Sports - Does hockey need a death before violence stops?

Avatar · 03-11-2004, 01:16 AM

So is the question asked by AP Sports Columnist Tim Dahlberg (Read Article). Personally, I think it unfortunately might. Like Dahlberg said, fighting has always been somewhat honourable in the NHL, and it's a short way from that and to Bertuzzi's actions. So I think in order to stop this kind of violence, we need to stop what breeds it - the unneccesary fighting that's condoned by the NHL.

And those who say that fights are a part of hockey neglect to consider that European and Olympic hockey get by without the vast amount of fights that happen in the NHL. People say that hockey's a physical game, and thus, fights are inevitable. To them, I ask - isn't football a physical game? And how many all-out brawls have we seen there?

I'm a hockey fan, and I want the NHL to succeed. But in order for that to happen, it needs to focus less on thuggery, and more on great play. I know people that became enarmoured with hockey during the Olympics only to be put off by the NHL, so hockey can become popular. It just need a correct focus.

Headhunter · 03-11-2004, 09:02 PM

If fighting remains allowed in the NHL, I doubt death would have an effect more than a few years in terms of curbing extreme violence.

Taking out fighting would result in more dirty and vicious hits from players who haven't yet vented their fury onto the opponent. The game is inherently more violent than any other sport I can think of; football has a lot of protective gear, rugby doesn't occur with nearly the same speed or enormous players, same speed limitation on lacrosse, and so on.

Really, I think hockey will always remain one of the most violent and, quite possibly, deadliest sports in North America. [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

Chi159 · 03-12-2004, 01:01 AM

Unfortunately, I think violence will always be a part of hockey. Well, at least in the NHL, that is. After the Marty McSorley-Donald Brashear incident a few years ago, you never thought you would see another player result to prosecutable/violent behavior, but look at what happened with Bertuzzi. Fighting is celebrated by many North American hockey fans. The NHL is aware of this and has even encouraged it in very unsubtle ways. In the face of dumb rules that restrict scoring, fighting has become the main source of entertainment for a lot of NHL fans. Sad, but true. However, what Bertuzzi did wasn�t your typical fight nor was it representative of �normal� physicality. He crossed a very fine line. I�m glad that he�s been suspended for the rest of this season and the playoffs. I wouldn�t mind seeing his request to be reinstated for next season be turned down. It would send a real message to potential thugs, however, I still fear that �message� would soon be forgotten.

A lot of rules changes need to be enforced in the NHL. Beavis Bettman has single-handedly made the game the least popular and marketable sport in the United States. That�s pretty sad. I don�t think he will ever discourage the fighting aspect of hockey, but *something* needs to be done to prevent such atrocities as this recent one from occurring again. If a death ever occurred from such behavior in the future, I think it would force the NHL to make policy changes, but I still doubt it would make the sport that less violent. It�s unfortunately become the nature of the beast. The game needs to change before that type of mentality also changes.

Headhunter · 03-12-2004, 01:12 AM

Though I'm not big on hockey, what I've noticed since the McSorely incident was an increasing tendency for players to take more care in landing their cheap shots. Not a reduction in quantity, but in visibility.

Hockey has become a very dry, uninvolving game with poorly marketed players, drastic overexpansion, and plummeting revenue. The fights are a spectacle that draws in some fans, as a band-aid to the real problems.

Save a suspension for life, I really don't see the Bertuzzi discipline to come as being a big change for the NHL longterm. Within a few years, there will be a bigger and more explosive situation; hockey has set itself up so poorly in terms of inconsistent punishment and an inbred culture of extreme violence that it cannot be avoided. It's like handing every player a loaded gun, and appealing to their morality to keep from using it; giving out the opportunity for violence was a huge mistake in the first place, that now cannot be undone.

Bettman absolutely needs to go. As much as fans badmouth Bud Selig, he at least cares about his product to some (narrowly focused) degree. Bettman's seeming indifference to the game and disregard of the real issues is alarming, and completely turned me off to hockey many years ago.

Chi159 · 03-12-2004, 01:29 AM

Preach it! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

That�s why I no longer consider myself a real fan of hockey. The NHL�s rules, poor marketing, inconsistent legislation, overexpansion, and buffoonery among the league brass has completely turned me off. To make matters worse, my �favorite� team (Chicago Blackhawks) are a pathetic excuse for an organization, led by a cheapskate, idiotic owner who has turned a once proud hockey town into one that feigns disinterest due to blacked out home games and a terrible on-ice product.

I�m no fan of Bud Selig�s, but I agree with your assessment of him versus Bettman. The latter is even worse, if possible. He has completely ruined the game. It�s pretty sad that the NHL is on the verge of having their season locked out next year, and very few people even care.

Headhunter · 03-12-2004, 03:13 AM

David Stern probably looks at the NHL, and cackles under the blinding glare of gold bricks throughout his mansion. [img]smilies/lol.gif[/img]

This was an interesting look at the problem with hockey, especially as a Canuck:

Quote:

Bertuzzi A Product of Hockey's Culture

By Jim Kelley
ESPN.com

The best and brightest minds in the NHL did the best they could in navigating the issues and elements relating to Todd Bertuzzi's contemptible hit on Steve Moore. In suspending Bertuzzi for the remainder of the regular season and the playoffs, and opting to re-examine whether the punishment will still fit the crime when training camps reopen, the NHL has taken a huge step in the right direction in punishing such acts.

But it doesn't really matter.

What the NHL did is what the NHL always does in these circumstances: It denies the problem is systemic. It argues that such acts do not belong in the game, are not a part of its game and should never be considered part of the game.

But that's not true.

What Bertuzzi did to Moore -- seeking him out with the intent to physically harm him, and doing so from behind -- has been a part of hockey for as long as the game has existed. It's as much a part of the culture of the game as sticks and skates and pucks.

It's also, in very large part, a Canadian thing.

The second most widely reported lie you will read during the following months of in what is now the wretched life of Todd Bertuzzi is that what he did is not who he is or how he plays the game.

The fact is, it's very much a part of who he is and how he plays the game -- and it's been that way almost from the day he first laced up his skates. It's a part of the dirty side of hockey that has existed seemingly since it became an organized sport.

The NHL, which embraces and sometimes even sells violence as a part of the game, deserves some of the blame. Bertuzzi, unquestionably, deserves more than he will ever be able to admit.

But in a larger sense, so does every coach who has ever led a kid to believe that retribution is part of the game and ever parent who has never told a child otherwise. It extends to every member of every front office -- from the grass-roots level, to major junior and to the pros -- who has subscribed to Conn Smythe's adage "If you can't beat them in the alley, you can't beat them on the ice" and assembled their team to do both.

The blame even extends to a great many broadcasters and writers, on both sides of the border, who feed the beast.

So when Colin Campbell, the NHL's executive vice president for hockey operations, says, "All these things stand alone," it's almost laughable. Just having so many "things" defeats the every essence of his argument.

For the record, this isn't the first time Bertuzzi has showed poor judgment with his use of aggression. He broke the nose of defenseman Karlis Skrastins, a non-fighter who's yet to crack 50 minutes in penalties in a single season, last year. He's been suspended for hitting an official, who was breaking up a fight Bertuzzi wouldn't back down from. He left the bench to participate in an an altercation four games into the 2001-02 season and was suspended 10 games, a penalty that arguably cost him the scoring title.

But he isn't the only one. At the risk of being charged with stereotyping, Bertuzzi's behavior is typical of the hockey culture in Canada, a country that has long claimed the game as its own.

Look at the record.

The list is seemingly endless and Bertuzzi, a "good Canadian boy from Sudbury, Ontario," is only the most recent Canadian native to rise to the top of a rather lengthy list of infamous characters.

There is of course Marty McSorley, lauded for serving as Wayne Gretzky's personal bodyguard, who commit the last unforgivable "stand alone" cheap shot four years ago when he whacked Donald Brashear across the side of the head -- from behind -- in the very same arena where Bertuzzi incapacitated Moore. It was Dale Hunter who separated Pierre Turgeon's shoulder with a hit from behind in 1993 and received a 21-game suspension -- the longest ever at the time -- from new commissioner Gary Bettman.

Least we forget, Matt Johnson took out Jeff Beukeboom with a cheap shot that ultimately ended Beukeboom's career. And Canadian media darling Tie Domi did it not once (a flying elbow away from the play that KO'd Scott Niedermayer in the 2001 playoffs), but twice (a sucker-punch to the kisser of Ulf Samuelsson in 1995). For the latter, he earned an eight-game suspension and a pat on the back from players who'd been witnesses to Samuelsson's cheap shots.

Then there's Dave Brown's stick-to-the-throat on Tomas Sandstrom and Claude Lemieux's cheap-shot hit-from-behind on Kris Draper.

And we haven't even addressed the duels that caved in the occasional skull or two in the pre-Bettman era, in the days when men were really men.

The list goes on and on and, for the most part, it's been a good ol' Canadian boys who have headed the cheap-shot parade.

America has its share of dirty players, and certainly there are noteworthy Europeans who could be accused of the same, but clearly there is a trend here.

Canadians and, I suspect, the NHL itself will rail in protest at the charge, but not all of them.

"I am a Canadian and I'm proud of that, but I can't say you're wrong," said former New York Rangers general manager Neil Smith. "There's a mentality in some parts of Canada that this is the way hockey is and should be. You've seen it from (Canadian broadcaster) Don Cherry on 'Hockey Night in Canada' and from some others. It's endorsed as long as it's by some favored son of the Canadian game. But sooner or later it's going to end with someone's death. The culture of hockey, the longer it goes on, the inevitable result will be a death on the ice."

When you look at the numbers, you have to at least ask if there's some merit to the charge.

The NHL's top five leaders in career penalty minutes -- Tiger Williams, Hunter, McSorley, Bob Probert and Domi -- are all products of the Canadian system and have committed the very acts the NHL says isn't a part of its game.

Yes, Canadians have always comprised a higher percentage of NHL players (52.1 percent in 2003-04, down from 66.2 percent in 1992-93), but a significant number of other countries have been contributing an ever-growing number of players to the league and the vast majority of them simply don't play the game that way.

After all, how do you explain that of the top 15 leaders in penalty minutes, only two -- Krzysztof Oliwa of Poland and Zdeno Chara of the Czech Republic -- aren't products of Canada.

The reason is simple: It's not in their culture. The Russians of the '60s, '70s and '80s produced some of the most remarkable combinations of talent and toughness the game has ever seen, but none of them ever attempted to take someone's head off from behind, bulldog them face first into the ice and then attempt to deliver what could well have been a killer blow while their opponent lay helpless or unconscious.

Samuelsson might have been a poster boy for dirty European hockey, but I don't recall him ever hitting an opponent in the head with a stick from behind.

America also has a criminal element in many of its sports, but it seldom manifests itself on the playing surfaces of the NFL, Major League Baseball or the NBA. With a few notable exceptions, those despicable acts generally take place outside of the actual games, in large part because the leagues simply don't tolerate them.

It's different in hockey, especially in Canadian hockey.

In many ways Canada is the most civilized country on earth, but how many times have we seen a player applauded for on-ice antics that include "taking a guy out" or "making him pay," code words for vigilante justice in "their game."

In the NFL if a player takes an opponent out with a cheap shot, he is heavily penalized and the other team rewarded with field position. There might be lingering anger, but when was the last time you saw an offensive lineman cross the line of scrimmage and cold **** the offending linebacker in the back of the head?

Do we not witness, on a nightly basis, an NHL player who will hit an opponent after the whistle and be rewarded rather than penalized for it? He might get a warning from the on-ice officials once, twice or even three times in the course of a game, but in the end he emerges with praise for being an aggressive player who "plays the game the way it should be played."

Pity, however, the player who retaliates. He gets a penalty. And if he doesn't retaliate, he is rarely rewarded for taking the slap. He instead is looked upon as "soft." It's all a part of the culture of the game, one that rewards the bully and humiliates the victim.

If Bertuzzi's actions hadn't fractured vertebrae in Moore's neck, he'd have been an honored man in his locker room, the city of Vancouver and across all of Canada. Even now his apologists talk more about "poor Todd" than they do of the injured Moore.

After all, he was just sending a message.

Headhunter · 03-13-2004, 09:59 PM

Another commentary on the Bertuzzi incident, and its wider ramifications on sport:

Quote:

Should Courts Look More Closely At Sports?

By Scott Burnside
Special to ESPN.com

Near the end of a lengthy press conference and conference call to discuss the penalty meted out to Vancouver Canucks forward Todd Bertuzzi for his sucker-punching of Colorado's Steve Moore, the NHL's top lawyer, Bill Daly, suggested that what fans saw Monday -- and, of course, saw over and over -- was not hockey and that Bertuzzi's suspension for the balance of the season, playoffs included, is proof of that.

"It's incumbent on us to send a message, and a strong message, that what happened on Monday night wasn't hockey," Daly said.

The message may indeed have been strong.

Bertuzzi's suspension may well cost the Vancouver Canucks a Stanley Cup and almost certainly millions of dollars in playoff revenue. But in spite of Daly's convictions, Bertuzzi's striking down of an unsuspecting opponent is, indeed, hockey.

It has been so since the game began, and it will continue to be so until the very fundamentals of the game are changed.

Even Daly's colleague, Colin Campbell, the NHL's executive vice president and director of hockey operations, the man who handed down what could be the stiffest suspension ever, acknowledged it, saying these types of incidents are bound to happen again.

"I hate to say this," Campbell said. "But wrong decisions will be made in the future."

Moreover, Campbell said things were worse back in the day when the league didn't monitor every game, when highlights of every game weren't replayed over and over as was the sight of Bertuzzi cruising up behind Moore and knocking him into unconsciousness.

But if the Bertuzzi attack really does reflect the game's inherently violent nature, then it also reflects sport as a whole and the special place it has in society. Although hockey is the only team sport that condones fighting (and Campbell was quick to point out that the Bertuzzi incident wasn't a fight), there are violent elements to every pro sport. Players and coaches, and even to a certain degree fans, accept that by crossing the boundaries and entering into the sporting arena (and we use "arena" in its broadest terms) the natural laws and rules of society do not apply to the playing surface.

Instead, there is the belief that the specific rules of the games and conduct surrounding those games will be justly and firmly applied by the games' officials and, if actions warrant it, by the sports' governing bodies.

Perhaps that's why when Ben Christensen of Wichita State beans an opposing batter who strayed out of the on-deck circle, ending the player's chance at a pro career, he is suspended for the balance of the season but not charged criminally.

Or why when Mike Tyson chews off part of Evander Holyfield's ear, Nevada boxing officials are left to mete out discipline, not local police.

Los Angeles Laker Kermit Washington was suspended 60 days and fined $10,000 in 1977 for punching Rudy Tomjanovich, a punch that some thought might have killed the Houston player.

Last August, Oakland Raider Bill Romanowski, tore off the helmet of teammate Marcus Williams and pounded him in the face, breaking Williams's eye socket and likely ending his career. He was suspended and fined by the team but no criminal charges were laid (Williams has filed a civil suit).

In July 2001 Boston Red Sox prospect Izzy Alcantara karate-kicked catcher Jeremy Salazar in the face mask and then charged the mound in a Triple-A game after being brushed back by a pitch. He was suspended six games and was denied his berth in the All-Star Game.

When athletes are charged for on-field behavior, it is not only rare, but it is news.

South San Antonio High School basketball player Tony Limon was sentenced to five years in jail after delivering a straight-arm to an opponent even though Limon insisted his coach had goaded him into the attack.

Given that sports popularity is at an all-time high and given the influence it has on all areas of society, law enforcement agencies will have to look more closely at bringing criminal charges for on-field behavior, said Peter Roby, director of Northeastern University's Center for the Study of Sport In Society, on Thursday.

"I think sport has gotten a free pass in many ways because it's held in such high esteem and has such a special place in many people's hearts," Roby said.

The Christensen bean-balling "was a criminal act and should have been prosecuted."

It is hockey, though -- and specifically the National Hockey League -- that has seen its attempts to police itself fall short, at least as far as police agencies are concerned, a phenomenon directly related to the culture of violence "that's been allowed to ferment in hockey," Roby said.

But Windsor, Ontario, criminal defense lawyer and player agent Patrick Ducharme said Thursday he thinks law enforcement has no business sticking its nose into the NHL unless they're prepared to staff each game and charge each player. Players who step on the ice assume the risk of being injured, and if they are injured the league will discipline the transgressor, said Ducharme.

His clients include Vancouver's Matt Cooke, who was slashed by Matt Johnson several weeks ago, prompting a suspension for Johnson.

"Where was the attorney general then? That was a vicious blow with a stick," Ducharme asked. "They should stay out forever or they should get in every day."

As far back as 1969, Canadian prosecutors waded in, charging Wayne Maki and Ted Green after one of the most violent stick-swinging duels in NHL history. Green required multiple life-saving surgeries and had a metal plate inserted in his skull after the melee during a preseason game in Ottawa. He was suspended 12 games while Maki was given a 30-day suspension. Assault charges against Green were dropped and Maki was acquitted.

In 1976, four members of the Philadelphia Flyers were charged after a playoff brawl with the Toronto Maple Leafs spilled into the stands at Maple Leaf Gardens. Mel Bridgeman (assault causing bodily harm) and Don Saleski (possession of a dangerous weapon, a stick) both had charges stayed, while Joe Watson and Bob Kelly both pleaded guilty to assault and were fined $750.

Earlier, in November 1975, Dan Maloney of the Red Wings was charged with assault after tomahawking Brian Glennie of Toronto with his stick. Maloney, who would go on to coach in Toronto a decade later, pleaded no-contest to the charge and was banned from playing in Toronto for two years.

Roy McMurtry, then the attorney general of Ontario, was behind the charges, which he laid after warning the NHL to clean up its act. But in part they stemmed from a report produced by McMurtry's brother, lawyer Bill McMurtry, which examined the escalating violence in hockey. Although the report, which condemns the culture of violence in the NHL, was written almost 30 years ago, Bill McMurtry said Thursday he wouldn't change a word.

"They've dealt with the symptoms of violence, sometimes criminal, with suspensions, without looking at the root causes. And the root causes are that they've not only tolerated but rewarded violence outside the rules. And also condoned a system of vigilantism," Bill McMurtry said.

The lawyer, who played hockey into his 50s and who admits a passion for the game, suggests this parallel: Imagine if football players were rewarded with big contracts for specializing at hitting opponents out of bounds or knocking down a kicker with an illegal hit. Yet dozens of hockey players are rewarded for fighting with contracts in excess of $1 million, even though fighting is against the rules.

Campbell, pressed on the point Thursday, insisted the Bertuzzi incident was not the result of a fight and that even if fighting was eliminated from the sport the incident might still have happened. But McMurtry insists that by eliminating the fighting you eliminate the vigilante culture that permeates the sport, a culture that was clearly at play in the hunting down and battering of Moore.

It's clear the NHL is hoping the stern punishment handed down Thursday will prompt Vancouver police to step back from their investigation as well as send a message to other coaches and players about the league's position on this type of aberrant behavior.

But Roby said he doesn't think the league went far enough. Further, he suggests it will get to the point where players end up suing the league itself for creating the kind of environment where this type of attack takes place.

In apologizing for the attack, Bertuzzi said he didn't mean to hurt Moore. Either Bertuzzi is trying to insult the public's intelligence or he really thinks that "shooting a gloved fist at somebody's head" is a perfectly acceptable part of the game, Roby said.

Raonaild · 03-14-2004, 12:08 AM

I had to jump in on this ... I'm not a particularly dedicated hockey fan, but I do live in Vancouver and you cannot go anywhere in the city without hearing people talking about this.

What gets me is how everyone is suddenly so ready to nail Bertuzzi to the wall - I've seen some real hostility from people this week. As much as what he did was wrong, and the League's at fault for not consistently dealing with the problem, and both teams are at fault for setting up a situation where this could have happened (the Canucks were loosing badly, Moore was marked for a previous hit on Naslund yet he was still playing when he didn't need to be), the fans also deserve a lot of the blame. I've heard people in the last week suddenly all indignant about the amount of violence in hockey ... but there are plenty more fans who cheer these fights on when they happen.

I also don't like the feeling that Bertuzzi and the Canucks are being made examples of. And I think the extent of Moore's injury has had more influence on their punishments than it should have ... if an action is wrong, it's wrong, it shouldn't matter what the results of that action are.

[ 03-13-2004: Message edited Raonaild ]

Chi159 · 03-14-2004, 02:45 AM

It�s an unfortunate situation all the way around. Like Headhunter said, the sport of hockey promotes the type of behavior that breeds violence. A lot of blame can be thrown around. It�s not surprising that a player would lose his cool in the heat of the moment like this and make a severe error in judgment. However, I definitely think Bertuzzi needs to be made an example of to help discourage further violence in the future. A precedent, albeit a flimsy one, was set with the McSorley-Brashear incident a few years ago, so the NHL had to follow through with a similar ruling in regards to this tragedy. I have not been privy to the way the Canadian sports media has treated this situation, but I do know that Bertuzzi has taken a justified beating for his actions in the United States. It�s obvious that he is very remorseful for what he did, but people are more inclined to look at the extreme results of someone�s actions rather than the intention behind them. Rulings are usually handed out based on the degree of an outcome. That�s human nature.

This is a difficult situation for both Moore and Bertuzzi. I actually feel sorry for both of them. [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

[ 03-14-2004: Message edited Chi159 ]

LaraCroft01 · 03-14-2004, 05:49 AM

Is it all over the press there Raonaild? Vancouver is my home but I go to school in the States and didn't hear about this until Friday. When did it happen?

I now read that there might be a civil suit against Bertuzzi. Seems to me this whole thing could have been avoided had Moore not been such a jerk. Not that what Bertuzzi did was right, but it's just a thought.

Headhunter · 03-14-2004, 09:29 AM

Bertuzzi has such a big suspension because of Moore's injuries, not the act itself. Were sucker punching always given a season/playoff-long suspension, there would be a lot of players out of action every year.

The consequences have to match the outcome; what if Moore had been permanently paralyzed, or worse? Certainly, Bertuzzi would be looking at a lifetime ban in that case. Had Moore popped up with only a slight headache, Bertuzzi would probably be almost halfway through a 10-game suspension by now.

Barring a sweeping and fundamental change in hockey throughout Canada, which will likely never happen, this kind of incident will occur with more and more frequency...

Raonaild · 03-14-2004, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LaraCroft01:
Is it all over the press there Raonaild? Vancouver is my home but I go to school in the States and didn't hear about this until Friday. When did it happen?

Hell yeah. It was headline news in the Vancouver Sun, and even on the CBC (it happened at a game Monday night). The infamous punch was shown thousands of times. Brian Burke and others have actually been pretty upset about the circus the media has made of this, and think it unfairly influenced the decision of the league.

As for lawsuits, there may be a couple of those flying in the wake of this incident. Like from Canucks management, who aren't happy about being fined $250,000 US over it.

Quote:

Bertuzzi has such a big suspension because of Moore's injuries, not the act itself. Were sucker punching always given a season/playoff-long suspension, there would be a lot of players out of action every year.

And this is my problem - if you're serious about stopping that kind of behaviour, then all those other players should be punished. Bertuzzi's gloved punch wasn't even the reason Moore's injuries were so severe, it was the fact that he fell down awkwardly on the ice and a bunch of players piled on top of them. And what if Moore makes a full recovery and is back on the ice before the season's over (he's been deemed well enough to be transferred to a hospital in Colorado this weekend, and other than fractured vertebrae there was no spinal cord damage or bruising), should they go back and re-evaluate Todd's punishment?

[ 03-14-2004: Message edited Raonaild ]

Carmelo Anthony · 03-14-2004, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LaraCroft01:
Is it all over the press there Raonaild? Vancouver is my home but I go to school in the States and didn't hear about this until Friday. When did it happen?

I now read that there might be a civil suit against Bertuzzi. Seems to me this whole thing could have been avoided had Moore not been such a jerk. Not that what Bertuzzi did was right, but it's just a thought.

How was Moore being a jerk? Tell me that? The hit he put on Naslund was a clean and legal hit, everyone in the league said so, I have no problem with Vancouver protecting their own, but the Canucks were wrong for publicly putting a bounty on his head and saying they were going to injury him, Moore even got in a fight in the first period of that game before he was injured by Bertuzzi. Bertuzzi was wrong for being an ass and jerk for sucker punching him from behind and then driving his head into the ice.

Fighting is apart of hockey and probably should be, but let it be face to face not from behind when the other player doesn't see it coming.

LaraCroft01 · 03-14-2004, 04:24 PM

What Moore did caued Nasland to not be able to play for three games. And the guy doesn't get puinshed? Tell me how that is fair. Moore started it off by being a jerk in the first place. Don't flame me for it cause it's my opinon. How is it "clean" when the guy gets a concussion?

I've heard that Moore was up and about the next day walking around the hospital. I could be biased but I am not seeing how he was deathly injured.

Headhunter True, had Moore not been hospitalized then Bertuzzi wouldn't be in so much trouble. I'm just wondering why Vancouver is being made a scape goat here when Moore gave someone a concussion and didn't get squat for it.

I think Raonaild is right: everyone who injurs someone else should be puinshed. This includes Moore who gave someone a concussion. I think being suspended and fine is a little harsh. I am also beginning to think that Vancouver is being made the scape goat for all injuries in the NHL- and that no one will learn anything from any of this.

Raonaild Thanks for the info. I am not hearing anything about it down here in the States (but then I'm not a news watcher). Vancouver's media tends to go a little over the top over some things, and I can picture how much of a fuss they have made over it. Do you think it's influenced the league? [img]smilies/look.gif[/img]

Raonaild · 03-14-2004, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LaraCroft01:
Raonaild Thanks for the info. I am not hearing anything about it down here in the States (but then I'm not a news watcher). Vancouver's media tends to go a little over the top over some things, and I can picture how much of a fuss they have made over it. Do you think it's influenced the league? [img]smilies/look.gif[/img]

It wasn't just Vancouver's media, it's been all over the national news too. And lots of them were going on about how Bertuzzi "broke Moore's neck", which wasn't even true, but brought a lot of other media out of the woodwork going on about the terrible state of violence in the NHL. The League had to have been embarassed by it all, and wanted to demonstrate that they were "dealing with the problem" by coming down hard on Bertuzzi and the Canucks.

Don Cherry this weekend was chastizing the media too, for how they were all belittling Bertuzzi for a press conference he held where he apologized for the incident, and was practically in tears over it.

If it comes right down to it, the media weren't exactly helpful either before this incident, the way they kept going on about Moore's hit on Naslund, and how the Canucks would be looking for payback.


Fan Forum > General Discussion > Sports > Does hockey need a death before violence stops?