Watching the NHL with the third eye, Vol. II

This is the year without cable.

School librarian and budding independent photographer The Upstate Ice Girl will be home with the children this season, wearing her apron and (unbeknownst to her, but hey!, that's what Christmas is for ...) her ice girl outfit, while I grind away at the local community college, tracking down errant commas and style infringements. This decision results in a significant decrease in our income, and although we have an apple tree in our new yard, conventionally purchased groceries and other necessities will take precedence over the NHL Network and the 24 Islanders games not broadcast on Staten-Island exclusive Metro 3, or whatever becomes the Isles' home when Siena is playing Hofstra in men's volleyball (live!).

This could be catastrophic, but I live a well-sated hockey life, for the most part. There is the weekly ball hockey game. There is blogging (guess I'll be doing more of that), and reading blogs. There is the 25th anniversary copy of Slap Shot, calling my name as the wind changes and the leaves brighten. And there is NHL 09. (which I will try to locate today, but probably won't locate until tomorrow, at which time you will find a full review in this space.)

But I still want to watch the Islanders. (hold your applause fellow Islanders fans. cut the laugh track NHL press.)

Looked into Center Ice Online. I know there are blackout restrictions within range of local broadcasts. I can't find a map of said restrictions (or a guide/table/spreadsheet) on the web site. Fair enough. I figure I'll go through the first few steps of account creation, see if I can find the blackout information, then get the Ice Girl on the phone for help in the decision-making process. (goes something like this: I sold my guitar/your camera/one of the children -- for a fair price -- can I get hockey on the computer?)

"Center Ice Online can not be accessed from within your broadcast region."

Mother. F.

I know, as a formerly mediocre and passive newspaper reporter, I could get some background on this and discover the real reason I can't pay someone to watch hockey on the computer. Too hard. I'll chalk it up to evil evil evil Time Warner and what I will suspect is some ridiculous ploy to get me to buy something other than the $7.34/month 2-13 service that will bring me five games (go Pens! go Wings!) on NBC this season.

Concessions

1. The first time I saw hockey on television I'm pretty sure Tom Mees was broadcasting a Whalers/Bruins game. I have fond memories of Tom Mees, if only because he didn't tell any jokes. You can watch more hockey now than ever before. I know this. Even Vs.

2. What with all of the other media options out there, including listening to Isles' game on web radio (thank you thank you thank you for not getting so goddamn greedy I have to pay for out-of-market streaming radio like baseball or football), I can stay abreast of developments. I would say I could also go to a bar and watch the game, but I'm liable to drop a season's worth of cable fees in a bar session, and let's say "I'm working on that this year."

3. The NHL Network, which I will get next year, is pretty good. Thanks. Whomever.

Here it is: The Islanders are getting pretty good at innovating and understanding new technologies. They're offering interesting tickets packages, great online features, and I'm guessing the trend will continue. The league needs to catch up. It's not a dire situation. I can find hockey, you can find hockey, and there's a certain sense in directing the game's die-hard fans to open their wallets for what they want.

But it's my job to bitch and moan, because I do it well. Let's get that Center Ice Online up here in the wilds of Central New York. And if you can't, I don't want to see any men in suits at my door when I find a P2P site to watch me Isles. I'll buy a hat, I promise, and we'll call it even.

Exhibit A: I Fucking Give Up

So, The New York Daily News royally Got Wrong the Sean Avery story yesterday. When I first read the update, like many people, I really thought he might be on his way to Dead. I even considered posting a sort of "please keep our previous juvenile ridiculing of Mr. Avery in context considering the events of this morning" message. Turns out he hurt his spleen and will be A-Ok, at least by next season.

Whoops. Time to apologize. Or, if you're a newspaper and don't understand how the previous standards governing your business might apply to the newish, but not no much so, Internet, you could just pretend you didn't do a fucking thing wrong. Like the TV stations you (me) made fun of for decades.

In the wake of the paper's wrong web reporting and subsequent lack of recognition of that wrongness, they were rightfully criticized by other media outlets, and even a few bloggers (full of shit as they all, unequivocally, undeniably, without variation, are).

The response? This piece of shit, which includes this piece of shit:

"Finally, for all those from other media outlets and newspapers who have sarcastically dismissed our initial web story about Sean Avery’s hospitalization since the Rangers refuted it Wednesday afternoon, I wonder:

Was your initial reaction that the story couldn’t have been correct or did you simply race up to the MSG Training Center to get player reaction? And, did you call the hospital and/or Avery’s representatives to get the real story or did your “reporting” simply consist of taking the team’s word for what happened?

Fortunately, the intrepid men an women of the press who have exposed baseball’s steroid problems didn’t similarly regurgitate what they were told by people who understandably want their businesses viewed as beyond reproach."

What? I think he's saying, "we got it wrong because we do actual, real reporting instead of taking the team's word for it, because they lie, the motherfuckers. And you got it right because you're lazy and waited until some kind of source that would be named gave you a comment."

Point missed, then distorted, then shat on.

Here: If you get an unnamed source telling you a hockey player might be close to death, get that verified by a real person who can give their name before you post it on the web. If he is dead, they will tell you at some point. Stake out the hospital, be the first there, whatever.

That's it. Simple Simon. Simon simple. Simple simple. Don't rush.

Of course, do you think having this "exclusive" might have helped web hits (revenue) for a day or so?

Messy.

Update, 2:04 p.m.

Upon reading this again, I noticed this line: "Fortunately, the intrepid men an (sic) women of the press who have exposed baseball’s steroid problems didn’t similarly regurgitate what they were told by people who understandably want their businesses viewed as beyond reproach."

If anyone deserves a big Thumbs Up for their role in the exposing of baseball's steroid problem, it certainly must not ever be the guys who spent 14 years in the dressing rooms of the MLB, watching, at one point, as Mark McGwire fondled a fucking bottle of something steroidish, and din't do a goddamned thing. I can't even get sarcastic about this. Good lord.

A crisis in hockey writing (with bonus: "Dave Maloney is an idiot")

(see amendments to the bottom of the post, 5:57 p.m.)

The ongoing disaster and oh!ffence to the game that is Larry Brooks.

Typically, I am the first to jump on the Canadian media for vilifying what it views as non-traditional markets and dumb American fans (a true fan of the Nashville Predators has to overcome many more obstacles to his fanhood than a Maple Leafs fan living in Hogtown -- a point easily lost on most of the Canadian media), but the reaction this week to the "Avery Clarification" has been overwhelmingly dumb in the States, and remarkably measured and smart in Canada. And this outburst of terrible writing has driven me to do something I'd rather not -- support Gary Bettman, which I found myself doing for a flicker last night during the Wild/Avs game.

Dear Larry Brooks, stop arguing the NHL "changed" the rule or wrote a new rule because of Sean Avery's little goal-crease dance. In a rare moment of clarity and responsiveness, the league clarified an existing rule -- unsportsmanlike conduct -- to include instances such as this, which had never come up before because Sean Avery is the perfect storm of douchebaggery and defies previously held human expectations.

There is no new rule. And, the oh!fficials in the game warned Avery in the act and told him they would call unsportsmanlike if he proceeded. The league simply backed them up post hoc. Even the oh!fficials were right! It's Christmas in hockeyland!

The same writers would have bitched about the league's inactivity and lack of responsiveness if this was ignored.

Sports journalism is a waste.

Another tired argument: This one I saw from Jim Kelley yesterday. He argues you can't call Avery's mime dance a "mockery" in a league allowing face washes, hits on the boards, and various other minor acts of violence throughout the playoffs. Oh, and he remembered to bring up the boot-stomping incidents, which, if I recall, led to significant suspensions for the oh!ffending players. The people who cry when Sean Avery gets the hose because he has a history of being an asshole are the same people who said Chris Simon should be put out on the ice floe because he is a repeat oh!ffender. Well, Sean Avery is a repeat asshole, hence the attention.

Kelley may actually have a good point, but he's not smart enough to know it, and masks it by trying to defend Avery's actions with the "if the league lets everybody do dumb things, they can't single out this dumb thing " argument.

Wrong. That's exactly what leagues (all sporting leagues) and officials are charged with accomplishing. Saying "I agree with Sean Avery because I disagree with Chris Neil" is incongruous and wrong. You deal with these on a case-by-case basis, because they are different actions. I can say, "I think Chris Neil shouldn't be penalized for punching players in the back of the head because I think a moderate level of violence is acceptable in an intense, physical environment, although I think the officials should warn him should he do it more than once; I also think they should take into consideration how hard he punches the player." And that's assuming the officials see him do it, which Kelley doesn't address! Similarly, I can say, "I think Chris Neil should be penalized for throwing a flying elbow at someone's head, as well as I think Dion Phaneuf should have been penalized for head-ramming Patrick Marleau the other night -- because these plays are far more inherently dangerous than face washes and rabbit punches to the back of helmets."

Also, bringing up the Roger Neilson and Hasek incidents is pointless, because the Hasek thing became a rule, and resulted in a near-equal amount of criticism to Hasek at the time. Or, at least consternation. Hasek isn't a petulant asshole, so people didn't accuse him of "mockery," but your history as a player and a person is an integral part of how you are perceived and how you will be dealt with in the working environment. To assume otherwise is baiting the reader.

So, I will say, with that cleared up, "Sean Avery's actions in front of Martin Brodeur constitute unsportsmanslike conduct and are not consistent with the spirit of competition. And because he consistently shows himself to be an asshole, someone big should punch him in the face." That is reasonable. So is calling it a mockery, because he was dancing around like a three-year-old asking for mommy's attention. I've seen it. I know it.

Go Devils.

Amended at 1:19 p.m.

Why I don't write about hockey professionally, Exhibit E

John Buccigross nails it. Much shorter, too.

"New Jersey vs. New York Rangers
What stands out in this series is Sean Avery's bizarre "Dancing With The Stars" routine with Martin Brodeur in Game 3. There is a term for him -- clown. That kind of stuff, coupled with the detached demeanor Avery seems to have toward the rest of the team's battles, has the potential to drain the Rangers. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, and maybe his teammates are largely ignoring him, but playoff hockey is difficult enough without having to try to manage some out-of-control, fall-out frat boy. It's even worse when he drags Brodeur into his sideshow. He's the Terrell Owens of the NHL, polluting the Rangers with his individuality. Can you imagine what Scott Stevens would have done had he seen Avery waving his stick like a giant windshield wiper in Brodeur's face? That also is partially an indictment of the contsruction of the Devils' roster."


Another amendment, 5:57 p.m.

Dave Maloney is an idiot. He was on HNIC radio using Kelley's "Roger Neilson was considered a genius when he 'tested the limits'" argument.

Yes, he was. Because people did not universally hate Roger Neilson. He was, at times, a creative, sly, and entertaining individual who devised some clever, funny (the flag on the stick), and memorable methods that created some pleasant and memorable memories for hockey fans. Sean Avery says things about players' families and acts like a jerkoff every time he is on the ice. He dives, whines, cries, and wears emo douche clothing. Roger Neilson didn't do these things. He coached hockey, revolutionized advanced scouting, and wore crazy ties.

Comparing Roger Neilson to Sean Avery is stupid. Dave Maloney is stupid. The Rangers suck.