even playing field for themselves and continued to put the team at risk by waiting until after the playoffs were over to remove Aldrich from the locker room. Foregoing the safety of your employees for the interest of a business gain is hardly maintaining a fair competitive playing field. It's reckless and callous negligence, reprehensible, and morally bankrupt.

A 2 million dollar fine and some firings doesn't even come close to matching their wrongdoing. But keep going to bat against some who dare suggest that supplemental punishment should exceed the bounds of the NHL Constitution which was, demonstrably, less than a pittance.

A 2 million dollar fine probably doesn't even dip into cup merchandise, if I'm guessing. Could be wrong but super fans probably ate a good bit of that fine through Cup related stuff alone between tickets and commemorative stuff.

Even at the basest reports, the fact that they can go into a meeting after the... Conference Finals(?) if I'm right and have Quenneville reportedly calling it a "distraction" was all I really needed to hear. If doing the right thing is put off because you don't want to shake up the locker room, it's a competitive advantage. The whole idea of putting it off is because you feel like you may lose the competitive advantage if it becomes an issue while games are played. That doesn't happen often with middling, weird business decisions and technical fines because the players don' give a shit. It may not manifest in cap dollars or anything else, but they knowingly put off doing the right thing so that they could have a shot at winning and then did.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Is Aldrich in prison?

 

[HTFN]

I don’t disagree with any of it, except for the bolded, which is really the only thing we were discussing. Foregoing the safety of the Blackhawks own employees and thereby putting them at risk (more or less quoting your words) provided them no advantage over other teams they played in the playoffs.

See above: if the Blackhawks were being fined for violating some truly white collar rule nobody would care, the team would operate as normal.

The decision to call it a "distraction" means it would potentially create unrest in the locker room, which is absolutely where you start questioning whether addressing the situation properly in the moment or waiting becomes a competitive advantage.

The motivation to hide it and keep Aldrich around until the offseason was to keep the room focused on winning. Is that not a competitive advantage when you should be doing something else? Yes, it's not motivated by creating one, but it's certainly motivated by a refusal to lose or damage one.

 

[TLEH]

Is Aldrich in prison?

He went and is already out. He went for 9 months. He is also a registered sex offender.

Joke of a sentence in my opinion.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I don’t disagree with any of it, except for the bolded, which is really the only thing we were discussing. Foregoing the safety of the Blackhawks own employees and thereby putting them at risk (more or less quoting your words) provided them no advantage over other teams they played in the playoffs.

Shocking that your shilling for the Hawks,

 

[hawksrule]

See above: if the Blackhawks were being fined for violating some truly white collar rule nobody would care, the team would operate as normal.

The decision to call it a "distraction" means it would potentially create unrest in the locker room, which is absolutely where you start questioning whether addressing the situation properly in the moment or waiting becomes a competitive advantage.

Focus isn’t an unfair competitive advantage. Assume both teams were 100% focused, neither has an edge in that department.

Shocking that your shilling for the Hawks,

You’re full of those insightful quips.

 

[TLEH]

See above: if the Blackhawks were being fined for violating some truly white collar rule nobody would care, the team would operate as normal.

The decision to call it a "distraction" means it would potentially create unrest in the locker room, which is absolutely where you start questioning whether addressing the situation properly in the moment or waiting becomes a competitive advantage.

The motivation to hide it and keep Aldrich around until the offseason was to keep the room focused on winning. Is that not a competitive advantage when you should be doing something else? Yes, it's not motivated by creating one, but it's certainly motivated by a refusal to lose or damage one.

You can clearly argue that not removing him was to the Blackhawks benefit. But that didn't give them an advantage over the Flyers. Just didn't put them at a disadvantage.

I understand the thought process. Could atleast argue it. Bettman could have tried that. Probably would have lost that battle to a third party court if the Blackhawks challenged it. Maybe they wouldn't have. IDK.

 

[HTFN]

Focus isn’t an unfair competitive advantage. Assume both teams were 100% focused, neither has an edge in that department.


You’re full of those insightful quips.

The minute you delay a criminal investigation to retain said focus, I think that argument starts losing a lot of steam.

"It's bad for the boys" is not a reason to cover up sexual assault.

You can clearly argue that not removing him was to the Blackhawks benefit. But that didn't give them an advantage over the Flyers. Just didn't put them at a disadvantage.

I understand the thought process. Could atleast argue it. Bettman could have tried that. Probably would have lost that battle to a third party court if the Blackhawks challenged it. Maybe they wouldn't have. IDK.

Like I said, I agree that it doesn't provide a material advantage, but I think a failure to do the right thing in due process because you don't want to distract the locker room means that if they do in fact find impropriety (and they did), you deserve to be held accountable for maintaining an advantage even if it is only the knowing prolonging of losing one.

Penn State didn't get a material advantage from Sandusky being Sandusky, but it absolutely paid a steep cost for allowing him to be involved in winning programs by protecting him and I don't see this as functionally much different outside of scale.

 

[HanSolo]

I don’t disagree with any of it, except for the bolded, which is really the only thing we were discussing. Foregoing the safety of the Blackhawks own employees and thereby putting them at risk (more or less quoting your words) provided them no advantage over other teams they played in the playoffs.

You're right. That part of it is a disadvantage to the safety of the players. But the adverse impact to the players continuing to be exposed to Aldrich is just one element.

When a team gets a key injury during the playoffs, it's a disadvantage. They don't get to make an emergency trade for a comparable replacement player because (among other considerations)curing the disadvantage would, be it's function, be an unfair competitive advantage.

I understand that circumstances are a little different here but I think most would agree that waiting to take action against Aldrich until after the playoffs were over was wrongdoing. Where deprivation of a professional video coach and player distraction that would ensue from an internal investigation would be disadvantages that burden Chicago's ability to compete, foregoing appropriate action to prevent such disadvantages that would have and should have flowed naturally from an appropriate response by the Blackhawks is, in and of itself, an unjust advantage and one that was taken in the interest of competitive goals over the safety and wellbeing of the players.

 

[BLONG7]

He went and is already out. He went for 9 months. He is also a registered sex offender.

Joke of a sentence in my opinion.

Tap on the wrists for everyone involved..............................next, they will win another lottery.
Good job by Gary....

 

[hawksrule]

The minute you delay a criminal investigation to retain said focus, I think that argument starts losing a lot of steam.

"It's bad for the boys" is not a reason to cover up sexual assault.

Didn’t say it was. Also doesn’t confer a competitive advantage over another team.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Focus isn’t an unfair competitive advantage. Assume both teams were 100% focused, neither has an edge in that department.


You’re full of those insightful quips.

Least I’m more insightful as opposed to standing up for sexual assault.

 

[Saga of the Elk]

Didn’t say it was. Also doesn’t confer a competitive advantage over another team.

Yes it does. Because if the criminal conduct were adequately exposed and punished, there would be consequences.

 

[HTFN]

Didn’t say it was. Also doesn’t confer a competitive advantage over another team.

But it does.

Doing the right thing at the right time means this comes out at a bad time for the Hawks, which complicates their singular focus. That's why they waited, this is very, very clear from the reports, Quenneville basically says as much point blank and it's well-established territory.

No, it's not the same as just bringing in some illegal high octane free agent, but if you refusing to do the right thing results in your ability to remain competitive when you were genuinely worried it would be a problem you're still breaking rules to be competitive, which is fundamentally the same thing.