The Money To Be Made By "Letting The Boys Play"
Matt Bodenschatz | National Hockey League
Oct 27, 10:55 PM | Hype this story!
I’m not one for conspiracy theories. In fact, I avoid them at all costs.
But as I sat on my couch nursing the flu this afternoon, I got to thinking — something that can be dangerous when under the influence of Robitussin.
Maybe it’s the meds. Or maybe it’s truly something I believe…
Could the NHL be cashing in by avoiding suspensions?
We’ve all heard the phrase “they’re just letting the boys play,” which refers to on-ice officials avoiding calling penalties for fear of scripting the result of a game.
That’s a whole other article, and one I’d love to get into down the line.
But maybe, league officials are “letting the boys play” in their own right by not suspending players for seemingly suspendable actions.
“It doesn’t make any sense,” you’re probably thinking. And maybe it doesn’t. But humor me for a few minutes. It’s the least you can do for a flu-stricken blogger, right?
What if the NHL is trying to intensify rivalries with hopes of luring fans to watch future matchups?
Let me tell you, I know quite a few casual hockey fans who have December 15 circled on their calenders. Why? That’s when the Penguins and Flyers meet for the first time after Mike Richards ran Marc-Andre Fleury and Scott Hartnell bit Kris Letang’s finger on October 8.
Neither player was suspended, indicating that league officials are fine with the type of actions demonstrated by the Flyers in the final two seconds of that October 8 game.
So the stage is set for what could be an even more intense matchup between two teams already known for a fierce and physical rivalry.
That’s money in the pocket of the NHL.
Hockey News writer Adam Proteau apparently agrees.
“If only they were governed by a sheriff who did something other than (a) profit off their broken bodies and (b) lean on logic-free justifications to keep players in permanent vigilante mode, they might leave the meting out of justice to the institutions of authority where they belong.”
In other words, players are forced to be vigilant to protect themselves from getting hurt. Meanwhile, the NHL is doing very little because the violence in hockey is what attracts many fans.
More vigilantism, more fans. More fans, more money. More money, more vigilantism.
See the cycle?
Some plays, such as Rob Scuderi’s botched hit on Jason Chimera over the weekend, are nothing more than accidents.
Accidents need not be punished.
Other plays, such as Mike Richards’ hit on David Booth over the weekend, are performed with intent to injure.
Actions with intent to injure should be punished, and for the most part, aren’t.
It’s time for NHL officials to establish a rigid set of guidelines for protecting players.
Hockey is a dangerous and physical sport. I get that. But physical is not and should not be synonymous with violent.
There is a way NHL officials can keep the game physical while also keeping players safe.
Unfortunately, money talks, and for a league that already has a difficult time bringing in the dough, cutting out a possible cash cow just isn’t an option.
Comments
DaBich
Oct 28, 05:55 AM
The problem with not dishing out suspensions (like with Richards) is that the players WILL take care of the matter themselves. I bet you $50, December 15 the Penguins will be singled out for more penalties than the Flyers. Myself, I’m hoping McKee, Godard, or Cooke knocks Richards into next year. The goon has it coming. And Hartnell? There is no fit punishment. The league looks horrible, letting both Hartnell and Richards go unpunished. So the players have no choice but to take care of business themselves. It’s a matter of self- respect and pride.
Casey
Oct 28, 06:17 AM
I almost want to see Richards convulsing on the ice more than I want to see a win. Almost.
SprJudd
Oct 28, 07:54 AM
The problem is this: the NHL has no set guidelines for punishment, and because of that, a player can get 6 games for questioning the virtue of his ex-girlfriend while another player can get a congratulatory handshake for trying to end another player’s career. The NHL front office – specifically Colin Campbell – is a joke when it comes to discipline.
While I will say your post has some merit, I am not sure that’s what is going on. Part of the issue – in my mind anyway – is that the NHL has never created any written policy for how to handle certain things. They say they want to put headshots off limits, but they never put it in writing. Because they don’t put this stuff in writing and make it official, the NHL is wary of making those first couple of players examples for the rest of the league.
One thing I must argue with is the contention that the league allows the players to police themselves. There’s been an uptick in instigator calls and officials are looking for fisticuffs after a dirty play. So invariably what happens is one player throws a cheap shot and goes without a penalty or league punishment while the player who retaliates to defend his fallen teammate gets a penalty in the game – possibly ejected – and faces league discipline. The whole system is a disgrace.
As much as I hate writing this, I almost want to see what would happen if one league star took out another star. Sure, it’s okay if Mike Richards takes out David Booth – a relative no-name even amongst most hockey fans. But what if Mike Richards took out Steve Stamkos with a similar hit? Or Alex Ovechkin took out Sidney Crosby?
Ray aka WildcatRay
Oct 28, 09:36 AM
Matt,
This is disturbing. I grew up watching the league shortly after it expanded to 12 teams. My first attended game was the 1972 end-of-season Blues game.
I saw the birth of the “Broad Street Bullies” and angrily denounced them for the bloodsport that they pursued. I still point out that the only two years the Flyers succeeded with their brand of violence rather than hockey was the year Ken Dryden sat out and the first year after he returned. After that, the Flyers could not beat a genuine hockey team.
What I am seeing is that a league that is desperate for national attention may indeed be willing to again compromise its rules in exchange for more viewers. I would not put it past the owners that they look at something like mix martial arts and ultimate fighting and say “We were there first! If young people are flocking to those “sports”, why shouldn’t we return to the days of the player policing themselves?” with all that implies. Also in play is the idea that any publicity is good publicity.
On a final note, I recall sports writer Al Morganti on, I believe, ESPN’s PTI saying (I’m sure about Flyers fans) that there are group of hockey fans that DO go to games for the fighting. I would not put it past the league with its “cozy” relationship with Comcast/VS. (meaning the Flyers owners) to turn a blind eye to things the Flyers players do on ice.
Matt Bodenschatz
Oct 28, 09:58 AM
Again, as I write this, I’m a bit lubed up on Robitussin, so forgive me if I’m not making sense.
I agree with most, if not all of you.
@Dabich, you’re right. The league leaves its punishment to the players, setting the stage for further violence, as opposed to curbing further violence by punishing those involved in the first place. I hope the Penguins do target Richards and the other stars wearing black and orange on December 15 — but I hope they do so in a legal, clean way, just as they have done for years and years. That’s how to play hockey.
@Casey, as much as I hate the Flyers, not sure I’d want to see anyone truly hurt.
@SprJudd, it is a very convoluted take the NHL has when it would rather punish players for potty-mouth than dangerous actions. I will say, though, that Avery deserved a suspension for his comments last season. They were uncalled for, unsolicited, and made in reference to someone not even involved in the game. Such actions are just as detrimental to this “garage league” as the dirty cheapshots we see so frequently.
Now, with that being said, I strongly believe the NHL needs a firm rulebook that defines what merits a suspension with a strong footnote that any activity not listed in the rulebook that is perceived to be with intent to injure is worthy of suspension. The NFL has become ultra sensitive to anything perceived at intent to injure. Some say it’s ruining the sport. To me, the NFL is just as popular, exciting, and physical as it ever was. And players who previously had major issues staying out of trouble (on and off the field) appear to be learning from their mistakes.
Unfortunately, the NHL can set forth any set of guidelines it wants, but if it ignores them (such as with the Ovechkin knee-on-knee hit to Gonchar during the playoffs last year), they’ll mean nothing.
@Ray, you really found the essence of what I was trying to get at. In my head, I kept picturing the UFC when I wrote this piece. “If one bloodsport is so popular, the NHL can be popular as a bloodsport too.”
I think, in general, there is a niche of hockey fans (who in and of themselves are fans of a niche sport) who watch for no other reason than the physicality and violence. While I’m sure every team has its segment of such fans, I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if the Flyers had the largest group of fans looking at hockey as a bloodsport and not a game of speed and grace.
I realize hockey is physical. I don’t want that to change. But as I wrote above, physicality and violence are not one and the same. There are many, many ways to have “safe” physicality without intent-to-injure — unfortunately, for one reason or another, I think the NHL simply turns a blind eye to “let the boys play.”
Dabich
Oct 28, 12:03 PM
Matt, you mention UFC as a bloodsport. UFC IS bloody and the fighters expect it to be so. They expect hits to the face. But even their officials have guidelines they follow and stop a fight if it’s getting too bloody, or if someone is in danger of being permanently harmed. Hockey players DO NOT expect the cheap shots that some goons (insert favorite goon here) dish out without being punished for it. THE NHL officials are a joke and they are letting this sport become a joke as well. Oh, and do feel better soon!
Sprjudd ~ I disagree that players policing themselves are punished severely. They may be assessed penalty minutes, but that’s nothing compared to a suspension (which should be levied upon a goon making a nasty hit). I hope Godard or Cooke lays Richards out. Not to permanently hurt him, but to let him know he won’t get away with cheap shots on our guys. Take the penalty and move on. Make it a CLEAN hard hit. I also disagree with the idea that David Booth is a no name. He had 29 goals and 31 assists for Florida last season. Nice numbers for a no name. Richards knew exactly what he was doing.
SprJudd
Oct 28, 12:43 PM
@Dabich – I said David Booth is “a relative no-name even amongst most hockey fans” and not a complete no-name. Yes, he has put up some decent numbers, I’m not arguing that. What I’m saying is that he’s a guy who plays in a market that isn’t closely followed, doesn’t get much TV exposure, and – despite good numbers – he isn’t getting put on All-Star teams. I knew who David Booth was before the hit, but I know some hockey fans – people who know the sport – who had no idea who David Booth was before that hit. And while his name is growing – especially with the publicity surrounding the hit – David Booth is far from NHL “star” status. That’s the point I was trying to make.
Dabich
Oct 28, 01:01 PM
Sprjudd ~ point taken. The thing is, it shouldn’t matter WHO is hit, or who is MAKING the hit, the league needs to address the situation. And I feel if nothing is done, you will see more and more of players taking care of it themselves.
PCharlton
Oct 28, 01:03 PM
I think there is a flaw to your thought process here. The NHL is smart enough to know that they make far more money off of their star power than any fighting that takes place during a game. With that said I find it very difficult to beleive that their lack of disciplinary action is an effort to draw more fans to the game, because eventually a Crosby, Malkin or Stamkos will be hurt. An injury like this would financially hurt the NHL more than they would gain from allowing teams to take runs at eachother.
sina220
Oct 28, 02:27 PM
I don’t know about the NHL not suspending someone like Richards, It’s obvious he was going for Booths head, especially considering Booth was skating fairly upright when the hit happened. If you want to eliminate headshots, as the NHL has said it does many times, this was the perfect time to do it. They really crapped the bed on this one though.
To your point though, I actually hope the NHL is letting the players police themselves. Punks like Richards and Hartnell aren’t going to take anything away from a penalty from a referee or a few game suspension. They’re far too arrogant and rationalize to themselves that’s just how they’re supposed to play and the consequences are just a formality of that playing style. Didn’t Philly have 5 suspensions 2 years ago and 3 or 4 more last year, including Carcillo’s butt-end to Talbots face?
Right. That didn’t change anything. So what’s left if the NHL’s discipline has no effect on the player? Not much besides an ol’ fashioned beat-down. I’m all for an-eye-for-an-eye in most cases, especially when it comes to dealing with and embarrasing arrogant SOBs. If Godard would just skate out on his first shift, grab Richards or Hartnell by the collar of their jersey, in the middle of play, and start blasting them in the face I’d be the first person to jump out of my seat cheering. Take the instigator, and the misconduct, the Flyers are bound to get some of their own from the melee that would ensue.
And be sure to ask Hartnell if knuckles taste as good as fingers.
Dabich
Oct 28, 03:23 PM
SINA I love it lol. I still think tho, that the league should suspend – and FINE IN LARGE AMOUNTS – players like Carcillo and Richards when they are goons. AND let the players do the eye for an eye thing as well…
Casey
Oct 28, 04:30 PM
@ Matt – Sorry, my comment was only made in jest. I don’t really want to see Richards, or anyone, hurt. However, would it be appropriate for me to say that I would like to see Orpik, Cooke, and Kunitz cleanly body check him continuously throughout the course of an evening?
Matt Bodenschatz
Oct 28, 05:50 PM
I don’t have time to respond to all, so I’ll just get back as Casey. In no way did I think you were serious. And, yes, I’m with you. Nothing better than seeing a dirty player repeatedly worn out and rendered useless by repeated clean hits and physical play.
Ray aka WildcatRay
Oct 29, 09:30 AM
In today’s P-G (Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09302/1009236-125.stm), Dave Molinari addresses a reader’s question regarding Richards’ hit on Booth. The money quote from Dave’s answer:
The fact that former Flyers captain Keith Primeau, whose ties to his former team remain strong, publicly skewered Richards’ check during an interview with a Toronto radio station Tuesday — Primeau said, among other things, that “there is not a place in the game for those kind of hits” and described Richards’ check as “a punishable act” — is a pretty powerful statement on the subject. Primeau, of course, was forced to retire prematurely because of multiple concussions.
‘Nuf said!
Commenting is closed for this article.