Save to del.icio.us
In last night’s game between the Buffalo Sabres and Florida Panthers, Richard Zednik was accidentally cut across the neck by teammate’s Oli Jokinen’s skate… cutting his carotid artery and causing a significant amount of bleeding. Zednik barely made it off the ice to the bench, and then was rushed by ambulance to a local hospital, where he received life-saving surgery. Here is a video clip of what happened:
After the injury took place, Colin Campbell (who was at the game watching his son play) talked with Gary Bettman and they decided to let the game continue. What were they thinking? A teammate just had a hockey player’s worst nightmare occur, sustaining a life-threatening injury, and all Bettman and Campbell could think about doing was making the two teams finish the hockey game? Even Oli Jokinen said “We shouldn’t have finished the game”. We at FB didn’t get to see the game, but from what we’ve read, the remainder of the game was very “solemn” and no one really seemed to care about winning. The game could have easily been called off and re-scheduled for a later time when all players, coaches and FANS knew the status of Zednik and were not all in a state of shock. We think this was terrible judgment on the part of Gary Bettman, and really aren’t surprised by it… just add it to the long, long list of terrible decisions that Bettman has made. However, we are very happy to report that Richard Zednik is currently in stable condition and it appears as though he will be okay.
On a much lighter note, we’d like to apologize for the lack of updates to the site lately. Travel and other commitments have been dominating our time… but we promise to get back on the ball and have all the latest, breaking hockey and Bettman news coverage for you. Thanks for your patience, and as always, for your support!
That’s a pretty gruesome title and doesn’t show much reverence for the incident, making your critique of Bettman even more hollow and inane. Even Toronto-area newspapers have more class.
Reply by FB Staff: Thank you for your comment Jordan. We meant the original title of “There Will Be Blood” to represent the way Gary Bettman Bettman handled the situation… as in the occurrence of blood through a life threatening injury was not taken seriously… kind of turning the title around on him. But based on your comment, we see that it is not being viewed in such light, and have thus, changed the title to something less controversial.
They didn’t decide to continue to play until they learned that Zednik was in stable condition…there is nothing wrong with that.
Pat is correct. It also should be noted that it was a group decision to continue the game and with less than half of the third period left to play rescheduling the entire game would have been immensely complicated.
The “new title” is still decidedly hyperbolic in its expression of the situation, of course, but that’s how FireBettman.Com tends to operate and that’s why we love it!
I disagree with the notion that Bettman didn’t take the incident seriously, however, and I think that all considerations were made. There is more to this incident than simply Gary Bettman and his decision, as we have a serious incident that took place on the ice that is being used as ammunition against the commissioner of the National Hockey League. I don’t think this serves as an indictment of Bettman for a number of reasons:
1. What Pat said. Zednik’s condition was stable and he was on his way to the hospital.
2. The coaches and general managers were consulted.
3. The game was in the third period.
Instead of thinking about what Bettman did wrong, maybe we could think about what happened that was right. First of all, the emergency response was incredible. Second, Zednik’s foresight to get himself off the ice as soon as possible was smart and showed impeccable awareness in such an alarming situation. Third, the time the game took off (15 or so minutes) to deliberate the incident and make a decision shows that management and other parties showed class and respect for the incident. Fourth, the Buffalo fans showed incredible class upon hearing Zednik was in stable condition.
I would like to see this site compose a more balanced critique of Gary Bettman that would focus on real issues (there are many) instead of critiquing ONE individual in a group that made a tough decision. Nobody should use Zednik’s terrible accident as ammunition against anyone else, even if it is Gary Bettman. Besides which, the case is flimsy at best.
Thanks for your comments and opinions Jordan. We agree with you on all of the positive things that occurred during the situation, however, we still believe it was in very poor taste for the NHL to decide that the game should go on… even if Zednik’s condition was “stable” at the time.
I’m sure all of the fans in the arena were very concerned about Zednik, since they did not know the results of what had happened… making them wait through the completion of a hockey game to know Zednik’s status, and to make them focus on a hockey game instead of the well-being of a player is flat-out ridiculous and an insult to fans and to Zednik. Imagine being a player or coach out there, wondering during the rest of the game how your buddy and teammate is doing after just seeing what had happened to him. How could you motivate to focus on something as trivial as a hockey game, when this teammate of yours was just VERY seriously injured??
What makes it worse and puts more of the weight on Gary Bettman’s shoulders is that Colin Cambpell did call Bettman, and when it comes down to it, Bettman made the decision here. As George Bush would say, he is “the decider”. He should have simply said right there, “have them stop the game and they will finish it later… what is more important here is that we make sure Mr. Zednik is okay, and allow all of the players, coaches and fans to take this time to gather their emotions and focus on what is truly important… the well-being of Richard Zednik.” Easy as 1-2-3.
Furthermore, if you would read through the history of our site and the different posts, we do focus on other (and according to you “real”) issues in the NHL. You are always more than welcome to spend as much time as you would like on the site reading them.
And as we posted, we are very very very happy to know that Richard Zednik’s surgery was successful and that he is recovering. This is about the scariest and most serious thing that many of us have seen happen during an NHL game in years, and our thoughts and prayers go out to Mr. Zednik.
Whether Bettman is to blame in this or not, I agree with the assessment here: the game should have been stopped for the night. Though a bit different, I was watching the Red Wings’ game when Jiri Fischer went into cardiac arrest, and when the game was postponed, I thought that there couldn’t have been any other decision but that. Sure, on the surface it was more serious, and it was in the first period. But a similar decision should have been made at this game. When something like this happens, players, I am sure, have a hard time focusing on the game again. They may even hold back for fear of getting hurt, or not be paying as close of attention as needed and cause another serious injury.
I think it was a very poor decision on the league’s part. And because he is in charge, Bettman is the man that the blame should be laid in front of. Sorry Jordan, but that’s the way business is.
Well, if we’re talking about “the way business is,” then we certainly need to make a few logistical points.
1. Trent McCleary. In January of 2000, McCleary’s career was cut short after taking a puck to the throat. Similar situation and he rushed to the bench after blocking a Chris Therien shot. I’m sure we all remember that as we looked on in horror. His throat immediately collapsed and it was a much worse situation than this one, but there was absolutely NO discussion about canceling that game. Perhaps there should have been, but at the time, the debate did not even take place. Nobody even considered canceling the game because, as Jeremy Roenick said yesterday, to paraphrase: “it’s hockey and it happens.”
2. Neck guards. The precedent of establishing neck guards is up to the NHLPA, as is any other potential precedent of changing or altering how the game is played on the ice. The notion of canceling or rescheduling a game is also in the hands of the NHLPA, so establishing any precedent for game cancellation due to injury is, in fact, up to the player’s union. At this point, there is no such precedent just as there is no such precedent to bring in neck guards after a handful of neck injuries. The act of beginning to cancel games is a lot like the act of beginning to institute neck guards. It’s not merely Bettman’s call and anyone that knows anything about the inner workings of hockey knows that Bettman’s not simply “the boss of it all.” Bettman represents owners, while the NHLPA represents players. It takes two parties to make a call like that and, during the game on Sunday night, the final call was certainly not just up to Bettman. We can argue the morality of it all until we’re blue in the face, but that doesn’t change the reality of it all. Instituting the precedent that games are canceled due to on-ice injury means you have to look at a number of issues. What if someone was injured in a fight? What about the countless times someone is hauled out on a stretcher? Surely games should be canceled if a player breaks his leg or arm. When Saku Koivu was struck in the eye with Justin Williams’ stick, surely that game should have been canceled. It’s all well and good to discuss the cancellation of Sunday’s game in hindsight, but how many other situations are we willing to apply that precedent to? The NHLPA and the owners need a policy on when to call off a game and, at this point and time, there is no such policy because nobody (Bettman included) has asked for one to be instituted. Surely there is enough history of bad injury on the ice, blood and guts included, to establish such a thing.
What about when 13-year-old Brittanie Cecil was hit with a puck in the stands back in March of 2002? She died because of her injuries. Should the NHLPA and owners have a policy that calls for game cancellations as the result of outside-the-rink accidents and incidents as well? If somebody suffers a heart attack in the stands, should the game be called because people cannot concentrate on hockey anymore? What kind of precedent does this establish in the sport of hockey? In sports period? The NHLPA and owners need to establish a concrete policy about the cancellation of games, when and if they should happen, and how rescheduling should take place. That responsibility does NOT fall at the feet of Gary Bettman alone, nor does the responsibility of canceling Sunday night’s game. To assert that it does, that Bettman as Commissioner of the NHL is somehow the league’s “boss,” is completely and utterly erroneous.
3. The logistics of stopping a game that is already in its third period with stats on the board and in the book are extremely complicated. First, rescheduling the game so that it fits with the schedule, travel times, playoffs, and such is a massive undertaking in today’s NHL. It manipulates the way the rest of the schedule plays out and could impact one team’s playoff picture, giving them an unfair advantage. Rescheduling a game is not something that can be done in a reactionary fashion like the inference is here, it needs to be done with, as I said, a concrete and sensible policy in place.
While I agree with the idea of canceling a game and I certainly agree that it would be tough to concentrate on hockey after witnessing something like that, the league simply has no policy with which to work on the topic. Gary Bettman is not “the decider” and his position is nowhere near akin to George W. Bush’s, although I find the comparison comical. Bettman is “the representative” not some CEO figure. He’s a figurehead (I’ve posted on this before and continue to be amazed that a whole site dedicated to Mr. Bettman isn’t even sure as to what his role is) and he is doing his job by representing the owners. Decisions like this one do not fall at his feet alone and, without any policy in place as designated by the players or owners, there’s really nowhere to go with it. So the idea to cancel a game at the sight of blood, even lots of blood, is a compelling idea but it’s not a practical idea. Like the discussion of neckguards that is now taking place with clearer heads around the NHL, the discussion of game cancellation isn’t getting much attention. The only discussion of game cancellation took place in the heat of the moment, after the game, and within the context of rightfully angry fans without a full comprehension of the situation and of similar situations.
Sorry, I can’t figure out how to edit posts, but I’d like to add a few notes to my post.
First of all, the TSN article that you link to states that Bettman and Campbell made the decision to continue “after knowing that Zednik was stable, that trainers had stopped the bleeding, and that the teams were willing to go on.” This suggests that consideration was taken into the severity of the incident, not that Bettman simply made a snap decision on his own to continue the game. This fact suggests that Campbell, who was at the game, consulted with the teams (including the general managers and possibly the owners) and examined the situation in the 15-minute period in which action was halted. The article you link to also goes on to state that the referees consulted in the tunnel. This notion of consultation and reflection certainly dispels the myth that Mr. Bettman was “the decider” and that the decision was his alone or that it was careless.
Second, neither Mr. Bettman nor the NHLPA nor the owners are responsible for the emotional wellbeing of the fans in the stands. They choose what to watch, what to experience, and how to react. The NHL cannot be responsible for this. People go to hockey games knowing the likelihood of injury, fights, blood, and other calamities. It is an unfortunate byproduct of a violent sport.
Third, the announcement regarding the condition of Zednik was made in the game and the TSN article you link to suggests that the announcement was made during or slightly after the 15-minute break in the game. From my recollection of watching the game on satellite, it was. You (Puckhead) infer that the announcement was left for the end of the game. Source?
Jordan…
yes, in situations like this, Gary Bettman is the one who makes the calls. On one of the “NHL Hour” shows a couple weeks ago he even made a point of this… that he does have some kind of final word when it comes to decisions like this. We completely agree with you that he is not the only one who makes the big, overall decisions… such as rules, suspensions, etc… but, he is still the man at the top and reserves the right to step in and throw his weight around when he sees fit. You must have missed some interviews with him and others over the years. Our guess is that Colin Campbell called Bettman for his advice in this situation and asked him what to do, and Bettman told him to do what he did… wait and see how Zednik is, consult with the teams and consult with the refs. Why else would have Campbell called Bettman?!!?! To ask him how his Sunday night is going?? You’re assumption that Gary Bettman is not the boss and does not have any power are very ill-informed and backed up.
And we completely agree with you that there needs to be a policy in place from the NHL about situations like this… because obviously Gary Bettman and Campbell do not make the correct decisions. Any life threatening injury that takes place on the ice, or any death that takes place in the stands due to the game at hand, should result in a stoppage of the game and a re-scheduling. No questions asked.
There is no need to carry on this argument, as it is obvious that you don’t agree with us here and won’t back down from your poorly backed up statements… but we are starting to wonder, Jordan, if you are a relative of Mr. Bettman or if you are just looking to get a job with Gary Bettman at some level. Maybe his limo driver??