Last March, NHL senior vice president of hockey operations Colin Campbell declined to suspend Pittsburgh’s Matt Cooke for a deliberately dirty hit that knocked out Boston’s Marc Savard. In his ruling, he mourned the fact that he could do nothing about the hit (which is a fallacy, as I blogged about here). And then he pointed out that he had coached Marc Savard, he liked Marc Savard, and oh, he felt just terrible about it.

In 2007, Colin Campbell wrote the following emails (discovered by intrepid hockey blogger Tyler Dellow to be regarding Marc Savard) to former director of officiating Stephen Walkom:

“Your answer re: his high stick calls and the score of the game were horse [bleep]. The 3rd call on [player] was while they were down 5 on 4 and on a def zone face off vs that little fake artist [player] I had him in [city] biggest faker going.”

“I know Murph and Kinger like [player] as a player but my view of him is this exactly… he puts his whining ahead of the game.”

Of course the main point of the email revelations is that this is the head of discipline for the NHL, writing to the head of officiating, complaining about calls made on his son. That’s bad enough in its own right. But these comments about Marc Savard — and you know this is only the tip of the iceberg; how many other players, coaches or officials does Campbell hold a grudge against? — absolutely reek of pettiness, vindictiveness and, combined with his post-Cooke hit comments, flat-out hypocrisy.

And this man is the sole arbiter of justice for the National Hockey League.

This is something that might be brushed off, as Campbell himself (who called it “much ado about nothing”) and NHL vice president Bill Daly (“Any suggestion that Colin Campbell performs his job with any less than 100% integrity at all times and in every decision he makes is way off base and just factually wrong”) have attempted to do, if Campbell had been the model of consistency and reliability when it comes to meting out discipline. To say he hasn’t is something of an understatement.

Whether you want to label it the “Wheel of Justice” as Yahoo’s Puck Daddy does, or the “Secret flow chart,” as described by DownGoesBrown, NHL justice under Colin Campbell has been a punch line. Only it’s really no joke when players have no idea what constitutes suspendable offenses. Jack Edwards is probably most accurate when he calls it “dart board justice.”

To put it bluntly, a trained chimpanzee could do as good a job. Better, because a chimpanzee doesn’t have any secret grudges or hidden agendas. That Daly actually uses the word “integrity” in describing Campbell is something of a sick joke.

That Campbell is being defended so vehemently by the powers-that-be in charge of the NHL just goes to show you what a good ol boys’ club the league is. That such a beautiful sport, played by (a majority of) decent young men, is in the hands of these incompetents is pathetic.

And perhaps just as reprehensible is the response (or lack thereof) of so many in the “mainstream” hockey media. For every Kevin Paul Dupont, who writes in the Boston Globe that Campbell should go, there is a Bob McKenzie, who astoundingly tries to spin in a video at www.tsn.ca that Campbell’s March ruling on Cooke actually proves that he’s not biased. I never thought Bob McKenzie was George Orwell.

So what can we, as hockey fans, do? All is can suggest is to keep the conversation going. Push for a change — suggested and endorsed by many — to a three-person panel to rule on discipline. For the sake of justice, for the sake of player safety, for the sake of integrity, this needs to happen.

Photo: Colin Campbell from nhl.com

The pot started simmering as the hockey world turned its attention to draft weekend, when Boston General Manager Peter Chiarelli told the media the only “untouchables” (i.e. untradables) on the Bruins were goalie Tuukka Rask and the #2 draft pick the Bruins had acquired from Toronto. Once the Bruins chose center Tyler Seguin, the lid blew off.

The Boston Bruins are shopping Marc Savard!

Trying to pin down the source of rumors is something like trying to find the source of the Nile. It’s a trip through the jungle, with a thousand wrong turns and dead ends. It appears the trickle begain with TSN’s Darren

Dreger, who Tweeted about the Toronto Maple Leafs expressing “some interest” in Savard. But what really turned that trickle into a stream was TSN’s Bob McKenzie, the Grand Poobah of hockey reporting, who said “IF Marc Savard goes to TOR, and there is a chance it may happen, Kaberle won’t be part of it. It would be a ‘softer’ trade.”

Now the stream turned into a veritable flood. The Boston Bruins want to dump Marc Savard because they need to get under the cap!

And then, of course, came all the attendant flotsam and jetsam washing through the airwaves and the Internet. Questions about Savard’s character, about his teammates’ feelings toward him. Rumors that he had requested a trade (later proven untrue), that he’d been asked to waive his no-trade clause (also untrue). Rampant speculation about who he’d be traded FOR.

And under it all, from the more thoughtful hockey fans, a sense that the entire proposal made no sense whatsoever. Why would the Bruins, a team whose offense struggled mightily last year, but a team with legitimate Stanley Cup aspirations, trade their top point-scorer, who had just a few months before signed a cap-friendly deal ($4 million annual hit) with an eye to spending the rest of his career in Boston? In a soft trade, no less, to get under the cap? It just didn’t add up.

Meanwhile, the flood of rumors churned merrily on. Savard is going to Los Angeles. Savard is going to Calgary (for Robyn Regehr). From James Murphy (ESPN.com/Boston): “Interesting tid-bit from one of my most trusted sources: ‘Don’t rule out Chicago and Ottawa trading for Marc Savard.’ Sharp? Spezza?” (Never mind that Spezza’s cap hit is 7 million dollars!!)

Finally, just as Murphy and his merry band of media cohorts were crossing the line from ridiculous to ludicrous, Bruce Garrioch of the Ottawa Sun tracked down Savard himself:

“They hurt me a little bit just because I went to Boston and I helped to build that team back up,” Savard said in his first public comments since trade rumors started running rampant. “I’ve really tried to work hard with the young guys and being a core player. I was really focused on staying there for the rest of my career. To hear all this stuff this summer bothered me inside more than anything else. Right now I’m a Bruin and that’s the way it is, but it’s been tough.”

Now the tide began to turn, helped along by Bruins broadcaster Jack Edwards, who wrote an It Would Be Stupid For The Bruins To Trade Marc Savard, And They’re Not Stupid manifesto for NESN.com, which caused

 James Murphy go into a rage on Twitter, with a rapid-fire series ranging from the likes of “I don’t want them to trade Savard, I was just reporting it!” and “My integrity is being questioned!” to “I got the Nathan Horton deal right!”

But the final word came from Chiarelli, via the Boston Globe, on Sept. 3:

“Chiarelli talked to Savard after reading his comments and told him he would not be traded. Savard had 10 goals and 23 assists in 41 games last season, as he was sidelined by foot, knee, and head injuries. ‘I made it clear that I was not moving him,’ Chiarelli said. ‘I wanted to make sure Marc knew he was part of the organization.’’’

Lessons learned (or remembered):

1. Don’t believe everything you hear/read.
2. If it doesn’t make sense, odds are it won’t happen.
3. Some media are more interested in being first than being right.

Photos: Marc Savard from swerve at bestlaidplans.org; James Murphy from bostonsportsmedia.com

Bob McKenzie has the right idea. A few days after the opening of the free agent market, he took himself off on vacation and, other than a couple of Kovalchuk comments, has mostly Tweeted about his hammock and golf game.

Other NHL media folk would be wise to follow suit. Or at the very least, as my mother used to say, think before they speak (or type, or Tweet).

Unfortunately, too many hockey media, with too much time on their hands, too eager to listen to any whispered rumors (whispered by whom? Agents, perhaps? Perish the thought!), are too ready to pass along any ridiculous crap they hear and call it “news.”

Case in point: The Boston Bruins are interested in Bill Guerin.

The story “broke” from St. Louis (St. Louis?) on July 27, in the midst of Blake Wheeler’s salary arbitration hearings. The New England Sports Network’s web site picked it up:

The Bruins could be welcoming back a familiar face to the Hub as the team is speaking with Bill Guerin about a potential return to Boston, according to Radio host and St. Louis Blues writer Andy Strickland.

“The Bruins are talking to veteran Billy Guerin,” Strickland Tweeted Tuesday. “They need to make a roster move before they can sign him…”

OK, obviously nobody stopped to ask one simple question. No, not WTF? (though I’ll admit that’s the first thing that crossed my mind.) The question would be “Why?”

The Bruins already have their Designated Old Guy. They’re in cap hell, and are going to have to move a player or two even without signing any free agents. Though they haven’t hung out signs saying “We’re going with a youth movment,” it’s fairly obvious to anyone paying attention that they’re aiming to get younger and more dynamic, with Tyler Seguin only the tip of their young prospect iceberg; they’ve got some real talent knocking on the door.

In a nutshell, signing Bill Guerin would make no sense whatsoever.

Meanwhile, that bastion of sports journalism The Bleacher Report picked up the story, with an added twist:

Reports from NESN have stated that the Boston Bruins have significant interest in veteran winger Bill Guerin.

Oooh, so now it’s “significant” interest!

The story grew, making it onto both of Boston’s sports radio stations, as well as ESPN’s web site. For 24 hours, Bruins fans hotly debated the pros and cons of the Return of Bill Guerin.

Until Joe Haggerty of CSNNE.com came along:

…A Bruins source told CSNNE.com Wednesday [July 28] there was no interest on their part in the 39-year-old free agent winger.

A Bruins source. Imagine that. A member of the media picked up the phone and, y’know, actually asked someone in the Bruins F.O. about it. Responsible journalism – who would have thunk it?

(And when you’re praising Joe Haggerty as a bastion of responsible journalism, you’re in trouble. But that’s a commentary for another day.)

However, like Monty Python’s iconic Black Knight, it’s not dead yet! Seriously. From yet another Bleacher Report blog (written on July 31):

I am hearing that Bill Guerin is generating interest from the Bruins, Penguins and Islanders.

And lest you think it’s just fannish blogs, think again…

Former Penguins forward Bill Guerin was linked to the Boston Bruins but given their limited cap space in the wake of their acceptance of Blake Wheeler’s arbitration award, they can’t afford him.

No, he wasn’t! It was a rumor, probably started by his agent, aiming to drum up interest… oh, never mind. Just go on vacation. Please.

Photos:  Bill Guerin from The Associated Press.  Mark Recchi from Getty Images.

For Thrasher fans it’s the thing to do nowadays to pretend they never loved you. That they don’t have your jersey hanging in the back of their closet. That they didn’t pay to see YOU. That they didn’t want you anyway. That we’re better off without you.

I confess it is with a tiny bit of satisfaction that, despite your trade to what you called a “class organization,” you, my dear Kovalchuk, went out much like you would have with the Thrashers — except that with the Thrashers you probably wouldn’t have won that one playoff game.

That being said, I loved you Kovy. Part of me always will. Just like all the others who have come and gone: Hossa (a personal favorite of mine and the only Thrasher jersey this non-jersey wearing Goddess has ever donned), Marc Savard, Peter Bondra, Slava Kozlov (I could post forever about how much I love him and how he, along with the Red Wings’ Russian Five, are the ones who really solidified my love of hockey), and now you, Kovy.

With a bit of shame and a dash of schadenfreude, I can honestly admit that your tasting defeat in another uniform made me smile a little — but sadly. Sadly because I did love you. And despite what Thrasher fans say, they loved you too. I wish you well, wherever you land. I do believe you did a lot for the city of Atlanta. You provided hockey’s version of the Human Highlight Film on many occasions. You were always accommodating and polite to fans (this year’s Casino Night notwithstanding, in which you were a bit “off”). So adieu Ilya Kovalchuk and best wishes.

And, please forgive my little grin. You don’t really deserve it, but I can’t help it.

Note: This post was written by a completely biased Thrasher fan who, deep in her heart, really wishes him back. No objectivity implied, striven for, or accomplished.

Photos: Ilya Kovalchuk; and Ilya Kovalchuk and Vyacheslav Kozlov by Goddess Kaatiya. Copyright 2009-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Dear Mr. Campbell:

Reportedly during a radio interview yesterday from the NHL general managers’ meeting, you responded to a question about possible discipline regarding Matt Cooke’s hit on Marc Savard Sunday by saying “it wasn’t an elbow.”

Please. Let’s watch the video one more time.

Cooke could have hit Savard with a solid open-ice body check. Instead, he deliberately moved his arm so it made contact with Marc’s head. Whether it was his elbow, shoulder, knee, foot, stick or a tire iron makes no difference (for the record, you can see that it’s neither precisely his elbow nor his shoulder, but somewhere in between that makes the connection). Are you going to make a decision on a suspension based on a few inches? Matt Cooke deliberately attempted to injure Marc Savard, and succeeded. No ifs, and, or buts about it.

I’m certainly not counting on you giving Cooke the 10-game suspension he deserves. Not after you handed Derek Boogard a pathetic two games for a hideous knee-on-knee hit. Not after you ignored Tomas Plekanec butt-ending David Krejci in the face. NHL discipline is, in a word, a joke. But as Marc Savard suffers the pain of a Grade 2 concussion, maybe, just maybe, this time, you’ll do the right thing.

Just imagine this: What if that was Sidney Crosby being carried off the ice on a stretcher? Because if you don’t stop this now, it very well may be, in the very near future.

Sincerely yours,
Savvy

Let’s see how we can make that hockey related…

Sleetaks freak me out. Kind of like the Thrashers’s play of late. What the hell Thrashers? Before we get to that, let’s talk about “The Land of the Lost,” one of my favorite shows of all time. I don’t know why, but I love that show. From the Sleestaks to Marshall, Will and Holly to Chaka and the *gasp* Sleestaks to the weird pylons where the gang would rearrange those glowing marbles to try to get home.

Speaking of pylons. Let’s talk about the Thrashers’ defense. Oh nevermind. There’s really no defense to speak of. Let’s just watch the trailer for the new “Land of the Lost” starring Will Ferrell.

The Thrashers’ “play” is getting really depressing. The only upside, I guess, is that they are falling so fast they just may get that No. 1 pick. Of course, the way the Thrashers’ luck goes, they will start to win at the last minute and win just enough not to be last. Hooray!

I want the Thrashers to have a “Land of the Lost”-style time warp and go back to when they had Marc Savard and Dany Heatley. Oh, I can’t believe those lean times were really the glory days!