I don't think there is a need to summarize last night’s game......if you saw it you know the many, many problems that occurred and if you didn't see it you've likely seen highlights or read about it by now. And if not then do yourselves and favour and forget about it.
So many missed calls.....and very questionable knee-on-knee hit.
Cooke's knee-on-knee with Donovan wasn't a cheap shot in my opinion, but Peter's hit on Neil is a different story.
Peters' originally went for a hit, a big hit, but instead of re-aligning after Neil moved out of the way Peters' continued full speed with the knee-on-knee.
We can argue about 'intent to injury' until our faces are blue, but Peters' has a history of crap like this and at the very least it was two minute minor...well had been against a non-sens player it would have been at least a two minute minor.
Then there was the lumber jacking of Ruutu's face in front of the Devils net....in front of both officials, there was blood but no call?
It'll be interesting to see what comes of this considering Murray has been very outspoken about the terrible officiating, has considered filing a complaint with the league and now has actually confronted the refs about this ongoing issue.
------------------------------------
Tonight Ottawa will have an interesting and 'unique' line-up to play against the hot and cold Blue Jackets.
We already know Fisher will be out again, and Kovalev will be back in.
According to Sportsnet's Ian Mendes, Chris Neil will be out at least 10-14 days.
Brian Elliott is expected to start once again.
So the good news is Carkner and Picard (somewhat good news) will be good to go tonight.
--------------------------------------
Just a little rumour making the rounds this morning is Chicago will have a scout or two in attendance tonight.
You can draw your own conclusions based on that.
And as soon as I can confirm that they are in attendance I'll update here.
-----------------------------------------
Macleans Interview with Gary Bettman:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/11/17/the-interview-gary-bettman/
It's truly amazing that Bettman hasn't reached out to his PR team for new answers or at least some updated media training, to help him come across as less of a ........well I'll let you fill in the blank.
I'll just pull some of the questions/answers out of the article and translate his answer (and have fun at the same time)
Q: We want to give you a chance to respond to the broad perception here in Canada that you feel the future of the game lies in the United States—and that the real reason the NHL was in court this summer was to keep Canada from getting more teams.
A: I’ve got to ask you a question about your question. Where does that perception come from? What is it based on? Give me any factual basis and I’ll answer the question.
Q: Well, we could start by pointing you to some of the public opinion polls that emerged during the court process.
A: That’s based on the coverage, not necessarily the reality.
So his answers translated are -
1 -"I haven't heard that, I don't have numbers that say that. I'll answer that when you put the hard numbers in front of me"
2 - "As far as I think you know, only in Canada people felt the NHL and I were against Canada" (thinks to himself: I sure hope Canadians didn't have access to satellite television during this whole thing.)
Q: You used the word “covenant” (from a previous question) to describe the bargain between the league and its fans. What about the covenant that existed between the league and the fans in Winnipeg, and the fans in Quebec City?
A: We had the same covenant there and we lost in both of those cases. Both teams were struggling. Both needed new arenas and there was no prospect of the arena coming from any source. And the bottom line that differentiates it from all the other cases we’ve talked about, including Phoenix, was that nobody wanted to own a team there anymore. That’s when you reach the end of the line.
Q: But, respectfully, who wants to own the team in Phoenix?
A: Let’s back up. We had a prospective buyer and I was attempting to deliver the offer on May 5 when they put the club into bankruptcy. What then happened was [Coyotes owner Jerry] Moyes, in conjunction with others, did everything they could to make the franchise unsellable. Through the summer, they lost the personnel; there was no selling of any tickets. They were trying to destroy the franchise so it would have to move.
1 - "Only I have the actual numbers and figures about what happened in Winnipeg and Quebec, besides back then people in the Colorado and Arizona had forgotten about/didn't know about Hockey and were likely forgetting about me from my NBA days."
2 - "We had a guy who wanted to buy the Coyotes!" (Thinks to himself: Hmmm do they already know he wanted to buy them on the condition Glendale taxed the hell out of the local area and would foot his loses after five years? oh and that we'd likely allow him to move the team after 5 years if problems persisted?)
"It's Jim's fault that nobody is attending the games, it's Jim's fault nobody wants to work for a broke company, it's Jim's fault Phoenix has been a failure lately." (Bettman thinking again "Were those court documents showing that Phoenix has been bleeding money since day one, been released in Canada?)
Q: That seems a lot to lay at the feet of Mr. Moyes. Surely if there was a viable fan base in Phoenix those fans would be demonstrating it now. Instead, as few as 5,800 show up to games.
A: With all due respect, what do you know about the operations of the Phoenix Coyotes? Do you know that they lost most of their staff over the summer? Do you know that most of their employees quit? Do you know that they sold virtually nothing because of all of the uncertainty? Do you know that in the bankruptcy court proceedings season ticket holders were being sent information that says you’re going to lose your season ticket deposits? That the sponsorships weren’t able to be renewed? That they’re doing as well as they are, I think, is pretty good. Time will tell whether or not this franchise was actually destroyed over the summer. We believe that it can be resurrected, and if we’re right then there’ll be a new owner and the team will be there. If we’re wrong then we’ll have to deal with that.
Q: And how is the search for a new owner going?
A: We’ve actually just got it out of bankruptcy court in the last week or so. But we are in discussions with a number of groups.
1 - (Thinks first "They have the attendance numbers!?") "How dare you come at me with hard evidence that I messed up! How dare you this is an Honda Civic....oh wait oops. It's Jim's fault......."
2 - "It's not going. A couple have called but they all want conditions attached that will allow them to relocate when the team doesn't get better"
Q: Prior to this summer, did you see operational problems with the Coyotes?
A: This team wasn’t particularly well run, and in a challenging economic climate, coupled with a variety of other factors, it was less than ideal circumstances. Listen, we have a pretty good track record of fixing these things—Winnipeg and Quebec notwithstanding. And you know, there’s been a lot of speculation about Quebec City getting another arena and wanting a team, and that’s something we’re going to want to look at, at the appropriate time.
"The team wasn't run well, and the economy and a few other things (thinks again: "the lack of an actual fan base..." all led to this team becoming what it is. But he love me I told Quebec that maybe one day they can have a team again. Yup I
told them that...."
Q: What about southern Ontario?
A: If we’re relocating, or if we decide to expand, then we’ll see who the applicant pool is, where they want to play, and it’ll get a very good, hard look. We don’t have this master list somewhere where we’ve ranked cities.
"We don't have a master list.....that’s public yet." (Bettman thinking again "Man that 500 million expansion fee is going to be awesome if MLSE lets me expand to southern Ontario and dilute the already shallow talent pool....I wonder if we can put a team in Anchorage....or Hawaii?)
Q: Jerry Moyes was losing a great deal of money.
A: He was losing, I don’t know, $20 million to $25 million a year. Okay, so that happens to clubs occasionally. It’s happened to clubs that are doing quite well right now. The fact of the matter is, that club went into bankruptcy because Mr. Moyes was trying to get money from something that he didn’t own. He owned Phoenix, he didn’t own someplace else. You know, I’ve made it a point of not really discussing what Mr. Balsillie did and why, because for me this was never about Mr. Balsillie, this was about our rules. I know you keep asking the questions that point in that direction. But I’d like you to be clear that’s not really something that I think is particularly important for us to discuss. The other side made this very personal, and the only way we could demonstrate from our standpoint that it wasn’t was by not responding to the personal attacks.
1 - "So? At least another 3-4 clubs are losing 20+ million a season lately. What makes Moyes so special? Selling it to the rich hockey fan Jimmy B wasn't fair because me and the board wouldn't get as much money as we could."
(Thinks......Oh crap I mentioned Jim again....)
"I don't we should talk about Jim. He isn't an important part of what I want to talk about"
Q: Still, it’s hard to remember a one-year period of time when there was as much media scorn, fan anger kind of directed at you. That can’t have been easy.
A: I sensed it in some quarters, but it wasn’t universal. I would submit if you went across our fan base most people would probably tell you they understood what we were doing and why. Listen, I know that we were the subject of a campaign that we decided not to participate in or even try to defend ourselves. We pride ourselves on trying to do the right things. And this notion of tumultuous, I’m not sure I get it. We came off an incredibly successful season, our Stanley Cup finals may have been the most viewed in years, our attendance for four years in a row set a record, our revenues four years in a row—all coming back since the work stoppage—set a record.
Q: You were booed when you presented the Stanley Cup—and that was in the United States.
A: I was booed presenting the Stanley Cup in Detroit to the Pittsburgh Penguins. Had I been presenting it in Pittsburgh I probably wouldn’t have been booed.
1 - "Yeah in Canada, and mainly any hockey market with a large fan base didn't like me, but hey is Nashville they love me....for the most part....."
2 - "Pittsburgh was getting booed not me. Same the year before....Detroit was getting booed not me."
(Finally thinks to himself "I sure hope he doesn't point out me getting booed at the all-star game, the NHL awards, and in any building I'm announced in, like at that Lakers game last year....")
Obviously I'm having some fun with Bettman's answers but it's likely some form of these thoughts went through his head.
So take the above as it is and check out the full article, Bettman doesn't come across to well in the very good article, at least in my opinion. But hey this happens anytime Bettman is asked a good question.
Mark Christopher
[email protected] 
Join the Discussion:
»