20 More Things Overheard at the NHL War Room

I know, I know. I did this joke yesterday. Cut me some slack. I can't even fully explain how much fun these are to come up with. You should try it. Tweet us @passittobulis, with the hashtag #NHLWarRoomQuotes. Here are twenty more things overheard at the NHL War Room:

1. "Okay, Mr. VanMassenhoven. Pick a number, then a colour, then a number."
   
2. "A lot of people said I was crazy to hire an all-blind team, but look at us now. Oh right, you can't."
   
3. "It's hard to make out... can we zoom in? Why did we pick such a dirty coin? I can't read heads or tails. Inconclusive."
   
4. "I'm torn. Both teams are from Canada, but we have to rule in favour of one of them."
   
5. "Wait, zoom in. Is that a tattoo?"
   
6. "I can't see it on camera, but I was just reading about object permanence. Did you know it has to be somewhere?"
   
7. "If you listen closely, you can hear him thinking about blowing the whistle just before the puck goes in."
   
8. "Hey, this is alfredo sauce! I said pomodoro sauce! This is the last time we order Italian. Rule against Luongo."
   
9. "Bad news, guys. We've all gotta stay late--I just found out the Canucks play tonight. Hey! Relax. Your beef is with Vancouver, not me."
   
10. "I don't think that should count. The goalie couldn't see it."
    
11. "Good news, guys! The NHL has asked us to pick the musical act for the All-Star Game. Let's put our heads together and see if we can't come up with something everyone will like."
    
12. "Okay, I was just looking through yesterday's logs, and it says here that someone ruled in favour of Buffalo. What the Hell! We've talked about this!"
    
13. "This clip is boring. Change it to Two and a Half Men."
    
14. "Did anyone else see Double Moustache Man?"
    
15. "That's a clean hit. The head is part of the shoulder, right?"
    
16. "I'm so sick of the officials calling us. Do we have to hold their hand through everything?"
    
17. "Hey, switch to the net cam. Ha ha, look how big his ass looks."
    
18. "The puck is black, right?"
    
19. "Tell them we couldn't see the puck so the call on the ice stands. Gosh, this will be a lot easier when the power comes back on."
    
20. "Get the Braille rule book."
    

20 Things Overheard in the NHL War Room

Last night's contentious decision from the NHL War Room--in which they defied their own precedent and overruled an on-ice no-goal call despite inconclusive evidence--was just another bit of proof that Colin Campbell and his crack squad of AV geeks have literally no idea what they're doing. And, in case you weren't convinced, PITB's recently-dispatched War Room spy has returned, reporting twenty of the most remarkable #NHLWarRoomQuotes he's heard:

1. "Vancouver's on the phone. Don't they know what time it is?"
   
2. "How did we do it last time?"
   
3. "What does 'distinct' mean, anyway? There's literally no way of knowing."
   
4. "Man, that's a tough call. Unplug the phone."
   
5. "I think it's a touchdown."
   
6. "I told them, I don't know much about hockey, but I was Dan Hartman's synth player, so I've got a lot of experience with Instant Replay."
   
7. "Crap, I think Canada's on to us."
   
8. He knocked it down with a high stick and then he kicked it in, but it's Gregory, so count it.
   
9. "What part of 'inconclusive' don't you understand? I said I'm on break."
   
10. "I can't decide. Load the mousetraps and get the mouse."
    
11. "Is that the rule? Somebody Google it."
    
12. "Did you know I interviewed for their vacant general manager position? I didn't get it. Anyway, no goal."
    
13. "I can't see it--the crossbar's in the way. Oh wait, it's just a Twizzler on the monitor again."


14. "FSN Pittsburgh has another angle, but they said it would take four to six weeks for delivery."
    
15. "Zoom in. Now increase the pixels."
    
16. "Let's just say 'he intended to blow the whistle'. Then amend the rule before people start snooping around. Unplug the phone."
    
17. "He's faking it. That's fake blood."
    
18. "Call it a goal. Nobody's watching anyway."
    
19. "Bwa ha ha, screw the Sabres."
    
20. "Guys, we suck at this."

Canucks 10K: Honouring the One-Goal Guys

Without Yannick Tremblay's one goal, the Canucks would still sit at 9999.

In case you missed it, Daniel Sedin's third period goal Wednesday against the Calgary Flames was the 10,000th regular-season goal in Canucks' history. These 10,000 goals were scored by 354 different players over the Canucks' forty-year history, and I'm sure we can name more than a few of the guys. Markus Naslund. Trevor Linden. Stan Smyl. Thomas Gradin. You know, the stars.

But any stat sheet, let alone a list of goalscorers, is incomplete without a perusal of the cellar-dwellers. In this case, the one-goal guys. Some might say they're not important, but that's crazy talk. Without the one-goal guys, the Canucks would be sitting at 9,957.

That's right. Of the 10,000 goals, 43 have been scored by guys who only got one. Today we honour them. It's not exactly a who's who (more of a "who?"), but there are some interesting names on this list. Some remain active NHLers. Some are memorable. Some are long forgotten. Some will surprise you. Here they are, the one-goal guys, in alphabetical order:

Ron MacLean Gets It

Read Puck Daddy's solid take on this video as well. Great stuff from Wyshynski.

Watch the above video starting from 3:28 on through. Pay special attention to what Ron MacLean has to say about the Colin Campbell situation. Now read this fantastic article from our very own Qris. Ron MacLean gets it. The biggest issue in this whole Campbell controversy is not Campbell calling Marc Savard a "little fake artist," though that is also completely inappropriate. The biggest issue is the head of NHL discipline speaking to an employee about situations involving his son. It's an abuse of position and, as Ron MacLean says, "it's a conflict of interest."

We at Pass it to Bulis have been pointing this out from the beginning: there is a bigger issue here than Marc Savard. Most of the mainstream media have been asking the wrong questions. Last night on the Hockey Night in Canada Hotstove, Ron MacLean asked the right ones.

McKenzie, Cox, and the Difference Between Bloggers and Journalists

Harrison touched on Damien Cox's recent words regarding Tyler Dellow and his blog. These comments received some backlash, as many thought he was being somewhat harsh. Cox has since deleted the tweets and issued a retraction. Still, his comments managed to stir the pot with the tired, old debate about a blogger's role in the hockey writers' community. The debate, as I said just a second ago, is tired and old, but recent events have required that the dead horse be given one more hard kick in the name of holding "real" journalists accountable.

The story about the Colin Campbell e-mails has shown not only bloggers' potential for great journalism, but actual "journalists'" potential for shoddy disappointment.

Bloggers haven't been given a fair shake. We're more than "web/twitter groupies," as Damien Cox called us. While it'd be fair to say individual bloggers reach fewer people than individual sportswriters, bloggers do have a great deal of influence, as Tyler Dellow's blog showed. The reaction to his blog was instantaneous. He essentially broke a story that TSN, CBC and others had to comment on. That's big. No one can realistically say that Greg Wyshynski isn't a big voice in the hockey world. Still, even he doesn't give himself enough credit. He said this a couple hours ago on his live chat:

"I think we're more like entertainment writers. That isn't to say we're not journalists. It's to say the guys who roll up their sleeves and start preaching about hard-nosed reporting are talking about covering a form of entertainment -- not Afghanistan."

He's right on both counts -- he's writing about a form of entertainment, and that doesn't mean he's not a journalist. While his blog is more editorial than news, he still holds himself to a standard of factual consistency. He's been known to fix any mistake he makes. This is what journalists are supposed to do.

Journalists are supposed to be better than bloggers. I can see right now a bunch of comments telling me that isn't necessarily true, and they'd be right, but it's supposed to be true. I can happily say that I think over 100 people read my comments on the Colin Campbell emails. Bob McKenzie and Damien Cox have thousands upon thousands of readers. They should be held to a higher standard.

The Wrong Questions: Colin Campbell and the Media's Poor Response

So the story about Colin "Lord Chaos" Campbell's e-mails has been active for about a full day. Originally, I elected to bite my tongue, confident that the right questions would be asked. How wrong I was.

To those who aren't familiar with this story, hockey blogger Tyler Dellow posted an article yesterday (Sunday) that started this whole thing. Dellow had found this court decision on a wrongful firing suit filed by former NHL referee Dean Warren. Warren claimed he was fired for his union work, so the NHL had to show evidence of his failures as a referee. To do so, they submitted into evidence, among other things, several e-mails between Colin Campbell and then-Director of Officiating Stephen Walkom. These e-mails had been redacted, but some had enough details that they could be traced back.

Dellow, after what I'd imagine was a great deal of investigative work, pinned down two specific penalties. The one that got the most attention was a call in which Campbell's son, Gregory Campbell, was given a high-sticking penalty against Marc Savard. Campbell called Marc Savard a "fake artist" and just showed a general dislike for the guy. There were two specific charges that followed -- that Campbell was unfairly biased towards his son, and that he was unfairly biased against Marc Savard, and that this affected his judgment when deciding to suspend Matt Cooke.

What's been said about this? TSN's Bob McKenzie said this:

"There's no question that there's a perception of inappropriate behavior when Colin Campbell sends an email within the office to Director of Officiating at the time Stephen Walkom. As for the specific charge that maybe Marc Savard would not get a fair shake in the Matt Cooke hearing when Matt Cooke delivered the knockout blow to him because Colin Campbell called him a little faker at some point I can only tell you this: I don't have e-mails to prove it, but I would venture a very strong guess that whatever Colin Campbell and the NHL Hockey Operations Department think of the way Matt Cooke plays the game is far worse than whatever Marc Savard would be deemed in terms of being a 'little faker.'"

He then went on to cite the Cooke-Savard hearing as an example of Campbell's integrity. I sort of agree on that point -- Campbell probably wanted to get Matt Cooke and didn't.

Elliotte Friedman of cbcsports.ca had this seemingly-relevant tidbit to contribute:

"The key thing to note here is that the emails in question were exchanged three years ago. On March 29, 2009, Steve Ott nearly decapitated Colin's son, Gregory Campbell. Ott, a repeat offender, was given no suspension."

That would be very interesting if Campbell had anything to do with that hearing. Campbell, of course, recused himself. Safeguards exist to prevent his ruling on hits on his own son.

What about Greg Wyshynski of Puck Daddy?

"I believe those holding up emails that deal with his son and malign the reputation of Marc Savard of the Bostin Bruins as a smoking gun that Campbell's been unfair to him are, ironically, being unfair to Colin Campbell [...] We don't have evidence that his personal feelings on Marc Savard (oddly not addressed in the TSN statement) contributed to any action taken (or not taken) in cases with which Savard's been involved."

Again, this is true, but missing the point, although to his credit, Wyshnyski does spend a lot of time on the real concern. The one that's been all but ignored.

Of course Colin Campbell didn't let his grudges impact his decision not to suspend Matt Cooke. Campbell isn't that kind of idiot. Campbell would never use his power to further his personal grudges. That's a sure-fire way to get caught.

The evidence shows, though, that while Campbell didn't abuse his power, he did abuse his position.