Wednesday, July 16, 2008

KHL enters PR war

I had this note dropped into my inbox today from public relations company Ketchum Sports Marketing:
At a meeting on July 15, representatives of all KHL clubs and senior executives reached unanimous agreement to impose a moratorium on signing NHL players, with the exception of free agents.

The KHL clubs and executives support the decisions made in a meeting on July 10 in Zurich among senior executives of the KHL, IIHF and the NHL and stated in a special Memorandum of Agreement.

The KHL is acting under the assumption that the Moratorium shall be honored by all Parties and shall be valid from July 10, 2008 until signing of the Memorandum of Agreement no later than August 1, 2008.
There's not a lot new there, although this does apparently come by way of the "KHL Press Service."
.

Labels:

9 Comments:

At 3:55 PM, July 16, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is a player without NHL contract a NHL player?

 
At 4:06 PM, July 16, 2008, Blogger Doogie2K said...

If a KHL player without a contract is still a KHL player, then I guess, by their logic, yes. By any real logic, no, but by their logic, yes.

 
At 4:19 PM, July 16, 2008, Blogger The Forechecker said...

I received this too, and am wondering what, if any, import to read into it.

The one odd bit is that it says the moratorium will be honored from July 10, which I think is the day Radulov signed his deal. So is that to be covered by the moratorium or did they set the line just a smidge too late?

 
At 4:43 PM, July 16, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let Radulov play and stay in Russia. In two or three years he wants to come back and then make him play that unfinished deal out in Nashville. Same way as NHL did with Jashin some years ago.

 
At 5:07 PM, July 16, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, what's a big deal about Radulov? Let him go. Obviously KHL will insist that Radulov signed with KHL before an agreement. It is clear.

 
At 5:35 PM, July 16, 2008, Blogger J. Michael Neal said...

If a KHL player without a contract is still a KHL player, then I guess, by their logic, yes. By any real logic, no, but by their logic, yes.

By NHL logic, a player without a contract can still be considered the property of a particular team. Until the reserve clause is eliminated, I don't have much moral sympathy for the NHL. They may be legally correct, and the courts should then enforce the reserve clause. I will, however, strongly discount the howls of outrage.

 
At 6:10 PM, July 16, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

NHL can hold player's rights because players have agreed to this in negotiations between NHLPA and NHL.

 
At 8:09 PM, July 16, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Radulov made a huge mistake. Since KHL doesn't have KHLPA, it would be one way street. Poor lil' rich Radulov...

 
At 11:00 PM, July 16, 2008, Blogger J. Michael Neal said...

NHL can hold player's rights because players have agreed to this in negotiations between NHLPA and NHL.

Yes, I agree that they have the legal right. Particularly when discussing draft picks, I still don't think that it's right.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link


.

Free Page Rank Checker
eXTReMe Tracker