A Winning Habit
Fansided

Brandon Prust: Condemn or Commend?

By Lissa Albert

facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
2 of 2
Next

“What’s said on the ice, stays on the ice.”

No longer. The league has delighted in mics on players in these playoffs. They have put mics on players in past years, and during the regular season as well. It’s great entertainment, no doubt. But it negates the sanctity of that adage.

And I believe it’s time to speak out. Hockey as we know it was born right here in my home town. Montreal is not only the oldest hockey club in the NHL, it is the founding city of hockey itself. Hockey is a venerable game, and those who follow it do so with loyalty, reverence and excitement for every event.

That’s why the game has to be brought back to the standards on which it was founded: corruption is everywhere but if we cannot enjoy our favorite pastime without worrying that behind the scenes, the game is being debased by those who are unfit to carry out their roles, it will be a sad day indeed.

Feb 28, 2015; Montreal, Quebec, CAN; General view during the Canadian national anthem before the game between the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Montreal Canadiens at the Bell Centre. Mandatory Credit: Eric Bolte-USA TODAY Sports

The incident between Prust and Watson has brought this into question. And while I understand the NHL wants to keep this quiet, keep it under wraps, I don’t believe it’s time to worry about anything but the virtue of hockey and all those associated with it. Not the egos of the NHL honchos or those associated with the League. The Game.

“This is an internal matter.”

Staying with my previous point, if coaches and players are required – and they are, in their contracts – to face the media, after every game, every series, why are referees immune? Why is there such secrecy surrounding the league’s arbiters? Why is there no insight as to their calls – especially when there is controversy?

And why, when one is accused of wrongdoing, are people more incensed at the accuser speaking publicly than at the allegations he brings forth?

Add to that the fact that there is video showing this referee scolding Prust as Prust sits in the box. As Fraser says, the optics are alarming. Since when did professional hockey players – Prust is 31 years old – become children to be chastised in public?

This is the age of technology; cameras, mics, video and the Internet have largely ensured that nothing remains, or stays private.

Clearly there was something going on in the interaction between Prust and Watson. And while it is being investigated by the NHL (according to Fraser), it has been said by others that the results should remain private.

Again, I disagree. While not everything has to be out there for hockey fans to know, this is now growing bigger by the hour. I believe every fan of hockey deserves to know the results of the investigation. And I believe that, if found to be provable, Watson’s statements to Prust should be punishable by some measures to protect Prust, his team, and every other team in the league.

Because if Watson is biased against Brandon Prust, and could take it out on the Canadiens, who’s to say there’s not another player on any of the other 29 teams who will push his buttons as well?

A referee is not supposed to get personal. And if Watson did (my instincts say he did), he is no longer able to stay impartial, and therefore no longer possesses the qualities of a referee in the professional league.

Irony:

Kerry Fraser stating outright that what Prust did, by speaking out, will affect him from here on in; in essence, confirming that the referees will have it in for Prust. This tweet says it best:

Brandon Prust showed courage in speaking out, knowing the consequences. Am I happy there are consequences that could adversely affect the Habs? No.

Am I happy Prust has spoken out? No I’m not.

I’m proud that he has. It’s time someone did.

More from A Winning Habit

Home/Editorials