According the the Boston Bruins PPV announcer, they have SUPERMAN in net. Apparently its true, because the Oilers were shut out this game - with a little help from Sam Gagner and the Bruins PP. Roloson played markedly well.
In this photo, Tim Thomas watches the puck fly by him. For the longest time, the former Oilers goaltending prospect thought he would watch his career fly by him as well. As you are all probably familiar with by now, the Thomas story involves a lot of perserverance, determination, and patience. In the last few years Thomas has established himself as the #1 in Boston. This year, it's not so etched in stone as Fernandez has come in to Boston as the #1b, perhaps to push Thomas to play better, who knows.
The only thing worse than watching your career fly by is watching PPV that is not worth your time. For those of you who were not at Rexall Place, tonight's game was on PPV and I've got to say I wasn't too impressed with the team's uninspired coverage last year on the PPV. But as a result of my unwillingness to commit to feeding the profitable yet lacklustre Oilers PPV machine, I decided to stream the game online from a popular P2P streaming forum. To be fair, I haven't watched an Oilers PPV game yet this year so I will be curious to see how they have changed it for this 2008-09 season.
To be fair, the shots were pretty close by the end of the 3rd but the Bruins still outshot the Oilers by a considerable margin. Still, it was an entertaining game and the 1-0 score is misleading.
Turns out the Boston Bruins have poor PPV coverage as well. Not only are the announcers heavily biased in their coverage of the Bruins they also get excited (they sound like they peed their pants) over seemingly unimportant plays which confuses listeners/watchers when the play is actually worth getting riled up for (think 630 CHED but on crack and from Boston). Furthermore, the Boston announcers called our rink Rexall Center. Come on buddy, you're a professional - get it right. This is down the same school of the announcers who have poisoned the airwaves with mystery players such as "Sam Cogliano" and polluted the press with the likes of the infamous Ladislav "Smead."
The Oilers performance tonight:
The Oilers started the game getting heavily outshot in the 1st period due to some spirited D coverage by the Bruins. Once the Oilers got into the flow of it, Hemsky and Cole were starting to zip around in the 2nd period. Grebeshkov and Gilbert looked great again.
3rd period: Roloson keeps the team in it and Cole, Moreau, and Cogliano make a lot of great plays going into the Bruins zone. Hemsky beginning to play a bit more of backchecking, stripping Nokeleinen of the puck at one point. The announcer did not feign to describe the great goaltending on this night. Roloson robs Savard at one point. Sam Gagner was mostly unoticable but he did pull of some sweet moves in the last minute of play. More on Sam Gagner's play later. All examples point to one thing: team chemistry and consistency are starting to find its way into the Oilers play.
OT: Sam Gagner's play leads to some mayhem in the D-zone. Oilers fail to kill off the subsequent penalty. Sigh.
At least we got 1 point, eh?
The D in the Oilers defensive zone is still a bit worrisome in terms of challenging shooters, though. I don't know if anybody else notices this, but we just let people cycle around the outside forever and ever and ever... this is like a PK, except it lasts the whole game. Sure, we haveMacT and Huddy who know all about playing defensively. But there has to be some time in the D-zone when someone has to pull a Regehr or Smith and strip a guy of the puck with strong physical play? Otherwise the opposition is going to tee up one-timers from the slot all game, and that sure caused us to bite the bullet in the Vancouver game. I'm sure a small change to the D-zone coverage could prevent the Oilers from being outshot every game.
Boston Bruins Announcement Gems:
(1) OH MY GODDDD.... SUPERMAN! (2) Coming straight to you from Rexall Center... (3) Steve Staios was coming in the back door HARD...
Brent Sutter, a hockey pseudo-legend, spoke about the Doug Weight hit on his son here. Here is obviously peeved about it, and relates the following quote:
It was a hard hit, a legal hit ... but something has to be done about players being hit in the head while in a vulnerable position.
Sutter nails it on the dot. Also quoted:
If a player got hit in the head, whether it was clean or dirty, you knew what was going to happen. It was going to be a long night for the guy who did the hitting. And the next time, it would be a long night.
The game today is better in a lot of areas. But in some areas, it's not and it's troublesome. There is a lack of respect for opponents' players. It's the way the game is played today, and there are significant injuries. It is what it is.
Unfortunately, the league is better at wiping out one thing and not the other. One thing is a deterrent to the other thing (aka big hits draw revenge so thus prevent stupid plays) but if you remove the balance then there will be too much of one thing. In a weird kind of way, the senseless violence balances out the senseless violence: revenge brawls or fights send a message about decking vulnerable guys on the ice. Not that I would suggest the Canes go and target Doug Weight, but it is a pretty effective deterrent to on-ice headshots. And obviously more effective than anything the league has tried recently...
Doug Weight, as well all know, is a classy player. But his hit on Brandon Sutter was not a classy move. The former Oiler captain was himself a victim of a big hit in the 2006 SCF that knocked his shoulder out and him out of the remainder of the series. There's Jim Rutherford, who is upset about the NHL saying that it is "concerned about headshots," when he contends that they are cleary not concerned.
There are many opinions on the headshot contorversy: there's the old school club, who believes all hits are legal as long as there's no elbows or leaving the feet involved, and then there are those who believe all headshots should be eliminated.
We all know big hits can change a game. Whether this is Kariya recovering to become a cult hero, or Stevens knocking Lindros out of the game. Whether this is Stoll getting demolished by Markov leading to a Datsyuk goal, or Ruutu removing Jagr from the Olympics. However, as we all know not all of these hits were helpful to the team of the guy who laid the big hit and most, if not all of the time, the guy who gets hit leaves the game with a concussion or a major injury. Sometimes, that one hit stays with a guy for the rest of his career.
To be fair, sometimes players don't mean to hit other guys in the head. Such as Pronger on McAmmond (SCF) and perhaps Weight on Sutter. But the bottom line is, should somebody lay a big hit on someone who has their head down?
Does it matter who does the hitting: whether it's Ruutu, Weight, Armstrong, or Stevens? Does it matter who gets hit: Kariya, Letowski, Lindros, or (Mathieu) Roy? I don' think it matters who is involved with the hitting or getting hit, but the NHL seems to think so. There is no real standard when it comes to punishing players. If you're a golden boy like Pronger or Stevens, it's A.O.K. If you're Downie, Simon, or (insert name of relatively unknown plugger here) you will be punished accordingly. I think Rutherford has a point. It would like to give the impression it cares by punishing the outcries against unpopular players and holding back on popular ones.
It's not really about who is doing the hitting/getting hit as much as it is about the attitude that is associated with the hitting.
We've all heard the argument about "late hits," "interference," "leaning with the shoulder," and "leaving the feet." It really does come down to a split-second decision, as many commentators on the subject have suggested. Perhaps we should change the way we react to this situation so that people can make better split-second decisions. Erik Cole broke his neck and other guys have had career threatening injuries. How long before someone gets paralyzed or loses their life?
I think it's stupid to suggest cracking down on headshots: those events would still happen anyway in a contact sport. What I do propose, however, is returning to an environment of mutual respect: NHL players shouldn't be hitting other guys who have their heads down. This is about discretion and picking your battles: you don't have to go out and destroy everyone you hit.
Quotes from Chris and Mike of Covered in Oil on the OilersNation comment area, who hit it ON THE SPOT:
Chris! Says: October 19th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Interesting points. Lots to consider here, but two things jumped out at me off the bat:
“The Oilers have agreements in place that ensure certain rights holders get first crack at events as they unfold live. That’s what rights holders pay for. The Oilers are well within their rights to insist rules regarding no live blogging be followed.”
Oh man, are the Oilers ever going to be shocked when they wake up and realize it’s almost the year two thousand and nine and any dummy with a BlackBerry and ticket to the game can be curating a live-blog read by thousands in real time. In fact, why even pay to go to the game? Stay home and write it off TV. Bottom line is sports blog coverage gets read and read well. Trying to control the message is futile and pointless. From a business perspective, the goal should be to use emerging avenues to maximize brand exposure. How long until those rights holders realize they’re wasting their money on the current “access” model?
“This isn’t a case of two OilersNation writers getting favourable treatment in the form of press passes while other bloggers are denied the same courtesy. Gregor and I are accredited MSM guys who happen to contribute to a website.”
Dave was also an accredited MSM guy who happens to contribute to a website. What is the distinction you’re making here? This comes off as an old guard vs. new guard statement to me, but maybe I’m misunderstanding.
chris!
So what is the distinction, exactly?
Mike W Says: October 19th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
As far as this specific incident goes, Berry is mistaken if he’s saying I’ve blogged live from Rexall Place.
He never did. Although he did suggest that other accredited media have used their access for exclusive content for blogs they were not accredited for. This includes you, despite the “majority” of your quotes coming from media scrums available online.
Gregor and I are accredited MSM guys who happen to contribute to a website.
So was David.
There are conventions and a code of professional conduct that members of the MSM are expected to adhere to, and they should apply to bloggers seeking access by way of credentials.
You don’t cheer in the press box. You don’t show up at the rink wearing an Oilers jersey—any jersey. You don’t try to take photos of players exiting the shower on your cell phone because your site is “Hunky Oil.”
None of this applies to David since he’s actually a accredited member of the media, and wasn’t wearing an Oilers jersey or taking nude photos.
You seem to be confusing this issue as blogger-wannabe-journalist, which is adorable, but it makes you sound like a grandparent who can’t set a VCR.
The issue is that the Oilers exercised a double-standard, still acted like jerks when David co-operated fully, and then back-peddled and actually offered his press pass back when they were caught making up their “live blog policy” up on the spot.
But yeah, thanks for the support.
Robin Brownlee is covering his own ass because he's getting preferential treatment as an established member of the "accepted MSM." In Sociology, this is identified as the gap between "legitimate means" and "illegitimate means" to achieve a goal, which are both equally as effective but are seperated by one which is accepted in society's norms and one that is unfamiliar, strange, or contrary to accepted norms.
Does it matter so much whether a quote or action is described before (now that would be special), during, or after the game? All bets are on the fact that ALL Oilers fans were watching or listening to the game that night, and not following via Live Blog. The MSM are not in any way threatened by blogs as an upcoming alternative to LIVE HOCKEY. To suggest otherwise would be plain stupidity. "A picture is worth a thousand words" and we can all appreciate that the live game of hockey is no comparison to some live blog description. The live blog is not there to compete with the big show - it's there to add personality, and to allow us to understand the game from someone else's perspective.
The goals of the MSM and the internet's "illegitimate" MSM, the so-called live blog are different and thus incomparable. The rights holders (SNW, CBC, 630 CHED) are in it for profit, whereas the bloggershave nothing to gain and everything to lose.
OLD POST:
What Dave said, and what I think:
Lastly, I want to clarify something for the people who have encouraged me to keep fighting the good fight, or some variation thereof. Though I appreciate your sentiments, to me keeping on is fighting the wrong fight. I understand the issues related to bloggers, their value and their growing importance in the media world. As Matt at BoA (here) so eloquently put it, though, that's not the drum I'm interested in beating. I respect the fact that the Oilers are a private organization who are free to issue their press passes to whoever they see fit. While I'm disappointed with their stance on bloggers, I also respect the fact that I violated their rules, even if I wasn't the only one to do it. What I don't respect is the fact that I was treated as someone acting maliciously or underhandedly; as I explained in an e-mail to the person I dealt with, I would have hoped the fact I was nothing but apologetic and cooperative was some indication of good will on my part. Naivete may not be an excuse, but it's an explanation, and at no point did it seem to me like the organization was interested in hearing even that. You're free to disagree with me all you want on this, but I feel a pretty good measure of character is how you act when you're in a position of power, and to me they acted with irrationality and pettiness; had they reacted with even a hint of either magnanimity or grace, I would have had no problem, even if their final decision was to revoke the pass.
- Taken from CiO
He's right about one thing: it's not about getting retribution or fighting the system or anything silly or revolutionary. It's about fairness in action; in policy; in countenance - I think this is the least any human being can expect from another human being.
Sports bloggers everywhere are talking about what happened to Dave Berry from CiO. Hockey fans from far away as Pittsburgh, Washington, L.A., and Tampa Bay have picked up on the story. This only further reveals the hypocrisy of the action of the Rexall "GestapOil" employee(s) who were involved and/or called the shots on Dave. Some non-hockey blogs have even picked it up.
To reiterate: this is not a call-to-arms; this is not a bunch of disgruntled bloggers yearning for a fight against our team (God no, anybody who would suggest it would be nuts). No, this is asking for what is fair for someone who has worked hard for what he has achieved and didn't deserve what he got instead.
And remember Oilers' bloggers, you could be next.
Here are some links to further coverage of the story I fished off other blogs:
Hot Oil - I don't want the press pass and other musings - here - and here Jean Shorts and Bagged Milk - here and here Oilblobosphere - here AOL Sports - NHL Fanbase - here Deadspin - The Edmonton Oilers Will Not Tolerate Your Live-Blogging Shenanigans - here Yahoo Sports - Puck Daddy - here The Blueland Chronicle -Oilers Brass are Petty Bureaucratic Tyrants - here Edmonton Journal - David Staples: Cult of Hockey - here On Frozen Blog - Caps and Oilers More Than A Conference Apart - here Barry Melrose Rocks - here Black Dog Hates Skunks - A High School Party Game - here Pension Plan Puppets - Rallying the Base - here Five Hole Fanatics - All class, all the time - here Sabretooth's House - Covered in Controversy - here Out Of Left Field - Covered In Oil embargo: The screwballs have spoken - here Still No Name - Because sports blogging is serious business - here The Program - This one hits hard... - here Here Come the Bruins! - Oilers: "Fans are just not that important to us." - here
This quote is taken from Covered in Oil and I think is the shortest, most concise representation about why fans are offended and why bloggers are essential to small-market teams like our Edmonton Oilers:
Cliffster said...
For some reason, I'm not all that surprised given the NHL's ineptitude when it comes to connecting with it's fans. The reality is that bloggers reflect the views of the fans for the most part, and don't churn out the same mundane articles that we get from MSM. Good on you for keeping the blog rolling.
Cliffster is right about one thing: sponsored articles are usually mundane, unchallenging and are not accountable to fans. Bloggers usually get the short end of the stick because most of them are anonymous. But nonetheless, we are more or less accountable to each other and to the teams we love: not out of duty, but out of respect. Respect should be mutual.
If you wish to be on this list, email me. If I've forgotten a link it's because I just updated this new layout. Give me a shout if you disappeared off the new list.
