The verdict is in

[Chloe]

The verdict is in and it sucks.

Tom Bertuzzi got a slap on the wrist for his undoubtably stupid conduct. Steve Moore who now suffers the after effects of his injury now has to deal with the fact that the accused only has to pay a small fine that probably is 1/10 of his entire salary as well as do community service. What kind of message does this send to kids and others involved in hockey. It sends the message that if you serverly hurt another hockey player on the ice then you don't have to worry about being criminally charged, and so continue playing the game with brutality. How is it, that the judge even saw it fit to carry out the trial without the victim even being present to give his victim impact statement.

I just don't get the thought process of some people.

[Cartman]

What do you think Bertuzzi should have received? Should the state bother to intervene if they are not going to hand out stiffer sentences?

[willy]

His name is Todd.

He got what any other person who committed a first offence would get.

The civil case is also yet to come.

You fix hockey by getting rid of fighting and not by punishing one poor shmo who played the way he was taught.

[Cartman]

You fix hockey by getting rid of fighting and not by punishing one poor shmo who played the way he was taught.

Good point. This is the tricky part. Bertuzzi was taught for years to be a tough customer (and a star). So, what is an appropriate punishment?

I will never understand why they put Moore on the ice when the game was well in hand, particularly after all of the threats against him.

I find it interesting that when you look at the videotape of the hit on Moore, many fans appeared to be applauding the hit only to judge it as inappropriate after the damage to Moore was known.

[Chloe]

Yes I meant to write Todd,

Furthermore, how can you get rid of fighting on the ice when the punishment does not indicate that fighting is a bad thing. If one does not have to face the consequence of his actions harshley then why would fighting on the ice stop. People only learn when something is wrong after someone dies, and it looks like that is what might happen here if we don't start somewhere, and I believe that starting somewhere involves dishing out harder punishment. If I'm approached by someone from the back on the street and I get pushed down, and my injuries are as bad as Steve Moore's what would be the punishment of the man or woman who attacked me. They would certainly be harsher than what Todd recieved. Why should he be exempt, just because it happened on the ice.

He should have gotten jail time, and not just some measly 80 hour community service deal. Teens have to do community service as part of their requirement for graduation, therefore he recieved no punishement at all.

[Chloe]

And saying he played the way he was taught is no excuse.

[kimmy]

I think under most circumstances an attack as severe as Bertuzzi's attack on Moore would merit a harsher punishment, first offense or not. Particularly given the premeditated nature. Bertuzzi and his team-mates had been making public, veiled threats against Moore since the previous game where Moore bodychecked Markus Naslund.

The attack was not a fight, it was one guy jumping another from behind. Nor was it a case of "playing the game the way he was taught." Bertuzzi's actions were completely outside of what's normal in hockey; even hockey's "enforcers" or "goons" follow a "code" which Bertuzzi went far outside of. Watch any amount of hockey, and you'll almost never see someone get punched from behind, and you'll never see somebody get their head pile-drived into the ice.

-kimmy

[Cartman]

Watch any amount of hockey, and you'll almost never see someone get punched from behind, and you'll never see somebody get their head pile-drived into the ice.

You are right to an extent, but recall when it used to be legal to hit from behind and players would push each other's heads into the boards with much force. He crossed the line, but I am not sure he crossed it very far. Everyone is upset at the result of his actions and not the actions themselves. Had Moore not been so badly hurt, nobody would have remembered this. What I am trying to say is that the intent to injure (i.e. violence) rarely seems to be of concern, it is only those instances that result in serious injury.

Some argued that much of the head trauma came after the original fall when everyone on the ice jumped on top of them. If Moore sues him, I suspect this will become important.

[kimmy]

Some argued that much of the head trauma came after the original fall when everyone on the ice jumped on top of them. If Moore sues him, I suspect this will become important.

Yes; this theory is popular with Canucks fans who are so blinded by loyalty to their team that they're unable to have any objectivity in the matter.

Anybody with an objective mind and a basic understanding of high-school physics should be able to assess how little merit that view has.

-kimmy

[Cartman]

Yes; this theory is popular with Canucks fans who are so blinded by loyalty to their team that they're unable to have any objectivity in the matter.

Agreed. I will give you this point. But, I certainly hope you are not suggesting I am a Canucks fan!! :angry: Flames all the way.

What about my other point which I think is more important?

[Chloe]

The intent to injure (i.e. violence) is my concern here. I find it fascinating how people who watch hockey religioulsy respond to the way hockey players play the game. When they see them pushing, and shoving and banging each other against the board, or they see another team player hit his oppenent and start a little rumble, observers watch this and even encourage them, saying "hit him harder" or "look at that chump he can't even fight back." Yet you hear on the news, that street violence is on the rise and that it needs to stop, and that on lookers who just watch are part of the problem and not the solution. People who don't do anything to stop a fight are seen as people in the wrong, but here you have a whole stadium of people who are in the wrong. What is it that makes what happens on the ice so different from what happens on the street. Why is it like the rules do not apply to those in the hockey league.

[Black Dog]

You fix hockey by getting rid of fighting and not by punishing one poor shmo who played the way he was taught.

Looking back on my playing days I don't every remember doing drills where we jumpe don other players' backs and drove their heads into the ice. So to argue he was just playing the game "the way he was taught" is disingenous.

He crossed the line, but I am not sure he crossed it very far. Everyone is upset at the result of his actions and not the actions themselves. Had Moore not been so badly hurt, nobody would have remembered this. What I am trying to say is that the intent to injure (i.e. violence) rarely seems to be of concern, it is only those instances that result in serious injury.

The only way he could have gone further over the line is if he killed Moore. As it is, Moore's career is over. I think that's plenty of damage. Furthermore, obviously a deliberate attempt to injure would warrant greate rpunishment and censur ethan an accident. Again: this was not part of the game, but an premeditated assault. If the same thing had happened on the street, Bertuzzi would be looking at jail.

So, what is an appropriate punishment?

Easy: Bertuzzi ended Moore's career (and furthermore, has yet to take any responsibility for his actions) so his career should be over as well. A lifetime suspension from the NHL and a ban from the IIHF.

[August1991]

A lifetime suspension from the NHL and a ban from the IIHF.

That would be for the NHL (or IIHF) to decide. This was a criminal charge.

The case was decided by plea bargain and he got one year probation, 80 hours of community time, a $400 fine and he'll have no criminal conviction. (This is important for him because it is difficult to travel internationally otherwise.)

He got what any other person who committed a first offence would get.

No, I think his lawyers got him a good deal - but then, he's got the money to pay them.

From the Crown prosecutor's perspective, this high-profile case would have eaten up alot of resources better used elsewhere. The one year probation is perhaps critical (if the strike ever ends). If Bertuzzi pulls any stunt, he'll be back in court facing jail time.

I wonder if this plea bargain will set a precedent?

[Newfie Canadian]

He may not file a civil suit.

Steve Moore only wants to play hockey again and says he will not file a civil suit against his on-ice attacker, Todd Bertuzzi, unless doctors tell him his NHL career is over.

In regards to the whole situation, I have a friend who's an RCMP corporal, and when the charges were filed he said he was embarrassed that this all went to court.

What Bertuzzi did was outside the rules, outside the code and seriously damaging to himself, Moore and the game, but it didn't belong in the judicial system.

[Big Blue Machine]

I know a way which they can stop fighting.

The first player who throws the first punch gets fined $50,000 on the point. The player gets thrown out of the game. The game doesn't continue until the player comes back with a suitcase full of cash.

[kimmy]

What is it that makes what happens on the ice so different from what happens on the street. Why is it like the rules do not apply to those in the hockey league.

People who have decided to play hockey (particularly pro hockey) have chosen to take part in a sport where rough physical contact (and even fighting) is an understood risk.

Being bodychecked or punched is not generally considered an understood risk of walking down the street.

You can not choose to enter a boxing match and then cry that your opponent has punched you. However, if your opponent pulls a knife out of his shorts, you've got just cause to be upset!

Likewise, Steve Moore can not complain that he was bodychecked by the Canucks, or that Matt Cooke fought him earlier in the game (Moore fought Cooke willingly, I recall). However, Moore is well within reason in complaining about what Bertuzzi did. Like a boxer who pulls out a knife during the match, Bertuzzi went way beyond the bounds of what someone participating in a hockey game has agreed to. And that's why Bertuzzi was suspended and that's why charges were filed.

-kimmy

[Cartman]

Looking back on my playing days I don't every remember doing drills where we jump on other player's backs and drove their heads into the ice. So to argue he was just playing the game "the way he was taught" is disingenous.

True enough Black Dog, but when I played hockey (minor and jb), I fought a lot. In front of everyone else, the coaches and others reprimanded me for fighting which I did almost every game (when not suspended). Once I was inside the locker room, however, they told me things like "atta boy 'Cartman', that'l getcha into the NHL" or on one occasion where I was really being a goon, I got a pat and was told "that's it, don't ever let anybody get the better of you". I think that there is a difference between what you are told officially (fighting is just terrible) and what you are taught (fighting is what will secure your career).

Bertuzzi is a big boy from a working class background where I suspect that being a "complete" player includes being rough, tough and responsible for his team. This is not pc, but is it not interesting that one of the best Vancouver players (vs one of their goons) was the one who dropped Moore when several threatened him openly for the hit on Naslund? I think that Bertuzzi did what he was always taught to do and then when he did it too well, the league pretends to come down harshly on him. Why else did he get such a wimpy sentence? I suspect that the NHL and the courts do not want to confront this openly and that this is why Moore was not allowed to attend the recent court hearing. They do not want to confront their hypocrisy.

[caesar]

You all seem to ignore the Colorado player on Bertuzzi'a Back driving them into the ice. He was swinging his fist, too and probably hit Moore more times that he hit Bertuzzi. It didn't look at all like they show on

tv; the same little bit over and over and over. It was not a surprise to Moore; 20 thousand fans were elling for his head. Moore showed no remorse or express any regret over the severe concussion and the wrist injury he gave to Naslund. Moore is not a great hockey player; he is more the enforcer type; injuring or intimidating others.

I was at the game.

[Cartman]

Moore showed no remorse or express any regret over the severe concussion and the wrist injury he gave to Naslund.

I want to be clear, I am NOT saying that violence in hockey is acceptable at all, but the above is an important point to consider. Moore's hit on Naslund was really dirty and was ignored by the refs. It was so dirty that the entire Vancouver team was saying to the media openly that they were going to get him. Why was Moore on the ice when EVERYONE was waiting for this to happen? Why was he in the game? Violence in hockey is wrong, but it is hypocritical to say that Bertuzzi is an excellent player because he can score and be intimidating at the same time, but then turn around and condemn him.

[caesar]

Whether the hit on Naslund was legal/ dirty or not; Moore expressed NO regret at having seriously injured Naslund. Naslund is not one of the players that tries to deliver hard checks. Bertuzzi did not use a "weapon"

Let's be honest; there is fighting in hockey because the fans love and demand a fight. The crowd really comes alive even with a minor fight. Fights sell tickets. It is not just a hockey players decision or adrenaline rush that promotes fighting.

[Slavik44]

In real life, in real life, in real life, In real life, in real life, in real life, In real life, in real life, in real life,

In real life if I were to body check you into a brick wall, I would get in a load of trouble, If I were to hip check you so you landed on your face over the sidewalk I woudl get in trouble. In real life if I were to grab your shirt and chuck you into a wall I woudl again get in trouble. In real life if I were to get ina fight with you again there would be trouble. Accordign tot he standards a select few people hold on this thread hockey woudln;t exist, every body check is assault.

The fact is Hockey is not real life, real people but not real life. In survivor marquesis a guy named Rob grabbed a guy named clay by the neck shook him and threw him off a pathway into the ocean, In football everday people commit crimes, the physically harm one another, Baseball has more bench brawls then any other sport, but no one gets arrested in those bowls. In certain cases Baseballs are thrown over 90 MPH with the intention of hitting people. There have been broken basseball bat chucked vicuously at other palyers in baseball. Lacrosse anyone, there is another violent sport with severe injuries and fighting. When it crosses the line the league deals with it, and none of you people complain. In professional sports circumstances are so different that comparing it to real life is idiotic. Things are so hieghtend that 90% of the behavoir in such sports is illegal. People play these sports knowing the risks. You may say the Moore didn't ask or concent for todd Bertuzzi to do what he did but by stepping on to the Ice he did, injuries are a part of the game, injuries in hockey largely result from what would be deemed illegal in the real world and by playing hockey one acknowledges and accepts the fact that they could be skatign down the ice one second and the next second lying on a stretcher.

Obviously Bertuzzi didn't want to break Moore's neck, but he did want to hurt him. I here this statement so often it makes me sick. Yes Bertuzzi wanted to hurt more, but when moore hit naslund he wanted to hurt him, every body check, hip check, cross check, slash, roughing every single one of those is someone attempting to inflict pain and hurt you, it happens in sports and is permissible because PARTICIPANTS, realise that they are pplaying a agressive and harmfull game.

Bertuzzi shoudl be punished because of what has happend to steve moore, in all hoensty no, he shouldn't. That is for steve more and his lawyer to do in a civil suite, but really what has a career AHL player lost? His ability to play semi-professional hockey? Yes, and that is what Steve Moore can sue for, mind you minor hockey players last maybe 4 years and Steve Moore was a harvard graduate he won't loose to many benjamins but a law suit willr ecover that. He hasn't lost his ability to play hockey, maybe temporarily. But these are all financial issues, that are not settled ina criminal court, the Justice system is not and never should be about revenge, save it for hockey games.

When it comes down to it what happend was an unfortunante event that should have never happend, a carrer minor leaguer playing int he NHL because half his team was injured, he was physcially one of the smallest players in the game, at 180 pounds. He was to scared to fight Bertuzzi his coach should ahve put out Peter worrell instead of Steve moore. Todd Bertuzzi should have thought before he acted, but he didn't. However in the end this happend under the circumstances of a hockey game it is up tot he NHL to get its act to gether, it is up to the fans to get their act together, but ther eis no need to punish a player, because you are thirsty for blood. When I looka t the thread starter I wonder if you are even a hockey fan, probley not, I wonder if you have even watched more then a few a games? Because in all hoensty, calling oen of the best hockey palyers int he game Tom instead of Todd indicates your total lack of knowledge about what goes on in the game or even about the game. Becaus even my mom who ha snever watched a hockey game in her life, would not make the mistake of calling him Tom Bertuzzi. So do you really know about the incident, or are you just actign like a parrot?

[caesar]

That's part of why hockey players get the big bucks; they do get injured; lose their teeth, etc, I would imagine that they have coverage under the NHL to compensate them when injured on the job. Moore is not a little guy. He has a least a foot on the only player he would fight (Brad Cooke). Granato should never have put him on the ice when the game went as bad as it did. However, the whole incident would not have happened if Moore had shown any respect for Naslund after he injured him. He just said he would do it again. Naslund had a serious wrist injury that he played with without complaint besides the concussion.

[Guest eureka]

I would suggest that it is time to get the collective national head together and do away with hockey violence altogether. Hockey is a crashing bore as a game now since it has virtually eliminated skill from the sport in favour of WWF wannabees throwing each other around. The major qualification for the game is size.

Probably no more than about 10% of the population can now play the game because of this requiremwnt. I remember just a couple of years ago, Toronto signing a player who was reputed to be of a high skill level but thought to have only a small chance of making it because he was "too small." It amused me since his weight would have put him into the heavyweight class as a boxer.

My son-in-laws brother was, a dozen years ago, one of the highest rated juniors in Canada. He captained a major junior team and had scouts watching his every gane. Unfortunately, or fortunately, as he now thinks himself, he stopped growing at about 5' 8" and was not drafted.

What is interesting about that is that his vice captain, a far less skilled player, is a $5 million man in the NHL today. The differences: lower skills but 6 inches more height.

Bertuzi should not even have been prosecuted. It is the culture of violence that should be on trial. Is hockey just a sublimination for Canadians that allows us to be peacekeepers since our thirst for blood is vicariously satisfied in an arena that most cannot afford even to see except on television?

[Argus]

I would suggest that it is time to get the collective national head together and do away with hockey violence altogether.

That's not going to happen. At least not soon. The unfortunate fact is that fighting is needed to distract people from the fact there is often so little talent on the ice. The expansions of the league have taken it well beyond the level where there are enough quality professional players to fill the ranks of the teams. Most teams have, at most, 4 to 6 legitimate NHL players. The rest are minor leaguers rounding out the ranks. Take a look at your favourite team. For the most part, those third and fourth liners should be in the minor leagues. Yes, and some of the second liners too. Most teams have no more than 2 real NHL defencemen, if that.

Hockey is a crashing bore as a game now since it has virtually eliminated skill from the sport in favour of WWF wannabees throwing each other around. The major qualification for the game is size.

Hockey is often a crashing bore, but because of a lack of talent. Interference is endless and allowed, regardless of the rules. Because it's the only way to equalize things between the gomers and the actual stars. Lemieux would have scored 150 goals his last couple of healthy seasons without interference and without the trap everyone plays now (another response to a lack of talent). Does anyone think Gretzky would be a superstar today? Not a chance. Too much hacking, holding, slashing, elbowing and interference, not to mention the trap. He's too lightweight to fight his way through that, and the instigator penalty would stop the McSorleys of his team from protecting him.

[kimmy]

Watch any amount of hockey, and you'll almost never see someone get punched from behind, and you'll never see somebody get their head pile-drived into the ice.

You are right to an extent, but recall when it used to be legal to hit from behind and players would push each other's heads into the boards with much force. He crossed the line, but I am not sure he crossed it very far. Everyone is upset at the result of his actions and not the actions themselves. Had Moore not been so badly hurt, nobody would have remembered this. What I am trying to say is that the intent to injure (i.e. violence) rarely seems to be of concern, it is only those instances that result in serious injury.

Sorry for not getting back to this sooner, but I wanted to check a few facts.

I somewhat disagree with what you are saying.

In 1999, Tie Domi punched Ulf Samuelsson from behind and knocked him out. Samuelsson was not seriously injured (by hockey standards) receiving only a light concussion and missing only a few games, but the NHL gave Domi a harsh suspension.

In 2001, Domi delivered an elbow to the head of Scott Niedermayer and was suspended for the rest of the playoffs and the start of the next season; Niedermayer only missed 4 games.

In 1993, Dale Hunter infamously rammed Pierre Turgeon into the boards after Turgeon had scored a goal. Turgeon received a concussion, and Hunter received what was (at the time) the most severe suspension in hockey history.

In 2000, Marty McSorley slashed Donald Brashear in the head. Brashear received a concussion; McSorley was suspended for a full season (and the extremely bad publicity surrounding the incident effectively "blackballed" him from the NHL, some would say.)

This spring, Hamilton AHL player Alexander Perezhogin was suspended for a full season after he slashed Garrett Stafford in the face with his stick. Stafford was cut, but not otherwise injured.

These are (aside from Bertuzzi) the most notorious recent hockey incidents I could think of. And in all of them, the victim was back playing hockey before the offender. I don't think the severity of the injury was the determining factor. I think the one thing the Bertuzzi incident shares with all of these incidents is that it looked horrible on TV.

You might be right that the league deals with these things reactively, but I believe they are reacting not to the extent of the injury, but to the extent of negative publicity.

-kimmy