Thursday, May 19, 2016

What's Wrong with Hockey

"If you're going to slash him, break a bone. If you're going to hit him from behind, give him a slight concussion." -- Mike Milbury, NHL TV analyst

There is a lot wrong with the sport of hockey. For starters, the puck is small and moves so fast that it does not translate well to television. Since TV is where sports make most of their money, that is a problem and will limit its popularity and growth. As will the games foreignness. Most of its potential audience have never skated; everybody has thrown a ball.
But there is a bigger problem, the problem of how the game--and the players--see themselves.
First, there is a gap between how players regard each other in hockey as opposed to other sports. Somehow hockey players transcend sportsmanship. Yes, they have an uplifting handshake after the series and they interview well and charitably. But they unquestionably try to hurt each other for advantage. There is some of that in all sports--"wearing the other guy down," hit him on every play," "throwing the pitch inside"--but nothing like hockey. Hockey allows--encourages--the athletes to harm each other. Harm. Athletes who respected the game and each other simply would not do that. It is the difference between Navratilova and Harding, Musial and Marishal. But Harding and Marishal are notable exceptions; such players are the rule in hockey, so much so that some teams hire skating bodyguards to protect their players.
Secondly, sportsmanship is not encouraged by the league. Blatant assault, a crime on the street, is a two minute penalty on the ice. And this is constantly reinforced by the league in its decisions as it splits hairs over split skulls. A league comment on Cooke's felonious hit on Savard implied Savard did not play correctly, that his skating style invited injury.
Finally, there is the league's purposeful public face. This is nowhere more obvious than the league's handling of Sydney Crosby. Crosby is the game's premier talent. His level of play, his devotion to the game, his suffering through unending physical abuse are all tributes to him. More, he is a nice guy that any sport would love to have as its face. Never troubled. Never a problem. No outrageous off-ice behavior. Yet the league does nothing to protect him. He is always hampered in playoffs when the game mysteriously changes and is suddenly judged by rules quite different from the rules that created the playoff competitors. He is held, interfered with, obstructed, concussed and sometimes injured so he cannot play. Imagine what would happen if Curry or Harper or Djokovic became purposeful targets for injury. Only a seriously arrogant--or benighted--league would be willing to sacrifice the play and presence of its premier players.
Not only do they stand by as willing accomplices to his nightly muggings and near-death experiences, they criticize him and his exceptional play. This, from NHL commentator, Jeremy Roenick--a guy whose hiring is approved by the league. “If I were Sidney Crosby right now,” Roenick said, “I’d watch the work ethic that Jonathan Drouin has on a nightly basis.” Drouin? Drouin is having a good series but has had a bad year. The forward was sent to the minors, decided to request a trade, then deserted the team’s American Hockey League affiliate for five weeks. Drouin? Work ethic? The one element of Crosby's game I have never before heard criticized is his work ethic.
No other sport abuses its stars physically and verbally. No sport would allow it--because they might not survive it.

 

No comments: