|
Truisms: Fans Will Be Fans, Bullies Will Be Cowards |
|
|
|
|
|
Follow Paul on Twitter: @PaulStewart22
I am always willing to look at video clips that people send me to ask for my take on certain plays; usually from an officiating or supplementary discipline framework, but sometimes in terms of hockey tactics or technique. Ever since I began blogging, many of these clips are sent by fans of certain teams who indirectly want me to back up their rooting interests.
That's fine. Without passionate fans, we don't have a livelihood. I have made many of my closest friendships over the years from getting to know folks who were simply fans of the sport and of their favorite team, with all that entails (including an unshakable belief that every call that goes against their club is a bad one).
When asked for my take on a certain play, you will always get my honest take. Respectfully, I don't care about the color of the laundry or the logo sewn on the shirt.
Case in point: This morning, someone sent me a clip of the interference penalty last night on Boston's Dominic Moore in the latter stages of the third period against Toronto. I watched the clip. I saw a clear-as-day interference penalty as Moore initiates a hit on a Leafs defender to provide himself a clear lane to the net as a teammate carries the puck in the right circle and prepares to put it at the net.
For a moment or two, I was puzzled as to why the clip was even sent to me. Then it dawned on me. The sender -- a Bruins fan -- wanted me to say that his team had been hosed and that the ensuing power play goal by Toronto's Tyler Bozak (which proved to be the game's pivotal goal before a pair of empty netters opened a three-goal lead) was caused by a bad call.
Sorry. No can do. It was a penalty under any game circumstance because it illegally improved a potential scoring opportunity for the Bruins if the puck went over to Moore. Taking the temperature of the game and applying the "Udvari Rule", I would say that a potential late go-ahead goal for Boston stemming from interference would be a missed call that an official would cringe to watch later. Calling obvious interference on a player driving the net in a tied game late in the third period? You simply did your job.
The only "blame" here belongs to Moore. Even then, I put the word blame in quotes because Moore was trying to get to the net as he should have but did it in a way that's against the rules -- not a capital crime, just a routine minor penalty that came at a precarious time for his team. Such is hockey, and such is the Rule Book. It's why we have two teams competing and why we have refs to judge fair from foul.
The only time I ever get worked up over being asked to validate someone's rooting interests is when I look at a clip of something that is clearly not within the realm of a hockey play (in other words, something worthy of supplementary discipline). When I see that, and then asked to dignify ludicrous notions about whether refs have it in for a certain team, it elevates my blood pressure.
By now, I think most fans have seen the recent incident in which Calgary Flames rookie Matthew Tkachuk deliberately elbowed LA Kings defenseman Drew Doughty in the head. You want my take? Well, here goes.
This is a head shot. It was worthy of significant supplementary discipline. In the good old days -- the era when dinosaurs roamed the earth, the pads weren't lethal weapons and players like Paul Stewart were able to find NHL employment -- we policed ourselves. We didn't wait for a suspension to come down from someone in NY or someone's son. I am not suggesting nepotism, that's a fact.
I am suggesting that the whole situation is a strange set of circumstances -- and the only way to get this right is to make people responsible for their actions or else get rid of the instigator rule and let the players police themselves again. Also, if your dad is the GM or president of a team and you are on the Player's safety board, you recuse yourself far, far away.
Oh, and as for the mouthpiece thing, that's another joke that hockey allows. Ether wear the damn thing properly or don't wear it at all. They don't really help, anyway.
Final thoughts: Thank you to everyone who read and responded to my Dennis Wideman blog from the other day. I have heard through the grapevine that my blog ruffled a few feathers among some higher-ups who put their varied agendas ahead of their sense of right and wrong. If so, well, so be it. I stand by everything I wrote.
If I was so obvious and stating all that anyone is thinking, why hasn't anyone come out and stepped up in a column or a show to call out the judge, the Unions, the NHL, Wideman, Burke and the whole sorry lot? I feel like a voice crying out in the wilderness that injustices have been committed to an innocent victim in Don Henderson over and over again. Funny, among the others involved or capable of informed opinion on this matter, their silence is deafening.
Some say that I took the whole thing too personally. I plead proudly guilty. First as a player and then as an official, I always took it personally when a coward hits one of my guys, a teammate and a friend.
In between my playing and refereeing careers, I was three years a police officer and turned down the FBI to return to the ice and ref. I know a little bit about the law. If Dennis Wideman did what he did outside a rink, he would have been cuffed and read his rights then prosecuted for assault and battery.
Ninety nine percent of you can stop reading here. The rest of this blog is not directed at you. Please keep opining away, sending those messages and video clips. I will always get and respond to as many as possible. If we debate, we debate. It's all good.
The rest of this is a response to those select few who try to turn a hockey debate into a personal attack. I respond to cyber bullies the same I do to real-life ones: head on.
To the anonymous brave soul who chose to entirely ignore the substance of what I wrote and instead chose to make it personal by telling me to "just can it already" with talking about my "insignificant playing career and constant mediocrity as an official", may I ask just what your own qualifications are in this sport?
Yes, I had just 21 games played in the NHL. For the record, I dressed in 60 for the Nordiques but, in 39, was not put on the ice to take a shift (so it did not count my games played totals). I had another two years in the WHA with the same situation. I played when they needed muscle: no shift, not touching the ice meant no game played. But I made one-way contract money the whole time. Even with my two career NHL goals, I had respect from the teams I played against. I got treated by Gretz, Lemieux, Mess, Gordie, Bobby Hull, Paul Henderson as one of them. I had eight years playing in a lot of pro leagues. For an American in the 70s, especially one who was not the most naturally skilled, that was pretty good.
Last but not least, 20 years reffing: 17 in the NHL. Eight months on chemo treatments still reffing every day for six months.
I could say that I don't recall you playing, reffing or even shoveling snow on an NHL rink but that would be condescending and mean-spirited. Have you ever been on any rink in pro hockey -- besides buying a ticket, if you ever did to get in? Can you even skate? It's guys like you that lose perspective until it's you that gets bashed by a bully then you look for a guy like me to save your bacon and make it right.
I'm not hard to find. The reason why I was nicknamed Stew Cat: I took a full-fledged punch in the face from a noted rival hockey tough guy, stared back at him without so much as a flinch, and proceeded to go toe-to-toe. I could do it verbally as well as physically, too.
Bullies and smartasses usually have the biggest mouths yet are the biggest cowards (especially when they can flex their internet muscles behind an anonymous cloak). When the time gets tough, they cut and run.
*********
Paul Stewart holds the distinction of being the first U.S.-born citizen to make it to the NHL as both a player and referee. On March 15, 2003, he became the first American-born referee to officiate in 1,000 NHL games.
Today, Stewart serves as director of hockey officiating for the ECAC.
Blogger •Former NHL Referee • 
Join the Discussion:
»