Wow. All I, no, we, can say is wow.
Remember when Bruins' center
Marc Savard was laid out by
Matt Cooke in a 2-1 loss to the Pittsburgh Penguins last March? More importantly, remember when Cooke went unpunished by the NHL and the league head-disciplinarian
Colin Campbell said "Well, I can't suspend Cooke for being Cooke."
Remember that?
Remember literally shaking your head in disbelief at the thought of Campbell essentially patronizing the demand from Boston for a suspension for what is/was believed to be a clear-cut forceful elbow to the head with intent to injure.
Well, thanks to the work of Tyler Dellow of MC79Hockey.com, the proverbial stuff could be about to hit the fans of the league office with a series of alleged leaked emails between Campbell and fellow league-office heads
Mike Murphy and
Stephen Walkom.
Their story, which can be
found here provides some incredible insight as to the incident, along with some notes as to a situation where Campbell also complains about then-NHL official
Dean Warren.
The following may get a little block-quote crazy here, but please follow.
To Stephen Walkom/Tor/NHL@NHL
Subject Re: Delayed Penalties/High Sticks 02/#/2007 4:24 pm
A bend in the road is a dead end if you round the corner and Dean Warren is standing there. Your answer re: his high stick calls and the score of the game were horse shit. The 3rd call on [player] was while they were down 5 on 4 and on a def zone face off vs that little fake artist [player] I had him in [city] biggest faker going. And Warren fell for it when he grabbed his face on a face off. Your supposed to see the act, not call the embellishing act. Dean Warren has to go with [referee] There must be a way to get rid of this guy. Is there a way we can tract (sic) and total minors called by referees this year. We could then get the minors they call per game. … or with 2 [referees on the ice] it is impossible? Warren and [referee] out of [club’s] games. Give them to [referees].
Stephen Walkom to: Colin Campbell 02/#/2007 04:39 PM
that’s funny yet not funny….I think we have that data but it may work in his favour….that’s why I’m against data and more about IT….he doesn’t have it, never had it, and is average at best, probably never get it,
OK I’m going to stop it….
From: Stephen Walkom
Sent: 02/#/2007 08:09 AM
To: Mike Murphy
Cc: Colin Campbell
Subject: Re: ….. / …….
Terry ran into …….after the game who was upset, linesmen…………..viewed the play but no injury could be found therefore no call [player] was saying to Terry that he was injured but the guys didn’t see anything but spit and gatorade residue….therefore no double minor….
Re [player]
Colin Campbell to Stephen Walkom, Mike Murphy
02/#/2007 09:21 AM
I know Murph and Kinger like [player] as a player but my view of him is this exactly…he puts his whining ahead of the game. I don’t think this is a regular occurrence (…..getting screwed) and …..exploded ………over the disallowed goal. He may be uncontrollable by ………….and……………..as I think his frustration level has hit a high point. He hates officials as well. He is still pissed off at [referee] for a call he missed in the playoffs years ago as I remember him bugging Murph about it. Let’s give him Warren and [referee] than (sic) he will really have something to whine about.
These are the e-mails allegedly exchanged between Campbell and Walkom regarding an incident involving where
Marc Savard drew a call from an official (Warren) to the disapproval of Colin Campbell.
As Dellow writes out, finding the only game that fits this description in terms of what Campbell said coming between the Panthers and Bruins, it appears that Campbell's referring to a high-sticking penalty on his son,
Greg Campbell, against the Bruins' Savard.
Savard, who played for Campbell during his tenure with the New York Rangers, is undoubtedly a known complainer among officials, making this claim by the elder Campbell all the more true.
However, here's where things get interesting--Did Campbell's views on Savard as a player affect the ruling on Cooke three years later?
While being very conspiracy theory-like, when it comes to Campbell, who's essentially screwed the Bruins on numerous occasions, specifically in regards to handing out suspensions.
He suspended then-Philly defensemen
Randy Jones for his brutal boarding of
Patrice Bergeron for a mere two games while Bergeron would miss the rest of the season, and then when the incident repeated itself, this time involving the Flyers'
Scott Hartnell and then-Bruin
Andrew Alberts on yet another boarding call, the status quo two-gamer was dished down to Hartnell.
Then the next season, after suspending
Milan Lucic for a contest in round one of the 2009 Playoffs for a 'forceful blow to the head' to Montreal's
Maxim Lapierre, Campbell sat on his heads when Carolina forward
Scott Walker clocked an unsuspecting
Aaron Ward after a scrum in front of the net.
While all these claims bill Campbell as an executive who's shown an incredible unwillingness to make calls that go in favor of the Bruins, these emails could ultimately alter the landscape of the future for the NHL's head disciplinarian and ultimately create an aura around the Cooke-Savard incident that could help it become the modern-day NHL's version of the JFK assassination.
Is the NHL's famed 'Wheel of Justice' nearing its end?
Or, if I can borrow a quote from the epitome of incompetence himself, can the NHL not fire Colin Campbell for being Colin Campbell?
Follow me on Twitter at Twitter.com/_TyAnderson or shoot me an email at [email protected] 
Boston Bruins Blogger •Bruins Feature Columnist • 
Join the Discussion:
»