Passing the Buck 101 - Bertuzzi Saga Returns

wow! That is indeed, as they say, the $64,000.00 question...

Really? He only spent 4:24 all season on the PK?!?!

Jebus...

I have to admit, I too wish this story would just go away. And by go away, I don't mean 'guilty' parties should escape punishment or reprimands, but I personally am tired of hearing about it.

Cronenbergfan wrote:wow! That is indeed, as they say, the $64,000.00 question...

Really? He only spent 4:24 all season on the PK?!?!

Jebus...

I have to admit, I too wish this story would just go away. And by go away, I don't mean 'guilty' parties should escape punishment or reprimands, but I personally am tired of hearing about it.

according to NHL.com..their stats machine has him playing 4:24 or 0:03 on average per game.

Well the whole reason that this is coming back up is because Bertuzzi is arguing that any fines that have to be paid should be paid by Crawford because apparently it was Bertuzzi's "duty" while he was out there from Crawford himself. I don't really picture a coach telling me " go jump him from behind and end his career ". That just might be me though.

Mosky wrote:Well the whole reason that this is coming back up is because Bertuzzi is arguing that any fines that have to be paid should be paid by Crawford because apparently it was Bertuzzi's "duty" while he was out there from Crawford himself. I don't really picture a coach telling me " go jump him from behind and end his career ". That just might be me though.

Normally I would agree. And while I remember playing Rugby in high school, our coach was a real Bruce Allen-type (HATES TO LOSE) and on at least 2 occasions, we were not quite instructed, but he hinted, if you will, that while in the scrum, the refs can't quite see what's going on...

Now, not all coaches are like that, granted, but for what it's worth, and I'm not kidding, I didn't play rugby the following year knowing he was coaching... But that is just me. I hate losing too, believe me, but I won't purposely work-over a guy to win either...

Mosky wrote:Well the whole reason that this is coming back up is because Bertuzzi is arguing that any fines that have to be paid should be paid by Crawford because apparently it was Bertuzzi's "duty" while he was out there from Crawford himself. I don't really picture a coach telling me " go jump him from behind and end his career ". That just might be me though.

Been there, done that...heard that.

Having played at a fairly high level I've not only heard a coach ask for a guy to get his head handed to him, but I've been asked to go for a skate and "take care of that guy".

It happens, but what I find laughable is the defense of Crawford. He was out on a penalty kill. Which he averaged 0:03/game through the season.

Do these guys really think we're all that stupid. I say fine them both, Bertuzzi for being stupid and ending a guys career, and Crawford for asking like we're stupid and we'd buy his bull.

Dawg wrote:

Mosky wrote:Well the whole reason that this is coming back up is because Bertuzzi is arguing that any fines that have to be paid should be paid by Crawford because apparently it was Bertuzzi's "duty" while he was out there from Crawford himself. I don't really picture a coach telling me " go jump him from behind and end his career ". That just might be me though.

Been there, done that...heard that.

Having played at a fairly high level I've not only heard a coach ask for a guy to get his head handed to him, but I've been asked to go for a skate and "take care of that guy".

It happens, but what I find laughable is the defense of Crawford. He was out on a penalty kill. Which he averaged 0:03/game through the season.

Do these guys really think we're all that stupid. I say fine them both, Bertuzzi for being stupid and ending a guys career, and Crawford for asking like we're stupid and we'd buy his bull.

To be honest, I can completely agree with that. I am one who does NOT believe in circumstances or coincidences. When the evidence piles up, it eventually becomes harder and harder to ignore... How does the old saying go: "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..."

Having played at a very high level myself as well, yes it has happened to me, I think that it definitely happened that Crawford said something but theres no way he should have to pay anything for Burt's mistakes. If you need to handle someone, you wait until they have their head down, and you lay into them, and most likely with a fight after depending on how you succeeded lol.

Mosky wrote:Having played at a very high level myself as well, yes it has happened to me, I think that it definitely happened that Crawford said something but theres no way he should have to pay anything for Burt's mistakes. If you need to handle someone, you wait until they have their head down, and you lay into them, and most likely with a fight after depending on how you succeeded lol.

LOL! good point.

I didn't necessarily agree with Crawford being fined and such, but he should definitely stop putting forth such drivel and lies... As Dawg mentioned, who does he think he's kidding!?!? LOL

Ya his defense might work on the non hockey enthusiast, but not here, not with these bright light bulbs lol!

Well written. This could have been a blog piece.

The NHL, in its own way, is circling its wagons. Passing the buck in this way, they know that there will always be disagreement. It's sad that the truth will probably never be known.

Sad, because Moore may never get closure.

Sad, because the guilty party will likely get away without just punishment

Sad, most of all, because the kids playing hockey (like mine) will learn that they can do the same thing and get away with it.

Acrobat wrote:Well written. This could have been a blog piece.

The NHL, in its own way, is circling its wagons. Passing the buck in this way, they know that there will always be disagreement. It's sad that the truth will probably never be known.

Sad, because Moore may never get closure.

Sad, because the guilty party will likely get away without just punishment

Sad, most of all, because the kids playing hockey (like mine) will learn that they can do the same thing and get away with it.

<>

We also have two small children a boy and a girl and it's really up to the parents to start raising their children and having the ability to discipline them on or off the ice. We have several times kept our son from playing hockey because of things that happened off the ice, or on the ice that we totally disagreed with. The coach was mad at us a couple of times, and we let it known that we would not tolerate our sons poor behavior even if the team/coach was ok with it.

Further I personally believe the best thing for the NHL right now is to give Steve Moore a settlement and publically apologize for the incident. If Bettman goes to the Moore camp and says we'll give you 4 million dollars, publically state how unfortunate the incident was and that the entire NHL was in some part to blame, from the officials, to the players, coach and even Bettman himself for not stepping in. In return Moore drops the law suit as well as any further action.

Everyone thinks something should have been done. Now the NHL steps up and accepts responsibility and makes a statement that this will never be tolerated and future punishments will be extreemly severe.

I for one as a parent would respect the sport so much more.

Dawg wrote:
We also have two small children a boy and a girl and it's really up to the parents to start raising their children and having the ability to discipline them on or off the ice. We have several times kept our son from playing hockey because of things that happened off the ice, or on the ice that we totally disagreed with. The coach was mad at us a couple of times, and we let it known that we would not tolerate our sons poor behavior even if the team/coach was ok with it.

Further I personally believe the best thing for the NHL right now is to give Steve Moore a settlement and publically apologize for the incident. If Bettman goes to the Moore camp and says we'll give you 4 million dollars, publically state how unfortunate the incident was and that the entire NHL was in some part to blame, from the officials, to the players, coach and even Bettman himself for not stepping in. In return Moore drops the law suit as well as any further action.

Everyone thinks something should have been done. Now the NHL steps up and accepts responsibility and makes a statement that this will never be tolerated and future punishments will be extreemly severe.

I for one as a parent would respect the sport so much more.

I agree with the responsibility laying with the parents, but it's hard to say that, and then have the coaches come out and tell the kids (and the parents, often) that "when you come to the rink, you listen to me, and nobody else".

I have sidetracked my career, to a certain extent, so that I can be involved in the coaching staff (trainer, assistant, whatever) and keep an eye on things, but it's still impossible to know everything that happens. And it will only get harder, as I have four kids, and right now, only two are in competitive sports, with the others yet to reach that magic age.

It's interesting - we, as parents and fans sit and criticize them for doing nothing, yet I will be the first to admit that when McGratton stepped onto the ice, we'd get a charge, knowing what might be coming. I sometimes wonder how far inside we have to go to find where the root problem really lies.

To address the initial question, and step away from the philosophy for a second:

Should Bert pay? yes, he is certainly responsible for his actions. But more importantly, I think that he should have been suspended for "as long as the injured player is unable to earn an income equivalent to that which he would have earned prior to the injury". Harsh, but sends a message. It's all about intent.

Should Crawford pay? as a coach, he is indirectly responsible. Your thesis clearly suggests that he was out there in a situation where he would not normally be out. So yes.

Should the club pay? Tough question. Legally, I would say yes, because they are the employers. Morally, it's less clear. But I'd say yes, purely on principle.

Should the NHL pay? I'd say yes, for all the reasons listed, but mostly because someone needs to show Moore that they are taking responsibility for what happened. And because the kids need to know that it is wrong. Very wrong.

Sorry about being verbose, but I feel strongly about this.

Dawg wrote:
SO my question continues to be, why was he out there?

Don't tell me that Bertuzzi was such a powerhouse of a penalty killer that it just so happens that he was out at the same time as Moore. If that were the case then this number wouldn't shock anyone 4:24. That happens to be the amount of time Todd Bertuzzi spent on the penalty kill. Four minutes and twenty four seconds. The problem is this wasn't the amount of time spent in this game on the PK. This was the total time spent on the PK for the entire season.

This means he averaged 3 seconds of PK time per game over his 69 games that season. So Marc, here is my question to you. Why was he even out there, at the end of a game, which you were losing in which a heated situation was occurring, on the penalty kill which you never trusted him before that night to take an active part in?

I know its big question so I'll not hold my breath waiting for an answer.

Dawg

That's just gold. :afro:

As devil's advocate (but also because I really don't know, and I'm too lazy to look it up myself,) was Moore a solid enough offensive talent that he was reasonable to have out on the PP? i.e. could he be counted on to at least not lose the puck in a vulnerable spot, if not potentially set up or score one?

I ask, yet I'm sure that the answer really doesn't matter...