I, like you, have been waiting with great interest to see what kind of concussion solution would come out of the NHL general managers meetings in Florida. I confess, the wait has not been without trepidation. After all, this is a league that took eleven years to mandate the wearing of helmets after Bill Masterton's death from a blow to the head.
So, Gary Bettman's five-point plan to reduce concussions is a positive, if flawed, step in the right direction. The most important of the five points is that there will be equipment modifications. Small, softer shoulder and elbow pads will certainly help. Yet, there will probably be resistance to that from players and teams who think the armour players wear prevents more injuries than it causes.
It's also good that a player who takes a hit to the head will now be removed to a quiet area and assessed by a doctor. The on-bench trainer-administered "count backward by twos" test won't be good enough anymore. That's positive, if it works, because there are certainly times when a player thinks he's fine when he's driven by adrenaline and the presence of his peers, but who'll recognize something's wrong when he's removed from those stimuli. The only flaw with this plan is that it relies on either the player to admit to "weakness" or the coach or trainer to recognize it and force the player off. There's no guarantee either of those things will happen if a team really needs a player or a guy really wants to stay in the game.
Then there's the plan for the league to impose sanctions on repeat offenders and repeat offending teams. This is where things get sticky. Zdeno Chara, for example, has no suspensions for head shots. He, without question, delivered a crushing one to Max Pacioretty. So, even though everyone in the world knows he broke a guy's neck with a very iffy hit, he has no record and therefore no escalating penalty for him or the Bruins. This rule relies on the effectiveness of the NHL's disciplinarian, Colin Campbell. We know there's a conflict of interest with him in that position, and we know his record of inconsistency.
It will help, too, to have the seamless glass replaced from rinks, including the Bell Centre, that still have it. And hopefully, the NHL's new safety committee will eliminate the stupid stanchion Pacioretty hit, as well as the overly-large camera holes that nearly removed Darryl Boyce's nose.
A committee of ex-players to examine other ways to reduce concussions is good, as long as they're not resistant to change. The risk in bringing in guys who played a different, pre-lockout game for most of their careers is that they fall into the "back in my day" trap. You know what I mean. "Back in my day, we learned not to turn our backs to hits." Or "Back in my day, we didn't have the instigator rule, so we could police ourselves." Those kinds of returns to the "good old days" aren't what's required here.
Sidney Crosby and David Perron both said today what's really needed. These good young players, both of whom have missed significant time with brain injuries, agree the NHL needs to punish ALL hits to the head. Crosby acknowledges that sometimes a head shot is unintentional, but Perron compares the situation with a high stick or delay-of-game penalty. If you hit someone with a high stick, whether you meant it or not, you're sitting for two or less. Ditto with the DOG penalty. So, every time a player gets his hands or elbow up high and strikes a player in the head, he should sit for five minutes, with a supplementary discipline review afterwards. That approach wouldn't have changed anything about the Chara hit, as the refs did see it as egregious and penalized it as such, while the league review let it go. It would, however, help change all those other hits you see, like the one on Crosby. Perhaps, if Steckel knew he'd get a five-minute major for hitting Crosby while his head was turned, he would have let up, or maybe hit him in the back instead.
The NHL really needs to take a no-tolerance approach to hitting people in the head. Bettman's five steps are five baby steps, but they're at least moving in the right direction. The better assessment in-game and the equipment changes will help. The big hole in the plan is the NHL's own will to punish offenders. It's in a position to get tough and start punishing offenders much more severely than it has been, but the appetite for change in a league driven by closed doors and tradition is not very great.
As Bob McKenzie said today, the NHL does things in nickels and dimes, and all that small change adds up to bigger changes. For those of us impatient to see some real direction on fixing the brain trauma problem in the NHL, it's maddening to see things moving so slowly. I guess it's something that at least they're moving.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Renewal
Earlier this week, I was chatting with a fan of another team and she made the caustic comment that the only reason people are freaking out about Max Pacioretty's injury is because he plays for the Canadiens. She meant that the Habs enjoy some kind of underhanded favouritism in the NHL, and their fans are hysterical and overreact. Obviously I don't agree with her reasoning, but I think what she said is true.
I think if Chara had hit a Columbus Blue Jacket or a Florida Panther like that, we would still have experienced the sickening feeling in the pits of our stomachs. We'd still be furious with the league when Chara got no suspension, and we'd still be horrified that the life and health of a promising young player were so close to being ended. That would be it, though. We wouldn't be as outraged in such great numbers if it weren't one of our own.
The thing is, Canadiens fans are passionate, numerous and powerful. There's a rabid appetite for everything Habs, so if there's a player caught talking to an alleged mobster, it's front-page news. If the Canadiens lose three in a row, millions of people are tearing their hair out. If they win, there are an equal number of millions walking with a lighter step. Walk into any opposition arena and, if the Habs are winning, you'll hear fans there singing Ole. That doesn't happen for other teams. Canadiens fans have rallied and rioted for their Habs before. They've mourned, celebrated, hoped and worried together for a hundred years, all for the sake of the team that owns their hearts.
Habs fans are everywhere. They're MPs, corporate CEOs, politicians, lawyers and doctors. They're people who have the power to make decisions and force changes. Hurt a Hab, and the wrath of important people will be aroused. There's no coincidence that two of the corporate sponsors, Via Rail and Air Canada, who have warned the NHL to clean up its act or lose their support, are based in Quebec. The Quebec police are looking into the incident, which probably wouldn't happen elsewhere, and there's suspicion that Canada's federal minister of sport, Gary Lunn, may be a Habs fan too.
The Canadiens themselves are one of the flagship franchises of the NHL. They're the league's oldest and most successful team, and even if they're no longer the powerhouse of the '70s, they're the most recognizable team in hockey and one of the wealthiest. Pierre Gauthier and Geoff Molson carry some weight in the boardroom.
Sometimes, the intense spotlight on the Canadiens is an inconvenience. Every scuffle in practice is analysed and debated to death. Players can't go out for groceries without allowing an extra 20 minutes for autographs, and if they have too much to drink on their summer holidays, the pictures make it around the internet like wildfire. In a case like this, though, that power might be harnessed for good.
Pacioretty's injury has already drawn more attention from people with the power to influence change than Sidney Crosby's has. If that horrible hit had to happen to anyone, only the fact that it was to a Canadien might keep it in the public eye long enough to make a difference to league policy.
So, my friend was right. The Chara hit is only creating such a huge public furor because it happened to a Hab. For the sake of the players, the fans who love the game and the future of the NHL, though, the Canadiens notoriety might be the only thing that works to force the rule makers to finally wake up.
I think if Chara had hit a Columbus Blue Jacket or a Florida Panther like that, we would still have experienced the sickening feeling in the pits of our stomachs. We'd still be furious with the league when Chara got no suspension, and we'd still be horrified that the life and health of a promising young player were so close to being ended. That would be it, though. We wouldn't be as outraged in such great numbers if it weren't one of our own.
The thing is, Canadiens fans are passionate, numerous and powerful. There's a rabid appetite for everything Habs, so if there's a player caught talking to an alleged mobster, it's front-page news. If the Canadiens lose three in a row, millions of people are tearing their hair out. If they win, there are an equal number of millions walking with a lighter step. Walk into any opposition arena and, if the Habs are winning, you'll hear fans there singing Ole. That doesn't happen for other teams. Canadiens fans have rallied and rioted for their Habs before. They've mourned, celebrated, hoped and worried together for a hundred years, all for the sake of the team that owns their hearts.
Habs fans are everywhere. They're MPs, corporate CEOs, politicians, lawyers and doctors. They're people who have the power to make decisions and force changes. Hurt a Hab, and the wrath of important people will be aroused. There's no coincidence that two of the corporate sponsors, Via Rail and Air Canada, who have warned the NHL to clean up its act or lose their support, are based in Quebec. The Quebec police are looking into the incident, which probably wouldn't happen elsewhere, and there's suspicion that Canada's federal minister of sport, Gary Lunn, may be a Habs fan too.
The Canadiens themselves are one of the flagship franchises of the NHL. They're the league's oldest and most successful team, and even if they're no longer the powerhouse of the '70s, they're the most recognizable team in hockey and one of the wealthiest. Pierre Gauthier and Geoff Molson carry some weight in the boardroom.
Sometimes, the intense spotlight on the Canadiens is an inconvenience. Every scuffle in practice is analysed and debated to death. Players can't go out for groceries without allowing an extra 20 minutes for autographs, and if they have too much to drink on their summer holidays, the pictures make it around the internet like wildfire. In a case like this, though, that power might be harnessed for good.
Pacioretty's injury has already drawn more attention from people with the power to influence change than Sidney Crosby's has. If that horrible hit had to happen to anyone, only the fact that it was to a Canadien might keep it in the public eye long enough to make a difference to league policy.
So, my friend was right. The Chara hit is only creating such a huge public furor because it happened to a Hab. For the sake of the players, the fans who love the game and the future of the NHL, though, the Canadiens notoriety might be the only thing that works to force the rule makers to finally wake up.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Heart
I think my hockey heart is broken. Or, if it's not broken, it's seriously bruised. I've loved this game since I was eleven years old. I love the speed, the impossible move that turns a defenceman inside out, the goalie strrreeeettttccchhhing for a spectacular save. The game; the one I read about in King Leary and Hockey Fever in Goganne Falls when I was a kid, the one we played on our backyard rink and on the canal late at night at university in Ottawa, is a beautiful thing.
What the beautiful game has become under NHL guardianship is something I don't really recognize. Systems and goons and injustice have turned it into a "product," not a "game." We still see real hockey in the playoffs, but to get there, a team must run the gauntlet of thuggery, cheap shots and league indifference to justice. Every decision the NHL brass makes is driven by money. When many teams were building new rinks, the league could have increased the size of the ice surface to give bigger, faster players more room to move and improve player safety. That didn't happen, because it would have meant the loss of too many paying seats.
We see empty arenas and dismal teams in US markets because the NHL commissioner believes the elusive national TV deal the league chases like the Holy Grail won't happen without teams in all the major centres. And we see devastating injuries to really good young players swept under the rug as the commissioner smiles his plastic smile and explains how they're unfortunate, but all part of our fast, exciting game. Rule changes are made to increase goal scoring because that's what paying customers and TV audiences want. Nothing happens to reduce violent hits or fights, because the league thinks paying customers and TV audiences want those too.
This is all to say that I watched the Canadiens play the Blues last night, and I didn't care what happened. The defence was disorganized, Pouliot was terrible and Cammalleri non-existent, but I didn't feel a spark of frustration or anger. Even when Matt D'Agostini scored, it didn't matter. The destruction of Max Pacioretty with the league's tacit approval has had the effect of a kick in the heart.
Lost in the business of the NHL is the fact that young, talented hockey players are taking their lives in their hands every night, and nobody cares to protect them. That's not something I enjoy, and I didn't blame the Canadiens for playing with no heart last night. They were the ones closest to their teammate as he lay on the ice, and the ones who heard the gunshot of his head hitting the stanchion. If they're a little queasy or heartsick, that's to be expected.
I don't know if my passion for NHL hockey will come back. I expect the Canadiens will recover because they're professionals who've trained all their lives to play this game, and most of them know nothing else. I wonder, though, how many other lifelong fans have finally had it with the NHL? How many others are watching games with the disinterest inspired by heartbreak? The Stanley Cup may be sport's greatest trophy, but how much meaning can a championship really hold, when it seems like the league has a say in who wins it? Those are questions I'm asking myself today. I expect a lot of you are too. I also expect the NHL brass won't bother, until the disinterest of formerly loyal fans starts to hit them on the bottom line.
What the beautiful game has become under NHL guardianship is something I don't really recognize. Systems and goons and injustice have turned it into a "product," not a "game." We still see real hockey in the playoffs, but to get there, a team must run the gauntlet of thuggery, cheap shots and league indifference to justice. Every decision the NHL brass makes is driven by money. When many teams were building new rinks, the league could have increased the size of the ice surface to give bigger, faster players more room to move and improve player safety. That didn't happen, because it would have meant the loss of too many paying seats.
We see empty arenas and dismal teams in US markets because the NHL commissioner believes the elusive national TV deal the league chases like the Holy Grail won't happen without teams in all the major centres. And we see devastating injuries to really good young players swept under the rug as the commissioner smiles his plastic smile and explains how they're unfortunate, but all part of our fast, exciting game. Rule changes are made to increase goal scoring because that's what paying customers and TV audiences want. Nothing happens to reduce violent hits or fights, because the league thinks paying customers and TV audiences want those too.
This is all to say that I watched the Canadiens play the Blues last night, and I didn't care what happened. The defence was disorganized, Pouliot was terrible and Cammalleri non-existent, but I didn't feel a spark of frustration or anger. Even when Matt D'Agostini scored, it didn't matter. The destruction of Max Pacioretty with the league's tacit approval has had the effect of a kick in the heart.
Lost in the business of the NHL is the fact that young, talented hockey players are taking their lives in their hands every night, and nobody cares to protect them. That's not something I enjoy, and I didn't blame the Canadiens for playing with no heart last night. They were the ones closest to their teammate as he lay on the ice, and the ones who heard the gunshot of his head hitting the stanchion. If they're a little queasy or heartsick, that's to be expected.
I don't know if my passion for NHL hockey will come back. I expect the Canadiens will recover because they're professionals who've trained all their lives to play this game, and most of them know nothing else. I wonder, though, how many other lifelong fans have finally had it with the NHL? How many others are watching games with the disinterest inspired by heartbreak? The Stanley Cup may be sport's greatest trophy, but how much meaning can a championship really hold, when it seems like the league has a say in who wins it? Those are questions I'm asking myself today. I expect a lot of you are too. I also expect the NHL brass won't bother, until the disinterest of formerly loyal fans starts to hit them on the bottom line.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Shame
Pierre Gauthier didn't make a big splash at the NHL trade deadline, and many Canadiens fans felt that was okay. Nobody wanted him to move important pieces of the Habs' own future for rentals, and the price for more long-term solutions was too high. It turns out, however, that Gauthier was wrong. He should have done whatever it would have taken to acquire Gregory Campbell. The player's not worth much, of course, but the "get out of jail free" card that comes with him is worth its weight in gold. It doesn't matter that his dad, NHL discipline guru Colin Campbell, doesn't pass judgement on infractions committed by Greg's teammates. Campbell's friend and hand-picked assistant, Mike Murphy does. The optics are bush-league and the potential for conflict of interest would be intolerable in any real professional league.
There's something wrong with the NHL. There's something deeply, seriously wrong with the culture and the flawed subjectivity that passes for discipline. Murphy stunned no one in the hockey world when he decided Zdeno Chara's breaking Max Pacioretty's neck and injuring his brain did not deserve a suspension. The only question is why he even bothered to have the hearing at all.
This is Murphy's statement:
"I conducted a hearing with Boston Bruins' defenseman Zdeno Chara with respect to the major penalty for interference and game misconduct that he was assessed at 19:44 of the second period for a hit on Max Pacioretty of the Montreal Canadiens.
"After a thorough review of the video I can find no basis to impose supplemental discipline. This hit resulted from a play that evolved and then happened very quickly -- with both players skating in the same direction and with Chara attempting to angle his opponent into the boards. I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent, left his feet or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous.
"This was a hockey play that resulted in an injury because of the player colliding with the stanchion and then the ice surface. In reviewing this play, I also took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career."
Interesting. Murphy sees no basis for supplemental discipline. Nothing about Chara getting his forearm up around Pacioretty's head and neck bothered the powers that be. It didn't raise any concern that Chara could clearly see the stanchion in front of him, yet continued to follow through on the hit. The consequences; a 22-year-old former first-round draft pick with his whole career in front of him now dealing with a broken neck and bruised brain, didn't count in the league's assessment.
The problem with league "discipline" is Murphy and Campbell look at the mechanics of the hit and then try to wedge it into the rules. If it doesn't fit, they'll suspend the offender. If, however, they can say "Okay, that was from the side, not behind," they'll conclude it doesn't break the rules and therefore isn't suspension-worthy. The league tries to make a one-size-fits-all policy, which doesn't work. The same thing happened with the Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard. All right-thinking people saw that hit and recognized the devastation visited on Savard. Yet, even though it was obviously wrong, it didn't fit within the league's antiquated rules about hits to the head, so Campbell did nothing. The public raised a cry of outrage and the rules changed, but Campbell himself did nothing.
Saying Chara did nothing wrong because he has a clean record is laughable. That's like saying you had a pit bull who was always well-behaved, until a kid taunted him and your dog ripped the kid's arm off. It was in the heat of the moment and the dog didn't mean it, but the cops don't care if it's his first offence. He still gets put down.
It's even more ridiculous to laud Chara for not leaving his feet. Seriously? Who on earth would a man nearly seven feet tall have to jump up to hurt?
What's wrong in the NHL is that it doesn't follow the same logic as the rest of the world. If you drive a car on the highway and cut off another vehicle because you're trying to pass it, and if that move causes an accident, you will be charged with reckless driving. If the accident you caused hurts or kills another person, the severity of the charges goes up. Of course, you didn't mean to hurt someone; you only wanted to pass that car. The law doesn't care. If you are reckless and hurt someone, you will pay the price. The outcome might not have been your intention, but you must still be accountable for the consequences of your actions.
The excuse that hockey is a physical game and players sign up for the risk doesn't hold much water either. The hit on Pacioretty called to mind the horrifying luge accident at the Vancouver Olympics, which cost the life of Nodar Kumaritashvili. Luge is obviously a risky sport and the athletes go into it knowing they might be hurt. They don't, however, expect a track that officials know is much too fast. In the same way, Pacioretty didn't expect his acceptable risk to include having his head slammed into an immovable object and his neck broken.
That the NHL has chosen to ignore right and reason in this case and let Chara walk free is a blight on the league and a shame to the game. Chara may not have meant to break Pacioretty's neck (and we can hope that's the case), but he did it. That he faces no reprimand for the consequences of his actions, intended or not, is disgraceful.
Postscript: That Pierre Gauthier has decided to zip his lip about the lack of NHL action against Chara is equally disgraceful. This kind of behaviour continues because nobody says anything that forces the NHL to at least gear up the PR machine and pay lip service to fixing the problem. Gauthier had a great camping spot on the moral high ground and could have used it to defend his player and make a statement that might, with the assistance of public pressure, have helped change the game. He chose to shut up and let the league deliver its "justice," and that's a disappointing shame.
There's something wrong with the NHL. There's something deeply, seriously wrong with the culture and the flawed subjectivity that passes for discipline. Murphy stunned no one in the hockey world when he decided Zdeno Chara's breaking Max Pacioretty's neck and injuring his brain did not deserve a suspension. The only question is why he even bothered to have the hearing at all.
This is Murphy's statement:
"I conducted a hearing with Boston Bruins' defenseman Zdeno Chara with respect to the major penalty for interference and game misconduct that he was assessed at 19:44 of the second period for a hit on Max Pacioretty of the Montreal Canadiens.
"After a thorough review of the video I can find no basis to impose supplemental discipline. This hit resulted from a play that evolved and then happened very quickly -- with both players skating in the same direction and with Chara attempting to angle his opponent into the boards. I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent, left his feet or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous.
"This was a hockey play that resulted in an injury because of the player colliding with the stanchion and then the ice surface. In reviewing this play, I also took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career."
Interesting. Murphy sees no basis for supplemental discipline. Nothing about Chara getting his forearm up around Pacioretty's head and neck bothered the powers that be. It didn't raise any concern that Chara could clearly see the stanchion in front of him, yet continued to follow through on the hit. The consequences; a 22-year-old former first-round draft pick with his whole career in front of him now dealing with a broken neck and bruised brain, didn't count in the league's assessment.
The problem with league "discipline" is Murphy and Campbell look at the mechanics of the hit and then try to wedge it into the rules. If it doesn't fit, they'll suspend the offender. If, however, they can say "Okay, that was from the side, not behind," they'll conclude it doesn't break the rules and therefore isn't suspension-worthy. The league tries to make a one-size-fits-all policy, which doesn't work. The same thing happened with the Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard. All right-thinking people saw that hit and recognized the devastation visited on Savard. Yet, even though it was obviously wrong, it didn't fit within the league's antiquated rules about hits to the head, so Campbell did nothing. The public raised a cry of outrage and the rules changed, but Campbell himself did nothing.
Saying Chara did nothing wrong because he has a clean record is laughable. That's like saying you had a pit bull who was always well-behaved, until a kid taunted him and your dog ripped the kid's arm off. It was in the heat of the moment and the dog didn't mean it, but the cops don't care if it's his first offence. He still gets put down.
It's even more ridiculous to laud Chara for not leaving his feet. Seriously? Who on earth would a man nearly seven feet tall have to jump up to hurt?
What's wrong in the NHL is that it doesn't follow the same logic as the rest of the world. If you drive a car on the highway and cut off another vehicle because you're trying to pass it, and if that move causes an accident, you will be charged with reckless driving. If the accident you caused hurts or kills another person, the severity of the charges goes up. Of course, you didn't mean to hurt someone; you only wanted to pass that car. The law doesn't care. If you are reckless and hurt someone, you will pay the price. The outcome might not have been your intention, but you must still be accountable for the consequences of your actions.
The excuse that hockey is a physical game and players sign up for the risk doesn't hold much water either. The hit on Pacioretty called to mind the horrifying luge accident at the Vancouver Olympics, which cost the life of Nodar Kumaritashvili. Luge is obviously a risky sport and the athletes go into it knowing they might be hurt. They don't, however, expect a track that officials know is much too fast. In the same way, Pacioretty didn't expect his acceptable risk to include having his head slammed into an immovable object and his neck broken.
That the NHL has chosen to ignore right and reason in this case and let Chara walk free is a blight on the league and a shame to the game. Chara may not have meant to break Pacioretty's neck (and we can hope that's the case), but he did it. That he faces no reprimand for the consequences of his actions, intended or not, is disgraceful.
Postscript: That Pierre Gauthier has decided to zip his lip about the lack of NHL action against Chara is equally disgraceful. This kind of behaviour continues because nobody says anything that forces the NHL to at least gear up the PR machine and pay lip service to fixing the problem. Gauthier had a great camping spot on the moral high ground and could have used it to defend his player and make a statement that might, with the assistance of public pressure, have helped change the game. He chose to shut up and let the league deliver its "justice," and that's a disappointing shame.
Aftermath: Fear
Watching Max Pacioretty lying motionless on the ice after being crushed into the glass by Zdeno Chara, I remembered him just before the outdoor game against Calgary. Reporters were asking several of the players how they intended to stay warm in the sub-zero temperatures. Most talked about layering or adrenaline or just toughing it out. Pacioretty sheepishly announced that his mom had sent him finger and toe warmers, to make sure he wouldn't suffer from the cold. With that in mind, I thought of Mrs.Pacioretty, and what she must have felt, seeing her son lying there motionless in the hush of a shocked arena. If the collective horror of the 21273 in the crowd was palpable, it was but a drop in the ocean to the fear and panic that mother experienced as doctors and trainers manouvered her son onto the stretcher. Worse for her, it was the second time she had to witness that this season.
The question everyone will be asking today is whether Chara caused all that fear and horror on purpose. NHL veterans know it's easy to get into Chara's head. While he may not be naturally inclined to violence, he can be goaded and frustrated into making stupid decisions. Brian Gionta knows this. There's no way a guy his size should get the best of a guy as big as Chara, but he does it because he knows Chara will react if harrassed. It's worse when the Bruins are getting trounced.
Last night was the perfect storm of factors for getting the biggest man in the NHL riled up. His team was getting absolutely dominated on the ice by its most hated rival, after a build-up completely out of whack for a regular-season game. The Bruins were being embarrassed 4-0 on the scoreboard, including two goals by relative nobody Lars Eller. On special teams, the Habs were 2-for-3 on the PP and sported a perfect PK, and the Canadiens' speed on transition was forcing Chara and his fellow defencemen into mistakes. That alone was frustrating for the Bruins. Then you factor in Pacioretty.
Chara was unreasonably angry at the kid for pushing him away from the Habs' victory scrum after an earlier Canadiens win in Boston. He went after Pacioretty then. And Pax likes to go plant himself in the area from which Chara's dedicated to moving people away. So, by the end of the second period, when the Bruins were getting Ole'd off the ice, Chara saw Pacioretty coming along the boards by the benches.
At that moment, the guy everyone claims is a lovable, gentle giant off the ice, made an impulsive decision driven by the frustration he so easily experiences on it. Instead of simply interfering with him and stopping him, Chara chose to erase Pacioretty altogether, driving his head into the stanchion. He said after the game he didn't mean to hurt Pacioretty, and the hit was "unfortunate."
Today, the league must decide what to do with Chara. He claims innocence and says Pacioretty exacerbated the damage by jumping into the glass himself as Chara laid the hit. Carey Price says anyone throwing a hit should know his surroundings and the risk involved, and he's right. Suspensions are often determined more by the injury to the victim rather than the intent of the offender, and we have to hope justice is served in that way for Pacioretty.
In the end, the Canadiens proved they are not too small or frail to beat the souped-up Bruins. Both teams came in with the rosters they'll be icing during the playoffs, with huge hype and a deep desire to win. Lack of motivation could not possibly have been a factor, yet the Habs handily won the only fight, then completely owned their rivals for the rest of the game. Milan Lucic's asshole gesturing to the crowd after his futile goal in the third notwithstanding, the Bruins had nothing. When push came to shove, the Canadiens pulled together and played their game, which beats the Bruins game almost every time.
It's just terribly sad that the joy we should be feeling after such a statement game by our team is absent today. There's satisfaction, to a degree, but the horrible vision of Max Pacioretty lying there before his mother's eyes overwhelms the urge to gloat. No matter the outcome for either team, the outcome for that young man is still uncertain. Sometimes, mom's toe warmers aren't enough to fix what's wrong, and we can only hope the brain injury Pacioretty suffered last night will heal quickly and well.
The question everyone will be asking today is whether Chara caused all that fear and horror on purpose. NHL veterans know it's easy to get into Chara's head. While he may not be naturally inclined to violence, he can be goaded and frustrated into making stupid decisions. Brian Gionta knows this. There's no way a guy his size should get the best of a guy as big as Chara, but he does it because he knows Chara will react if harrassed. It's worse when the Bruins are getting trounced.
Last night was the perfect storm of factors for getting the biggest man in the NHL riled up. His team was getting absolutely dominated on the ice by its most hated rival, after a build-up completely out of whack for a regular-season game. The Bruins were being embarrassed 4-0 on the scoreboard, including two goals by relative nobody Lars Eller. On special teams, the Habs were 2-for-3 on the PP and sported a perfect PK, and the Canadiens' speed on transition was forcing Chara and his fellow defencemen into mistakes. That alone was frustrating for the Bruins. Then you factor in Pacioretty.
Chara was unreasonably angry at the kid for pushing him away from the Habs' victory scrum after an earlier Canadiens win in Boston. He went after Pacioretty then. And Pax likes to go plant himself in the area from which Chara's dedicated to moving people away. So, by the end of the second period, when the Bruins were getting Ole'd off the ice, Chara saw Pacioretty coming along the boards by the benches.
At that moment, the guy everyone claims is a lovable, gentle giant off the ice, made an impulsive decision driven by the frustration he so easily experiences on it. Instead of simply interfering with him and stopping him, Chara chose to erase Pacioretty altogether, driving his head into the stanchion. He said after the game he didn't mean to hurt Pacioretty, and the hit was "unfortunate."
Today, the league must decide what to do with Chara. He claims innocence and says Pacioretty exacerbated the damage by jumping into the glass himself as Chara laid the hit. Carey Price says anyone throwing a hit should know his surroundings and the risk involved, and he's right. Suspensions are often determined more by the injury to the victim rather than the intent of the offender, and we have to hope justice is served in that way for Pacioretty.
In the end, the Canadiens proved they are not too small or frail to beat the souped-up Bruins. Both teams came in with the rosters they'll be icing during the playoffs, with huge hype and a deep desire to win. Lack of motivation could not possibly have been a factor, yet the Habs handily won the only fight, then completely owned their rivals for the rest of the game. Milan Lucic's asshole gesturing to the crowd after his futile goal in the third notwithstanding, the Bruins had nothing. When push came to shove, the Canadiens pulled together and played their game, which beats the Bruins game almost every time.
It's just terribly sad that the joy we should be feeling after such a statement game by our team is absent today. There's satisfaction, to a degree, but the horrible vision of Max Pacioretty lying there before his mother's eyes overwhelms the urge to gloat. No matter the outcome for either team, the outcome for that young man is still uncertain. Sometimes, mom's toe warmers aren't enough to fix what's wrong, and we can only hope the brain injury Pacioretty suffered last night will heal quickly and well.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Bruins vs. Habs - There Will Be Blood Edition
Notes on the third:
-A major penalty does nothing to make up for that destruction.
-It does make up for it a tiny bit to see Price stone that pissant Marchand on a PS.
-White shoots on the 2-on-1 with Pleks? Um, maybe a pass next time, okay kid?
-Whoopee. The Missing Link gets one to break the shutout. It's hard to care when you're wondering how Pacioretty is.
-When's the last time P.K. Subban made a really crappy play? I don't remember either.
-Excellent shut-down hockey with their hearts not really into it.
-The best part of a Habs/Bs game: Julien walking across the ice with a face like heartburn.
Notes on the second:
-Plekanec's penalty illustrates the new NHL rule that you cannot check the man carrying the puck. What? There's no such rule?
-Don't look now, but Gomez is hustling.
-The Gomez line must have cycled that puck for a whole minute in the Bs' end.
-Gionta's 24th sneaked over the line like a trench spy in WWI, but it counts.
-Anybody notice Desharnais is a beast on faceoffs? Obviously not Martin, who continues to use Gomez on o-zone draws to start the PP.
-The Canadiens, in fear of losing their league-leading standard in too-many-men penalties, quickly added to their lead with a particularly dumbass example.
-Amazing shot by Wisniewski. It went under the shot blocker, BEFORE he could even fall down. Wiz' shot is faster than gravity.
-Uh oh. We should fear Ryder. He was the one who started The Comeback against the Rags with two quick goals.
-Chara always looks like his nose is running.
-Oh God. Pacioretty's head hit that stanchion so much like Nodar Kumaritashvili did in Vancouver, it's terrifying.
-The Canadiens looked ill-prepared for a serious injury. They had to have the Bs' trainer out there helping, and Dr.Mulder, at age 176 was trying to help haul the stretcher.
-That hit...my friend Jay says Chara knew exactly where the stanchion was and tried to hurt Pax on purpose...takes all the joy out of a 4-0 Bs beatdown.
Notes on the first:
-The Bell Centre crowd's biggest challenge tonight is to decide who to boo.
-How sweet would it be for Skillsie to score in his third straight?
-Oh, Boychuk's brave. Fighting with a visor on. Imagine if a Hab did that? White pounded him anyway.
-Halpern saved a goal as surely as spring follows winter.
-Price took at least ten minutes off my life with that crease giveaway on the PP.
-Eller's tip was as beautiful as a sunrise over water.
-Hard work by all the boys. They're like a bunch of hard rock miners out there.
-Eller again! The hands on that boy are smoother than David Copperfield's patter.
-What a shame Kostitsyn didn't get any points on those goals. He was instrumental in both of them.
-Great period. Hopefully, the Habs will come out just as strong in the second, because two goals don't last long in this league if you're not careful.
-A major penalty does nothing to make up for that destruction.
-It does make up for it a tiny bit to see Price stone that pissant Marchand on a PS.
-White shoots on the 2-on-1 with Pleks? Um, maybe a pass next time, okay kid?
-Whoopee. The Missing Link gets one to break the shutout. It's hard to care when you're wondering how Pacioretty is.
-When's the last time P.K. Subban made a really crappy play? I don't remember either.
-Excellent shut-down hockey with their hearts not really into it.
-The best part of a Habs/Bs game: Julien walking across the ice with a face like heartburn.
Notes on the second:
-Plekanec's penalty illustrates the new NHL rule that you cannot check the man carrying the puck. What? There's no such rule?
-Don't look now, but Gomez is hustling.
-The Gomez line must have cycled that puck for a whole minute in the Bs' end.
-Gionta's 24th sneaked over the line like a trench spy in WWI, but it counts.
-Anybody notice Desharnais is a beast on faceoffs? Obviously not Martin, who continues to use Gomez on o-zone draws to start the PP.
-The Canadiens, in fear of losing their league-leading standard in too-many-men penalties, quickly added to their lead with a particularly dumbass example.
-Amazing shot by Wisniewski. It went under the shot blocker, BEFORE he could even fall down. Wiz' shot is faster than gravity.
-Uh oh. We should fear Ryder. He was the one who started The Comeback against the Rags with two quick goals.
-Chara always looks like his nose is running.
-Oh God. Pacioretty's head hit that stanchion so much like Nodar Kumaritashvili did in Vancouver, it's terrifying.
-The Canadiens looked ill-prepared for a serious injury. They had to have the Bs' trainer out there helping, and Dr.Mulder, at age 176 was trying to help haul the stretcher.
-That hit...my friend Jay says Chara knew exactly where the stanchion was and tried to hurt Pax on purpose...takes all the joy out of a 4-0 Bs beatdown.
Notes on the first:
-The Bell Centre crowd's biggest challenge tonight is to decide who to boo.
-How sweet would it be for Skillsie to score in his third straight?
-Oh, Boychuk's brave. Fighting with a visor on. Imagine if a Hab did that? White pounded him anyway.
-Halpern saved a goal as surely as spring follows winter.
-Price took at least ten minutes off my life with that crease giveaway on the PP.
-Eller's tip was as beautiful as a sunrise over water.
-Hard work by all the boys. They're like a bunch of hard rock miners out there.
-Eller again! The hands on that boy are smoother than David Copperfield's patter.
-What a shame Kostitsyn didn't get any points on those goals. He was instrumental in both of them.
-Great period. Hopefully, the Habs will come out just as strong in the second, because two goals don't last long in this league if you're not careful.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Showdown
Yesterday evening, I was a guest on CJAD's The Habs Show. It's always a fun gig because, hey, who doesn't like to talk about the Canadiens for twenty minutes with other people who like talking about them just as much as you do? One topic surprised me a bit, though. The host asked whether I thought the Canadiens should call up Alex Henry from Hamilton to toughen up the Habs' lineup for tomorrow's game against the Bruins.
I answered honestly: of course they shouldn't. I watched Henry yesterday, playing for the Hamilton Bulldogs versus the Toronto Marlies in an AHL game. He's a heart-and-soul kind of player; one who gives it his all in every game. He's tough as nails. He's not, however, better than any of the defencemen the Canadiens can ice instead. He's not better than Subban, Hamrlik or Wisniewski on offence. He's not as good a shotblocker or PKer as Gill or Sopel. And, while he's certainly willing to fight, so is Paul Mara, who'll probably draw in in Yannick Weber's place.
So, for the sake of the two minutes when Henry would fight a Bruin, you'd have to trade off ten or twelve minutes of very iffy defence against a Boston team that scored eight goals on Carey Price last time they met. A lot of those goals were scored off odd-man rushes and very suspect defensive coverage, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to make the D worse than it is now. Really, if the score is close toward the end of the game, who's Jacques the Knife going to have on the ice? Alex Henry or an over-worked Roman Hamrlik? He'll go with Hamrlik, who would have had to play more minutes as Henry got two shifts in the third. That's not a recipe for lead protection.
Apparently, though, the majority of fans who answered the CJAD question are in favour of calling Henry up for the game. I think that's probably spawned by a thirst for revenge and willingness to settle for a moral victory. In other words, the Habs might lose by reducing the quality of their D, but as long as the guys in the lineup kick some Bruin ass to save face after last game, who cares?
I think that's a misguided notion, though. If the Bruins' "toughness" is really in the Habs' heads, bringing in a ringer to fight one of them tomorrow isn't going to really solve the problem. Even if he fought and won, Henry isn't going to be on the playoff roster. The Canadiens are what they are as far as post-season participation goes, so they have to find solutions within their own lineup. If their answer to aggression is going to be team toughness...whether they get beaten up or not...then, that's got to come from the team they have.
That said, whatever happens tomorrow isn't likely to be indicative of what the teams can expect in the playoffs, should they meet. You don't often see five fights in a playoff game, and because teams live and die on special teams, they're much more circumspect about taking pointless penalties. The Canadiens need to focus more on shutting down the Bruins' offence and worry less about calling up a fighter to send a rather empty message.
So, no, I wouldn't call up anybody to fight the Bruins, and I'm kind of surprised that 99% of the fans who answered CJAD's poll question on the issue would.
I answered honestly: of course they shouldn't. I watched Henry yesterday, playing for the Hamilton Bulldogs versus the Toronto Marlies in an AHL game. He's a heart-and-soul kind of player; one who gives it his all in every game. He's tough as nails. He's not, however, better than any of the defencemen the Canadiens can ice instead. He's not better than Subban, Hamrlik or Wisniewski on offence. He's not as good a shotblocker or PKer as Gill or Sopel. And, while he's certainly willing to fight, so is Paul Mara, who'll probably draw in in Yannick Weber's place.
So, for the sake of the two minutes when Henry would fight a Bruin, you'd have to trade off ten or twelve minutes of very iffy defence against a Boston team that scored eight goals on Carey Price last time they met. A lot of those goals were scored off odd-man rushes and very suspect defensive coverage, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to make the D worse than it is now. Really, if the score is close toward the end of the game, who's Jacques the Knife going to have on the ice? Alex Henry or an over-worked Roman Hamrlik? He'll go with Hamrlik, who would have had to play more minutes as Henry got two shifts in the third. That's not a recipe for lead protection.
Apparently, though, the majority of fans who answered the CJAD question are in favour of calling Henry up for the game. I think that's probably spawned by a thirst for revenge and willingness to settle for a moral victory. In other words, the Habs might lose by reducing the quality of their D, but as long as the guys in the lineup kick some Bruin ass to save face after last game, who cares?
I think that's a misguided notion, though. If the Bruins' "toughness" is really in the Habs' heads, bringing in a ringer to fight one of them tomorrow isn't going to really solve the problem. Even if he fought and won, Henry isn't going to be on the playoff roster. The Canadiens are what they are as far as post-season participation goes, so they have to find solutions within their own lineup. If their answer to aggression is going to be team toughness...whether they get beaten up or not...then, that's got to come from the team they have.
That said, whatever happens tomorrow isn't likely to be indicative of what the teams can expect in the playoffs, should they meet. You don't often see five fights in a playoff game, and because teams live and die on special teams, they're much more circumspect about taking pointless penalties. The Canadiens need to focus more on shutting down the Bruins' offence and worry less about calling up a fighter to send a rather empty message.
So, no, I wouldn't call up anybody to fight the Bruins, and I'm kind of surprised that 99% of the fans who answered CJAD's poll question on the issue would.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
