Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Full Coverage Of New York's Victory Celebration

Colin Campbell is Well... Unprintable Words

Puck Daddy has a very good piece up about the two major disciplinary actions (or non-actions) from the past couple of days. Please, go read the post.

The quote of the day for Wild fans, and a quote that proves that the NHL doesn't care if someone tries to kill someone, just so they haven't done it before:

"Every 5-minute major is not a suspension or a fine. There's gotta be a little bit of passion in the game.

"Cal Clutterbuck leads the League, or is close to leading the League, in hits. He hit Gonchar very hard into the boards prior to that -- real hard. That could have been boarding. Could have been charging. It wasn't. So Gonchar, who's been hurt before and knocked out before and suffered a concussion; he's on the receiving end more than he's on the giving end -- I don't think he's ever been on the giving end -- he went in and it was a 5-minute interference penalty and he hit him with his shoulder.

"We felt the penalty was the penalty. We don't feel [based on] past history that Gonchar deserved to be suspended. Clutterbuck came out and I thought his statement was ridiculous, that somebody's going to ‘get this guy'. Last time I looked, Sergei Gonchar wasn't on too many guys hit lists."

That is from Colin Campbell himself, via EJ HRadek, and I have a follow-up question: "Mr. Campbell, are you drunk at this very moment?"

Let me give you all a moment to absorb that. "We don't feel IN PAST HISTORY that Gonchar deserved to be suspended." So it has absolutely nothing to do with the current action on the ice. Got it.

So let me ask this question: If Chris Simon had absolutely no history of having done anything wrong before he tomahawked Ryan Hollweg, would he have been suspended? How many dirty hits does it take before someone is considered a suspendable person? Can we get it spelled out in a rule please?

Is there any way, any way at all that the RULE BOOK could explain this to us? Or is it normal for a major professional sports league to allow one man to make discipline decisions that make as much sense as my 18 month old daughter asking for the nuclear launch codes.

Let's break it down, shall we. For in it's glory, this may be the dumbest string of words that any one man has ever put into the public sphere.

Every 5-minute major is not a suspension or a fine. There's gotta be a little bit of passion in the game.

Agreed. Not every five minute penalty deserves a suspension or fine. That much is obvious. However, when a player admits fully that he hit someone high, with intent for pay back, that leads logically to intent to injure. Intent to injure automatically should equal a suspension. Nice argument, though, Mr. Campbell. Passion in the game, yes. Smashing people across the face with your elbow? Not so much. That's called inability to control your emotions, not passion.

Cal Clutterbuck leads the League, or is close to leading the League, in hits. He hit Gonchar very hard into the boards prior to that -- real hard.

And? So what? How many questions can you come up with that all mean the same thing? What's your point?

Clutterbuck hits people. He checks them. Sometimes hard. Unless we have moved into high school girls hockey, or perhaps to under 13 year old hockey, checking is legal, and there are no rules as to how hard you can hit them.

That could have been boarding. Could have been charging. It wasn't.

So it could have been, but it wasn't. So either you really don't think it was, or you are admitting that your referees blew a call they should have made. Which is it?

So Gonchar, who's been hurt before and knocked out before and suffered a concussion; he's on the receiving end more than he's on the giving end -- I don't think he's ever been on the giving end -- he went in and it was a 5-minute interference penalty and he hit him with his shoulder.

Mr. Campbell, are you saying that any player who has been injured in the past now has free reign to lay illegal hits on players? Because that is certainly what it sounds like. He has had a concussion, so, what the hell, let him hand out concussion inducing hits. Sounds fair. He's had one before, so what the hell, right?

Does he also get to stick his leg out and go knee-on-knee with anyone he wants? Since Ovechkin did it to him, Gonchar must be permitted to do that too. Any other injuries Gonchar has permission to inflict?

As for him hitting Clutterbuck with his shoulder. Not so much, Mr. Campbell. Do you not have access to Youtube? Perhaps someone could teach you how to do a screen capture, because this moment, right here, is in internet speak, where you get "pwned."

No_elbow_medium

Unless Gonchar's shoulder is three feet long, his shoulder is not what is in Clutterbuck's forehead in this picture. Nice try.

We felt the penalty was the penalty.

Yeah. This makes you sound really intelligent. The penalty was the penalty? Well done, sir. Indeed, the penalty was the penalty.

We don't feel [based on] past history that Gonchar deserved to be suspended.

Ugh. My argument against this is above, but let me just say this. Until Colin Campbell is in the unemployment line, I would not want to be in the NHL anymore. This is one of the most dangerous admissions I have ever read. Go ahead Mikko, chop someone across the shin, buddy. You are a stand up player, and have no past history, plus you had someone do it to you, so go right ahead.

Watch out Ohlund. Mikko's got free reign now.

Clutterbuck came out and I thought his statement was ridiculous, that somebody's going to ‘get this guy'. Last time I looked, Sergei Gonchar wasn't on too many guys hit lists.

Nice. Criticize Clutterbuck. That's professional. Never mind that the super star just broke so many rules in one play that the refs, media, and players don't even know what the penalty was. Never mind that Gonchar tried to break someone's nose, or worse. No big deal. It is way easy to tell a guy like Cal Clutterbuck to shut his yap.

Why would someone not be out to get Gonchar the next time around? Explain that to me. Oh wait, that's right, because of your stupid instigator rule. No need to let the players police themselves when we have such a crack staff of disciplinarians on the job at NHL headquarters.

And, Mr. Campbell? Gonchar just got put on at least 24 guys' hitlists. Just saying.

Moving on to Wysh's post:

Huh, that's strange: Last time we looked Sergei Gonchar was blindsiding an opponent with a hit to the head that's an obvious intent to injure, something that's clearly validated by Campbell's admission that Gonchar had been hit earlier in the sequence.

Exactly. But that would be using logic, Wysh, and that just would not be right.

It's actually stunning how Down Goes Brown perfectly captured the thinking here iin the now-legendary Suspension Flow Chart, though we suppose an argument could be made that Clutterbuck's non-penalized hit instigated Gonchar's hit to the head.

But that argument is secondary to the "Gonch is a good egg" thesis that was clearly at the core of Campbell's thought process here. Which is a joke, considering Gonchar's actions.

Someday, I am going to be somewhere with the guys at DGB, and I am buying drinks the entire night. What ever they want, and in as high of volume as they wanted. It's almost like Campbell himself designed the flowchart.

Alright. I am going to sign off now. Why? Because, it is safer that way. I am about to start typing highly unprofessional things, and I just really don't want to do that.

Let him have it Wilderness readers. He deserves it.

-Buddha

Comment 31 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I don't have anything nice to say, either

So, as my mother taught me, I’m just not going to say anything at all. What a f’n joke, NHL…

Let's Go Wild!

by redheadzeb on Jan 14, 2010 3:09 PM CST reply actions  

This non ruling really pisses me off.

by Eric B on Jan 14, 2010 3:14 PM CST reply actions  

rec’d

Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.

by Chemmy on Jan 14, 2010 4:07 PM CST up reply actions  

If you are ever in Minnesota, look me up. I am absolutely serious about the offer.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 4:18 PM CST up reply actions  

That

Will be one hell of a bar tab.

Support Your Local Coyotes Blog - Five For Howling
JaredFromLondon: ...Odin, he's cool.

by Travis Hair on Jan 14, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions  

You coming too? ;-)

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 5:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Your suspension post is friggen great. I am going to print it and bring it to the X to hand out to the fans in my section.

by wild32384 on Jan 14, 2010 8:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Thanks! Oh… wait… you meant DGB. Dammit.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 10:07 PM CST up reply actions  

Campbell is an embarassment to the NHL, his ramblings are nothing short of dementia and his bias is obvious. He is the reason headshots are still tolerated despite what the PLAYERS want. Same thing happened to Havlat with the Kronwall hit. If a player’s head is targeted in the hit, I don’t care if he uses his FOOT, automatic suspension, especially if the player is unconsious or gets a concussion from the hit

His argument is childish, like if we rule out head hits we’ll all be pansies. Hockey is a game of skill and his reasoning puts the players at risk and hurts the game.

by Givinchy on Jan 14, 2010 3:47 PM CST reply actions  

You have to love the logic of suspension history.

Players with no history don’t get suspensions because they’ve never been suspended. But because they don’t get suspended they won’t get suspended.

My head hurts.

Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.

by Chemmy on Jan 14, 2010 4:08 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

Aside from the obvious “Toronto fans know logic??” jokes, I must say this is something I have loved about the NHL’s argument. Yet they either don’t see it or don’t care.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Jan 14, 2010 7:19 PM CST up reply actions  

This, this is the league we watch.

This is the guy they have in charge. Sometimes (like, um, now) I wonder why the hell I spend so much time watching and writing about this circus, when they insult us with crapesian logic like this.

On the other hand, it’s great to know that if you’re a nice guy and you “get hit real hard,” you can pretty much do whatever the hell you want.*

*as long as the result is not a multi-game injury. Then everything is different. Somehow.

Lighthouse Hockey: Under contract through 2021, knees and hips be damned.

by Dominik on Jan 14, 2010 4:18 PM CST reply actions  

but the guy who does the hit

that injures a player will still likely be back before the injured player. Got to love it.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 14, 2010 4:33 PM CST up reply actions  

I kinda expected Gonchar to avoid suspension (I at least figured they’d be a fine), but Campbell does kinda sorta have to think before he speaks. Wild fans have a right to be pissed by it.

Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.

by FrankD on Jan 14, 2010 4:53 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

I agree, I cynically didn’t expect a suspension based on Campbell’s history. But my god, he opens his mouth and makes it so much worse.

Lighthouse Hockey: Under contract through 2021, knees and hips be damned.

by Dominik on Jan 14, 2010 4:59 PM CST up reply actions  

Agreed 100%. It would not have surprised me if Gonchar had not been suspended. Not even a little. But, damn, at least make the explanation make sense, or just don’t comment.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 5:50 PM CST up reply actions  

Dom and you hit it on the nose. We all know how the NHL hands out suspensions, but when they try to explain their method, they just look like complete morons.

At some point, you just gotta stop digging your hole.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Jan 14, 2010 7:23 PM CST up reply actions  

As my boss used to tell me, “Just. Put. The. Shovel. Down.”

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 7:29 PM CST up reply actions  

So let me ask this question: If Chris Simon had absolutely no history of having done anything wrong before he tomahawked Ryan Hollweg, would he have been suspended?

That is a really funny rhetorical question, because in fact before Simon delivered the chop, he had just “been hit real hard” by Hollweg, pretty much from behind

There are a million holes in Campbell’s “reasoning” that most here probably already see, but I hadn’t thought about this one before: I always assumed the “repeat offender/prior history” thing was about making your supplemental punishment worse (to increase the deterrent for a guy who didn’t learn his lesson). But here the lack of prior history doesn’t just limit the punishment, it absolves him from any punishment at all. Free shots until your first suspension.

Lighthouse Hockey: Under contract through 2021, knees and hips be damned.

by Dominik on Jan 14, 2010 4:57 PM CST reply actions  

Ah yes. Didn’t they try and say that Simon had no idea what he was doing because of the head injury he sustained?

Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.

by FrankD on Jan 14, 2010 5:30 PM CST up reply actions  

So what your saying is.....

No body should ever get suspended, unless they have already been suspended in a prior season? did I say that right?

by wild32384 on Jan 14, 2010 8:00 PM CST up reply actions  

That was sarcasm. Trust me.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 10:07 PM CST up reply actions  

I know. i think its funny how contradictive Colin Campbells own words can be.

by wild32384 on Jan 17, 2010 8:16 PM CST up reply actions  

Whew

Glad I don’t follow a team that employs anyone even remotely related to Campbell. That would be embarrassing right about now.

Oh wait…

by Donny Rivette on Jan 14, 2010 5:37 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

HA! OK, I needed that. Thank you.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 14, 2010 5:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Colin Cambell explaining Burrows fine

This dude sounds like a complete moron. How did he get a job with so much authority.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=57159

I think the video shows this man’s ineptitude and why Gonchar probably didn’t even get a slap on the wrist. Try to understand the entire story he explains about Burrows’ fine….

by HeDidWhat? on Jan 14, 2010 5:47 PM CST reply actions  

Its funny.

Media guys have such an influence on OUR league. Whether you are a Wild or Canucks fan, the message seems to be that if you are a “certain type” of player, you are not to be believed. Media is crucifying Burrows out of T.O…yet if you check sites all over the net…most every poll says that 75% of hockey fans believe him, and not Auger.

The media guys like Cox and others are on him so bad, because they want to help the league…most of the ones with TV jobs to protect (Dreger, Cox,etc)…slag Burrows, and guys that have no agenda like Sekeres at the G&M and Puck Daddy do not. Interesting…huh?

Some one will get seriously hurt and sue before it changes though.

Oh, and Boogey trying to get things going with that tripe about AV is just hi-larious!

Every time he can talk smack about the Canucks he does, and we are supposed to believe that Hordichuk told him AV sent him out to fight?

Yeaaahhh….riiiigggghhht! Guess when you play 5 minutes a game, you have a lot of time on the bench to think this stuff up!

Peace

The earliest use of the word with the spelling we recognize today is found in "L'Acadie: or Seven Years' Exploration in British America" by James Edward Alexander, published in 1849:

We also met a lusty fellow in a forest road with a keg of whisky slung round him who called to us 'Come boys and have some grog, I'm what you call a canuck"

by vancitydan on Jan 14, 2010 5:47 PM CST reply actions  

This Fits The Formula...

This fits in perfectly with DownGoesBrown’s Official NHL Suspension Flowchart…

http://www.downgoesbrown.com/2009/11/nhl-suspensions.html

by TheQatarian on Jan 14, 2010 6:01 PM CST reply actions  

I’m sorry but I agree with Campbell on most points here. Clutterbuck’s comments were far worse than Gonchar’s hit, which was probably his first dirty hit in his career.

by ipenguin67 on Jan 15, 2010 10:34 PM CST reply actions  

1. Words are NEVER worse than action. Never.

2. First dirty hit, second, fifth. Doesn’t matter. It’s dirty, and it needs to be punished as such. How many dirty hits would does it take before you get punished?

3. What if you replace Cal Clutterbuck with Sidney Crosby, and replace Gonchar with say, Shane Hnidy? Hnidy has never been suspended. Never been a dirty player. But damn, if he threw this hit on Crosby, he’d have gotten a suspension. Guarantee it.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Jan 17, 2010 12:26 AM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Your Minnesota Wild Blog Community

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Goalie4_small
Sell to Buy, Buy to Sell: The Wild at the Deadline and Beyond
Walter_small
This may sound like a weird question, but ...
Small
would you make this trade ?
Small
A few questions
Wildlogoxaw_small
Tim Thomas is a racist?
Small
Who should the Wild sell?
Small
Anybody selling Saturday tickets for March?
Small
The Fail for Nail?
Me
Could this be a bad move? Yeah, maybe for this year...but the future? I'm not so sure.
Peter_griffin_small
Are there lockout positives?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Chuck Fletcher

Twitter_profile_small nathaneide

Mike Yeo

297235_228875923843877_197693266962143_697284_1857293148_n_small BReynolds

Darby Hendrickson, Daryl Sydor, Rick Wilson & Bob Mason

Mscon_bigger_small ms.conduct

Small bciskie

Granlund_small JDesthubert

N1282200019_30083840_3437_small elisebutler

6merh_small JSLandry

Avatar_small danccchan

Western-lg_small WCHBlog