Beginning on September 13th, 2004, the owners and the players of the National Hockey League are set to begin a protracted labor war that will put the game we love so much into deep freeze at the professional level. And if the situation persists for too long, Bill Lankhof of the Toronto Star thinks it might be time to take away the Stanley Cup:
"In 1947 there was a formal agreement between the trustees whereby the league was delegated the full authority ... making the Stanley Cup a competition for NHL teams," points out Gary Meagher, the NHL vice-president of public relations. He's right. You can check it in Total Hockey, 2nd Edition. Page 355. But wait...! The text goes on: "the agreement shall remain in force so long as the league continues to be the world's leading professional hockey league as determined by it's playing calibre, and in the event of dissolution or other termination of the National Hockey League, the Stanley Cup shall revert to the custody of the trustees." (emphasis mine, EMc)It wouldn't take a Johnnie Cochrane to argue that a strike or lockout could be seen as "other termination". Not to mention, if they're not playing, the NHL can hardly be "the world's leading professional hockey league." And, if they're not competing, NHL teams are forfeiting their claim to the Cup.
The ridiculous antics of both the owner and players union aside, this strikes me as something of an empty gesture. Granted, it would be a great one day story if the trustees of the Cup (whoever they might be) sent a letter to NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman demanding an explanation as to why they shouldn't be able to revoke the league's rights to the Cup. But what happens after that?
Assists to the Hockey Pundits and Puck Update.
Since there’s no river running through Tampa/St. Pete – How about threatening to chuck Lord Stanley’s Cup into Tampa Bay if the league and players don’t come to their senses? The Cup will then be hoisted and paraded around Tampa Bay by Flipper!
Wherever Lord Stanley goes, I follow.