This weekend, my travel hockey team went to Raleigh, NC to play two games against the Raleigh Storm. We tied both games 5-5, and 3-3. Although they were just exhibition games, they got very intense. They included a couple large scrums in front of the net and a lot of heavy hitting. However, as we were leaving, a we walked by a couple of the players from the other team. They gave us high fives and told us we played well. We talked to them for a little while and they said they would see us in a couple of weeks when they came up to play us.
We left feeling satisfied with how we had played, but even more, who we had played. One of the things that I love about hockey is that in general the people who play it are descent and kind, and they respect their opponent more than in most other sports. I find it incredible that players can go at each other, often brutally for an hour and a half, and then afterwards, act like old friends.
As we were leaving, they jokingly called after us, "We love you." We laughed and called back. But I realized that although it was a joke, it was kind of true. Our mutual love for the sport creates a bond that can survive the vicious things we did to each other during the game.
Last night, after homecoming, I was relaxing, rehydrating, and watching Saturday Night Live (SNL). SNL opened, like it does after every presidential debate, with a satire sketch of the debate. The sketch showed the candidates not answering questions, arguing over whose facts are right, and getting very agressive with eachother over trivial things. Now, SNL may have employed some hyperbole, and while it was still amusing, it also made me think about the way this election is unfolding.
The presidential elections of 2004 and 2008, the only ones I can remember, candidates argued about the issues, used rhetoric to try and win votes, and even ran some attack ads on TV. This year, however, the candidates have fought about their records on the issues, substituted rhetoric in place of serious answers at debates, and the attack ads have been out of control.
I believe the problems with the United States' electoral process today stems from multiple things. The first of those things is that candidates aren't forced to answer the hard questions during debates. When they are asked a question about a particular issue, they simply repeat the part of their stump speech about that issue. They make blanket statements such as Romney saying, "I know what it takes to..." and Obama saying, "We said we would go after Al Qaeda, and we did..." These things are simply appeals to pathos that the candidates and their teams think will win them the election. The American people need to speak up and demand that candidates answer the question asked of them at a debate, that they should not be able to move on until the candidate answers the question fully.
Another issues in the electoral process currently is the Super Pacs and unrestricted money not tied to a campaign. These Super Pacs spend almost all their money on attack ads, which has cause an unrelentless assault on the American people via the airwaves. I can barely turn on my TV without hearing Obama, or Romney, or Tim Kaine, or George Allen, "approve this message." Not to mention the content of the ads. They employ the most blatant propaganda techniques to try and depict their opponent as a monster who is going to lead America back into the Great Depression.
It's time to get rid of the malarky (as Vice President Biden would say) that's weighing down American politics. The American people need to realize that neither candidate has bad intentions for this nation, neither candidate is going to lead us back into the Depression, and especially that neither candidate is how they seem on the other candidate's attack ads. The only way to change the way this election is going, and how future elections will go, is for the citizens of this nation to demand answers, and demand that the level of political discourse be raised above pointless squabbling. Because, at least in my opinion, we're better than that.
The impending NHL lockout, which will be the second in the last ten years and the third under Gary Bettman as commissioner, has angered many fans of the NHL, including myself. However, if the powers that be in the NHL were smart, this lockout could be a blessing in disguise. Let me explain.
In 2004, after the lockout, the NHL decided changed the rules slightly to try and allow the highly skilled players to better use their offensive talent. They legalized the "two-line pass," allowing for more explosive transitions from defense to offense. They instructed referees to enforce a zero-tolerance policy regarding hooking, tripping, holding, and other stick infractions, allowing offensive players to have more time and space with the puck, and creating more power plays. They also added the shootout at the end of regular season tied games to add some excitement to the games and showcase the skills of the league's budding stars.
Ever since the lockout in 2004, the NHL has been growing in popularity. This is partially because of the new rules allowing for more high-scoring games, but it's partially because of the sheer talent present in the NHL currently. Now, I don't want to open up a huge argument over whose better than who, but I think we can all agree that the influx of players such as Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Ovechkin, the Sedin twins, Kane, Datsyuk, Nash, Brown, Girouz, Alfredson, and many more have made the game incredibly fun to watch.
However, if the league doesn't act quickly, it could lose some of the stars that have increased the sport's popularity. For example, on Januray 5th, 2011, Sydney Crosby, arguably the most talented player in the league currently, suffered a season ending concussion due to a hit by Victor Hedman of the Tampa Bay Lightning. Another example came in the 1st round of the 2012 playoffs when Carl Hagelin of the New York Rangers through Senators captain Daniel Alfredson a vicious elbow, forcing him to leave the game early and sit the next three play-off games. I've embedded the video of the hit:
After this year's lockout, the NHL must take steps to protect their stars. That means cracking down hard on elbows to the head and hits with malicious intent. Some argue that it is hard to tell whether there is a malicious intent in a hit or not, and so the league has been soft and inconsistent. However, some hits are clearly malicious, such as the one I've embedded below of Boston's Zdeno Chara hitting Montreal's Max Pacioretty. Chara was not suspended for the hit.
If you watch it closely, you'll notcice how long the puck was gone before the hit was thrown, and what a vunerable position Pacioretty was in.
In conclusion, if the NHL wants to keep gaining popularity after this year's lockout, they'd better take some steps to protect the men who provide the popularity.
