Avery suspension could be big one

by James Mirtle on Dec 3, 2008 11:48 PM CST Comment 51 comments

Sean Avery

#16 / Left Winger / Dallas Stars

Height: 5-10

Weight: 195

Born: Apr 10, 1980

Silly me for thinking the NHL would be able to administer appropriate justice for Sean Avery's transgression, limiting his time missed to an acceptable number of games and a stern warning.

What Avery did was wrong, no question, but I would have been fine with a one- or two-game ban and a short trip to the principal's office. I could live with three or four games, and five seems to be pushing the limits.

And, yet, minds much more plugged into the league's innerworkings than myself are saying Avery's suspension on Thursday could mean a long, long time on the sidelines for hockey's bad boy. As in, right up there with the longest suspensions in league history.

Good grief.

Here's Eric Duhatschek:

In general, short single-digit suspensions are seen as slaps on the wrist. This will require a message and usually a message is in the 10-to 20-game range.

I disagree with what Avery did, but all it deserves — regardless of the personality involved — is a slap on the wrist. Twenty games is the equivalent of lopping off Avery's arms and beating him senseless with them.

Todd Bertuzzi missed 20 games.

It's too much, especially in light of the fact that, when his ban ends, Avery might not have a team to go back to anyway. In a lot of ways, his punishment will be a team one no matter what, as the Stars sound eager to finally have a reason to boot him out of what's apparently become a toxic dressing room as the team has fallen in the standings.

There's even talk they may not honour the rest of his contract.

Here's Tom Benjamin:

I don’t like the idea that Gary Bettman can suspend a player for what he said off the ice. I don’t trust him enough without impossibly clear guidelines. What is allowed and what isn’t? Would it be okay if Avery had sneered at Phaneuf about his girl friend without using the phrase "sloppy seconds"? Would it be okay if Avery called Bettman a twit? If Avery complained about the ice or the officiating?

Bettman should have let Dallas manage the problem. He’s their employee and his comments reflected on Avery and his team, not on the NHL.

Tom's right. If the NHL's handing out anything over a handful of games, it's completely overstepping its bounds and, in the future, teams would be far better equipped to deal with these issues.

We'll know later in the day.

A 10-game ban will mean Avery forfeits about $425,000 in salary. A 20-game one is about $850,000.

That's a lot for sloppy seconds.

Poll

How long should Sean Avery be suspended for?

No games

188 votes

1-4 games

274 votes

5-9 games

59 votes

10-19 games

31 votes

20+ games

64 votes

616 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 51 comments | Add comment |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

What he said was innapropriate

but he shouldn’t be suspended games for it. The Stars might be better without him, though. Just look at the Rangers. Hes and addition by subtraction.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Dec 4, 2008 1:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

This is totally asinine. The overreaction is reaching cartoonish proportions. The fact that the media has been throwing the “sloppy seconds” idea around for months makes it ring even more hollow.

As for voiding the contract, does anyone believe the Stars didn’t know exactly what they were getting? I have no doubt that’s part of the reason they signed him in the first place.

Good luck with the suspension and voiding that contract. I don’t think there’s any way Paul Kelley will let this one go.

by GOOLIAN on Dec 4, 2008 3:51 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

V@gina

That’s what Tom Hick’s is, for using Avery’s regrettable choice of words as an excuse to run away from a stupid overpay of his own doing. Maybe next time, don’t hire a high school dropout/failed TV commentator as your GM.

Or maybe don’t buy an English soccer team.

There’s no way the PA lets this one stand, no matter how much the unaccountable, anonymous cowards quoted in Duhatschek’s story want Avery gone.

by Dr Van Nostrum on Dec 4, 2008 4:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

“Regrettable choice of words”. What utter bullshit.

The correct term that you are searching for is “slander”.

by Gerald on Dec 4, 2008 9:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It’s not slander because it’s true, people need to stop getting ridiculous their accusations and talking about people taking people to court. Avery is a jackass and I’m glad to see him get villified, but what he did was, at worst, a game suspension… probably closer to a fine though.

by Quain on Dec 4, 2008 9:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You need to figure out what slander is before you start throwing the word around.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 10:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

I think Gerald’s a lawyer so if he says that calling someone sloppy seconds is slander then he’s probably right.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Dec 4, 2008 10:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, he may be a lawyer, but he doesn’t know the definition of slander. The key word is untruthful.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 10:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, Marcello, but I do. You apparently do not understand the meaning of the term “sloppy seconds”, as evidenced by your posts in the other threads. “Sloppy seconds” is a gang-bang reference, chum.

by Gerald on Dec 4, 2008 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"Sloppy seconds" is a gang-bang reference, chum.

Is it always, Gerald? We seem to get caught up quite a bit on this technicality, but I think just based on the range of reactions that there isn’t only one way to interpret Avery’s comments. I know I’ve heard the term used with a less specific meaning.

http://battleofcalifornia.blogspot.com/

by Earl Sleek on Dec 4, 2008 1:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sleek

What kind of heathens do you hang out with who throw this phrase around willy-nilly. My Heavens!

I believe in Peter Budaj

by Jibblescribbits on Dec 4, 2008 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It’s like every fifth word out of Rudy Kelly’s mouth.

And that’s when the Kings win. :)

http://battleofcalifornia.blogspot.com/

by Earl Sleek on Dec 4, 2008 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

They were actually going to rename their blog Battle of Sloppy Seconds recently.

by James Mirtle on Dec 4, 2008 8:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It most certainly is NOT a gang-bang reference. It can be, but it can be used many other ways.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 3:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

When you’re talking about women, that is what it means. I don’t know what it means among the teenybopper crowd, Marcello. I suspect that your age puts you more in that demographic.

by Gerald on Dec 4, 2008 4:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice try, but no. I am 26, which makes me still young enough to actually know what slang words mean. You should realize that language is fluid, so what something meant to you 10 years ago has very little to do with what it means now.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 4:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

My conclusion is that the term “sloppy seconds” has a different meaning to those older than Gen X. My generation, my husband’s generation (mid20’s – early 30’s, which happens to be where Avery fits in) there is no ‘gang bang’ connotation.

Perhaps this is why it seems so weird to us that Bettman would come down so hard on Avery. I agree that his words were rude, inappropriate and disrespectful, and that such trash talk should never include players’ significant others, but I have no idea how a lengthy suspension would apply. Nowadays, sloppy seconds is a demeaning way of saying an ex.

by Karina on Dec 4, 2008 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the term

All through college (5-6 years ago) I hear the term as someone who sleeps with a person after the previous person and in the context Avery said it I’m sure this is what he meant.

I didn’t even know about the gang-bang connotation until this rather absurd discussion.

I believe in Peter Budaj

by Jibblescribbits on Dec 4, 2008 5:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

which is why I think the whole thing is silly, and Bettman should come a bit back down to earth on this one.

If Avery is suspended longer that Bertuzzi was… well, something needs to be done.

by Karina on Dec 4, 2008 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Absurd discussion! We’re getting places here…

by James Mirtle on Dec 4, 2008 8:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well

What is the internet if not a place for absurd discussions

I believe in Peter Budaj

by Jibblescribbits on Dec 5, 2008 9:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you. You said this much better, and more tactfully, than I could.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 6:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve only heard it as a crude way of describing an ex, never with any gang bang connotations. It’s obnoxious, but hardly deserving of such an intense reaction. (And I’m 38, so even some people a little older than Avery are hardly scandalized by it.)

"A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with." -- Tennessee Williams

by Baroque on Dec 4, 2008 8:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Slander

is irrefutably wrong. It doesn’t apply here…

The word he’s looking for is Libel.

I believe in Peter Budaj

by Jibblescribbits on Dec 4, 2008 10:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Slander and libel are pretty close to the same thing (I don’t want to say exact because it’s not my profession), just differing in the conduit: Slander is spoken, libel is written. Both require the accusation to be untruthful.

Neither could ever apply in this case, because it’s entirely truthful that Dion Phaneuf is dating Sean Avery’s ‘sloppy seconds’.. (or that Calgary is employing Avery’s ‘sloppy seconds’, but I don’t think he was talking about linemates).

by Quain on Dec 4, 2008 12:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You’re stilla little off. Slander is more like gossip and saying it in private, and Libel is saying it to the media. It can still be spoken. They are close but the definition of the two is pretty clear.

I think you could reasonably debate Libel in this case, but i don’t think a jury would awards it, especially to people like Cuthbert ann Phaneuf since they both live public lifestyles and libel cases against celebrities tend to be even tougher to go after.

I believe in Peter Budaj

by Jibblescribbits on Dec 4, 2008 12:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong again, armchair lawyer #2.

Avery said it. The broadcasters published it. One is slander, the other is libel.

Leave the legal analysis to those trained in the field.

by Gerald on Dec 4, 2008 1:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not to belabour the legal niceties here, since this is not a legal blog, but the fact that Avery called the press conference COULD lead to a conclusion that it is also libel. That, however, is an irrelevant distinction, and it really only is relevant in terms of damages that could be claimed. Avery in that sense could be guilty of libel as well, but that does not mean he is not also guilty of slander. I just wanted to clarify, since in looking at my post above, I was guilty of abbreviating a lot of legal background.

by Gerald on Dec 4, 2008 1:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Preferably those trained a little bit better.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 3:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I’ll mention that to my employers on the next billion-dollar-plus transaction that I am working on.

by Gerald on Dec 4, 2008 4:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Don’t forget to bring their coffee with the copies they asked you to make.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized God doesn’t work that way, so I stole one and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Dec 4, 2008 4:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That’s enough guys.

by James Mirtle on Dec 4, 2008 8:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So now it will be perfectly clear to all hockey players what they need to do to stay out of trouble.

Don’t insult anyone in the media, especially not another player’s girlfriend. Confine yourself to elbows to the head, stepping on opponents, and whacks in the back, legs, hands, and heads with a stick and you should be okay.

What a #%$^$##&ing farce. I may have to find another sport with all this blasted nonsense.

"A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with." -- Tennessee Williams

by Baroque on Dec 4, 2008 6:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

If this winds up being the biggest suspension in league history, than that definitely says a lot for the league. Would that mean violence (ie. baseball swings with a stick, stomping with a skate) receives less serious repercussions than running your mouth?

Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com

by FrankD on Dec 4, 2008 7:13 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I’m in full agreement with FrankD here.

I can understand the logic of suspending him prior to the Flames game to head off a potential one ice confrontation like the Bertuzzi incident.

The NHL has chosen to dish out 5 game suspensions for some some truly barbaric behavior over the years. 20 games suspension for offensive words that is way out of proportion to other punishments.

by The Falconer on Dec 4, 2008 10:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

For almost any other player this would not be acceptable. However the message that the league is really sending is that Avery is not welcome in the NHL

Blue and Gold (of Buffalo)

by Ebscer on Dec 4, 2008 11:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure what he said was tasteless, but a long term suspension is ridiculous.
I think the reason why Bettman is overreacting is because Elisha has (had?) a blog on NHL.com, and Bettman thinks that hockey player/starlet relationships will help bolster the leagues ratings.

by schnookums on Dec 4, 2008 7:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I can understand suspending him for the Flames game as the league was probably worried about a brawl. Suspending him for anything more than that game is ridiculous. Sure, he’s a low class buffoon, but that isn’t reason to suspend him.

by CJM23 on Dec 4, 2008 8:30 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I do feel much more comfortable letting the Stars handle this one. He’s already been suspended for two games (just happened to occur during a back-to-back scenario) so anything beyond next weekend as part of an official suspension would seem quite excessive in terms of games.

The TSN panel seemed to think 5-7 games was what it was going to end up being last night.

The bigger story will be if Dallas tries to release Avery on cause, without a buyout. I don’t think the NHLPA will put up too much of a fight on the suspension, but they will save their energy for if the Stars try to use the incident to get out of any further financial obligations to Avery.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Dec 4, 2008 9:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Here's a disturbing thought

Maybe getting the Stars out from under Avery’s contract is the goal of the league’s intervention. If the league can blow up these comments into a major incident, it would feed the Stars’ contention that he’s violated whatever personal conduct clauses exist in the Standard Players Contract.

But meanwhile, they manage to avoid paying $4M per year for three more seasons to an unpopular third liner.

I’m not trying to defend Avery, and certainly not what he said. But it is unprecedented and severe disciplinary action leveled at a player with a particularly burdensome contract. And this is the NHL…

I've been looking at the sky

by Back In Black on Dec 4, 2008 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Good Grief is right.

What a revolting development – and all to cover their PR-starved butts. Let’s hope the league doesn’t do something epically foolish and make this their Gold Standard for punishment.

Gross Misconduct with Hockey Joe

by HockeyJoe on Dec 4, 2008 11:12 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Leave it to Gary Bettman

Even when he does something right, he f*cks it up.

To treat this as equal to the stick fouls the league punishes with long suspensions is beyond ridiculous. Its bad enough that the league is making a bigger deal out of this than blatant elbows to the head [see Chris Pronger, 2007 playoffs], and hits from behind that cause a player to lose an entire season [see Randy Jones and Patrice Bergeron, 2007-08 season]. But to suggest this is so much worse than those things, shows how far out of touch Bettman and the current NHL brass it.

I wonder if Hicks and Bettman are working in tandem – at least implicitly. Maybe the League wants to be able to find more and more ways to challenge these long-term, super expensive agreements as invalid. And a broad expansion of “[conduct] detrimental to [the NHL] or the game of hockey,” as is apparently being cited as the basis for this suspension, is one way that might be possible.

by poploser on Dec 4, 2008 11:14 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Does anyone else find it odd that NHL.com has (check that – had) a candid paparazzi-style shot of Avery arriving in New York on their main page?

It’s a rhetorical question, but if the guy is that reprehensible to the league why is the NHL pushing all this coverage?

Bitter Leaf Fan: a life-long Toronto Maple Leafs fan comments on the team, the media and the exasperation...

by mf37 on Dec 4, 2008 12:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

1) Have to agree with Tom Benjamin on this. What exactly IS the line that can’t be crossed with regard to player comments about non hockey topics? Wonder why the NHLPA isn’t saying anything about the arbitrariness of it all. He didn’t hurt another PA member. He just made a verbal comment that might have been perceived as vulgar to some. he didn’t use one of George Carlin’s 7 words.
2) Yes, IF Avery had threatened a player or person OR if he said something about the game itself we could maybe understand a fine, but a long suspension? More idiocy from the NHL. Gary Bettman and Sean Avery deserve each other!.

by Fauxrumors on Dec 4, 2008 12:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

“Twenty games is the equivalent of lopping off Avery’s arms and beating him senseless with them.”

There are people in the hockey world that would pay good money to see precisely that.

That being said, as has been stated numerous times elsewhere, the problem with throwing the book at Avery is that is opens the NHL up to a lot of uncomfortable questions about the Wheel of Justice. Three games from Napoleon for conduct detrimental to the League and professional hockey seems pretty reasonable; from there, it’s up to the Stars to manage their players’ personal conduct.

by Doogie2K on Dec 4, 2008 2:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

1) In our opinion ANY suspension opens up the league (again) to being second guessed the next time a player might say something that some might find out of line.
2) Just like the double and triple standard that exists with respect to suspension length given to players for on-ice infractions, what will the line be for off ice verbal defecation? Its a slippery slope, but the NHL has been skating on that slope for years now, so we guess they’re comfortable with the inane-ness of their reactions.

by Fauxrumors on Dec 4, 2008 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Giant Douche v Turd Sandwich

And the winner is…..Gerald.

You might play a lawyer on the internet, Carpenter, but in order to be actionable, a suit for slander or libel has to prove damages.

But maybe the University of Phoenix LLB didn’t require that course.

by Dr Van Nostrum on Dec 4, 2008 4:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Oops

Or did I just slander you by suggesting you got your “degree” at an online university.

Giant Douche.

by Dr Van Nostrum on Dec 4, 2008 4:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Kind of appropriate

that this Avery thread has gotten mean-spirited and regrettable awfully fast. Gerald may offer a different opinion, but he’s been a valuable commenter in the past and I’m not going to question his credibility today.

Way to stay on point, though. These comments are getting very close to Averyish.

http://battleofcalifornia.blogspot.com/

by Earl Sleek on Dec 4, 2008 5:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs