Did Don Cherry go too far this time?????

October 6, 2011, 10:51 pm


THE CANADIAN PRESS

TORONTO -- Hockey personality Don Cherry called three former NHL tough guys "pukes" for speaking out against fighting Thursday on the season's first edition of CBC's "Hockey Night in Canada."

Speaking on his popular "Coach's Corner" segment, Cherry called out former enforcers Stu Grimson, Chris Nilan and Jim Thomson for suggesting that NHL players who fight are prone to substance abuse. The comments come after three former NHLers known for fighting died over the summer.





"The ones that I am really disgusted with ... are the bunch of pukes that fought before: Stu Grimson, Chris Nilan and Jim Thomson," an animated Cherry said.

"(They say) 'Oh, the reason that they're drinking, (taking) drugs and alcoholics is because they're fighting.' You turncoats, you hypocrites. If there's one thing I'm not it's a hypocrite. You guys were fighters, and now you don't want guys to make the same living you did."

Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy

Cut the dude some slack, eh! He probably didn't have time to change his Depends before he went on air and his bung hole was chafed.

Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus

I'm sure some people didn't bother to watch the video and therefore don't know what he and MacLean were talking about.


This guy sums it up pretty well:



If you watch the video, you'll see that before he the infamous 'puke' comment, Cherry made a number of salient points and comments which included:

-saying that he believes those who " took advantage" of the 3 so-called tough guys suicides and used them as an excuse to get up on their anti-fighting soap box should be "ashamed of yourselves" for doing something like that.

-pointed out that prior to this years deaths, since 1999 there had been 8 suicides of NHL or former NHL players, none of whom were fighters and he also said that during the years he himself played, there were 4 suicides, again no fighters.

Cherry then even sort of in his own endearing way, almost apologized in advance to " the kids" who were watching for saying what he was about to say about the three named NHL former fighters, i.e., "the pukes." Cherry was actually incorporating the word puke that former-NHLer Georges Laraque had used when describing what it made him feel like doing when he heard people slamming fighting in hockey.

So while I may understand where Don Cherry is coming from and why he said what he said, I disagree with him for specifically naming the three ex-NHLers. I think it would have been sufficient for him to say his usual "you'se guys, and you know who you are" and be done with it.

Read more: --

Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv

I honestly don't have too much of a problem with what he said. Any of the former fighters that suddenly want fighting removed now that they have retired from the game are being hypocrites. Don Cherry isn't wrong by saying that.

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear

That's funny considering your disingenuous requests for maturity and civility in other discussions.

Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy

And you complain others don't have a sense of humour.

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny

Of course, it's entirely possible that they might have learned something about the physical and mental damage that it causes, but I understand your point: for anyone to change an opinion on something they personally have done makes them a hypocrite and a puke.

So that's good, we'll remember that - make sure you encourage your children to make every mistake in life that you did. Otherwise, well, you're a hypocrite and a puke, by your own definition.

Rock on, kids!

Any of the former fighters that suddenly want fighting removed now that they have retired from the game are being hypocrites.

Of course, it's entirely possible that they might have learned something about the physical and mental damage that it causes, but I understand your point: for anyone to change an opinion on something they personally have done makes them a hypocrite and a puke

Don Cherry isn't wrong by saying that.

That is what needs to get removed from hockey, not fighting.

Quote: Originally Posted by Nationhood

Let me tell you about some of these so called hypocrites. Some of these retired 'hypocrites' have health and physical problems from all the headshots and fights they experienced on the rink. Some are suffering because they didn't know any better at the time, and they're trying to improve the culture of hockey by removing head shots so other players won't have to suffer the same fate as them, and they're hypocrites.
It's nasty to underplay the real ramifications of head shots and physical blows to the body, and it's even more nasty to call these people hypocrites and whiners. If not ignorant.

People can and do change their opinion in retrospect. Especially after circumstances change, and facts are presented. Like the real physical risks.


Exactly. That's why shadowshiv won't retract what he says when reason comes to prove him wrong, because if he changed his mind he would be a hypocrite.


Yes he is. If you don't want to be hard on good old Don, we can just say he's being thoughtless, reactionary and plain stupid on this.
I mean, he did later apologize for saying what he said. I'm not going to speculate on whether he was genuine or not, but he did say "He didn't want the kids to hear that".


Well, the biggest and most articulate advocates on reform to hockey are the ones advocating banning the head shot. Ken Dryden, for example. A former NHLer, and a former MP. It's good you agree with the mostly popular sentiment that headshots should be banned.

Wider debate and discussion about the health of hockey fights is warranted too, but I think head shots are a good start.

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear

That's funny considering your disingenuous requests for maturity and civility in other discussions.

Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv

It's not my definition. It's what the definition of hypocrite is in the dictionary.

So shall we ban boxing as well? There's fighting there, and there is a lot more damage being done to the fighters there. Also, most of the concussions in hockey are from hits from behind or elbows flying into the opposing player's heads. That is what needs to get removed from hockey, not fighting.

Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv

I honestly don't have too much of a problem with what he said. Any of the former fighters that suddenly want fighting removed now that they have retired from the game are being hypocrites. Don Cherry isn't wrong by saying that.

Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_Soldier

I move that this thread be merged with Dumps thread.

Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_Soldier

I move that this thread be merged with Dumps thread.

Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato

If your a retired soldier then Im sure you can relate to mental illness as lots coming back from Afghanistan are now suffering with it,it's not something to make light of and it's killing a lot of young people through suicide.
It's a disease,let's treat it as such.

Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_Soldier

Kakato. I did not make light of suicide or post traumatic disorder. I was referring to the fact that we have two threads on Don Cherry and whether or not people should think he should be fired from the CBC.

Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato

After watching our hometown boy and best scrapper in the NHL commit suicide a couple months ago I would have to disagree with you.
I'm glad they are finally coming out and talking about it as it was well known Rick Rypien had some problems and he was nowhere close to retiring,some people did get an interview from him before his death and it will be out sometime in the future and it's all about why he took his leave of absence from the Canucks.
The one thing everyone learned in high school was you didnt mess with the Rypien boys.

RIP Rick.
--

Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv

And not all the hockey suicides can be attributed to fighting. Some people have depression, it doesn't matter what their profession is. Michael Landsberg wrote an excellent article about it(at tsn.ca) where he was talking about how crippling it can be, and how someone may have depression and you may not even know it. His article was about how he suffers from depression and how his friend Wade Belak also suffered from it(and ultimately lost his battle to it ). I'm not sure if the article is still there(their archives only go so far back), but if you can find it, I recommend reading it.
I like fighting in hockey, I'll make no bones(nor excuses) about it. However, I think fighting has it's time and place. Just dropping the gloves to "fire up your team" or the fights that are obviously staged/planned have no place in hockey. I think that fighting should be in response to someone on the opposing team taking liberties with your teammates. By liberties I mean dirty hits that the refs don't catch. Slew-foots, elbows to the head, etc. There are some players that just don't show any respect at all, and when Campbell was in charge of disciplinary actions, he was way too light with the punishment. I think that Shannahan will perform in a better capacity and perhaps the dirty hits/lack of respect will finally start to wane.

Quote has been trimmed, See full post:

Quote: Originally Posted by Goober

Concussion are cumlative in the damages to the brain. The more you have the more damage. Now the new Sherrif will I am sure set a new tone. But tougher penalties costing the Team itself based upon dollars is one option.

Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv

I just hope he treats all of the players the same. I don't care if it's a superstar like Ovechkin or a 4th-line plugger, I want them to get the same punishment for the same infraction. Ovechkin has been borderline dirty on more than one occasion during his career, and if he was given a substantial suspension, then perhaps he would not do it any more.