Sticks and Stones and Double Standards

Well here's another picture perfect example of moral indignation mixed with the accuser's own double standards.

First it was the Sean Avery "sloppy seconds" episode. Now it's the accusal of a league official using profanity, with this pansy ass accusation by Ryan Miller.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we always see guys like MacTavish and Wilson using profanity (we don't hear it, but we can work out the mouth motions and they're not saying fudge...). Heck, I even remember seeing precious Sam "the kid line" Gagner asserting his lack of innocence by a well-timed "FUCK" in front of a Sportsnet West camera.

But now with the Sean Avery incident and the league setting its double-standard on word choices, Ryan Miller has jumped the gun and accused an official of using profanity. Even worse, he characterizes the argument which involved the heated exchange of words as having led to a penalty against his team.

Miller said he joked with Ruff that the exchange with the official might have played a factor a few minutes later when the Sabres were issued a bench minor penalty for arguing an interference penalty against Thomas Vanek.

Correct me if I'm wrong. The ref swore at you, and then you got a penalty for it? That's makes absolutely no sense at all. Where does the "I did something to piss off the referee" part come into the equation? Or is Ryan Miller the do-good Mormon he wants us to believe he is. Surely he has nothing to admit to except what you would expect from Goodman Brown himself -- endless righteousness.

I feign to believe that portrayal. He is probably more self-righteous than righteous.

The problem with the league taking Sean Avery's problem into its own hands is that it will be swamped by bull shit petty concerns like this Ryan Miller incident where people take sides on issues that have no business presenting sides.

You were an asshole, the ref gave you a bench minor penalty. It's pretty simple.

If the league had let Sean Avery's problems get hammered out on the ice, then they would just have to deal with the aftermath of the natural way of dealing with things. Now guys think they're entitled to interpret the rule book and play with the league's backwards policies.

Good grief.

What next, suspensions for showing up at the rink in a bad mood?

Revenge: Oilers @ Kings and NHL on Avery

Interesting little wallpaper I found on Google with an ironic twist. It's Mr. sloppy-seconds himself during his Los Angeles Kings days.

------------------------------------------------

Oilers @ Kings, 8:30 PM

We need to win this game because of the 2-1 loss back in November when the team was non-existent for 60 minutes. This keeps in line with our current trend of getting games back for wins we should've won. For example, the 5-2 shallacking of Dallas earlier this week in return for the 4-3 loss in Dallas.

Hopefully, we keep up the intensity and I'll be raring for HockeyJesus the Schremp to get some points.

------------------------------------------------

Sean Avery Gets 6 Games - TSN

I'm amazed that the NHL, a league that thinks that shoulders to the heads of players that cause concussions are legal would think that sloppy seconds, something that could mean anything from sex with multiple partners to mountains of leftover pancakes, could be found offensive. The range of denotations and connotations are humongous. Sure, it's within context of his personal life. But why are we involved in his personal life anyway? Because he wants us to be - or because we choose to keep publishing his words or airing his interviews?

Whatever happened to sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me?

The truth: the NHL can't stand someone who is willing to feed their own b.s. back to them. This is why Bettman, Campbell, Daly and others are picking on this guy. Is Avery the neighbourhood bully? No. That's because Phaneuf would've kicked his ass. But now Avery gets the scorn of the media, the NHL fans, and still has to face the wrath of the Calgary Flames when he continues his career.

Not exactly fair to the guy.

The Hockey News and Puck Daddy agree with Strange Deadfellows on Avery

Ken Campbell of The Hockey News had this to say:

"The Dallas Stars, who were only too happy to sign him, expressed their disgust, saying they would have suspended him themselves if the NHL hadn’t seen fit to do so. A number of commentators are calling for Avery’s head, saying the NHL should use its broad moral powers to kick Avery out of the league or the Stars should invoke a morality clause to void his contract. A 10-game suspension for this nonsense is expected.

So, I ask, where was all this moral indignation when Bryan Allen two-handed Henrik Zetterberg and broke his leg a few years back? Why isn’t everyone scrambling to occupy the moral high ground when players are getting stepped on and having their heads driven into the boards?

Just so we all have this straight: John Zeiler gets three games for his boarding/check-from-behind/headshot to Adam Foote and Mike Mottau gets two games for a flying elbow at the head of Frans Nielsen. Funny how nobody ever talks about how potentially ending another player’s career is 'detrimental to the league or game of hockey.'

Then you have commentators on all-sports stations rebuking Avery as though Cuthbert was their own daughter. Please. These are the same outlets that, moments after expressing their disgust with Avery, chose to replay the tape of his comments dozens of times. If it were so offensive, why did they have to keep showing us what Avery said?"

Two insightful blog entries from Puck Daddy:

Link 1

Link 2

Also, have a read-read over at JSBM:

JSBM

Sean Avery met with the "long arm of the law" at NHL HQ in New York today. We'll find out later today or early tomorrow what the verdict is.

Stars @ Oilers & Avery Quotable Quotes

Garon starts. Robbie Schremp plays for Nilsson. The legend continues.

-------------------------------------------------------

Proof that readers and writers of our OilersNation have more common sense than TSN

By Jeanshorts:

"I have always hated Sean Avery and the fact that most, if not all of his team, and his GM hate him just as much as everyone else in the league makes me giddy.
And lets be honest, the only reason he’s still in the league is because he’s good at pissing off every single person around him. Because the dude doesn’t hit, doesn’t fight, he can barely handle the puck and he’s a career third liner at best.

But I think it’s ridiculous that the league suspended him for making fun of no one in particular. Sure you know it was aimed at Shrek, but he didn’t come right out and trash him personally. If that kind of thing warrents a suspension then god forbid the league gets anywhere within hearing distance of the ice during a game, because you know that the stuff that comes out in the coarse of a game is 20 times worse. Let the players police themselves, and you won’t get Sean Avery’s running their mouths without fear of retaliation."

"Someone made a really good point on Off The Record yesterday. Basically, if he would have said it on the ice, like you said, no one would have known and it would have been taken care of by the players. But since he did say it in a media scrum and it got all this immediate attention, now Double Dion has to deal with it with his wooms, and now she is involved personally.

I still don’t agree he should have had that thick NHL rule book hurled at him by the Munchkin King in New York, but leave it to the NHL to have knee jerk reactions about everything."

By ThoughtPolice:

"I can’t believe that they suspended Avery over this of all things. Everyone is applauding this decision but it was made at completely the wrong time IMO. Why not punish him for his racial slurs against Georges and Gauthier? things he said to Tucker? And numerous other altercations?

His comment today was harmless only meant to rile up Phaneuf and his ex. I agree it wasn’t smart to say or kind but since when do we censor people for speaking their mind when the speech is clean?….since today in the NHL i guess."

By oilboy76:

"I see what your saying, and I think if this was an isolated incident(ie:not someone like Avery who’s always running on like a soup sandwich) it would of been dismissed as being an ignorant and rude remark."

By Travis Dakin:

"What Avery said was true, plain and simple. At the end of the day, we don’t know what has been said and done in their personal lives that may have contributed to Avery saying what he said. Fact is he may have been over the line with the comments, but he was ready to back it up on the ice. I admire that. Now go back to your bible and pay for the power of christ to compel Avery of his wicked ways. Do you see that black thing on your coffee table with all the buttons? Use it to change the channel or turn the TV off. I’m sure you are capable of making your own decisions as to what you would like to watch or not. Ridiculous."

"You cheer for a game where fighting is allowed and attempts to injure players go pretty much un-punished because that’s “rough and tough hockey” and yet when a player says something to anger another player and is ready to back it up, you get your panties all bunched up in a knot because some moral code was broken? If you want to play moral police, go preach to some sunday school kids. Otherwise, let the grown men playing a game for a living be themselves. And like I said, He was ready to back it up on the ice that same night. Had he said it from across the continent with no fear of retribution, I’d say he was a pussy. But no, just a damn fine showman and funny as hell."

And finally, Scott Gallof, a blogger from Hockeybuzz.com:

"When the NHL decided to suspend Sean Avery for meaningless comments he made in an interview, a big opportunity was lost to actually generate some interest and buzz about a game. The very second Sean Avery was moved from the line up for last night's game against Dion Phanenuf and the Calgary Flames all national interest in said game was gone. The casual American public needs story lines and drama to be interested. Now I wish I could sit here and state that the public should watch for the beauty of the game, and gosh darn it they should, but this is reality.

You need to know your buyers when you try to sell something. Gary Bettman and the rest of the NHL brass seem to have no idea to what the typical American audience is actually genuinely looking for. Sometimes you need to have that Reggie Dunlop ideology and make the people crazy and clamor for something.

If the league really feels the need to punish Sean Avery for those oh-so not nice, hurtful, callous comments, then slap him with a huge fine and go after his Gucci wallet, but let the conflict resolve where it needs to, right on the ice in the game of the week. Instead, Gary Bettman wants to coddle the public and keep them safe, to me it's like he's saying, "What would the public think with such crass comments coming from a hockey player!" Well, Gary I got news for you, right now Joe Public isn't thinking much of anything concerning hockey."

Sean Avery Fiasco -- John MacKinnon: Get over yourself

The Publishing Rules Media Covering the NHL

Player F-bombs? Not published in the newspaper.

Coach explosions? Sometimes.

Sean Avery? Without exception.

With all due respect to John MacKinnon and his professional career as a journalist, his article "Avery crosses line -- again" is exactly the sad, crappy reporting I was talking about in my post yesterday. This is the same cardboard cutout version splashed across sports sections across North America that attempts to dismiss Avery's call to attention as self aggrandizing while simultaneously maintaining that call to attention by publishing all his words in a shamelessly self-contradicting manner.

This sad excuse for journalism is why Sean Avery gets "the sort of media attention he seems to believe is his due" in all the newspapers and media.

Why would Avery make a point of saying something so base mere minutes after his own coach, Dave Tippett, a good man acting in good faith, defended the Dallas Stars' agitating winger, suggesting coverage of Avery's history of misbehaviour was overblown?

I'll tell you why: he just proved his point by the subsequent attention that was thrown his way. And you media yuppies all ate it up.

So get a grip on yourself John MacKinnon, I know it just makes you feel better about yourself to pick on Sean Avery because it makes you feel morally superior. If you don't think its newsworthy, don't write about it. If you're going to report the story then don't judge the subjects involved - they're giving you something to do. But by God, don't lecture about something you're making a big deal about when the lecture was about how small a deal it should be, otherwise you're the pot calling the kettle black.

For the record, I don't think the NHL is in the wrong to take action against Sean Avery. But the people who cover the story make their own responsible decisions about what they print and what they report and if they don't make a good one, they're no different than Sean Avery.

Enjoy My Sloppy Seconds Dion, signed Sean Avery

Sean Avery was suspended today.

Someone wake me up because I'm about to defend Sean Avery.

I personally don't see anything wrong with Sean Avery making those comments for two reasons only:

(1) Sean Avery saying outlandish stuff isn't news anymore, so don't print it if you don't think its newsworthy.
(2) Reporters often ignore or censor outlandish stuff they hear from professional athleters in order to maintain a more politically correct, washed down version of events for a report worded in "athlete-speak." They do not make that compromise in the case of "Avery-talk," however.

A prime example of what reporters usually do when faced with reporting "crass" comments or "foul-mouthed" comments is self-censorship. How often are such comments deliberately broadcasted on CBC or published in the newspaper? Next to never. Because that would be irresponsible of the journalist, right? Here's one example of a piss-poor article that is willing to compromise the "punch line" in their reporting in order to adhere to journalistic standards and not to offend anyone. Why these compromises aren't made in the case of "Avery-talk" are very clear: he's a damn quotable and the feeling in the NHL media is that you're a fool not to be the first to publish his comments. More on why he gets this special treatment later.

Of course, we have our own quotable character in Craig MacTavish, who has been punished in the past for his words and conduct on and off the ice. I'm not saying the media should censor everything and take the sizzle of out of the reporting business. But there's a certain level of responsibility the individual reporter has to identify the right and the wrong time to publish certain comments. However, it's a consistent theme with the media and the league if you're dealing with Sean Avery. Sean Avery is the pest everyone loves to hate and the NHL is doing a splendid job picking on the guy.

He's been getting the Chris Simon treatment, but is the response proportional the stimulus?

Just ask yourself - how many years have NHL guys spent their careers in front of the goaltender's crease? Dino Cicarelli? Tomas Holmstrom? Ryan Smyth? Their whole damn careers. But the NHL up and changed the rules in the rulebook over Avery's treatment of Martin Brodeur.

Boohoo. The future hall of famer and NHL golden boy can't handle a little pressure from an annoying crease crasher. Boohoo.

All I have to say to that is Martin Brodeur needs to grow a pair and pull a Ron Hextall and deal with it if his defenseman don't feel like they're up to the task. Or I guess he could let the NHL and Gary Bettman come to his rescue...

Honestly. If you think Sean Avery is annoying and you don't want his words published as a special report anymore, let it be known to the NHL-covering media that his garbage isn't newsworthy anymore. Otherwise, Avery will keep getting special treatment - both from the media and from the NHL. And that's not exactly fair to him, either.

On the plus side, he won't be around to play us on Wednesday.