Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.
For me, the decision has little to do with his off-ice activity. I'm interested in judging his on-ice accomplishments.
For those people who are trying to decide if and how much his off-ice troubles tarnish his retirement prospects, in fairness then we should also then be asking the converse: How mediocre a hockey player can you be and still get your number retired because you're an amazing samaritan off the ice?
I don't see anyone lobbying the case for a middling / average player to get their number retired because they worked tirelessly with charities. It's unfair and hypocritical to use off-ice elements only in the negative. Therefore, I think it's unfair to bring Theo's off-ice troubles into the discussion of whether he should have his number retired.
|
The standard for me is elite on Ice performance with acceptable off ice behaviour. I think that's reasonable and there is nothing hypocritical about it