Friday, March 12, 2004
For Bertuzzi: Blame Canada?
ESPN Jim Kelly said this about the Bertuzzi suspension http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?columnist=kelley_jim&id=1757143
This what I would have said to him.
For the most part I agree with your analysis. Canadians do celebrate and foster the Hobbesian ethnic that exists in the NHL. What is more, when push comes to shove you will get many Canadians to admit just that. Of course, it would be accompanied with barbed come back that we think this is better than the off field criminality of the National Felons League. However, it is incorrect to say that American fans are not infused with same Canadian ethic. Indeed, hockey fans in the States cheer just as hard when there is a fight as Canadian fans do. The nicknames such as the Big Bad Bruins and the Board Street Bullies were terms of affection not derision and Flyer fans and Bruins fans happily referred to their teams thus. The only difference is that as a percentage of the total population there are just far fewer fans down there than up here. As a result, their acceptance of such an ethos seems a little archaic. As for American born players, one need only to review the whose who of American hockey over the last 15 years to see that American players share such an ethnic (e.g., Guerin, Tkachuk, Suter (retired), Roenick, Darren Hatcher, and Chelios)
Incidentally, I think a little bit about the Clarke Kharlamov incident during game 5 of the 1972 summit series would have boasted your argument. The series, as I am sure you know, is etched in the historical conscious of Canadians. Everyone of a certain age would be able to tell you where they were when Henderson scored the series winning goal. CBC describes the Kharlamov incident thus:
“While most incidents of on-ice violence are met with shock and disciplinary action, Bobby Clarke's slash on Soviet superstar Valeri Kharlamov's ankle has been lauded in some hockey circles as an act of heroism.
With Canada trailing in the legendary series 3-1-1 and in a dogfight in Game Six, Clarke, at the encouragement of assistant coach John Ferguson, delivered a brutal two-hand slash to Kharlamov's sore ankle. The attack proved to be the turning point in the emotionally-charged matchup.
Kharlamov, the Soviets' most skillful player, was never the same after the hack, and the Canadians rallied for a series victory. When asked about the incident years later Clarke said: "If I hadn't learned to lay on a two-hander once in a while, I'd never have left Flin Flon." The attack also cemented Canadian hockey players' reputation as thugs who won games through intimidation and violence rather than skill and finesse.”
All that said, it should be pointed out that the reaction of Vancouver fans is a far cry from way Montreal fans reacted to the Richard suspension back in 1955. CBC describes that the incident and the fallout as follows:
"The longtime Hab set the standard for snipers with an eight-point game in 1944. Few can forget his 14 all-star selections or his 1961 Hall of Fame induction. But the fiery "Rocket" Richard may best be known for the riot he sparked.
It stemmed from a March 13, 1955, game in which Richard was given a match penalty for deliberately injuring Hal Laycoe - tomahawking him over the head with his stick – and punching linesman Cliff Thompson. Richard was later suspended for the rest of the season, causing an uproar amongst Habs fans, given Richard was leading the NHL in scoring and his team was battling for first place.
The following season, NHL president Clarence Campbell was pelted with eggs while attending a game between the Canadiens and Detroit at the Montreal Forum. The game was forfeited and the arena evacuated due to an out-of-control crowd that took to the streets. A riot ensued, causing $500,000 in damage."
By contrast, some 1400 Vancouver fans have signed a petition to have Bertuzzi’s suspension reduced to only 2 playoffs rounds -- those rebels.
Turning now to the Bertuzzi incident, I do not agree with the length of Bertuzzi’s suspension. Yes, I know what you are thinking. I am a Canuck fan and have some kind of emotional investment in the team. However, hear me out. The problem I have with the Bertuzzi suspension is procedural and not substantive. Historically, the NHL has treated stick related infractions much more seriously than non stick related infractions. Hitherto, the longest suspension for an elbow, or a punch is Matt Johnson’s sucker punch for which he received 12 games. In this sense there is no point in comparing what happened to Brasher, also a completely unprecedented suspension, with what happened to Moore. What is more, the decision to factor in a victim’s health, whether in the long term or short term, is also completely without precedent. In all, Bertuzzi will miss at a minimum 13 regular season games and 4 playoff games. Potentially he could miss up to 28 playoff games and if the suspension carries into next year god knows how many regular season games. The decision to suspend Bertuzzi for the playoffs is particularly extreme. The NHL has historically been very reluctant to suspend someone for long durations during the playoffs. Claude Lemieux received only two games for what he did to Kris Draper; had he done that in the regular season. it is generally aggreed that he would likely have gotten around 10 games.
The NHL’s decision to use a knew unspecified rubric to suspend Bertuzzi is completely arbitrary and seems akin to a judge choosing without explaining himself to hand down a 50 year sentence for a crime that usually nets at most 15 years. What the NHL should have done is handed down a stiff suspension (e.g., last 13 games of the regular season 4 playoff games). Then, in the summer Bettman and company could have sat down with the players union and management and hashed out an agreement that spelled out clear criteria the league would use judge whether a player would be suspended and if so for how long. They could also spell out what penalties would be given out for publicly inciting violence. If it was then decided that the health of the victim of incident should be taken into account, fine. If it was decided that a Moore like incident warranted a 50 game suspension, that is fine too.
If the McSorely and Hunter cases proved anything, it is that far from setting the NHL on a new course the odd draconian suspension has further mudded the waters. The system for handing down suspensions is, as more than a few NHL players have already noted, even less predictable then it was before. If you sucker punch a guy, you will get anywhere from between 2 to 12 games. If on the other hand you sucker punch a guy and by some fluke the guy ends up with two fractured vertebra in the subsequent pileup, then you get the stiffest suspension ever handed down. Contrary to what Bettman might think, a fluke occurrence can not be used as precedent: after all, a fluke occurrence is by definition rare. What is worse, since fluke occurrences are by definition rare, Bertuzzi’s punishment is not likely to deter anyone from taking a shot at another player; if they think it through at all, they are going to be thinking, what are the chances. The same thing goes for the fine leveled against the Canucks. In so far, as Clarke can wax poetic about hurting Hossa and Havlet and not get punished, the message the head office is sending is that so long as someone does not end up with two fractured vertebra, such talk is permissible.
ESPN Jim Kelly said this about the Bertuzzi suspension http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?columnist=kelley_jim&id=1757143
This what I would have said to him.
For the most part I agree with your analysis. Canadians do celebrate and foster the Hobbesian ethnic that exists in the NHL. What is more, when push comes to shove you will get many Canadians to admit just that. Of course, it would be accompanied with barbed come back that we think this is better than the off field criminality of the National Felons League. However, it is incorrect to say that American fans are not infused with same Canadian ethic. Indeed, hockey fans in the States cheer just as hard when there is a fight as Canadian fans do. The nicknames such as the Big Bad Bruins and the Board Street Bullies were terms of affection not derision and Flyer fans and Bruins fans happily referred to their teams thus. The only difference is that as a percentage of the total population there are just far fewer fans down there than up here. As a result, their acceptance of such an ethos seems a little archaic. As for American born players, one need only to review the whose who of American hockey over the last 15 years to see that American players share such an ethnic (e.g., Guerin, Tkachuk, Suter (retired), Roenick, Darren Hatcher, and Chelios)
Incidentally, I think a little bit about the Clarke Kharlamov incident during game 5 of the 1972 summit series would have boasted your argument. The series, as I am sure you know, is etched in the historical conscious of Canadians. Everyone of a certain age would be able to tell you where they were when Henderson scored the series winning goal. CBC describes the Kharlamov incident thus:
“While most incidents of on-ice violence are met with shock and disciplinary action, Bobby Clarke's slash on Soviet superstar Valeri Kharlamov's ankle has been lauded in some hockey circles as an act of heroism.
With Canada trailing in the legendary series 3-1-1 and in a dogfight in Game Six, Clarke, at the encouragement of assistant coach John Ferguson, delivered a brutal two-hand slash to Kharlamov's sore ankle. The attack proved to be the turning point in the emotionally-charged matchup.
Kharlamov, the Soviets' most skillful player, was never the same after the hack, and the Canadians rallied for a series victory. When asked about the incident years later Clarke said: "If I hadn't learned to lay on a two-hander once in a while, I'd never have left Flin Flon." The attack also cemented Canadian hockey players' reputation as thugs who won games through intimidation and violence rather than skill and finesse.”
All that said, it should be pointed out that the reaction of Vancouver fans is a far cry from way Montreal fans reacted to the Richard suspension back in 1955. CBC describes that the incident and the fallout as follows:
"The longtime Hab set the standard for snipers with an eight-point game in 1944. Few can forget his 14 all-star selections or his 1961 Hall of Fame induction. But the fiery "Rocket" Richard may best be known for the riot he sparked.
It stemmed from a March 13, 1955, game in which Richard was given a match penalty for deliberately injuring Hal Laycoe - tomahawking him over the head with his stick – and punching linesman Cliff Thompson. Richard was later suspended for the rest of the season, causing an uproar amongst Habs fans, given Richard was leading the NHL in scoring and his team was battling for first place.
The following season, NHL president Clarence Campbell was pelted with eggs while attending a game between the Canadiens and Detroit at the Montreal Forum. The game was forfeited and the arena evacuated due to an out-of-control crowd that took to the streets. A riot ensued, causing $500,000 in damage."
By contrast, some 1400 Vancouver fans have signed a petition to have Bertuzzi’s suspension reduced to only 2 playoffs rounds -- those rebels.
Turning now to the Bertuzzi incident, I do not agree with the length of Bertuzzi’s suspension. Yes, I know what you are thinking. I am a Canuck fan and have some kind of emotional investment in the team. However, hear me out. The problem I have with the Bertuzzi suspension is procedural and not substantive. Historically, the NHL has treated stick related infractions much more seriously than non stick related infractions. Hitherto, the longest suspension for an elbow, or a punch is Matt Johnson’s sucker punch for which he received 12 games. In this sense there is no point in comparing what happened to Brasher, also a completely unprecedented suspension, with what happened to Moore. What is more, the decision to factor in a victim’s health, whether in the long term or short term, is also completely without precedent. In all, Bertuzzi will miss at a minimum 13 regular season games and 4 playoff games. Potentially he could miss up to 28 playoff games and if the suspension carries into next year god knows how many regular season games. The decision to suspend Bertuzzi for the playoffs is particularly extreme. The NHL has historically been very reluctant to suspend someone for long durations during the playoffs. Claude Lemieux received only two games for what he did to Kris Draper; had he done that in the regular season. it is generally aggreed that he would likely have gotten around 10 games.
The NHL’s decision to use a knew unspecified rubric to suspend Bertuzzi is completely arbitrary and seems akin to a judge choosing without explaining himself to hand down a 50 year sentence for a crime that usually nets at most 15 years. What the NHL should have done is handed down a stiff suspension (e.g., last 13 games of the regular season 4 playoff games). Then, in the summer Bettman and company could have sat down with the players union and management and hashed out an agreement that spelled out clear criteria the league would use judge whether a player would be suspended and if so for how long. They could also spell out what penalties would be given out for publicly inciting violence. If it was then decided that the health of the victim of incident should be taken into account, fine. If it was decided that a Moore like incident warranted a 50 game suspension, that is fine too.
If the McSorely and Hunter cases proved anything, it is that far from setting the NHL on a new course the odd draconian suspension has further mudded the waters. The system for handing down suspensions is, as more than a few NHL players have already noted, even less predictable then it was before. If you sucker punch a guy, you will get anywhere from between 2 to 12 games. If on the other hand you sucker punch a guy and by some fluke the guy ends up with two fractured vertebra in the subsequent pileup, then you get the stiffest suspension ever handed down. Contrary to what Bettman might think, a fluke occurrence can not be used as precedent: after all, a fluke occurrence is by definition rare. What is worse, since fluke occurrences are by definition rare, Bertuzzi’s punishment is not likely to deter anyone from taking a shot at another player; if they think it through at all, they are going to be thinking, what are the chances. The same thing goes for the fine leveled against the Canucks. In so far, as Clarke can wax poetic about hurting Hossa and Havlet and not get punished, the message the head office is sending is that so long as someone does not end up with two fractured vertebra, such talk is permissible.
Comments:
Post a Comment
