In a previous post, I discussed why and how the NHL disciplined the five former members of Canada’s 2018 World Juniors team who were acquitted of sexual assault charges in July. The league relied on Article 18-A of the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, which allows the Commissioner to punish “conduct that is detrimental to the welfare of the League.”[1]
Since the question of whether Hart, McLeod, Foote, Dube, and Formenton would face discipline has been answered, the focus has shifted to whether they will actually be welcomed back to the league. None of the five players are currently on an NHL contract,[2] and while their reinstatement plan allows them to sign contracts on October 15 and begin play on December 1,[3] their path back to the ice seems far from certain.
The Carolina Hurricanes were reportedly interested in both Carter Hart and Michael McLeod.[4] However, fans quickly voiced strong opposition to adding the former top prospects to their Stanley Cup contending team.[5] This backlash led the Hurricanes front office to rescind their rumored interest.[6]
Michael McLeod has since signed a three-year deal with Avangard Omsk in the KHL, seemingly admitting that any interest NHL teams may have had in him has vanished.[7] Meanwhile, Carter Hart is still reportedly receiving serious interest from the Vegas Golden Knights.[8] Hart was undoubtedly the most prominent of the five players prior to the filing of charges; and, as a goaltender, he offers to fill a vital need for many teams. Hart’s persisting NHL interest may be indicative of teams’ willingness to take on a certain amount of public backlash in order to secure wins on the ice.
The diverging trajectories of these players highlight how market forces are now instilling a new, informal discipline that goes beyond what the NHL CBA contemplates. In some circumstances, teams may fear their own fanbases more than the Commissioner’s office. In an era of instant social media reaction and sponsor sensitivity, reputational harm can cost more than any suspension under Article 18-A. The situation in Carolina shows that moral judgment is not decided by the Commissioner, it’s crowdsourced by the ticket-buying and television-watching public.
Ultimately, the Hockey Canada case continues to test where the hockey world draws the line between legal innocence and moral responsibility. The league admonished the player’s alleged actions and laid down punishment: its job is done. The question remains whether the court of public opinion will allow these players a second chance.
[1] NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, Art. 18-A.2 (2013).
[2] Reuters, NHL players in Hockey Canada trial eligible to play Dec. 1, Reuters (Sep. 11, 2025).
[3] Stephen Whyno, NHL makes 5 players acquitted of sexual assault charges eligible to sign contract, play this season, AP News (Sep. 11, 2025).
[4] Meredith Turits, Rumors of Canes Interest in Hockey Canada Trial Players Provokes Fan Backlash, Front Office Sports (Sep. 23, 2025).
[5] Id.
[6] Pat Welter, Canes decide against signing player acquitted of sex assault, WRAL News (Oct. 3, 2025).
[7] Greg Wyshynski, Michael McLeod signs with KHL’s Avangard Omsk after acquittal, ESPN (Oct. 9, 2025).
[8] Antonio Losada, Carter Hart’s Potential Next Move Revealed By Frank Seravalli, Yahoo! Sports (Oct. 1, 2025).
Leave a Reply