http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jimZ1tSdPY0
The new reality for Chara is one where players of opposing teams will not trust him on the ice or off, and will slowly reconsider his hit on Pacioretty, on account of the simple statement he made: "I had no idea he was on the ice. I had no idea it was him."
That would normally send shivers up the spine of NHL players who unanimously agree Chara is the biggest and strongest player in the league. The notion that a player of Chara’s size, strength and talent plays the game with a confessed level of unconsciousness in what is arguably the fastest and potentially deadliest contact sport on the planet would (should) be frightening to everyone in the NHL.
It’s like a driver racing and overtaking someone to his left and not knowing if it’s someone on a bike or a driver in a fast car. As for the stanchion Chara was apparently also not aware of, that’s like racing and overtaking that someone to your left, guiding that someone through an intersection and into a car traveling in a perpendicular direction and then claiming that he didn’t see the red light. If he can’t see the red light it’s probably because he had his eyes on that someone to his left he was trying to overtake and slam into a car or a pole. If on the other hand he couldn’t tell who that someone to his left was, bike or car, it’s presumably because he had his eyes on the lights. If he didn’t see both the someone to his left and the lights up ahead, where was he looking and what’s he doing driving a car?
No NHL player will buy this of course, including Chara’s teammates, and it’s why he will eventually lose the players’ trust.
Two great players thus far have publicly stated they don’t buy Chara’s story or logic. Vancouver Canucks captain Henrik Sedin and San Jose Shark Joe Thornton.
“Sedin agreed with Thornton that all players know where stanchions are in rinks and understand the danger of hitting or getting hit in that area. Sedin and Thornton are Hart Trophy winners, two of the best players in the NHL.”
“I'll tell you this: if you say that you don't know where things are around the ice, I think you're not telling the truth,” Sedin said. “You play the game for 20 years, you know it's there.”
Some may say, wait, Thornton and Sedin are great players, and not all players have their talent or vision on the ice. True. But everyone, including those defending Chara, has also stated that Chara is one of the great players in the NHL, in the “best defenceman” category. Could one of the best defenceman in the league, some say the best, be that unaware, that unconscious on the ice?
And if that’s the case when he is skating, what about when he's standing still, on the ice, when the play is dead, like just before a faceoff?
That raises the other disturbing bit of info Chara shares in the same breath of his contention that he had no idea it was Pacioretty:
“It was a faceoff and we tried to set up a play. The puck went to the other side and we were racing for the puck,” said Chara. “I had no idea he was on the ice. I had no idea it was him.”
How does a team set up a play from a faceoff in the offensive zone?
Hockey players and coaches and analysts the world over know that come faceoff time everyone on both teams takes careful account of who is on the ice and where, so that when the puck is dropped, depending where it goes, there will be an appropriate response from each attacking or defending player strictly based on having carefully studied everyone’s position on the ice before the puck was dropped.
Perhaps a different story if the play had been going for some time without a whistle, or players were at the end of their shift, light headed and tired.
But this was a play fresh off a faceoff. Ask anyone in the league and they’ll be able to tell you whose line and defensive duo was on for their side and the opposing side. In fact, during a faceoff in the offensive zone the attacking team takes careful stock of who, on the opposing team, may launch a counter attack. The stats and reports are there for everyone, and used by everyone, all the time.
Both Boston and Canadiens know that on the Montreal team Pacioretty has been THE offensive counter-attack threat the last few weeks. Even the Boston coach Claude Julien would have reminded his players to keep an eye on the speedy and crafty Pacioretty at all times, especially during a faceoff in the offensive zone, because he can burn you on the counter attack. And when you are about to take a faceoff in the offensive zone, you know if Pacioretty is on the ice or not. You keep an eye on him, as Chara did and as the tape shows. You don’t suddenly forget (five seconds later) that he was there, when he did launch the counter attack and you slammed him into the stanchion. Otherwise you can’t possibly be one of the best defeceman in the league.
The basic hockey logic and reality has not been explored or mentioned by analysts and certainly not by the NHL with the lists of questions it put to Chara when making its decision to suspend him or not.
And suddenly, it’s no longer the game we thought we knew and how it’s being studied and played by players and coaches (while it’s being played) and support staff in the rafters and private boxes constantly communicating to the bench.
No, suddenly, the mechanics and game of hockey, its logic, the careful eyes on the game by everyone including players on both teams, on THAT faceoff, went dead for about 5 seconds and came back to life AFTER the hit. That’s what we’re supposed to believe.
Suddenly it’s a game of instincts, total abandon, unconsciousness, and not strategy, it's a fast game, as in too fast, players don’t know who they’re hitting, there’s no taking stock of who’s on the ice during faceoffs, and coaches don’t get stats on which opposing player is hot or cold, and don't even know who is on the ice, and whether or not to place special attention on him, and matching lines is something that never existed, apparently, etc.
Watch the tape, from the faceoff. It was not a fast game at that time. Take note of the view the giant Chara has of the defending Montreal team at the time of the faceoff, and you will see he clearly has Pacioretty in his vision while in the offensive (montreal) zone way before he gets close to him at the blue line and travels with him in the neutral zone - for the interference and the hit.
Chara’s new reality in the NHL will be well deserved, unfortunately. Unfortunate as hell, for him, for hockey, for players, and for hockey fans.
Tony Nardi
Friday, March 11, 2011
But why? Why this hit, this time?
It's what Bruce Arthur of the post asked in his Opinion, National Post · Friday, Mar. 11, 2011
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/tipping+point/4420898/story.html
There is a reason why this hit is different.
As a chid, living in Montreal, and having arrived from Italy only a few years before, I watched Bobby Rousseau (my favourite player then) lying on the ice. I believe he had been hit by a puck in the head. He was there for a while. He wore a helmet after that, and then was traded. That stuck with me because the play seemed to have stopped forever. And then helmets slowly began to show up more and more. Mind you there was the death of the player at the hands of a double check by two Golden Seals players in 1968. That changed the culture, as well.
Over the years there were many incidents in hockey. The cheap shot hit by Chelios on Brian Propp 1989 was another one. Propp is down, outish, barely moving, and a balloon of blood under his head widened gradually on the ice surface.
There have been others. To my recollection what they all had in common was where they took place, awful and devastating as they were. They happened on the ice, within the ice surface, but more important, they happened within the boards... within the air space the boards define, even if many players have, over the years, made major contact with the boards and the "glass" partition and some were badly hurt as a result.
Then came Chara's hit. A different world. A different class of hit. For the first time we saw a player's head being guided by an opposing player outside the air space defined by the boards and then thrust, at the very last minute, into a vertical support pole that seemed capable of decapitating the player on the spot or the very least kill him on impact. It took me back to the 2010 winter olympics. Simple as that. No hit has ever come close. Even more serious hits with more devastating results were not as violent even when they were. What we have here is Chara taking Pacioretty into a non-man's land area of the rink (air space) where the body, or at least the head and the rest of the body, could be separated on impact or at least give that impression. And then the noise. The actual hit. That, too was right back to the 2010 Winter Olympics nightmare.
I felt sick. And like Farber writing for sports illustrated, I thought he was dead.
The other thing to remember: two drivers traveling at 80 miles an hour, side by side, are not moving fast at all when looking at each other. They are actually still. Yet for those watching from the side of the road, the cars are going incredibly fast.
It's the same with skaters. Pacioretty and Chara for a good couple of seconds were traveling fast together but still (motionless) together as well. Fast to spectators, but not to the players or even Carey Price, a goalie, whose eyes, in a sense, have to move as fast as the speeding skaters in order to be within the same aerodynamic speed and stillness. That's why to the players on the ice, they could see what you and I couldn't.
That's why Carey Price stated, "It wasn't fast, it was slow, actually. Chara took two or three strides and then hit him". That tells you how the players see the play on the ice. It's like when we, as spectators, are having a hard time following the puck and suddenly before you know it someone has already slapped it and the opposing goalie saved it. It is simply easier to see the driver traveling next to you when you're going the same speed, than when looking at him fly by while standing at the side of the road.
The other thing I don't get and has only been talked about on the French sports network.... there was an initial interference by Chara, with Pacioretty already having disposed of the puck. Then Chara remains in interference mode, stays with Pacioretti, then the extra strides are taken and then Chara's left hand guides Pacioretty into the stanchion. The geography of this hit was actually very long. Two infractions by Chara occurred within seconds: Interference and then an illegal hit, both infractions while Pacioretty did not have possession of the puck.
As Pacioretty's head clears no doubt we will hear more of what Chara may have whispered to Pacioretty or vice versa... and then we'll know if Chara knew or didn't which player he was guiding into the non-man's land boardless airspace and stanchion.
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/tipping+point/4420898/story.html
There is a reason why this hit is different.
As a chid, living in Montreal, and having arrived from Italy only a few years before, I watched Bobby Rousseau (my favourite player then) lying on the ice. I believe he had been hit by a puck in the head. He was there for a while. He wore a helmet after that, and then was traded. That stuck with me because the play seemed to have stopped forever. And then helmets slowly began to show up more and more. Mind you there was the death of the player at the hands of a double check by two Golden Seals players in 1968. That changed the culture, as well.
Over the years there were many incidents in hockey. The cheap shot hit by Chelios on Brian Propp 1989 was another one. Propp is down, outish, barely moving, and a balloon of blood under his head widened gradually on the ice surface.
There have been others. To my recollection what they all had in common was where they took place, awful and devastating as they were. They happened on the ice, within the ice surface, but more important, they happened within the boards... within the air space the boards define, even if many players have, over the years, made major contact with the boards and the "glass" partition and some were badly hurt as a result.
Then came Chara's hit. A different world. A different class of hit. For the first time we saw a player's head being guided by an opposing player outside the air space defined by the boards and then thrust, at the very last minute, into a vertical support pole that seemed capable of decapitating the player on the spot or the very least kill him on impact. It took me back to the 2010 winter olympics. Simple as that. No hit has ever come close. Even more serious hits with more devastating results were not as violent even when they were. What we have here is Chara taking Pacioretty into a non-man's land area of the rink (air space) where the body, or at least the head and the rest of the body, could be separated on impact or at least give that impression. And then the noise. The actual hit. That, too was right back to the 2010 Winter Olympics nightmare.
I felt sick. And like Farber writing for sports illustrated, I thought he was dead.
The other thing to remember: two drivers traveling at 80 miles an hour, side by side, are not moving fast at all when looking at each other. They are actually still. Yet for those watching from the side of the road, the cars are going incredibly fast.
It's the same with skaters. Pacioretty and Chara for a good couple of seconds were traveling fast together but still (motionless) together as well. Fast to spectators, but not to the players or even Carey Price, a goalie, whose eyes, in a sense, have to move as fast as the speeding skaters in order to be within the same aerodynamic speed and stillness. That's why to the players on the ice, they could see what you and I couldn't.
That's why Carey Price stated, "It wasn't fast, it was slow, actually. Chara took two or three strides and then hit him". That tells you how the players see the play on the ice. It's like when we, as spectators, are having a hard time following the puck and suddenly before you know it someone has already slapped it and the opposing goalie saved it. It is simply easier to see the driver traveling next to you when you're going the same speed, than when looking at him fly by while standing at the side of the road.
The other thing I don't get and has only been talked about on the French sports network.... there was an initial interference by Chara, with Pacioretty already having disposed of the puck. Then Chara remains in interference mode, stays with Pacioretti, then the extra strides are taken and then Chara's left hand guides Pacioretty into the stanchion. The geography of this hit was actually very long. Two infractions by Chara occurred within seconds: Interference and then an illegal hit, both infractions while Pacioretty did not have possession of the puck.
As Pacioretty's head clears no doubt we will hear more of what Chara may have whispered to Pacioretty or vice versa... and then we'll know if Chara knew or didn't which player he was guiding into the non-man's land boardless airspace and stanchion.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Welcome to the 1920s. What next, McCarthy?
"I'm all for casting Hoffman and Giamatti in Barney's Version. They are brilliant actors and it gaurantees better business but I think it is asanine to nominate them for Genie awards. Major fail. I am also, incidentally, all for any Canadian producer, director, writer or whatever getting nominated for such a movie. They are there to celebrate Canadian achievement in film. Feel free to disagree."
Actor Tony Nappo
Dear Mr. Nappo (so people don't think I'm talking to myself),
The Genies were never meant to celebrate Canadian achievement in film. Since when? They were always meant to celebrate achievement in Canadian film. There’s a big difference.
The first example reflects a protectionist (regressive) practice where only the Canadians who worked on a Canadian film could be celebrated and honoured; in the second, anyone who participates in and contributes to making a Canadian film qualifies, whether they be crew, actors, writers, producers, stuntpeople or gerbils.
If Hoffman and Giamatti are cast in a Canadian film why should only the Canadians who worked on the film be honoured? This is tantamount to the French having soccer player Zidane on their national team in 1998 (who wins for France the world cup) while his Algerian parents were repeatedly denied French papers/status or passports. France is not the only one: a couple of European countries love and welcome the foreign talent to stay over, sleep over, contribute, spend money, etc. but with none of the privileges granted the ‘pure wool’.
Anyone who works in a film affects the quality of the film, artistically, possibly at the box office and the culture as a whole. So all should qualify when it comes time to celebrate achievement in Canadian film.
By your logic, only Americans in every American produced film, TV or play should be honoured at the Oscars, Emmys and the Tony Awards. Brent Carver should have turned down the Tony. Drowsy Chaperone had no business being nominated on Broadway for best whatever, cause it wasn’t American.
Listen, if Canadians want to put into practice today what Fascist Italy did in the 1920s, by all means, that’s fine. It’s not, but, there’s little I can do in a climate as reactionary as the one we’re living in now. But let’s be consistent, for crying out loud. Let’s make sure Canadian actors, writers and directors turn down Oscar nominations for having participated in an American film and that they can only be nominated where and if the Oscars have specific categories for foreign film, foreign actor, foreign writer, and foreign everything.
The hypocrisy, of course, is that Canadian actors work way more in American made TV movies in Canada than in anything else. On stage Canadian artists are honoured every year, in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal for best acting, best direction and best production for their work in largely foreign plays or musicals.
Years ago a Canadian actor we all know and love turned down a British play produced in Toronto for the singular reason that he purportedly wanted to concentrate strictly on Canadian made plays. Soon after he was cast in a Canadian film that did very well, was subsequently cast in a Hollywood film and then moved to LA, and has never laid eyes on a Canadian play on Canadian soil since then.
Actor Tony Nappo
Dear Mr. Nappo (so people don't think I'm talking to myself),
The Genies were never meant to celebrate Canadian achievement in film. Since when? They were always meant to celebrate achievement in Canadian film. There’s a big difference.
The first example reflects a protectionist (regressive) practice where only the Canadians who worked on a Canadian film could be celebrated and honoured; in the second, anyone who participates in and contributes to making a Canadian film qualifies, whether they be crew, actors, writers, producers, stuntpeople or gerbils.
If Hoffman and Giamatti are cast in a Canadian film why should only the Canadians who worked on the film be honoured? This is tantamount to the French having soccer player Zidane on their national team in 1998 (who wins for France the world cup) while his Algerian parents were repeatedly denied French papers/status or passports. France is not the only one: a couple of European countries love and welcome the foreign talent to stay over, sleep over, contribute, spend money, etc. but with none of the privileges granted the ‘pure wool’.
Anyone who works in a film affects the quality of the film, artistically, possibly at the box office and the culture as a whole. So all should qualify when it comes time to celebrate achievement in Canadian film.
By your logic, only Americans in every American produced film, TV or play should be honoured at the Oscars, Emmys and the Tony Awards. Brent Carver should have turned down the Tony. Drowsy Chaperone had no business being nominated on Broadway for best whatever, cause it wasn’t American.
Listen, if Canadians want to put into practice today what Fascist Italy did in the 1920s, by all means, that’s fine. It’s not, but, there’s little I can do in a climate as reactionary as the one we’re living in now. But let’s be consistent, for crying out loud. Let’s make sure Canadian actors, writers and directors turn down Oscar nominations for having participated in an American film and that they can only be nominated where and if the Oscars have specific categories for foreign film, foreign actor, foreign writer, and foreign everything.
The hypocrisy, of course, is that Canadian actors work way more in American made TV movies in Canada than in anything else. On stage Canadian artists are honoured every year, in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal for best acting, best direction and best production for their work in largely foreign plays or musicals.
Years ago a Canadian actor we all know and love turned down a British play produced in Toronto for the singular reason that he purportedly wanted to concentrate strictly on Canadian made plays. Soon after he was cast in a Canadian film that did very well, was subsequently cast in a Hollywood film and then moved to LA, and has never laid eyes on a Canadian play on Canadian soil since then.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
A cultural wasteland with the CBC's royal seal of approval (assuming you were watching)
If anyone needs proof that culture in English Canada means nothing more than projecting a triumphant image of culture, of being culturally advanced and relevant, even superior, among first world countries, while gorging on and drowning in sodium-laden, fast food, tabloid culture from south of the border, just look at yesterday’s CBC's The National 3-minute story on the National Theatre School and today’s Toronto Star full page on Charlie Sheen’s meltdown.
I never said the National Theatre School was undeserving of celebrating it’s 50th anniversary for training actors. The CBC News’ editors with their bureaucratic mindset believe fundamentally that Canada is undeserving of culture given the 3-minute dog bone they dedicated to the National Theatre School story. It’s the news media across the country that deems Canada’s viewing and reading public culturally dumb and unsophisticated.
My CBC (raw) interview was almost an hour long. The crux of what I said was that the National Theatre School’s 50th should make us question what ALL theatre schools in Canada have done with the training of actors given that almost 90% of our theatrical output and over 98% of our movie screens showcase and project American, British and foreign made plays and films. The problem is not with the American, British and foreign works. The problem is with the dearth of authentic Canadian works by its theatre and film artists reflecting the time and society they live in. That the few homegrown plays, films and TV produced in Canada do not reflect and exclude – for the most part – the multiracial and multicultural population riding our city buses and subways should also be a concern.
A theatre school, an institution, can’t be a cocooned laboratory disconnected from its society. It can’t be a peace treaty between Canada’s Two Solitudes to heal the wounds of the Plains of Abraham – the premise on which NTS was founded. It can’t profess to prep actors for gladiator stardom south of the border. Canada is not what it was in the 1950s. Above and beyond supplying and distilling an actors' skills and techniques, a school and its students must reflect – be connected to - the landscape and society they inhabit. The students – and what they do later in the professional realm – best reflect the quality of the school and culture. It is not for the school to define and shape students' artistic qualities. That’s branding. And should be reserved for cattle not humans. A school should encourage critical thinking in artists, and the skills and toolboxes artists acquire (together with their innate talent) should serve and nourish the creation of culturally relevant works.
Jazz musicians and composers of the ‘20s, ‘30s, ‘40s, ‘50’s and ‘60s for the most part did not attend music institutions. Yet they perfected their musical skills and toolbox on the job, reflected their reality through their music, and contributed to humanity the 20th century’s most relevant music with Duke Ellington being the 20th century’s greatest and most prolific composer. In the opinion of many Jazz also predicted the civil rights movement.
Yet here in Canada, we have no problem shutting eyes and ears to reality, promoting facsimile culture, dedicating full page ink to a Hollywood star's personal problems, justifying it as culture, and bragging to the world that we're a world class country when it comes to culture.
Silver, golden and centennial anniversaries in Canada simply project an image of itself out of touch with reality. It was the case with Expo ‘67. And as always, after the party, reality hits.
see: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/The_National/1242568525/ID=1830669048
I never said the National Theatre School was undeserving of celebrating it’s 50th anniversary for training actors. The CBC News’ editors with their bureaucratic mindset believe fundamentally that Canada is undeserving of culture given the 3-minute dog bone they dedicated to the National Theatre School story. It’s the news media across the country that deems Canada’s viewing and reading public culturally dumb and unsophisticated.
My CBC (raw) interview was almost an hour long. The crux of what I said was that the National Theatre School’s 50th should make us question what ALL theatre schools in Canada have done with the training of actors given that almost 90% of our theatrical output and over 98% of our movie screens showcase and project American, British and foreign made plays and films. The problem is not with the American, British and foreign works. The problem is with the dearth of authentic Canadian works by its theatre and film artists reflecting the time and society they live in. That the few homegrown plays, films and TV produced in Canada do not reflect and exclude – for the most part – the multiracial and multicultural population riding our city buses and subways should also be a concern.
A theatre school, an institution, can’t be a cocooned laboratory disconnected from its society. It can’t be a peace treaty between Canada’s Two Solitudes to heal the wounds of the Plains of Abraham – the premise on which NTS was founded. It can’t profess to prep actors for gladiator stardom south of the border. Canada is not what it was in the 1950s. Above and beyond supplying and distilling an actors' skills and techniques, a school and its students must reflect – be connected to - the landscape and society they inhabit. The students – and what they do later in the professional realm – best reflect the quality of the school and culture. It is not for the school to define and shape students' artistic qualities. That’s branding. And should be reserved for cattle not humans. A school should encourage critical thinking in artists, and the skills and toolboxes artists acquire (together with their innate talent) should serve and nourish the creation of culturally relevant works.
Jazz musicians and composers of the ‘20s, ‘30s, ‘40s, ‘50’s and ‘60s for the most part did not attend music institutions. Yet they perfected their musical skills and toolbox on the job, reflected their reality through their music, and contributed to humanity the 20th century’s most relevant music with Duke Ellington being the 20th century’s greatest and most prolific composer. In the opinion of many Jazz also predicted the civil rights movement.
Yet here in Canada, we have no problem shutting eyes and ears to reality, promoting facsimile culture, dedicating full page ink to a Hollywood star's personal problems, justifying it as culture, and bragging to the world that we're a world class country when it comes to culture.
Silver, golden and centennial anniversaries in Canada simply project an image of itself out of touch with reality. It was the case with Expo ‘67. And as always, after the party, reality hits.
see: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/The_National/1242568525/ID=1830669048
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)