WARNING!!!: NHL TALK...Should Moore Sue Bertuzzi?

[Logan]

Here's an article from ESPN.com by Terry Frei, wondering whether it's "right" or not for Steve Moore to sue Todd Bertuzzi for his cheap shot that may end up finishing Moore's career. Would like to hear other's thoughts on this.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=1955978

Moore faces tough decision

By Terry Frei
Special to ESPN.com

To sue or not to sue.

The choice is Steve Moore's.

Last week at his hastily called news conference in Toronto, Moore said he was leaving open the option of filing a lawsuit against Todd Bertuzzi -- particularly if Moore, the former Colorado Avalanche winger, isn't able to recover and return to the NHL.

Moore hasn't retained Toronto attorney Tim Danson, noted for his victims-advocate crusades and cases, for a game of shinny. And Moore's palpable disgust at the plea-bargaining and sentencing process in Vancouver that culminated in Bertuzzi getting off with a conditional discharge makes a lawsuit more likely.

The Avalanche haven't offered Moore a new contract, but he wouldn't be able to pass the physical, anyway, and not receiving a contract offer could be cited as additional evidence of damages.

It's easy for us to sit here and say Moore should sue only as a last resort, or not sue at all, because of the implied-consent argument so many of us have advanced. It's easy because we're not suffering from post-concussion stress syndrome. We're not plagued by the lingering physical problems caused by Bertuzzi's attack from behind. We're not facing the likely end of a career. And we're not still flashing back to that night, when the first conscious moments after the attack involved foggy confusion.

But we'll say it again: Moore should only sue as a last resort. Clearly, though, he is a thoughtful, erudite man perfectly capable of weighing the alternatives and making a reason-based decision.

And, no, it won't be just about the money.

The case for suing
1. Others have done so.

And like Moore's potential suit, two of the notable NHL cases both involved exceptional transgressions -- rather than mundane, virtually common incidents taking place on the ice that had unfortunate results.

Detroit's Dennis Polonich in 1982 was awarded $850,000 in his lawsuit against Wilf Paiement, who was playing for the Colorado Rockies at the time of his 1978 nailing of Polonich in the face with a stick.

Henry Boucha received a $3.5 million settlement from Boston's Dave Forbes, the Bruins and the NHL shortly before his lawsuit was about to go to trial in the 1980s. Boucha, then playing with the North Stars, suffered a crushed eye socket when Forbes nailed him with the butt end of his stick shortly after the two men came out of the penalty boxes in 1975.

Polonich and Boucha -- who both eventually returned to the ice -- have said they would have traded the money for not suffering the physical problems that affect them to this day.

"I still have breathing impairment on the left side and I have disfigurement," Polonich said. "And the other issue is: What if? What kind of a career would have I had if it hadn't happened? Would I have played longer in the NHL? Would I have had better stats?

"I wasn't the same after. ... Before, I played with reckless abandon and I was ultra-competitive. My statistics will tell you that I never was the same."

Boucha recently told The Denver Post that he "had everything going for me, with a lot to look forward to. The next minute, I'm in an emergency room and doctors are telling me I might lose my right eye."

The money helped.

2. Bertuzzi shouldn't be allowed to get away with an act that, if it occurred on the street with the same physical results, would have led to far more serious recriminations.

The light sentence he received from the British Columbia authorities is, at least from the legal point of view, allowing him to get away with it. His NHL suspension has cost him a lot of money, and he stands to lose much more if the league keeps him off the ice and the payroll after the lockout ends.

But there's something unseemly about such a blatant attack, and one with a long trail of rhetoric that could have been cited as premeditation, going virtually unpenalized within the legal system.

3. If the case goes to trial, the examination of the "code" will be a positive step for the game, especially north of the border.

Those continuing to cite the "code" as unalterable might have to acknowledge that modernization isn't always a horrible phenomenon, especially when it involves messages being sent to kids.

Even those fanatic "code" loyalists agree that a sucker punch from behind is going too far, but then in the next breath, they often come off as if they believe Moore actually took a dive and drove his own head into the ice -- and/or -- that his own hit on Markus Naslund weeks earlier was the cheapest shot in the history of the game.

4. It could force the NHL Players' Association to stop worrying more about protecting the Bertuzzis than the Moores.

That's the most inexplicable aspect of the entire incident -- this baffling refusal to step forward and declare that it's not some sissification of the sport or a distortion of the union purpose to condemn heinous conduct. There but for the grace of God ...

The case against suing
1. If Moore sues, he will be ostracized, to degrees varying from portrayal as a whining marginal player who had it coming or couldn't take it; to a victim of something that can't be excused, but should be accepted as the outgrowth of the fortunes of a rough sport that involves risk.

2. Especially if Moore files a suit before he has completely given up on returning to the ice, he can kiss goodbye his chances of ever playing in the NHL again.

Even if he wants another contract, he would be blackballed. It might even be subtle or somewhat unintentional, but he would be blackballed nonetheless. That kind of shunning can be rationalized as a prudent personnel decision, because it's not as if Moore was destined for a long-term, elite career anyway, even before he was injured.

Boucha said he wasn't given much of a chance during his brief stint with the Colorado Rockies in the 1976-77 season because he had filed the lawsuit. (Ironically, Boucha was Paiement's teammate, playing in the city where Moore later would knock Naslund out of the lineup for three games.) Boucha ended up in the WHA.

Polonich said he also "felt pressure" not to sue "because I was taking on the Establishment. Only my wife and I know what I went through -- the pain and the suffering, the disfigurement. So when I look back, yeah, I did the right thing."

Moreover, there could be fallout reprisals against Moore's younger brother, Dominic, a fellow Harvard grad and a Rangers prospect.

3. Does Moore want to be remembered as the guy who helped unleash a more lawsuits? Don't laugh. Yes, the legal cases have been few and far between in the NHL, but in this increasingly litigious era, it's not absurd to expect that a Moore lawsuit could encourage others -- lawyers and players -- to go to ridiculous extremes in going to court. Even if it's just because the coffee was too hot in the dressing room.

4. Sports don't belong in the courts. Period.

The choices are neither easy nor simple.

Personally, I've always believed in his last point. Sports don't belong in the courts. But this was different. It wasn't just a cheap shot. It was a premediated punch to the back of someone's head that really could have ended up killing Moore.

And I also think it's ridiculous to think that other NHLers (who, I feel are easily the most respectable athletes despite the violent nature of their sport) would start cheap-shotting Dominic Moore because his brother brought a suit against another hockey player.

[Maple Leafs]

I will say something that people may find distasteful: I am really getting tired of Steve Moore.

I don't buy the idea that Moore got what he deserved. I don't support Bertuzzi -- he stepped over the line, and his "I didn't mean to hurt you, Steve" press conference was one of the more pathetic sports moments in recent memory. I think he's an entertaining player to watch, but it wouldn't especially bother me if Moore sued him out of house and home. As I said at the time, it was Bertuzzi and not Moore who violated the code, so sue away.

But Steve Moore needs to stop with this sniveling victim routine. And yes, I use the word "routine" intentionally, implying that a lot of this is an act. I don't doubt that he was (and still is) seriously injured. I don't doubt that he's bitter. But I also don't doubt that, as an ivy-league educated person with a high-profile lawyer, he knows exactly how to work the media. And he is doing it masterfully.

Should he sue? Probably, at least if his career turns out to have been ended. He will be ostracized, and that's why he'll only do it as a last resort. But he also needs to realize this: if he sues Bertuzzi, and especially if he sues the Canucks and the NHL, they will defend themselves. And they'll defend themselves by pointing out the ugly truth that nobody seems to want to mention: Steve Moore probably wasn't going to have much of an NHL career.

He was a 25-year-old rookie (in a league where teenagers regularly make the jump to the pros). He was a fourth-liner, and the Naslund episode aside, not an especially good one. He wasn't a scoring threat, wasn't especially tough, and he managed to be a minus player on a very good team. He was a solid player, probably not a bad player, but players who can do what Steve Moore could do on the ice are a dime a dozen.

There's a reason it took him six years to make the NHL, there's a reason he was a fourth-liner, there's a reason he didn't have a contract past this year, and there's a reason the Avs haven't been especially interested in resigning him. He just isn't very good.

Nobody wants to say that now because, all that aside, he's still the victim here. And besides, it makes for a better story if we can talk about a promising career cut short in one brutal act, a childhood dream turned to ashes etc, etc. It ruins the mood a bit if you point out that there was a decent possibility that his career was ending this year anyways.

It will be fascinating to see if he and his lawyer can manage to sell their story to a judge as easily as they've sold it to the public.

[Draft Dodger]

I more or less with ML on this.

I don't think the criminal stuff has any place in this, and, frankly, I was a little bit disappointed that Moore and his lawyer were so outspoken against Bertuzzi's plea bargain agreement. I'm also kind of surprised, I think, that Moore doesn't even seem remotely receptive to letting Bertuzzi apologize. His perrogative, I guess.

Lawsuit? Yeah, I can see that. Moore probably isn't going to play again, is my guess. ML is right - he didn't exactly have a bright and prosperous NHL future ahead of him. But, that aside, I assume he's going to be feeling the physical effects of this injury for the rest of his life. If Bertuzzi had hit him (accidentally) with his car, and caused those injuries, Moore would certainly sue. I don't think this is any different.

[Solecismic]

I'll dissent here.

Moore stood up and fought earlier in that game, even though he's not a fighter. He understood the Canucks were angry, and he gave the system a chance to work the way all the goons say it's supposed to work.

What happened later was a mugging and had nothing to do with hockey, codes or justice of any kind. I hope Moore sues Bertuzzi into financial oblivion.

Hockey has been thriving with its limited audience and adolescent sense of codes and violence for decades now. Players and hard-core fans may only be learning this year that by refusing to adjust to the times, the sport has languished. Sure, the arenas are still moderately full. But put the NHL on television and it gets ratings better suited to women's field hockey.

I love the sport, when it's played by skilled puck handlers on an open rink.

I hate obstruction. I hate the macho attitudes that lead to players refusing to wear face shields. I hate the fighting and the infantile retorts from players that if you take the blood out of the game, you'll only get more blood. The NFL somehow manages to survive without punches being thrown. It polices the infants with stiff fines and suspensions.

Bertuzzi doesn't belong in the NHL. I don't care that Moore is a fourth-line hanger-on. What Bertuzzi did exposes the sport for what it has become.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I'll dissent here.

I'm guessing by the time this thread is done, your opinion will be of the majority.

[clintl]

FWIW, I don't think being a participant on a playing field entitles anyone to commit assault, and it shouldn't provide any shield from legal action against the perpetrators.

[Desnudo]

Considering that pain and suffering are a large part of any money that would be awarded, I'd say his lawsuit will have little to do with what his potential could have been in the NHL. I'm sure it'll all get settled long before it makes it to a courtroom though.

[Poli]

Who is Sue Bertuzzi?

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Hockey has been thriving with its limited audience and adolescent sense of codes and violence for decades now. Players and hard-core fans may only be learning this year that by refusing to adjust to the times, the sport has languished. Sure, the arenas are still moderately full. But put the NHL on television and it gets ratings better suited to women's field hockey.

And those poor ratings have far more to do with the sluggish, dead-puck style of play that we've seen in the last decade that with anything related to violence. The NHL may be less violent now than it has been at any point in it's history, and yet the game continues to fade into sports oblivion. Meanwhile, a sport like Nascar, where there is a legitimate chance of a participant actually dying at any given event, continues to grow and flourish.

My suggestion would be that the link between violence and popularity is probably an extremely weak one, if it exists at all. We've been hearing for years that the NHL was just one more rule change, one more attitude change, away from mass acceptance. And yet each year brings a new set of rules -- the instigator, automatic majors, automatic 10-game suspensions, more refereees -- and that mass acceptance still remains a pipe dream. Meanwhile, the deep thinkers at the head office spend their time worrying about the violence-related PR-issues instead of the game's many real problems, to the point where even long-time fans are turning away.

There are perfectly legitimate reasons to criticize the NHL's approach to on-ince violence and to argue for changes. But to try to tie it into the sport's declining popularity is wishful thinking. The problems run far deeper than that.

[Logan]

ELIMINATE THE RED LINE!!!!!

[Logan]

Dola...

I feel like that was the right type of message to make as my 666th post.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Considering that pain and suffering are a large part of any money that would be awarded, I'd say his lawsuit will have little to do with what his potential could have been in the NHL. I'm sure it'll all get settled long before it makes it to a courtroom though.

Remember that Moore and Bertuzzi are both Canadian, and the incident happened in Canada. I'm assuming (perhaps incorrectly) that the lawsuit would have to happen in Canada. Unlike the US, Canadian courts place far more weight on actual, provable losses than on theoretical or punitive damages.

Moore could certainly sue for his pain and suffering, but that would only go so far. Unless Moore ends up being permanently crippled or emotionally damaged, their best (and maybe only) chance at a jackpot ruling would be to demonstrate that the attack cost Moore millions in potential earnings.

[samifan24]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

I will say something that people may find distasteful: I am really getting tired of Steve Moore.

But Steve Moore needs to stop with this sniveling victim routine. And yes, I use the word "routine" intentionally, implying that a lot of this is an act. I don't doubt that he was (and still is) seriously injured. I don't doubt that he's bitter. But I also don't doubt that, as an ivy-league educated person with a high-profile lawyer, he knows exactly how to work the media. And he is doing it masterfully.

There's a reason it took him six years to make the NHL, there's a reason he was a fourth-liner, there's a reason he didn't have a contract past this year, and there's a reason the Avs haven't been especially interested in resigning him. He just isn't very good.

Nobody wants to say that now because, all that aside, he's still the victim here. And besides, it makes for a better story if we can talk about a promising career cut short in one brutal act, a childhood dream turned to ashes etc, etc. It ruins the mood a bit if you point out that there was a decent possibility that his career was ending this year anyways.

It will be fascinating to see if he and his lawyer can manage to sell their story to a judge as easily as they've sold it to the public.

Ok, I'll bite. We're both hockey fans and we've agreed before, but I absolutely disagree here. Yes, Moore is a Harvard grad, undoubtably bright, and a fourth line checking center who took six years to make the league, but he is the victim. Those six years were erased by Bertuzzi's actions and I agree with Jim here: Moore fought Cooke earlier in the game and probably thought the thing ended.

Bertuzzi's attack had nothing to do with hockey and everything to do with hockey's image of thuggery. Those who love the game, as you and I both do, understand that, but for the throngs of mainstream America who saw the clip on the news and read the headlines, they scoff and mock the NHL.

My point is this: Moore might not be an elite player, but that doesn't change the fact that he was the victim. Sure, maybe Moore doesn't last another year if it never happened and there was another year, but you've got to view Bertuzzi's shot outside of Moore's career trajectory.

Bertuzzi attacked Moore. Bertuzzi got what is, in my opinion, a lame sentence. Obviously I join you in condemning Bertuzzi for his actions, but how can you call Moore's statements a "routine" when he didn't even comment publicly for a second time about the event until just last week after Bertuzzi's sentence was announced? The man kept quiet the whole time. I hardly see that as "routine."

Moore should sue Bertuzzi because Bertuzzi damaged his career. Moore might never play again. Bertuzzi will. Regardless of whether Moore's a star, he worked hard for years to get to the NHL, thought he paid his penance by fighting Cooke, and then his whole career comes crashing down in one cheap shot. He stays quiet for months about the incident. How can you call that a "sniveling victim routine?" He is the victim, and he has every right to sue.

[miked]

Bertuzzi is a joke, the plea bargain is a joke and I hope Moore bankrupts him. Bertuzzi took the cheapest shot he could take and ended a man's career...nearly killing him or paralyzing him. How you could say Moore is just "playing" a victim is insane. Maybe you need to re-read his injuries and the cowardess of Bertuzzi's actions. If they go to court, it will be a no-brainer for any juror who isn't named Todd Bertuzzi.

[Maple Leafs]

I don't think there's much disagreement here over the actual attack. Moore didn't deserve it, he certainly is the victim, and Bertuzzi was especially cowardly for attacking him from behind. There's no sympathy for Bertuzzi anywhere here.

But that doesn't change the fact that Moore and his lawyer are engaging in some showmanship here, and in my mind that takes some of the shine off of Moore as a sympathetic figure.

If Moore sues him, he'll win (or settle), I don't think there's any question. But how much he'll win will depend on how much he can show that he lost. And I was pointing out that he may have a tough time demonstrating that his "lost career" is worth as much as people have made it out to be.

As far as Bertuzzi's sentence, I can't claim to be a legal expert. So I'll ask a legitimate question: what have the courts done in similar assault cases? If the attacker has no criminal record, is reasonably well respected in the community, has expressed remorse and is willing to plead guilty, would he normally go straight to jail on the first offence? My guess is that Bertuzzi got essentially the same treatment as most people would get.

(And while it may be splitting hairs, can we get past the overly-dramatic "nearly killing him" stuff? Moore was certainly hurt badly -- with broken bones in his neck, a serious concussion and bad cuts to his face. But there's been zero suggestion that Moore's life was ever in danger or that he was at risk of paralysis. So let's resist the urge to spice the story up.)

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I'll dissent here.

Moore stood up and fought earlier in that game, even though he's not a fighter. He understood the Canucks were angry, and he gave the system a chance to work the way all the goons say it's supposed to work.

What happened later was a mugging and had nothing to do with hockey, codes or justice of any kind. I hope Moore sues Bertuzzi into financial oblivion.

Hockey has been thriving with its limited audience and adolescent sense of codes and violence for decades now. Players and hard-core fans may only be learning this year that by refusing to adjust to the times, the sport has languished. Sure, the arenas are still moderately full. But put the NHL on television and it gets ratings better suited to women's field hockey.

I love the sport, when it's played by skilled puck handlers on an open rink.

I hate obstruction. I hate the macho attitudes that lead to players refusing to wear face shields. I hate the fighting and the infantile retorts from players that if you take the blood out of the game, you'll only get more blood. The NFL somehow manages to survive without punches being thrown. It polices the infants with stiff fines and suspensions.

Best exposition of NHL hockey I've ever seen. There is NO legitmate reason for the fights in hockey, and as much as I've tried to watch/follow it in the past, the juvenile fighting makes me stop.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

I don't think there's much disagreement here over the actual attack. Moore didn't deserve it, he certainly is the victim, and Bertuzzi was especially cowardly for attacking him from behind. There's no sympathy for Bertuzzi anywhere here.

But that doesn't change the fact that Moore and his lawyer are engaging in some showmanship here, and in my mind that takes some of the shine off of Moore as a sympathetic figure.

If Moore sues him, he'll win (or settle), I don't think there's any question. But how much he'll win will depend on how much he can show that he lost. And I was pointing out that he may have a tough time demonstrating that his "lost career" is worth as much as people have made it out to be.

As far as Bertuzzi's sentence, I can't claim to be a legal expert. So I'll ask a legitimate question: what have the courts done in similar assault cases? If the attacker has no criminal record, is reasonably well respected in the community, has expressed remorse and is willing to plead guilty, would he normally go straight to jail on the first offence? My guess is that Bertuzzi got essentially the same treatment as most people would get.

(And while it may be splitting hairs, can we get past the overly-dramatic "nearly killing him" stuff? Moore was certainly hurt badly -- with broken bones in his neck, a serious concussion and bad cuts to his face. But there's been zero suggestion that Moore's life was ever in danger or that he was at risk of paralysis. So let's resist the urge to spice the story up.)

Well, first of all, any time there's damage to veterbrae, there is definitely a risk of paralysis, whether or not he was really that close is up to debate. Suffice it to say if he had landed one inch differently, the outcome could've been very different.

My guess, if I ran up to a guy on the street unprovoked and punched him in the head while driving him into the cement breaking veterbrae and doing other types of damage, I don't know how much of a deal I'd get with thousands of witnesses. To say he got a fair penalty is a joke because he definitely made out better than 75-80% of people facing similar charges most likely. The remorse and apology did nothing for me...he meant to do it and the only reason he was apologizing was because of the public outcry and impending legal issues.

[sabotai]

I guess no matter how much of a leap it is, people will continue to tie this action in with the fighting and the "code". I guess they don't realize that the people who are "loyalist" to the code are more pissed off about what Bertuzzi did than they are. But, you wouldn't know it by listening to the media. I find it interesting that people who admittably do not watch hockey at all seem to think they know exactly what the NHL needs to change or do to appeal to the mass audience.

Maybe hockey just isn't for the mass audience, no matter how you change it. No matter what you do, soccer will not be one of the "Big 4" in the US, and neither will Hockey. It's just not a mass appeal sport to the US and IMO, no matter how you change it to appeal to the masses, it never will be. If you took the fighting out (if that's possible), the people who say they don't watch because of the fighting will most likely find that they just don't like the sport anyway. I find it hard to beleive that something that occurs on average once in half the games and takes at most 10 seconds to happen is the one and only thing keeping people from watching a game that takes as long as a football game or a baseball game.

Simply put, I don't see this as something that hurt the NHL's chance at "mass appeal" because that's just something the NHL doesn't have a chance at. I just don't think that ice hockey, not matter how you change it, is something most US citizens will get interested in. The reason the NHL has been dying is because thye are trying to change it to force it to appela to the masses. The NHL would be fine if they would just let hockey be hockey and not some commercialized hockey-lite. Not only are they not gaining more audience, they are driving away the hardcore fans.

(/end rant)

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by miked

My guess, if I ran up to a guy on the street unprovoked and punched him in the head while driving him into the cement breaking veterbrae and doing other types of damage, I don't know how much of a deal I'd get with thousands of witnesses.

Not meaning to pick on you miked, but I'm getting tired of seeing people try to make comparisons with what would happen off the ice. You could say the same thing about checking someone, unprovoked, into a wall. That's assault too. And so is grabbing someone and slamming him to the ground, but football players are allowed to do. You can't just take a ball and throw it at someone like they do in baseball. And you can't run into a crowd and start throwing punches like they do in basketball.

I think Moore does deserve something for his pain and suffering, and I most certainly do not think Bertuzzi should be kicked out of the NHL or thrown in jail. My worry is if Moore sues, we'll see a lot of lawsuits occuring when a player gets injured because of an illegal act. We might see receivers start sueing defensive backs when they get injured because of a late hit. Or QBs doing it to defensive players who injured them on a roughing the passer call. Batters sueing pitchers when they get injured because a bean ball. Basketball players sueing....anyway. Slipperly slope, yes, but considering lawsuits these days, I say it's at least plausable. All it really needs is one high profile case to set off the spark.

[Solecismic]

I expected some anger from the hard-core NHLers at what I posted. I am a casual hockey fan. Generally, I don't watch a single complete game until the real season begins in April.

(That's another serious problem with the NHL - the only suspense during the regular season is which one or two of the eight mediocre teams in the league won't make the playoffs - kind of like if week 17 in the NFL lasted for three months, with all the focus on Carolina, New Orleans and Jacksonville).

I enjoy the sport. But it's unique in that about 10-15% of its players are chosen for no other reason than their skills in bare-knuckle boxing. Hard-core fans swear that we just don't understand. Yet their arguments just don't pass muster. The goons are always breaking their own "codes". Many of the great players of the game are reduced to shadows of their former selves (see Kariya, Paul and Lindros, Eric) because they've taken too many shots to the head. Which is exactly what the goons supposedly prevent.

And here, yes, we very nearly did see a fatality on the ice. Ask a doctor what often happens when a neck is broken.

You can't compare gooning to late hits on the quarterback or elbows on the hardwood. In the NFL, late hits are analyzed by the league office, and fines result. If the fines don't work, suspensions result. You see very little of that in hockey. There's extreme tolerance for stickwork. Someone gets cut, it's a five-minute major. If it's close and late and that five minutes might actually impact the result, the penalty is usually reduced to a two-minute minor. This does nothing to stop players from initiating contact with their sticks up.

Like many of us, I became a sports fan because of my dad. He loved sports. He was a casual fan of everything, didn't follow the batting averages or the yardage records. He took me to Michigan football and basketball games from the time I was 3 years old. We went to Detroit Tigers games two or three times a year. We even went to a Detroit Lions game or two when I asked, though the NFL has always been an expensive ticket, and we didn't have a lot of money.

My dad would not take me to hockey games. I used to watch Hockey Night in Canada often when I was little. But if I asked to go to a game, he'd say no. He didn't approve of the fighting, didn't want me to see that up close.

I'm sure that's not fully representative of all of your fathers, but to my dad, the fighting made professional hockey a sideshow sport, not appropriate for inclusion in the mainstream sporting world.

Hockey is a great sport, when players are allowed to skate and pass. To me, the violence goes hand in hand with the constant obstruction and the tiny rinks and the constant beating down of any player who shows any real skill for the game. If the sport were cleaned up, it might open up the game to a new generation of kids.

[Abe Sargent]

The NHL needs Moore to sue. They need to get all of this stuff out in the open. They need to let sportswriters and fans know that this is simply untolerable. The NHL has a history of such attacks, this was hardly the first (it happens every couple of years). Some victims have sued, some have not, but this is simply and clearly too far.

Imagine someone saying that they were going to bitch-smack you into next year on the 6 o'clock news. You take it as mere blustering, yet at the next business confernce, during a particularly heated debate, he cold-cocks you and knocks you out. Wouldn't you be amazingly pissed if the judicial system simply patted him on the wrist and let him go? Wouldn't you want to sue?

Now imagine that your injuries were much more severe.


-Anxiety

[TroyF]

But that doesn't change the fact that Moore and his lawyer are engaging in some showmanship here, and in my mind that takes some of the shine off of Moore as a sympathetic figure.

You keep saying this and I just don't understand it.

Showmanship? I live in Denver and can tell you Moore didn't talk about the hit, the rehab or anything else to the media sinse directly after the incident happened.

By all accounts, he wanted the courts to do it. He was looking forward to getting the chance to speak in a courtroom about what happened. The chance was astonishingly taken away from him and Bertuzzi was given a wrist slap.

What in the hell is Moore supposed to do after that? Continue to be quiet and pretend it never happened? Here is a newsflash. . . He's ANGRY. It's not called showmanship, it's called FRUSTRATION. He feels (and rightfully so) that Bertuzzi was not punished enough.

So I ask again, what do you want him to do? He's doing exactly what any of us would do. Let it be known that the decision was both disgusting and weak. That if the Canadian courts don't want to take care of it, that him and his attorney WILL seek justice in other ways.

I hope he bankrupts that son of a bitch. I wish the courts had taken care of it, but they weaseled their way out of it.

It's bad enough that Moore had to deal with the cheap shot, the rehab, and the courts doing what they did. . . now he gets to deal with people saying he's grandstanding for having the audacity to comment on something he feels is a travesty.

[Cydney]

Keeping quiet can be a form of showmanship itself don't forget.

Controversy surrounding fighting in hockey is something that has confused me for a very long time. Why are people so wrapped up in the overt nature of the violence in hockey? Are they so blind to subversive violence in other sports? Personally I'd rather have a fist thrown at my head than a 95 mph heater, call me crazy.

Now, I'm a pacifist, so don't get me wrong. I don't particularly enjoy fights, in fact whenever they occur I use the opportunity to make use of the facilities, or prepare some sort of additional nourishment. That said, I fully understand its place in the game. It sends a message, just like that ball that's a little inside, or the hit that's a fraction of a second too late. It should be punished, it's an offence against the rules, but I really don't feel that it should be completely removed.

Concerning popularity of the game in the US, I suspect alot of it has to do with presentation style. Being Canadian, I have an affinity for HNIC, so I may be biased, but I really think they have it right. Hockey is not a game well suited to the Monday Night Football presentation, and does not afford the pomp and splendour of such broadcasts. More than anything (and I could be wrong, maybe this has been changed since last I saw) the American sports networks need to adjust their cameras. Better positioning allows a greater sense of the flow of the game.

For the record, concussions affecting the careers of players like Eric Lindros and Paul Kariya, were not the result of fighting, illegal stickwork, or similar such nonsense. The vast majority of these injuries are the result instead of largely (though certainly not exclusively) legal hits. Truth is, equipment has developed far beyond necessity, and may be causing more injuries than it prevents (those familiar with the classic Don Cherry elbow pad moment will know what I mean).

As far as the initial intent of the thread is concerned, I must admit I'm torn. Steve Moore was a marginal player. If he plays again it will be out of pity, not skill. Yes he worked hard to get to where he was/is. However, the exact cause of the injury (be it the suckerpunch or the resulting pileup) is impossible to determine (and btw I fully recognize that the one predicated the other). I don't think it's a civil matter. The analogies that have been mentioned are invalid. A car accident cannot be compared to an incident during a hockey game, period. Nor can we say anything about anyone randomly punching me in the head on the street. The event was not random, it occurred in a context, wherein a certain waiver of liability is acknowledged by participation. The question is whether or not that includes civil liability, and I'm afraid I just can't answer that.

[TroyF]

wherein a certain waiver of liability is acknowledged by participation.

Ridiculous.

A certain waiver of liability doesn't include a cheap shot to the back of the head.

I compete in Tae Kwon Doe tournaments. I risk major injury everytime. A combination of fighting a better competitor with a major mistake (ie: lowering my head when I shouldn't) could result in disaster.

But there are rules to these tournaments. No punching/kicking in the back. No punches allowed in the face. (kicking the head is legal as I've found out numerous times)

If I get a kick to the stomach that knocks the wind out of me and a drop to a knee and the other competitor takes that chance to do a full spinning roundhouse or backfist to my head, that goes well beyond the "implied waiver"

I know I can get hurt, but just because I stop onto the mat, it does not give the person across from me freen reign to do whatever he pleases. He must play within the confines of the rules of the sport. He has no right to punch me in the back of the neck and jump on me after doing so.

When Bertuzzi chased down Moore from behind and drove his fist into the back of his head and neck, he ceased to be a hockey player. He became a common thug on the street corner. And I have zero doubt he'll pay big when he loses the civil suit.

[samifan24]

Originally Posted by Cydney

For the record, concussions affecting the careers of players like Eric Lindros and Paul Kariya, were not the result of fighting, illegal stickwork, or similar such nonsense. The vast majority of these injuries are the result instead of largely (though certainly not exclusively) legal hits.

Kariya missed the Olympics because of a Gary Suter cheap shot crosscheck to the back of the head. Kariya's never been the same since. Granted, the same can't be said for all injuries, but Kariya's one example of an illegal hit souring a career.

[samifan24]

Dola-

I'm tired of hearing how Steve Moore's just a marginal 4th-line checking center. The point is that his career's been ruined because of Bertuzzi. If Moore were a star player, there'd be far more outrage league-wide. Moore might have been an NHL 4th liner, but he was an NHLer. Just because he wasn't a marquee name doesn't make the incident any less outrageous.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Cydney

Keeping quiet can be a form of showmanship itself don't forget.

Controversy surrounding fighting in hockey is something that has confused me for a very long time. Why are people so wrapped up in the overt nature of the violence in hockey? Are they so blind to subversive violence in other sports? Personally I'd rather have a fist thrown at my head than a 95 mph heater, call me crazy.

Now, I'm a pacifist, so don't get me wrong. I don't particularly enjoy fights, in fact whenever they occur I use the opportunity to make use of the facilities, or prepare some sort of additional nourishment. That said, I fully understand its place in the game. It sends a message, just like that ball that's a little inside, or the hit that's a fraction of a second too late. It should be punished, it's an offence against the rules, but I really don't feel that it should be completely removed.

You flagrantly throw a 95 mph fastball at someones head, you get kicked out of the game and fined. You hit someone a little late in football you get flagged. If you take a swing, you are thrown out of the game and fined. You take a swing in hockey, you get to sit for five minutes and have people tell you it is "an important part of the game." Bull. I'm not taking my kids to a game that says "if the other team aggrevates you, just take a swing at someone."

[Cydney]

Okay, some good thoughtful and thought provoking responses to my statements, I like that.
First, I think the waiver of liability does indeed include a recognition, though certainly not always an acceptance, of the fact that one is partaking in what is, lets be honest, a dangerous sport with, and this is key, other people. Any time people are involved, there is almost certainly going to be someone who will go one step too far, or take the easy cheap route, aiming to injure or otherwise disable. This is why rules exist and must absolutely be enforced. Here enters the problem; the NHL, in recent years, has not been willing to engage the players union to ensure that the game is played properly. Suspensions, though not rare by any means (in my opinion, comparison to other hockey leagues not other sports) are inconsistent, mainly because the two sides will not agree on minimums.
As for Kariya not being the same since the, yes I know it, cheap hit, any hockey fan can also point out that the league itself was in a period of serious transition. Kariya's game was based almost entirely on speed. Take that away, you know, with all the clutching and the grabbing and the illegal stickwork (remember those rules?), and he's left with very little. I will not deny that the concussion may have slowed him a bit, made him a bit more hesitant, but having seen him play, I suspect he could still dominate any game that's a little more open.
Mentioning that Steve Moore was nothing more than a fourth liner, and likely would not have been more, is not (and here I presume to know others' intentions) meant to slight his accomplishment in the least. Rather, it is meant to demonstrate that, on the whole (and please don't go spitting out dozens of exceptions, I know who they are) 4th line checkers will not have careers spanning the course of more than two seasons. We (by which I mean I of course) are only suggesting that maybe the emphasis should be taken off of the "ruined career" and placed on health issues, mental, physical, whatever. I really don't think anyone should find that offensive.
Finally, fighting in hockey is penalized with a five minute major (leaving aside for the moment the instigator of course). Why should there be more? The vast majority of fights do not, I repeat, do not result in injuries. More injuries occur(red) due to pucks flying over the glass into the stands than from fights (before the netting protected us all you understand). If you want a cause that will reduce injuries in hockey (assuming that's anyone's true motivation), then how about touch icing? If it's violence you're about, then I'm in. I don't like seeing sticks swung, or elbows up. But I truly disagree that fighting is a problem, suckerpunches yes, fighting no. The latter occurs between two consenting adults (barring the occasional brawl of course).
What Bertuzzi did was wrong, and deserved every punishment levied upon him so far. There is a very real possibility that he'll never play in the NHL (if it ever goes again) again. But it is NOT a civil matter, plain and simple. I wouldn't think any different if it was a quarterback hurt by a late hit.

[TroyF]

What Bertuzzi did was wrong, and deserved every punishment levied upon him so far. There is a very real possibility that he'll never play in the NHL (if it ever goes again) again. But it is NOT a civil matter, plain and simple. I wouldn't think any different if it was a quarterback hurt by a late hit.
Reply With Quote

Then what does Moore do? Who gives him what is owed to him? The league?

That's a bunch of BS. Bertuzzi engaged in a pathetic, cowardly act. Just because he did it on the ice doesn't lesson that fact and it doesn't let him escape from any damages caused by this.

If the NHL/Colorado Avalanche wanted to sue Bertuzzi for the medical bills they'd be well within their right IMO.

Yeah, there is a fine line between civil courts and sports. I don't want to see every late hit challenged or every injured player going to court. Thing is, I won't. This case is special in a lot of ways.

One: This wasn't a late hit or something that went with the normal flow of the game. This was a guy who chased down a defenseless player from behind and nearly killed him. Two: This was premeditated. All of the evidence points to this. A late hit on a QB is kind of difficult to prove that, in this case it's easy.

No way Bertuzzi gets to slide from this because he did it on the ice and not in the parking lot. No way.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by TroyF

No way Bertuzzi gets to slide from this because he did it on the ice and not in the parking lot. No way.

He didn't. A $500,000 fine from the NHL was the result along with a suspension that technically is still going on. When (if) the NHL starts up again, Bertuzzi will likely still be on suspension for a length to be determined at that time. The NHL also fined the Canucks franchise $250,000.

To me, a good solution would be for Moore not to sue and the NHL to give Moore the money they collected from bertuzzi and the Canucks. (Does Moore have medical bills? I would think the NHLPA and the NHL have pretty good medical insureance.)

[samifan24]

Originally Posted by Cydney

As for Kariya not being the same since the, yes I know it, cheap hit, any hockey fan can also point out that the league itself was in a period of serious transition. Kariya's game was based almost entirely on speed. Take that away, you know, with all the clutching and the grabbing and the illegal stickwork (remember those rules?), and he's left with very little. I will not deny that the concussion may have slowed him a bit, made him a bit more hesitant, but having seen him play, I suspect he could still dominate any game that's a little more open.

Mentioning that Steve Moore was nothing more than a fourth liner, and likely would not have been more, is not (and here I presume to know others' intentions) meant to slight his accomplishment in the least. Rather, it is meant to demonstrate that, on the whole (and please don't go spitting out dozens of exceptions, I know who they are) 4th line checkers will not have careers spanning the course of more than two seasons. We (by which I mean I of course) are only suggesting that maybe the emphasis should be taken off of the "ruined career" and placed on health issues, mental, physical, whatever. I really don't think anyone should find that offensive.

Ok, well first of all, I agree with you that Kariya could still dominate a game that's wide-open, except for the fact that few games are wide-open any more due to the clutching and grabbing and obstruction which you mentioned above. Anyway, my point about the Suter hit on Kariya wasn't that it single-handedly ruined his career, but that the single hit (which, as far as I remember, went unpunished and without league action) contributed to Kariya's downfall from the league's elite.

If the league took action against players who run other players, as opposed to leaving it up to the players on the ice, the league wouldn't have these problems. As Jim mentioned above, the NFL is a similarly violent contact sport which has little problems policing its players. Why is the NHL so different?

As for Moore I think you're splitting hairs here. Yes, it's probably true that most 4th line centers' careers last around two years in the league, but his has been cut short by Bertuzzi's actions. You say the emphasis should be taken off of Moore's ruined career and placed upon his myriad health issues. Moore would not have said health issues were it not for the Bertuzzi hit, hence his career has been ruined by his health issues. My point is that you can't seperate Moore's ruined career from his health issues because his health issues are the sole reason for his ruined career.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by samifan24

Ok, well first of all, I agree with you that Kariya could still dominate a game that's wide-open, except for the fact that few games are wide-open any more due to the clutching and grabbing and obstruction which you mentioned above. Anyway, my point about the Suter hit on Kariya wasn't that it single-handedly ruined his career, but that the single hit (which, as far as I remember, went unpunished and without league action) contributed to Kariya's downfall from the league's elite.

The Suter/Kariya incident certainly was a cheap shot. That said, I'm not sure how it really fits into the discussion of fighting. It was a stick foul, and Suter certainly isn't one of those players who wouldn't have a job without fighting. If anything, Suter was exactly the sort of player who got dirtier and dirtier throughout his career as fighting was being reduced.

(And by the way, Suter was suspended, although only for four games.)

Originally Posted by samifan24

My point is that you can't seperate Moore's ruined career from his health issues because his health issues are the sole reason for his ruined career.

Not if we're being brutally honest. His health issues are the reason that he can't play right now and may not be able to play any time soon. But the bottom line is that if his career is over, it will be because no team wanted to invest the time it will take to get him back to 100%.

The cruel truth is that if he was a star, we wouldn't be considering this a career ending injury -- we'd be talking about a serious injury and a potential lost season. But because Moore wasn't guaranteed to even have a career after the season, that lost year translates into a lost career for him. That's unfair and it's unfortunate, but it's reality. It may sound like splitting hairs, but I think if you're going to crucify Bertuzzi over the damage he caused you have to be honest about what the damage really was.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sabotai

He didn't. A $500,000 fine from the NHL was the result along with a suspension that technically is still going on. When (if) the NHL starts up again, Bertuzzi will likely still be on suspension for a length to be determined at that time. The NHL also fined the Canucks franchise $250,000.

To me, a good solution would be for Moore not to sue and the NHL to give Moore the money they collected from bertuzzi and the Canucks. (Does Moore have medical bills? I would think the NHLPA and the NHL have pretty good medical insureance.)

The NHLPA and NHL insurance is what I'm talking about. No, Moore doesn't have any bills, but if the NHL demanded Bertuzzi pay for Moore's hospital bills, they'd have every right to do so.

And in terms of what happened to Moore, Bertuzzi got off scott free. He can walk into a room, pick up his kids and give them a hug. He can take a jog down to the corner store. He can continue to work out while he's awaiting for his suspension to be lifted.

Moore can do none of those things. Moore's very chance at ever making another check as an NHL player may have been ended.

Not if we're being brutally honest. His health issues are the reason that he can't play right now and may not be able to play any time soon. But the bottom line is that if his career is over, it will be because no team wanted to invest the time it will take to get him back to 100%.

The cruel truth is that if he was a star, we wouldn't be considering this a career ending injury -- we'd be talking about a serious injury and a potential lost season.

This is just more of the ridiculous type of comments I've seen in this thread. Moore doesn't have a potential lost season. Do you know anything about the injury? Steve Moore is still wearing a neck to chest neck brace ten months after the attack. He's not even close to STARTING rehab yet, much less get back on the ice.

Superstar, fourth winger, whatever. . . Moore lost/will lose two seasons MINIMUM to this hit. And when we keep talking about his career, lets be sure to keep in mind the NHL isn't the only paying hockey league in the universe. Even were Moore to drop back to the minors, he has another five to ten years of play before he is forced into retirement. Granted, the money is significantly lower, but it's still money and it's still money lost because of Bertuzzi's actions.

[samifan24]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

(And by the way, Suter was suspended, although only for four games.)

Very well. I stand corrected. I agree that Suter was one of many players who became increasingly cheap throughout his career, but why? If the league policed its players at an acceptable level, Suter & others like him would never have been allowed to ruin the game by injuring marquee players like Kariya.

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Not if we're being brutally honest. His health issues are the reason that he can't play right now and may not be able to play any time soon. But the bottom line is that if his career is over, it will be because no team wanted to invest the time it will take to get him back to 100%.

Neither you nor I cannot say that Moore would/would not have a job were it not for Bertuzzi's cheap shot, although we can all agree that his health problems have contributed to his current state. Any further speculation on Moore's career trajectory is pointless now, especially given that he has not even begun rehab and the NHL isn't even playing.

[Warhammer]

OK, I gotta weigh in on this. I began following hockey around 1990. The game seemed to be much cleaner, anyone who got a cheap shot in on someone was thrashed soon after by an enforcer.

Then the NHL began to crack down on fighting. It was bad for the sport's image. Suddenly, stars began to fall like flies to cheap shots. It gradually got worse, until this incident occurs.

My feeling is this, sure the NHL can crack down on cheap shots, but there are tons of things dirty players can do that cannot be seen by refs, or on the cameras. That is why you need enforcers. Sure, they may not be pretty, but they were effective in policing the game. My support is how players got dirtier and dirtier as the fighting crackdowns became more severe.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by samifan24

Any further speculation on Moore's career trajectory is pointless now, especially given that he has not even begun rehab and the NHL isn't even playing.

Fair enough. My only argument (and the way this whole tangent got started) was that the speculation will be absolutely front-and-center at a trial should Moore decide to sue Bertuzzi for lost future earnings, and that we should be realistic when discussing it.

[miked]

Anyone remember the Dale Hunter hit on Turgeon (I think it was Turgeon). I forgot the magnitude of the injury, but I believe it nearly ended Turngeon's career (broken back or something) and Hunter got a huge suspension. Maybe since suspensions and fines don't seem to curtail this sort of dirty play, bringing suits to the courts will.

And I was comparing it to an off the ice incident to show how crappy the penalty was. My point was that just because it happened during a PRO game, he got off cheap. I doubt I would in an amateur or pickup game.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by miked

Anyone remember the Dale Hunter hit on Turgeon (I think it was Turgeon). I forgot the magnitude of the injury, but I believe it nearly ended Turngeon's career (broken back or something) and Hunter got a huge suspension.

Hunter was suspended 21 games, which is still one of the biggest suspensions of all time. Turgeon wasn't seriously hurt to the extent that his career was threatened, but he did miss the rest of the Islanders playoff run that year so it had a major impact.

As far as what would happen to you in a pickup game, I can honestly say I don't know what the penalty would be. My guess is still that people here are overestimating what the courts would do with a first-offender, but I'll admit I don't know it for a fact. (Just keep in mind that if you do what Bertuzzi did in a pickup game, you won't lose your job and be asked to cough up a half-million bucks before the case even goes to trial.)

[gtmarc]

Well, I can't resist this one.

Last year was my first winter in Denver, so while I'd followed hockey and the Atlanta teams for years, it was my first season really closely following a home team that was a serious contender.

The game in Vancouver was the first time I'd seen one of these serious incidents, in a game I was watching closely (as opposed to seeing it as a sports center highlight). I don't know how Canuck fans reacted to that, but the play made me sick when I saw it happen.

From the way Moore went straight to the ice, I've never had any thought he was faking a serious injury. Watching that game when it happened, you gasped as soon as you saw him hit the ice. And when you saw the pool of blood that poured out of his face.

I've always thought the rule in a case like this (when a player commits a deliberate act against the rules that injures someone) is that the player shouldn't be allowed back until the player he injured comes back. When Steve Moore laces up hockey skates again, that's when they should talk about Bertuzzi coming back, not before.

Actually, I think a civil suit is appropriate. The act was so far outside the rules of what's allowed in hockey, I think it should have been appropriate for a criminal case and a civil case is legitimate. This isn't for every injury in hockey. If someone gets hurt bad by the skate of a tumbling player, or an inadvertant high-stick, those are the sorts of risks you acknowledge when you go on the rink. But when someone goes completely outside the rules, and swings a stick at someone's head, or in this case charges them down from behind while throwing a sucker punch at the back of the head, I think then its completely legitimate that the courts get involved.

BTW, the $250k fine on Vancouver was largely for Coach Crawford's comments and lack of control of his team. He led all the talk about retalliation get way out of hand.

BTW^2, you don't know what sort of career Moore might have had. Hockey is a sport where a scrappy, energetic player who doesn't have as much talent can have a long successful career in the league. There's always a few of those guys holding down spots in the league, and usually cup contenders seem to have at least one. Watching the season up to that point, I'd really started to like Steve Moore. He was fun to watch, and in watching a lot of Avs games, you started to notice him when he got a shift. Given how flat the Avs looked in some of the playoff games, I think they could have used him to help get the team going.

BTW^3, I know I'm an Avs fan, but I didn't think the hit Moore put on Naslund was all that bad. If I remember correctly, Naslund had just let go of the puck and wasn't paying any attention to Moore. Moore only changed direction a little to drill him. I'm always sorry to see a good player miss games when he's hurt, but the league watched that tape I'm sure and didn't see anything too bad. I thought Crawford and the Canucks went way overboard with all their talk about it.

[Maple Leafs]

According to the Fan 590 in Toronto, Moore has indeed sued Bertuzzi (although, apparently, not the NHL).

The fact that the story is breaking the day after the season was cancelled is, no doubt, pure coincidence.

[SoxWin]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

OK, I gotta weigh in on this. I began following hockey around 1990. The game seemed to be much cleaner, anyone who got a cheap shot in on someone was thrashed soon after by an enforcer.

Then the NHL began to crack down on fighting. It was bad for the sport's image. Suddenly, stars began to fall like flies to cheap shots. It gradually got worse, until this incident occurs.

My feeling is this, sure the NHL can crack down on cheap shots, but there are tons of things dirty players can do that cannot be seen by refs, or on the cameras. That is why you need enforcers. Sure, they may not be pretty, but they were effective in policing the game. My support is how players got dirtier and dirtier as the fighting crackdowns became more severe.

Agreed 100% It's open season on star players and has been for years. 10 years ago, when Moore hit Naslund a few weeks prior to the whole mess at GM place, Brookbank or May would have kicked the crap out of him and it would have been over.

As a Canucks fan, I hate to see Todd get sued and or suspended, but I really can't argue against it either. There's any number of parties who could also be held partially responsible, but this one's on Bert.

[Maple Leafs]

Ouch.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=115695

Markus Naslund blasts Moore lawsuit

Canadian Press
2/21/2005

Markus Naslund has weighed in on the Steve Moore lawsuit.

The Canucks captain told the Vancouver Sun that the lawsuit against Todd Bertuzzi and others is a money grab by a player who simply isnt good enough to make a living in the NHL.

"He's suing everyone so he can make money," Naslund told the Vancouver Sun from Sweden. "I've got no respect for him at all.

"Even talking to his teammates, it seems evident he doesn't have a lot of support in hockey."

Moore has been unable to play since Bertuzzi sucker-punched him during a game in Vancouver on March 8. He sustained cracked vertebrae and a concussion, from which he continues to suffer.

"This is just a guy who's trying to hit a home run (financially)," Naslund said to the Sun. "Someone who wasn't good enough to play.

"I'm not saying what (Bertuzzi did) was right. But if it was me, I'd be doing everything I could to get back and play and show everyone the character I have . . . instead of trying to sue everyone."

Moore, now an unrestricted free agent, is suing Canucks Bertuzzi and Brad May, Vancouver coach Marc Crawford, former general manager Brian Burke and the hockey club for unspecified damages.

Moore claims the defendants conspired to injure him.

"This isn't about the hit," Naslund told the paper of his feelings toward Moore. "Hockey players take hits and give hits."

Bertuzzi pleaded guilty in December to a charge of assault causing bodily harm and received a conditional discharge. He remains suspended indefinitely by the NHL.

[Maple Leafs]

And in response, Damien Cox in today's Toronto Star absolutely rips Naslund...

Naslund drops gloves, throws cheap shot

DAMIEN COX
SPORTS COLUMNIST

In Markus Naslund's world, only elite hockey players have rights.

Steve Moore, to Naslund, only had the right to be a victim.

And certainly not to make a fuss about it.

"He's suing everyone so he can make money," Naslund told a Vancouver paper. "I've got no respect for him at all.

"This is just a guy who's trying to hit a home run (financially). Someone who wasn't good enough to play.

"I'm not saying what (Bertuzzi did) was right. But if it was me, I'd be doing everything I could to get back and play and show everyone the character I have."

Oh, don't worry. We now are keenly aware of the "character" possessed by Naslund.

This is the same captain of the Canucks who hid behind the brutes on his own team after being nailed with a clean hit, asked them to go out and make like the dogs of war so he could keep his saintly hands clean.

Has a little Tonya Harding-Jeff Gillooly scent to it, wouldn't you say?

This is a hockey player, based on his words yesterday, who looks down his nose at the marginal players in the game, the grunts, checkers and pluggers who have to scratch and claw just to get on the active roster of an NHL team for a few games.

Those Naslund judges as not "good enough to play" certainly don't deserve the same consideration as, say, he does. People like Moore should not have the temerity to bodycheck those above him in the food chain.

This Naslund is a "leader" who allowed the foaming-at-the-mouth lynch mob to get way out of control in the Canucks dressing room, ultimately helping to create the scenario that left Moore with a broken neck, Bertuzzi suspended indefinitely and the Canucks out millions of dollars in post-season revenue.

That Moore's career has been destroyed by Bertuzzi's attack, and that his health may have been permanently damaged, matters not to the Scandinavian, who we can only assume would never had made his comments without first thoroughly examining Moore's health charts.

That Bertuzzi pleaded guilty in criminal court to intentionally assaulting Moore was also similarly not worth consideration to Naslund.

He figures Moore should just suck it up. Recovering lost wages and opportunity through a lawsuit would never be done by a manly sort.

Just go and steal somebody else's job during the lockout like the rest of us, Naslund seems to instruct.

It's the hypocrisy that really gets you.

On one hand, Naslund takes shots at NHL commissioner Gary Bettman for the indecency of trying to design a system that will cap NHL playing incomes at an average of about $1.3 million per season. The Swedish profile-in-courage then takes shots at an injured athlete who can't even exercise because of his severe injuries, suggesting he's just out for the money.

Gotta love a guy who suggests that if he'd suffered a broken neck he'd make like John Wayne.

Moreover, this is the reverse juice on the hockey slang of the 1970s when newcomers were labelled "chicken Swedes" by nasty Canadian brutes.

Now it's the Swedes deriding the manhood of the Canadians.

That Naslund questions Moore's character is indeed the topper. After all, at least Borje Salming stood up for himself. Naslund could have sought revenge against Moore himself last winter, could have dropped his gloves, lifted his protective visor and given the Harvard grad the old Ingemar Johansson one-two.

Instead, he let Brad May and Bertuzzi play judge and jury while he kept his Lady Byng tiara in place.

Now the lawsuit is on, and the evidence sure looks compelling that there was a conspiracy to take Moore's livelihood away from him.

Sadly, one name is missing from the list of defendants.

Would love to see the name of Markus Naslund added.

What a stupid, stupid man.