TRIBUNE.COM.PK 
Just evidence of how screwed up this organization is...can we fire the owner?
The woman only revealed this after she was being investigated by Ranger management for supplying another Ranger player with anxiety drugs. The obvious question is why not report the incident immediately after, instead of waiting til her alleged drug supplying issues came to light.
The most logical reason would be that she was afraid of losing her job -- a woman working in a predominantly male profession, making an accusation against the team's top player -- even if totally true and provable, she would have been finished in this business.The woman only revealed this after she was being investigated by Ranger management for supplying another Ranger player with anxiety drugs. The obvious question is why not report the incident immediately after, instead of waiting til her alleged drug supplying issues came to light.
The most logical reason would be that she was afraid of losing her job -- a woman working in a predominantly male profession, making an accusation against the team's top player -- even if totally true and provable, she would have been finished in this business.The woman only revealed this after she was being investigated by Ranger management for supplying another Ranger player with anxiety drugs. The obvious question is why not report the incident immediately after, instead of waiting til her alleged drug supplying issues came to light.
I’m not taking sides just raising questions. But if totally true and provable she probably wouldn't have had to work again after a settlement. The save the job stuff might have flown 10 years ago, but I don’t think to many women today would be that weak.
I get what you're saying but you'd be surprised at how many people still live by the "old system" (look at the continued mental and physical abuse of women -- how is this still going on as much as it is). Personally, I also think she was given some very bad advise by someone she trusted. There's also the psychological factor - we don't know how the incident affected her.The most logical reason would be that she was afraid of losing her job -- a woman working in a predominantly male profession, making an accusation against the team's top player -- even if totally true and provable, she would have been finished in this business.The woman only revealed this after she was being investigated by Ranger management for supplying another Ranger player with anxiety drugs. The obvious question is why not report the incident immediately after, instead of waiting til her alleged drug supplying issues came to light.
I’m not taking sides just raising questions. But if totally true and provable she probably wouldn't have had to work again after a settlement. The save the job stuff might have flown 10 years ago, but I don’t think to many women today would be that weak.
It’s very convenient the timing of the Ranger release of the news. The story has already pretty much effectively been swept under the rug, lost in the coaching change. These NHL contracts need to be addressed if this incident and others don’t create a loophole for the team to be able to move the player. Pretty sure there are behaviour clauses but to what standard. Maybe No move No trade contracts should be held to a higher standard of behaviour
Didn't the Hawks use a morals clause to get rid of Corey Perry?It’s very convenient the timing of the Ranger release of the news. The story has already pretty much effectively been swept under the rug, lost in the coaching change. These NHL contracts need to be addressed if this incident and others don’t create a loophole for the team to be able to move the player. Pretty sure there are behaviour clauses but to what standard. Maybe No move No trade contracts should be held to a higher standard of behaviour
Didn't the Hawks use a morals clause to get rid of Corey Perry?It’s very convenient the timing of the Ranger release of the news. The story has already pretty much effectively been swept under the rug, lost in the coaching change. These NHL contracts need to be addressed if this incident and others don’t create a loophole for the team to be able to move the player. Pretty sure there are behaviour clauses but to what standard. Maybe No move No trade contracts should be held to a higher standard of behaviour
I believe they did. But he was released. My point is more this incident and resolution the Rangers were involved in, should have allowed them to alter his no move, no trade clause to where the Rangers could trade him if they chose to now and in the future.
Canfield scoring on a one timer off a crisp pass from Hutson. Are you listening Fox those forever to get to Zib passes are killing his chance to beat anyone. The fact Ovie was in the box was sweet to.
Latest Post: Rangers sign Conor Sheary Our newest member: Anarion Recent Posts Unread Posts
