Toggle sidebar

Mike Richards VI (UGH): The Armageddon Edition (MOD NOTE POST #1)

Status
Not open for further replies.
raswilliam said:
Didnt the league have to ok this before the contract was terminated? That tells me it is something big. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...

I believe so but I don't think that necessarily means it will stick. The league has it's own agenda and while I doubt they'd just terminate a contract to cause a **** storm, many people believe they may be trying to set a precedent on some level. From everything I've read over the past day or so, labor contracts are hard to void. Not many have been voided in professional sports. But until we actually know what Mike is accused of, it's hard to really have any perspective of what will happen.
 
efhank said:
I'm no lawyer, but at which point is the contract legally and fully terminated? Can one party unilaterally just declare a contract terminated, and then, that makes it so? To me, wouldn't the actual consummation of the "breach" be final when due course has ran its process?
Click to expand...

A contract can be terminated by one party if they feel the other party has violated the terms and language of the contract unless there is language specifying otherwise. The other party can then dispute the termination and take legal action if they have avenues to do so.

You do not need to wait until an investigation completes to determine if the party actually broke the rules of the contract, but you should have a reasonable understanding that the terms of the contract was violated.

Every contract is different however. When I work as a contract photographer I have it stipulated in my contract just exactly what takes place if there is a dispute, a cap on damages equal to the contract value, and so on. I also work as a contracted instructor, and that contract is considered at-will. Even though it's for a set length of time (two semesters), the contract is written in that either party can terminate at any time for any reason. The other party can dispute, but only through arbitration.

Since Richards is under a CBA, he obviously has recourse and pathways to dispute at his disposal. This same CBA gives the Kings the right to terminate his contract for what they reasonably believe to be a breach of the language.
 
Once a person is arrested Canadian Police have a few choices

1. Charge and hold for court, 24 hours to hold before accused is put before the court

2. Charge and release on an Apperance Notice, Promise to Appear, Recognizance/ Undertaking
- this is done on certain charges when identity is proven, not a flight risk, and continuation of offence is not believed to happen.

3. arrest/ detain for 24 hours for investigation, then release without charges. Charges can be sought later.

Who knows what is coming down the pipe. Once charged and in Court for trial it becomes public unless a publication ban is put one which is always the case with people under 18. As an adult a publication ban is rare.

Also while a case is being investigated it can sometimes be a detriment to investigations, people's safety, etc if information is leaked. This is common.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the upcoming days/ weeks
 
Scottkmlps said:
I'm wondering if the Kings lose, and he gets assigned to the AHL and he doesn't report and they suspend him without pay, would his cap hit count? Or is that's grounds for termination?
Click to expand...

If he doesn't report, then that's grounds for termination. It no different than he's retiring I believe. Not reporting would still involve his Cap Recapture Penalty.
 
Reaper45 said:
Indeed.

...

So was the border stuff ever confirmed? No arrest? I'm to lazy to dig through the thread.
Click to expand...
You support Soton, right? Gonna hold on to Schneiderlin? Whatever you do, don't sell him to to the Arse.

And yeah, there was a report this morning that RCMP and Border Services are conducting some kind of investigation.
 
If Richards were to win, I wonder if he would have rights to his entire pay, not just something like 2/3 under a buyout, or would he even have to show up and play if he wins? He would be damaged to some extent by this termination, wouldn't he? Or, would everything just reverse to a state of as if nothing ever happened in the first place, meaning the Kings never terminated his contract?
 
efhank said:
My gut thinks the same thing. I'm sure it might not be a good thing, but to terminate?
Click to expand...

Just curious, you seem pretty adamant that even if its criminal that the Kings shouldn't be allowed to terminate Richards, despite the conduct clause in the CBA. Just how bad a crime would it have to be for you to think terminating a player is acceptable? Murder?

I'm just surprised people are so against terminating a players contract even if serious criminal charges may be involved. I'm a pretty union supportive kind of guy but that's not unconditional. If this is as serious as people ares saying and the PA fights it I hope theres a huge backlash against the PA. There are points where employment should be ended for people who do things like seriously running afoul of the law, especially in high profile occupations like a pro athlete. I mean, a speeding ticket or getting in a fight in a bar, ok. But if a player is a rapist, a drug dealer, or running a dog fighting operation, screw em. (Not saying any of these specifically applies to Richards). People can say "well the timing sure is convenient. This sets a precedent for teams to terminate contracts they dont like when a player screws up." If a player doesn"t want that to risk contract termination, there's a simple solution - don't commit a serious crime.

I'm really torn on this situation with Richards. For his sake, I hope it isnt as serious as it seems to be. For the teams image as well. On the other hand, if this is a serious charge, its obviously better for the team if we can end his contract and its totally justified. Voynov (allegedly), Stoll, Richards... what happened to class and being character guys? I don't expect players to be angels, but come on. There's a character problem in the Kings locker room right now. It seems there are some bad apples on this team and its hurt the org and the teams ability to compete. They need to be disciplined or moved.
 
Last edited:
Chain said:
Just curious, you seem pretty adamant that even if its criminal that the Kings shouldn't be allowed to terminate Richards, despite the conduct clause in the CBA. Just how bad a crime would it have to be for you to think terminating a player is acceptable? Murder?

I'm just surprised people are so against terminating a players contract even if serious criminal charges may be involved. I'm a pretty union supportive kind of guy but that's not unconditional. If this is as serious as people ares saying and the PA fights it I hope theres a huge backlash against the PA. There are points where employment should be ended for people who do things like seriously running afoul of the law, especially in high profile occupations like a pro athlete. I mean, a speeding ticket or getting in a fight in a bar, ok. But if a player is a rapist, a drug dealer, or running a dog fighting operation, screw em. (Not saying any of these specifically applies to Richards). People can say "well the timing sure is convenient. This sets a precedent for teams to terminate contracts they dont like when a player screws up." If a player doesn"t want that to risk contract termination, there's a simple solution - don't commit a serious crime.

I'm really torn on this situation with Richards. For his sake, I hope it isnt as serious as it seems to be. For the teams image as well. On the other hand, if this is a serious charge, its obviously better for the team if we can end his contract and its totally justified. Voynov, Stoll, Richards... what happened to class and being character guys? I don't expect players to be angels, but come on. There's a character problem in the Kings locker room right now. It seems there are some bad apples on this team and its hurt the org and the teams ability to compete. They need to be disciplined or moved.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm taking out of all of this as well, and is ultimately more important. DL always wanted to get the right guys, which had tons of character, a good upbringing (sadly why Patty O'Sullivan didn't make it), and were good in the locker room. I honestly feel like now that Mitchell is gone, there's a void in that locker room that can't be filled.

My gut tells me that Richards' contract won't be terminated because its a super rare thing to happen in professional sports.
 
Omni Owl said:
This is what I'm taking out of all of this as well, and is ultimately more important. DL always wanted to get the right guys, which had tons of character, a good upbringing (sadly why Patty O'Sullivan didn't make it), and were good in the locker room. I honestly feel like now that Mitchell is gone, there's a void in that locker room that can't be filled.

My gut tells me that Richards' contract won't be terminated because its a super rare thing to happen in professional sports.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they know that it's super rare, why would they bother going down this route if they didn't think they could win? it just doesn't make sense, why would they just throw a hail mary with potentially significant repercussions instead of buying out or trading, which is what they had every intention of doing before this all came out?
 
Sources tell me that Richards tried to smuggle a torta and Inn n Out with him across the border.
 
gnarls barkley said:
I'm sure they know that it's super rare, why would they bother going down this route if they didn't think they could win? it just doesn't make sense, why would they just throw a hail mary with potentially significant repercussions instead of buying out or trading, which is what they had every intention of doing before this all came out?
Click to expand...

Knowing DL has a history of law makes me hope that he knows what he's doing. It would look awful on him and the organization if he did this for some petty reason, which I don't really see. We're gonna have to wait until the stories out, because no one knows enough to really say what's going to happen.
 
The funny thing about a termination vs. the buyout is that for next year, the termination cost us more than the buyout as far as cap hit. $1.32M vs. $ 1.22M.
 
Omni Owl said:
Knowing DL has a history of law makes me hope that he knows what he's doing. It would look awful on him and the organization if he did this for some petty reason, which I don't really see. We're gonna have to wait until the stories out, because no one knows enough to really say what's going to happen.
Click to expand...

yeah, completely agree - I don't think there's any way he'd put that much at risk without a strong case. this is about a lot more than just a cap hit.
 
What is semi telling is Richards and his team have said nothing.
Not "the truth will come out"
"My client will be video vindicated "
"There's two sides to every story"
"It's just a misunderstanding "
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom