Marc Crawford on leave after recent allegations

[2014olympicgold]

What makes it a false equivalency? Isn't false equivalency suggesting that two things are similar when in fact they are nowhere close? So I think you might have use the fancy terminology in the wrong context?

- 2014OG suggested that slapshots do not leave marks when you get hit by them because of the padding in the pants.
- I suggested an experiment based on the statement made by 2014 that slapshots do not leave marks, to see how hard someone would have to be kicked through hockey pants to leave a mark. (not on an actual human subject... but I am sure there is a scientific way to test it. My hypothesis was that a slapshot would be more likely to leave a mark than a kick.

The discussion was solely about the a slapshot vs a kick... So I am not sure where this false equivalency comes into play... I don't think anyone said anything about anything being equivalent. Yes, being kicked by a coach has some other ramifications... but that was outside the scope.

Again this does not take away from abuse being abuse and if a coach kicked a player... that is not right. I am just debating in my mind if a kick through hockey pads could leave a mark if a hockey puck from a slapshot does not. And just because a kick does not leave a mark, does not mean it is not still abuse.

I was getting at if I don’t get bruised by a slapshot, how would a kick, presumably less forceful, bruise a player. I know the slapshots I take in beer league hockey aren’t that hard, but a kick would have to be pretty hard to bruise a player.

Ya know?

[PenguinHunter]

I was getting at if I don’t get bruised by a slapshot, how would a kick, presumably less forceful, bruise a player. I know the slapshots I take in beer league hockey aren’t that hard, but a kick would have to be pretty hard to bruise a player.

Ya know?

Yup I know.. I think we are the same page here. I hope I don't get told I make false accusations or false ramifications for agreeing with you... haha

[2014olympicgold]

Yup I know.. I think we are the same page here. I hope I don't get told I make false accusations or false ramifications for agreeing with you... haha

Oh I'm sure there's a member here who will say I'm a snowflake for not taking a block shot off my face, or how I can't apparently start a mower, or make some random assumption I can't fix a microwave or something and drag you into it somehow to. So I'll apologize in advance.

Anyways, I didn't realize there's a Coaches Union. Makes sense though. But they released this statement yesterday.

We believe the NHL is a league built on hard work, respect, and teamwork. It is a coach's job to understand how best to motivate players while respecting them as individuals and valuing them as people. Coaching philosophies differ from coach to coach, and season to season, but there are lines that cannot be crossed and there is certainly no room in the NHL, or anywhere else, for abusive behavior of any kind. The National Hockey League, including management, players, and coaches, has evolved, and the NHLCA is committed to working with the NHL and NHLPA to ensure respectful working environments for everyone.

https://twitter.com/NHLCoachesAssoc/...90033223376898

[Canucks_fan18]

Well I guess it is completely acceptable then if Crawford choked him; afterall, there was something that Crawford liked about him which clearly makes it ok.

Rylant

The thing is just like the Avery statement, it seems these guys are starting back peddle a little when the story gets blown up or investigation ensues. Maybe the choking was him pulling his helmet back or like a head lock sort of thing on the bench and not as sinister as it sounds.

It's funny I heard on Frank Seravalli talking about how Avery came out after saying it was no big deal and he likes Crow. Franks response was it's not up to very (the presumed victim) to decide if it's a big deal or not. Come on so now were deciding when people are the victim or if they should be offended, even when their not? SJW's at their best.

[2014olympicgold]

Also Patrick O'Sullivan came out and said pretty much "go look at what I wrote in my book 4 yrs ago"

I talked about his physical abuse in my book 4 years ago kicking me and others on the bench. Verbal abuse included homophobic slurs on a regular basis. I look forward to participating in your investigation.

So yet another ex-player bringing stuff up in the past but not taken seriously. Marc might be screwed.

https://twitter.com/realPOSULLIVAN/s...87553730064385

[newfcollins]

I was getting at if I don’t get bruised by a slapshot, how would a kick, presumably less forceful, bruise a player. I know the slapshots I take in beer league hockey aren’t that hard, but a kick would have to be pretty hard to bruise a player.

Ya know?

It might depend on where he kicked him. I was under the impression that Crawford kicked Avery during a game, so while Avery was sitting on the bench. In that context, it feels like Crawford would have kicked him in the back area, where you normally aren't blocking shots and there's less padding. So, more likely to leave a bruise than when blocking a slapshot.

Also, I feel like this isn't a new story. I read O'Sullivan's book, so maybe that's where I heard the story before. But I am sure that Crawford kicking players isn't exactly news. It's just getting blown up now with everything else that happened.

[Auston'sWilly]

The game must change folks. No doubt about it.
Buddy of mine from the future already knows how it's going to turn out and he sent me this.
Looks about right.

U43ntitled.jpg

[Canucks_fan18]

I was listening to Mondays hockey central at noon and Patrick Sharp came on and was talking about some of the old heated battles on the ice with words to each other. He said some of the things he regrets saying or doing, in which Marek said no come on man it was an intense hockey game or something along those lines. Shrap than said your right, It was just because I am such a fiery competitor.

Can you imagine what these players say to each other out there? How many things are way off side, probably racist, sexiest, weight shaming etc... Yet it's all good because it's on the ice boys. Just like you can hit a guy in the face with your stick but a coach gives a player kick in the ass on the bench and the world loses its mind.

[newfcollins]

Just like you can hit a guy in the face with your stick but a coach gives a player kick in the ass on the bench and the world loses its mind.

Hitting a player in the face with a stick comes with a punishment, usually a penalty or suspension. Ask Marty McSorley about it.

Kicking a player should also come with a punishment.

[Canucks_fan18]

Hitting a player in the face with a stick comes with a punishment, usually a penalty or suspension. Ask Marty McSorley about it.

Kicking a player should also come with a punishment.

A penalty is hardly a punshiment. You sit in a box for two minutes sometimes 4. You get suspension if it looks deliberate or with intent to injure. I can't hit a guy in my office with my stapler and go sit in the boardroom for two minutes but it's on the ice so all good. Just like you should be able to say whatever you want to someone on the ice and it will be all good.

[newfcollins]

A penalty is hardly a punshiment. You sit in a box for two minutes sometimes 4. You get suspension if it looks deliberate or with intent to injure. I can't hit a guy in my office with my stapler and go sit in the boardroom for two minutes but it's on the ice so all good. Just like you should be able to say whatever you want to someone on the ice and it will be all good.

You can argue whether a two-minute penalty is hardly a punishment, but it's still a punishment. I am unsure of what you are trying to argue by comparing it to an office boardroom.

[PenguinHunter]

You can argue whether a two-minute penalty is hardly a punishment, but it's still a punishment. I am unsure of what you are trying to argue by comparing it to an office boardroom.

The comparison being made is that a penalty is not a punishment to you as an individual as you do not lose your job over it, or get suspended without pay. A penalty is just part of the game and is more of a punishment to your team than to the individual. Sure individuals feel bad about it and such... so the comparison to going an sitting in the boardroom is accurate... the punishment trickles down to your co-workers having to pick up the extra work while in the boardroom.. whilst you just sit there.

[newfcollins]

The comparison being made is that a penalty is not a punishment to you as an individual as you do not lose your job over it, or get suspended without pay. A penalty is just part of the game and is more of a punishment to your team than to the individual. Sure individuals feel bad about it and such... so the comparison to going an sitting in the boardroom is accurate... the punishment trickles down to your co-workers having to pick up the extra work while in the boardroom.. whilst you just sit there.

So it is a punishment. Glad we cleared that up.

There's also the chance that a player can get benched, sent to the minors, traded, waived, etc. if they take too many high sticking penalties. So even more punishment.

The point remains that doing something on the ice (high-sticking, fighting, etc.) comes with a punishment of some type, no matter what degree of severity it may be. It's not unreasonable to expect a level of punishment for a coach kicking, hitting, chocking a player.

[Canucks_fan18]

The comparison being made is that a penalty is not a punishment to you as an individual as you do not lose your job over it, or get suspended without pay. A penalty is just part of the game and is more of a punishment to your team than to the individual. Sure individuals feel bad about it and such... so the comparison to going an sitting in the boardroom is accurate... the punishment trickles down to your co-workers having to pick up the extra work while in the boardroom.. whilst you just sit there.

Thank you. I don't understand how people wouldn't understand the metaphor.

[Rylant]

Most people understand that stepping on the ice as a professional hockey player, that there are some risks associated with it. It is a physical game and so you might get hit with a stick; it comes with the territory and understanding that those things can happen. It is within the scope of the game and there are rules about it and ways to penalize those actions and the players accept those risks when they step onto the ice. Now, if somebody on the ice pulled out a knife and stabbed another player, that would be and should be dealt with differently as that is NOT within the scope of the game.

If Crawford yelled at somebody in practice "You lazy piece of shit! Get your act together!" I would think that people would accept that is within the scope of what is expected, and probably not a big deal. However, there are lines that you cannot cross under any circumstances which include any kind of racial or homophobic slur (Which Crawford has also now been accused of) and ANY kind of physical abuse. Kicking, choking, and slapping all fit this. These are things which are NOT within the scope of NHL coaching and I have no problem with his job being in jeopardy because of it. It is sad to me that we need to explain the difference between getting hit by a high stick in game, and a coach kicking you.

It is also sad to me that several people in this thread have downplayed and defended the act of choking a player on the grounds that it probably isn't as sinister as it sounds. He probably didn't actually garrotte the player; he just pulled so hard on his jersey that he choked or put him in a headlock. Seriously?

Rylant