I'd rather find a way to top Steve-O in a jackass stunt
than listen to more Scott Stevens accolades.
Seriously, bring me fireworks, a match and a lemon and
a sheep and get ready to start filming.
Because I can't listen to guys like Berman and Melrose
ramble on about what a warrior Stevens is, anymore.
Probably the only thing stopping ESPN from dressing
Stevens in Roman gladiator garb was Stevens himself.
In fact, this is less a rant about Scott Stevens and
more about the inane drones in the media.
The crux of my issue is a simple question - why is it
acceptable to try to knock someone out with a blow to
the head than it is to knock someone out at the knees?
The Villains
Marchment. Ulfie. Tucker.
Most of the players who media-types revile in print were
those that took out a player at the knees.
Even if the hits were legal, if the intent was to take a
player out of commission then it stained a player's
resume for his career.
Let's make no mistake - the issue for knee hits was never
solely focused on its legality. It was always that somehow
the player had broken the unwritten code of conduct.
The Hero?
And then here comes Scott Stevens, who has made a recent
living trying to take out other team's best stars with
shots to their head with their heads down.
I am not doubting the legality of any of the hits.
The hit on Kariya, from what I saw, was hockey.
But in this day when medicine has made knee surgeries
less threatening to a player's career, whereas head
injuries are becoming an increasingly dangerous trend,
shouldn't the perspective change a bit?
What Stevens is doing is trying to injure a player -
scratch that, he's trying to injure the opponent's
best player.
How do media sources find this part of hockey endearing,
yet fighting and hits to the knees abhorrent?
And don't lay on me any spirit of the game malarkey.
The hit on Shane Willis in the Carolina series last year
summed it all up for me.
Final seconds of an already decided game and Stevens
lays out the rookie with a vicious blind side hit. The
kid leaves the series with a concussion and his career
has never been the same.
To me, that was as clear an intent to injure a player
outside the spirit of the game that I've seen.
But he's a warrior. Bah.
The Real Results
Stevens himself isn't to blame. Unlike Messier, the guy
has never sought to cash in on his hits with commercials
or hanging at the China Club with models.
And I'm not seeking to judge your perspective on Stevens
and his hits. If you respect the guy, fine with me.
But if you, like so many in the press, find a way to make
the distinction between trying to injure a player by
legally taking him out at the knees versus legally taking
him out with a hit to the head, then I'd urge you to rethink.
The NFL protects it quarterbacks, and the NBA protects
its stars. The NHL already has minimized its talent through
expansion and the trap. By having its broadcasts laud
Stevens, it's essentially giving the go-ahead to take them
out entirely.
I guess ESPN doesn't mind. They just need the players to
stay on the ice for one more season until their contract
with the NHL runs out ...
-Gabe
Posted by Gabe at June 09, 2003 11:34 PMeMail this entry!
"But if you, like so many in the press, find a way to make the distinction between trying to injure a player by legally taking him out at the knees versus legally taking him out with a hit to the head, then I'd urge you to rethink."
Why do I get the impression this was directed at me ?
Sunday June 8th front page of Hockeybird:
"I know, a lot of you are still coming up with different ways to describe Scott Stevens as being a dirty player. I have no problem taking the opposite point of view. Mean ? Yes....Nasty ? Hell yes. Hard hitting ? Of course. Dirty ? C'mon now. This is the NHL. If Mr. Stevens was going after peoples knees I wouldn't argue a bit. Scott hits with intent to ring the bell.....to take a guy out....OK, I'll agree. But that's not dirty in my book. And after all these years, if the players themselves thought he was dirty, then he'd have already paid for it."
Fodder for debate......
----}-
Posted by: Bird on June 10, 2003 05:21 PMBravo, Gabe.
Great piece.
Yes, GREAT piece indeed! I wish it could make it to one of the major papers or magazines.
--JBytes
Posted by: JBytes on June 11, 2003 01:55 PMExcellent Gabe! I can only hope that the clowns like Berman, Clement , Thorne and Melrose read Hockeybird.
paul
Great article. I totally agree. If I had the choice of someone hitting me over the head or across the knees with a baseball bat, I'd choose the knees any day. I mean, your brain is the most important thing you got. Period. A hit to the head is a hit to everything a person has. EVERYTHING. If the intent is to injure, then the man who hits the head is the most horrendous of them all. And if people don't have a problem with Stevens, then they have no concern for the value of human life. Think about how horrible a human being Stevens must be to not care if his opponent ever wakes up the same person. Forget about being able to play, forget about a career, Stevens has no concern for the actual life of his opponents on and off the ice, and that is truly dispicable.
Posted by: ngn on June 11, 2003 02:52 PMI agree with ngn. I hate Scott Stevens, that bastard! The Devils won the cup fair & square, but in my opinion he isn't worthy of lifting it over his head!
Posted by: Tina on June 11, 2003 04:42 PMi hate stevens too. he has been trying to hurt people for years. whenever he puts a clean hit on somebody he is not so tough and nothing happens. mike fisher and the senators treated him like the bitch he is. he always puts a cheap hit on big name players because he cant stop them with his limited talent. he is old and slow like the deer he hunts in hicksville canada. i would give anything to play against him and john madden. if the refs did their job correctly,nj would be cupless.
Posted by: mike on August 2, 2003 11:37 PMi hate stevens too. he has been trying to hurt people for years. whenever he puts a clean hit on somebody he is not so tough and nothing happens. mike fisher and the senators treated him like the bitch he is. he always puts a cheap hit on big name players because he cant stop them with his limited talent. he is old and slow like the deer he hunts in hicksville canada. i would give anything to play against him and john madden. if the refs did their job correctly,nj would be cupless.
Posted by: mike on August 2, 2003 11:37 PMi hate stevens too. he has been trying to hurt people for years. whenever he puts a clean hit on somebody he is not so tough and nothing happens. mike fisher and the senators treated him like the bitch he is. he always puts a cheap hit on big name players because he cant stop them with his limited talent. he is old and slow like the deer he hunts in hicksville canada. i would give anything to play against him and john madden. if the refs did their job correctly,nj would be cupless.
Posted by: mike on August 2, 2003 11:37 PMi hate stevens too. he has been trying to hurt people for years. whenever he puts a clean hit on somebody he is not so tough and nothing happens. mike fisher and the senators treated him like the bitch he is. he always puts a cheap hit on big name players because he cant stop them with his limited talent. he is old and slow like the deer he hunts in hicksville canada. i would give anything to play against him and john madden. if the refs did their job correctly,nj would be cupless.
Posted by: mike on August 2, 2003 11:39 PMI agree with you totally on Scott Stevens intent to injure other players. The hit on the North Carolina player a couple of years back was certainly not called for. Jersy was up 2 nothing and Carolina had pulled their goalie in a last ditch effort to try and score. Twice Jersy regained control of the puck and did not try to score, instead shooting it back in to the corner in Carolina's end ( Scott Stevens shooting it in once himself). Finally the rookie took the bait and made the mad rush up ice, being directed in to the waiting elbow/shoulder of Mr Stevens. Guess what, now we have conspiracy, at least among his linemates and most likely the bench as well. There can be no other explanation of trying not to score on an empty net than their plan ot intent ot injure. After the game one of the sports commentators said Jersey was sending them a message, brilliant commentary, you may as well send thugs after them in a bar, I veiw it as the same thing. Mrs Stevens must be really proud of her son.
Posted by: Ed Fraser on October 28, 2003 12:50 PM
|
Recent Articles
|
|
|