You want to know who is a wealth of misinformation? Every single hockey writer in North America, that's who.
I have grown abundantly weary of the terms 'unnamed source' or ' a source close to the negotiations'. It seems as though every other day we hear some great news from a writer quoting a source, only to have other writers spend two days quoting sources who contradict the good news from the original source. Right now, the most respected hockey writers have about as much credibility as the most criticized internet bloggers. They are all talking to their 'sources', and none of them appear to be on the money.
The world of hockey news was on fire the last couple of days, with rampant rumors that a deal was 'imminent'. Much of the talk was sparked by the Larry Brooks article from last Sunday, where he outlined a potential deal that he said was very close to being done. Well, don't look now, but Larry is taking it back.
In today's New York Post, Larry takes a step back from his proclamation of this past weekend. In his Slapshots article, Mr. Brooks boldly announced that the nightmare was almost over, and that "the NHL lockout is drawing to a conclusion".
Now, we get this:
"While an atmosphere of inevitability hovers over the ongoing negotiations between the NHL and the players union, that does not mean an announcement of an agreement to end the lockout is imminent — because it is not."
and
"Though some players apparently have been led to believe that the tough negotiating has essentially been completed, that simply is not true. At the same time, there are league governors who have been told the process is further advanced than it is."
Larry cites 'sources on both sides'. Well where the hell were these sources on Sunday, when he wrote the original article? Maybe Larry should have his 'sources' call each other, because some of them appear to be misinformed. Unless, of course, some of the things he is writing are being directed by Bob Goodenow and the NHLPA, as has been recently suggested.
Yesterday, a Toronto radio station suggested that a new CBA was essentially done and that it just needed a little fine tuning before an announcement could be made. Bob McKenzie at TSN takes the time to find his own 'sources' to say that the report was "Total horsebleep" (as Bob writes it).
Here is the only FACT that we could find with respect to the CBA negotiations. The NHL and NHLPA met for over 10 hours yesterday, and are expected to resume again today. Yesterday's meeting was another one of those revenue-defining missions. Today's session is supposed to be more substantial.
Al Strachan of the Toronto Sun wants to throw even more cold water onto any optimism you might have had.
Bruce Garrioch of the Ottawa Sun warns that there is a sense within the NHLPA ranks that if a deal isn't good enough, it might not get ratified by the union's membership. He quotes a 'source' of course.
Spector talks about the recent suggestions that the union is split into various factions.
The Rodent warns that the most difficult haggling has not even taken place between the sides, and don't expect that to be friendly haggling.
I really admire those fans who have lost interest in this whole process, because for those of us that still care, this is a frustrating process. I can't really blame the writers all that much, because they are just doing their job and trying to land a scoop. But you would think that they would have learned who and what to trust after all this time.
HDH
Posted by Jim at June 02, 2005 10:23 AMeMail this entry!
|
Recent Articles
|
|
|