Quote:
Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19
^Mooney is a Puck Daddy columnist, but I don't think he has Botchford's back at all there. He's being sarcastic, and saying that Botchford's counter argument is a straw man.
This is wrong. You're deliberately altering his statement. He said he has never seen a particular situation where a player calls out a reporter while said reporter is interviewing someone else. Your "gotcha" methodology here is pointless and distracts from the real issue, which is....
|
Here is Botchford's comments, directly from his mouth, word for word.
Quote:
|
No I've never heard in a scrum a player shout out "shut up", use a curse word, and then ask everyone in the media, "have any of you played the game?" No, I have never seen that before. .... I've never seen a situation like that
|
I am not altering anything. Botchford said he has never seen a situation like that before. He repeated it. I have shown that he has, in fact, commented on it. He may not have been in the room with Keith and Thomson, but he has clearly heard, maybe secondhand, that a player asked a reporter if they've played the game. This isn't disputable, as he clearly has knowledge that it has happened before, and in his hometown. He defended the reporter then, and he thinks he's doing it again here.
Botchford didn't even answer the question directly. He was asked if he's ever heard a comment like that, in all his years in a dressing room, in all his years in a Vancouver dressing room. Botchford gave a round about answer to say he's never seen this specific situation. That wasn't the question. The correct, and truthful, answer would have been, "Yes I have heard locker room banter, off colour jokes and players asking if reporters had played the game. In fact, I've written about some of them".
How is my methodology of pointing out facts pointless? Just because you don't like them, doesn't make them pointless. Just because you think something is the real issue, doesn't make it the real issue. I believe the issue is should Botchford have printed the comment. I think that's what most people are debating. I don't think he has. I think to defend himself, he's been caught in a lie, where he has shown that he's seen similar instances. No, they are not exact, but they are very similar, including location.
If you can't see the difference between Thornton masturbating on the ic, and a hockey team getting bodies in front of the net to help score goals, I don't know how to help you. You can use any tone, setting, caps lock or text colour you want, but in no way, shape or form is Thornton stating a truthful, specific way to help their team win hockey games anywhere near the same thing as Thornton saying he would whip out his rooster and stroke it if he scored four goals. The fact that he declined to repeat the joke on camera and would have no problem saying they need bodies in front of the net is proof enough of this.