Torts Suspended For 15 Days; Bob Hartley Fined $25,000

[juliansteed]

Really can't make a case against Hartley because it's all assumption. The reason I make assumption is based on his comments that "they were playing well". I find it hilarious that the NHL takes this more seriously than what players actually do.

Didn't think giving Hartley anything was the right call at first but after thinking about it a bit, I don't mind it. But it should not be for the players he started, but for what those players did right off the opening faceoff. Coaches should be able to start whoever they want. Otherwise, why did the officials allow it. But when players try to fight right off the faceoff, I think the coach needs to bear some of the responsibility. In which case, it shouldn't matter whether they were top line guys or minor league call-ups. Now we don't know for sure that he sent them out to fight, but it wouldn't be the first time and won't be the last time that a coach is penalized for not being able to control his players. NHL coaches are very well paid for all the times their players do the right things so I can live with them being fined when they do not.

Now, if the reasoning for the suspension was simply because of who he put on the ice to start a game, then I would have a huge problem with that.

 

[Cobiemonster]

Didn't think giving Hartley anything was the right call at first but after thinking about it a bit, I don't mind it. But it should not be for the players he started, but for what those players did right off the opening faceoff. Coaches should be able to start whoever they want. Otherwise, why did the officials allow it. But when players try to fight right off the faceoff, I think the coach needs to bear some of the responsibility. In which case, it shouldn't matter whether they were top line guys or minor league call-ups. Now we don't know for sure that he sent them out to fight, but it wouldn't be the first time and won't be the last time that a coach is penalized for not being able to control his players. NHL coaches are very well paid for all the times their players do the right things so I can live with them being fined when they do not.

Now, if the reasoning for the suspension was simply because of who he put on the ice to start a game, then I would have a huge problem with that.

Well, if it is true, the report that was out that Kevin Westgarth knew and was told to go out there to start something and that he was telling Bieksa the same thing, then the fine is probably justifiable, because I don't think Westy wanted to do it but he was told to do so

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Didn't think giving Hartley anything was the right call at first but after thinking about it a bit, I don't mind it. But it should not be for the players he started, but for what those players did right off the opening faceoff. Coaches should be able to start whoever they want. Otherwise, why did the officials allow it. But when players try to fight right off the faceoff, I think the coach needs to bear some of the responsibility. In which case, it shouldn't matter whether they were top line guys or minor league call-ups. Now we don't know for sure that he sent them out to fight, but it wouldn't be the first time and won't be the last time that a coach is penalized for not being able to control his players. NHL coaches are very well paid for all the times their players do the right things so I can live with them being fined when they do not.

Now, if the reasoning for the suspension was simply because of who he put on the ice to start a game, then I would have a huge problem with that.

Agree with u

Nhl should do better than using the term "player selection" but i guess if you throw intent (ie coach intended for his players to fight) youre publically opening some serious liability issues in this day

 

[esls79]

Lost salary. Not a fine

156k not in his jeans is 156k not in his jeans. He skirts some taxation regardless by living in point roberts washington ... What other tax implications r there?? Is a fine a deduction? Lol

For the players, if their fine goes to the Players' Emergency Relief Fund, then yes, that would be a legitimate deduction (not necessarily a straight dollar for dollar, but some benefit) - in the US, it falls under the category of unreimbursed business expenses

/this is also why it's nice to buy your season tickets under a business guise - you can say you wine and dine clients at the game and get a partial benefit

 

[jstewismybastardson]

/this is also why it's nice to buy your season tickets under a business guise - you can say you wine and dine clients at the game and get a partial benefit

Dang ... meals&entertainment only 50% deductible in canada

 

[mattola]

Im glad he did it. all of it. its about time that someone took a stand for all the attacks on canucks players that dont get called. that get ignored and brushed off. no other stars in the league take the abuse that the sedins do and get no retribution from the league for calls. this NEEDED to be done. this message needed to be sent. they have sent a message that reads

We will not go quietly into the night!

We will not vanish without a fight!

We're going to live on!

We're going to survive!"

Today, we celebrate WE ARE ALL CANUCKS!

 

[DevilishWon]

For the players, if their fine goes to the Players' Emergency Relief Fund, then yes, that would be a legitimate deduction (not necessarily a straight dollar for dollar, but some benefit) - in the US, it falls under the category of unreimbursed business expenses

/this is also why it's nice to buy your season tickets under a business guise - you can say you wine and dine clients at the game and get a partial benefit

But from a tax standpoint doesn't that get you to the same place as not having the income to start with?

 

[esls79]

Dang ... meals&entertainment only 50% deductible in canada

It's 50% here too, but if you say you got work done during the game, then it's a business meeting...

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Mattola has just been named interim canucks coach!!!

 

[jstewismybastardson]

It's 50% here too, but if you say you got work done during the game, then it's a business meeting...

Lol cra up here doesnt fall for that shit

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Up here season tickets can be fully deductible if they are given to employees (all employees included .. Not just select few) ... But then ... Employees must have face value of each ticket included as taxable income with full source deductions taken from pay

/stayed at a hojo once

 

[esls79]

But from a tax standpoint doesn't that get you to the same place as not having the income to start with?

No, because with a fine, you do actually receive the income and then pay the fine - with the time off with no pay, you wouldn't receive the income to begin with (as in Torts case). For a player that gets a Shanaban, they usually don't get fined, they just lose their prorated portion of their salary for the number of games missed.

 

[juliansteed]

No, because with a fine, you do actually receive the income and then pay the fine - with the time off with no pay, you wouldn't receive the income to begin with (as in Torts case). For a player that gets a Shanaban, they usually don't get fined, they just lose their prorated portion of their salary for the number of games missed.

Ahhh, so a fine is not deductible is what you are saying?

 

[puckhead]

Im glad he did it. all of it. its about time that someone took a stand for all the attacks on canucks players that dont get called. that get ignored and brushed off. no other stars in the league take the abuse that the sedins do and get no retribution from the league for calls. this NEEDED to be done. this message needed to be sent.

with Gillis / Torts / Gilman versus buttman / campbell / hillwedieon at the meeting, I sure as fuck hope the Canucks got their moneys worth and brought up all the bullshit calls that have consistent gone against us for god knows how long. Some of that shit has been fucking criminal.
Finally had a look at the 'melee' that gave the Ducks that 7 minute 5 on 3.

and I don't have a problem with what Torts did either. I mentioned in the game thread - Nucks needed something to rally around.
a) The coach protecting the players by starting his own idiots
b) Bieksa attempting to rescue the newest idiot from the melee
c) Tortorella going into the dragon's lair, as it were...

all sets this up as a team bonding moment. Unless a team is willing to die and kill for each other, they will not win. Not sure we're there yet, but this certainly pushes them in that direction.

 

[mattola]

with Gillis / Torts / Gilman versus buttman / campbell / hillwedieon at the meeting, I sure as fuck hope the Canucks got their moneys worth and brought up all the bullshit calls that have consistent gone against us for god knows how long. Some of that shit has been fucking criminal.
Finally had a look at the 'melee' that gave the Ducks that 7 minute 5 on 3.

and I don't have a problem with what Torts did either. I mentioned in the game thread - Nucks needed something to rally around.
a) The coach protecting the players by starting his own idiots
b) Bieksa attempting to rescue the newest idiot from the melee
c) Tortorella going into the dragon's lair, as it were...

all sets this up as a team bonding moment. Unless a team is willing to die and kill for each other, they will not win. Not sure we're there yet, but this certainly pushes them in that direction.

still dont think they have the horses nor the health anymore...

 

[esls79]

Ahhh, so a fine is not deductible is what you are saying?

Yes, a fine is deductible - getting a three game suspension and losing X amount of prorated salary is not deductible.

 

[forty_three]

This player selection fine is a real slippery slope

Yeah. Every time Richards send out Boll he risks 15 days off. Good thing the meat head is hurt.

Did colin campbell say torts actions were an embarrassment to the league with a straight face?

That's like 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife.



I don't get 15 days vs 15 games. Why is it different for coaches? A suspended player is not allowed to practice or travel with the team while on suspension, correct? Seems like a weird thing to get all semantic-y on. Should be an X number of Games thing for consistency. But then again, consistency is not something the discipline squad is very good at.

You still use a fax

I do. It's how I get my free Boomer Plush coupons.

 

[dash]

That's a good question JR...

"Did Hartley get fined $25,000 because he started his 4th liners? So if the next team starts their 4th liners against the Canucks, will their head coach get fined $25,000?"

 

[puckhead]

That's a good question JR...

"Did Hartley get fined $25,000 because he started his 4th liners? So if the next team starts their 4th liners against the Canucks, will their head coach get fined $25,000?"

if they had started their 4th liners and had a good hard forchecking shift, we're all good.
immediate gongshow shows intent pretty clearly.

 

[juliansteed]

Yes, a fine is deductible - getting a three game suspension and losing X amount of prorated salary is not deductible.

Hahaha I'm still confused , but certain that you are correct as you are an accountant. It seems like 6 of 1 or half a dozen of the other to me, at least if we are to assume that "x amount of pro-rated salary" and the amount of the fine would be the same.

If someone makes $100,000 but is able to deduct $25,000, I'm not sure I get how that is different than someone who only makes $75,000 to begin without that deduction, if all other things are equal.

The good news is, I don't need to understand it.