Just in time for the Stanley Cup Finals, I go on a rant:
Despite growing up in Canada, my childhood encounters with hockey were minimal. I understood the basics of the sport, knew the players’ names, and even feigned interest by admiring hockey’s self-described “heritage” squad, the Montreal Canadiens – the consequences of which I am only now beginning to comprehend. But one truth kept me from the rink: it was inaccessible. I played baseball and basketball; the rich kids played hockey. For me, there was no avoiding that stereotype. So while the majority of Canada carried sticks and skates to the rink, I threw tennis balls at a school wall and shot hoops through a crooked, meshless rim.
(image: Worth1000.com)
Whereas I didn’t play hockey, I found it surprisingly watchable. Its quick ebb and flow, combined with the juxtaposition of power and grace, fashioned a great spectator sport. Hockey had all the elements of a great sporting narrative (with suspense, “sudden death,” rivalries, exciting plays, etc). It even had its share of colorful heroes and villains, storybook endings, and undeniable controversy. Playoff hockey in particular was unadulterated visual stimulus; eye candy for sports fans.
(image: Flickr User MPR529)
For many people, hockey still fulfils the role of pride/enjoyment/excitement that you would associate with sport. Yet, slowly, ever-so-gradually, I’m losing my grip. I no longer enjoy watching hockey with as much relish as I do baseball, basketball, football, or soccer. And this saddens me.
I’m not going to claim that I hate hockey – not yet, anyway. Most people who hate hockey do so without an ounce of rational motivation. I’ve read respected American sports journalists chime about the “general fan” not appreciating the beauty of a well-placed bunt, while simultaneously ranting about the dreariness of an hour-long hockey game. That’s hypocrisy. The thinking fan is an individual who can appreciate the nuances of every game – whether it be baseball, hockey, ultimate frisbee, or chess. Hockey is much too skilled a sport to be tossed about like a worn-out toy.
(image: mblsha)
No. Like the proverbial frog that got boiled as the temperature of the water gradually increased, my current state is the product of an ongoing malaise. I am disenfranchised with the sport, and I believe there are fingers to be pointed.
Canadian Media Bias
In Canada, we don’t get the American channels (which is lamentable in and of itself). There are three major sports networks here, the executives of which make no secret their affinity to hockey. The first twenty minutes of a half-hour highlight show is usually spent discussing the daily happenings of the NHL, including a panel of commentators disputing their opinions of everything from the merits of wearing tight-fitting jerseys to the tint of Alexander Ovechkin’s visor. If you’re looking for highlights of basketball, baseball, or football, you’ll have to wait your turn. Hockey reigns in Canada. There is no middleground. The media will force you, by means of Winston-Smith-Big-Brother submission stranglehold, to realize its importance until you give up the struggle and love the NHL.
Leadership & Lockout
Gary Bettman never understood the irony of watching hockey on the Outdoor Life Network. With the lack of a solid television deal I sometimes wonder about the talent handling the NHL’s marketing, but the signs here point to bad leadership. It would be easy to blame Bettman entirely, but Colin Campbell and Ted Saskin are not exactly the beacons of guidance the sport so desperately needs. The NHL is behind all major sports in both revenue and television ratings. Behind by a mile – which is not so bad, except that the league is so desperate to improve “the numbers” that they (unintentionally) jeopardize the game. No wonder the NHL has had three lockouts since 1992, including the longest work-stoppage of a league in sports history (310 days).
But the post-lockout saw an opportunity for the league to come back strong. The quick fix as the NHL saw it was to “speed up the game” and induce more scoring by calling a thousand more penalties. Here’s the rub: you don’t need more goals to acheive a better sport. You need more drama, you need a storyline. (There’s also something about playing hockey in May and June that seems unnatural.)
Maybe the league expanded too quickly. Expansion is a good idea when the market can financially support a team for many years AND the league can afford to dilute its talent pool because of an influx of skilled players. To me, that was not apparent when the league bloated to 30 teams.
Coaches Corner & Politics
I used to love watching Coaches Corner with Don Cherry. Now, I can’t stand it. Every recent episode (in memory) manages to reference our troops fighting in far off places and how much they look like “tough, Canadian” hockey players. Sports and Politics don’t mix. I can understand making reference to a historic victory or a devastating casualty, but I find the discussions go off on tangents where Cherry defends our Prime Minister’s decision to send troops to the Middle East. The message I get from Cherry these days is that any good, Canadian, hockey fan MUST support our troops.
Which brings me to a final point about the globalization of hockey (ending this crazy rant of mine). Canada is very proud of their hockey, with ample justification. But we have to let the rest of world into our circle. We cannot demonize.
Hockey needs:
(image: Worth1000.com)
Tien
You meant “hypocrisy” and not “hypocrasy”, right?
I found your comment that “rich kids played hockey” interesting. There is no doubt that having a child play organized hockey is expensive. I would have to say though that of the many friends I had as a child who played organized hockey, very few (if any) were rich. They did however have the willingness to get up at un-godly hours and family members who were willing to do the same.
Maybe it was a difference in the areas where we grew up, but all of the kids around where I grew up played hockey of some kind. Street hockey when it was warm and ice hockey at the local outdoor rink when it was cold enough….and in Ottawa (or its now almagamated suburb) it was cold enough quite a lot. We all threw tennis balls at walls and shot hoops through crooked meshless hoops too. Where I grew up, rich kid played organized tennis.
Not really the point of your post, but I’m not a sports fan by any means.
May 24, 2007 at 4:24 pm
D. E Culbert
You don’t need to be a rich kid to make it in ice hockey. Wayne Gretzky came from humble beginnings and so did a lot of other great hockey players, the list goes on and on. It’s the same in any sport, either you got talent and skill, or you don’t.
Not really the point of your post, but I’m not a sports fan by any means.
If your not a sports fan, what is the point you are trying to make?
May 24, 2007 at 5:43 pm
hroman
I should use the spellcheck feature! Thanks for the edit, Tien.
As to the issue of “rich kids,” I know it’s a stereotype, but that’s how I saw it. The kids playing hockey where I grew up were all noticably more affluent than those who didn’t; The Stars released a survey that showed families of hockey players (including their fan base) were more prosperous than those of the other three major sports – Basketball, Football, Baseball. (This doesn’t mean that well-off kids play hockey exclusively!)
I agree with the statement that “you don’t need to be a rich kid to make it in ice hockey.” But not everyone’s parents have the faculty to fashion for their children outdoor hockey rinks (i.e. Walter Gretzky). So I think the Gretzky example is not particularly effective. Especially considering there are many more “rags to riches” stories from Basketball, Baseball, and Football.
It’s all relative.
May 24, 2007 at 8:27 pm
Carl
What makes hockey interesting is it’s a blue collar sport that still costs a lot of money to play. Arguably, hockey is amongst the grittiest toughest sports there is, along with the one you’re most likely to get a black eye while playing, or even lose some teeth. When you look at Mike Ricci you don’t think rich kid.
I don’t think the big ‘cost’ is someone laying out a few hundred bucks on equipment, and new pair of skates every year. I think the big cost is in the time. 5am practices to drive to, tournaments in Moose Jaw, summer inline leagues, weekend power skating clinics, etc etc. Poorer families tend to have jobs that don’t necessarily fit into the 9-5 workday, making it tough to get little Wayne to the rink on the weekend. Not to mention the fact that they’re less likely to have a car.
Conversely, sports like tennis or cricket have an aura of sophistication and pretentiousness about them. Dressed all in white sweaters on finely cut grass, white men discuss how their old money is doing in the blue chips that week, and whether or not they’d care for a spot of tea after the match. Cricket even has a tea break built into the sport!! These sports cost comparatively nothing to play.
Hamid, maybe you should start a kids cricket league in St James town.
May 24, 2007 at 10:16 pm
hroman
Carl, I think you hit the nail on the head with your definition of “cost,” as compared with the blue-collar nature of hockey.
May 24, 2007 at 11:31 pm
Lynh Nguyen
On the issue of cost Hamid, I agree and disagree with you. The cost of joining a league and fitting your growing kid with equipment does cost in the thousands every year. But plenty of kids from poor families kept the hockey spirit alive by playing streety hockey every night. A group of kids with ratty beat up nets, a ball and old hockey sticks.
What I think the real issue is that you are not disheartened by hockey. You are being let down by the NHL. You are bored with the NHL. That’s not to say that hockey is alive and exciting elsewhere. Everyone seems to think that the be all and end all of hockey is the NHL. If you want the story line and intense passion watch OHL or AHL. Watch all the various grades of World Hockey. These leagues and events are not always well advertised but you will always be able to find a great OHL game during the year. You can get cheap tickets for an AHL game and still get a good game. I was even one of the few people that would show up to U of T Blues games. Our girl’s team was amazing. So if you really love hockey look elsewhere. Learn the stories of the OHL and AHL. You’ll fall back in love with the game!
May 25, 2007 at 9:00 am
Lynh Nguyen
hmmm … correction to a phrase above …
THat’s not to say that hockey is not alive and exciting elsewhere.
That’s what I meant …
May 25, 2007 at 9:02 am
hroman
Brilliant observation of the day:
“What I think the real issue is that you are not disheartened by hockey. You are being let down by the NHL. You are bored with the NHL”
May 25, 2007 at 9:37 am
Carl
I refer you to your own post on November 28th 2006.
There’s no more convincing reference than your own used against you.
May 28, 2007 at 12:34 am
Lee Corso’s Merkin » Blog Archive » Stanley Cup Finals: Stanley Cup Finals Pants Party: Ducks Vs. Senators
[...] honest, rage is the only emotion that any fans feel about no matter the reason or the season when the subject is Commissioner Bettman — is that we’re on the cusp of what promises to be a pretty compelling matchup on the [...]
May 28, 2007 at 11:42 am
Pierre
I might be a week late with my post, but I still feel like chipping in.
I share a relatively similar story than you Hamid. I grew up in a family which wasn’t willing to go through the annoying 6am practice on Saturday morning, not to say that my parents didn’t want me to grow up in surrounded by the crazy parents shouting at the referees and the coaches all game long. I did play all the time outside on rinks or in the street though.
Then I stopped liking hockey, probably in the late 90s. However, post-lockout, I started loving it again. I think the main difference from me is the media you access the game with. I can totaly understand how you hate watching Don Cherry. I’m a Quebecer. Need I say more? I also couldn’t care less about the 5th Oilers-Canucks game I’m offered by CBC. Serisouly, do these 3 teams (Flames, Oilers, Canucks) only play against each other?!?!!?!? What I like: going on to nhl.com every morning and watch the highlight of the games I care about. I would love for CBC and other TV channels to start broadcasting more diversity, and for the NHL to allow that diversity (8 games within your own division in one year is simply too many).
I used to agree that there were too many teams in the NHL, but now, with the post lock out reality, we saw this year that many teams can be competitive, and that many younger players are ready to take the stage. Once all GMs will have updated their ways of managing their teams, we should have a good league to watch.
Finally, I agree that there are other good leagues to get your hockey fix from. I’m always amazed every time I go back to Chicoutimi to see that the Sags (the junior hockey team) is playing in front of a sell-out crowd game after game. Weirdly enough, I think the biggest cities could be the worst cities for the average hockey fan…
May 28, 2007 at 5:38 pm
Just Tape Four Tylenols To It « The Roman Empire
[...] a year ago I wrote about there being something rotten in my state of hockey. I got quite a bit off my chest back then and, looking back, perhaps I was a [...]
April 16, 2008 at 11:35 pm