Hockey Abuse Reckoning

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

In my experience, not in hockey, you gain respect...and respect is what it is all about.

But your experience is not the same as everyone else's experiences. It seems to me with how much of this stuff about inappropriate behaviour and abusive tactics promoted by hockey coaches from years ago is coming out now that it was never as simple as having a "man to man" chat for a lot of these players.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right, but that was likely not something that occurred in the age of "suck it up and take it like a man." And even if it did on occasion occur, it also seems likely that these conversations were not received well by the person in authority, and in such cases as Akim Aliu's actually contributed to furthering the abuse.

I still think that you are glossing over the real power that coaches for a long time weirded, and the real fear that young players under their charge experienced. For some, the effects were so traumatizing that they continued to suffer repercussions into later adulthood. As mentioned earlier, Johan Franzen—a 32-year-old 12-year professional player—suffered a nervous breakdown as a result of his treatment by his coach.

Yes, I understand the old ways of coaching, and possibly the odd one today, would be considered abusive, but I still think there is a right way to handle the situation without upsetting the delicate balance of power between coach and players.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Yes, I understand the old ways of coaching, and possibly the odd one today, would be considered abusive, but I still think there is a right way to handle the situation without upsetting the delicate balance of power between coach and players.

I think you are most likely oversimplifying the situations that a lot of players endured.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think you are most likely oversimplifying the situations that a lot of players endured.

Probably the great majority of ex NHL players are living good happy and successful lives, in spite of what they had to put up with by coaches.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I would think the first step for a player would be to have a one on one private conversation with the coach i.e. man to man looking him in the eye.

I did that once to an overbearing boss in the early 90's. know where that got me?
abused more, then fired and replaced.

I'm sure that's on the players minds when thoughts of "manning up" occurred to them. it's not a fantasy world where the bully bonds with the victim over their manly bravery and newfound respect for each other.

I don't think many players would jeopardize what often is their slim hold on the NHL and pro hockey.
especially in eras gone by.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Probably the great majority of ex NHL players are living good happy and successful lives, in spite of what they had to put up with by coaches.

So that makes abuse ok?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Probably the great majority of ex NHL players are living good happy and successful lives, in spite of what they had to put up with by coaches.

Maybe. I tend to think the main targets are the marginal players. The good ones don't draw the coach's ire, the more successful lower line players either fall into the category of coach's pet, getting ice time and better line spots (Bouma, say) while the ones they perceive as more talented but lazy get the abuse (Sven, Aliu).

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I did that once to an overbearing boss in the early 90's. know where that got me?
abused more, then fired and replaced.

I'm sure that's on the players minds when thoughts of "manning up" occurred to them. it's not a fantasy world where the bully bonds with the victim over their manly bravery and newfound respect for each other.

I don't think many players would jeopardize what often is their slim hold on the NHL and pro hockey.
especially in eras gone by.

I see your point.

Then perhaps the responsibility for addressing coaching abuse should fall on the captain. If he is afraid of losing his job for speaking up, then he shouldn't be captain.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I see your point.

Then perhaps the responsibility for addressing coaching abuse should fall on the captain. If he is afraid of losing his job for speaking up, then he shouldn't be captain.

Since when does a captaincy come with a career protection shield??

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Since when does a captaincy come with a career protection shield??

EDIT: I would think a good captain should stick up for the players under him, in cases of abuse. I wouldn't think it went so far as career protection.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I would think the best captains should offer that.

Offered by the captain??? So that is just automatically honoured by the coach? What are you talking about?

Honest question, do you understand the power a coach holds over the direction a players career goes?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I would think a good captain should stick up for the players under him, in cases of abuse. I wouldn't think it went so far as career protection.

I guess I’ll respond to the edit too as it’s completely different.

Last sentence there... so... You don’t understand the entirety of this conversation. That is what we are talking about. The power your boss has over you and what conduct is appropriate. Completely ignoring “normal jobs”, coaches are your boss. The old mentality of “You do what your told, put your head down, and take the abuse” is what they are trying to fix. The reason 20 somethings don’t speak up is the coach holds their NHL dream in the palm of their hand.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I guess I’ll respond to the edit too as it’s completely different.

Last sentence there... so... You don’t understand the entirety of this conversation. That is what we are talking about. The power your boss has over you and what conduct is appropriate. Completely ignoring “normal jobs”, coaches are your boss. The old mentality of “You do what your told, put your head down, and take the abuse” is what they are trying to fix. The reason 20 somethings don’t speak up is the coach holds their NHL dream in the palm of their hand.

I think the op started out saying that he didn't pretend to know what the solution is. Do you know?

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think the op started out saying that he didn't pretend to know what the solution is. Do you know?

Step 1 is not be silent, I believe that's where we're at right now.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

Step 1 is not be silent, I believe that's where we're at right now.

I had a brother-in-law whose favorite saying was, "There are no problems....just solutions".

What we need is Step two.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Probably the great majority of ex NHL players are living good happy and successful lives, in spite of what they had to put up with by coaches.

This is fairly irrelevant. Most players getting through okay does not somehow solve the problem, nor does it help the much smaller number of players who have suffered latent effects of abuse from coaches.

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I had a brother-in-law whose favorite saying was, "There are no problems....just solutions".

What we need is Step two.

Step two is removing abusers from positions of authority. I think we are seeing that taking place as we speak.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think the op started out saying that he didn't pretend to know what the solution is. Do you know?

I entered the conversation when you claimed to know that step one is talking to the coach “man to man“ (which give me my own vibes on your overall take here, but I’ll try not to read too much into it). I am explaining to you why that doesn’t happen, which has been discussed at length (it was the entire start of this thing, a 10 year old incident).

[Azure]

Originally Posted by jlh2640

I am sure Osullivan, Sopel are not lying and Crawford should be investigated. But now we are listening to guys like Sean Avery and Dan Carcillo. . . . . . There has to be some thought in there of the type of guy who is making the complaints.

I believe O'Sullivan has been saying it for a while, but nobody was listening.

[SuperMatt18]

I wonder if the next shoe to drop will be around hazing incidents.

Some of the stuff you hear about hazing is worse then anything these coaches have been accused of so far. I’m not sure it’s as big of an issue now as it was in the past, but I feel like there are lots of horrible stories there that could also have big shockwaves in the hockey world.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Step two is removing abusers from positions of authority. I think we are seeing that taking place as we speak.

In order to make the process fair and within the law, for removal of a coach on grounds of abusive behavior, it may be more difficult than you think. Also the op is a lawyer and does not pretend to know the solutions.

1. The accused coach will have all rights under the Constitution, including the assumption of his innocence until proven guilty.

2. the term abuse in NHL hockey will have to be clearly defined, and yet not restrict the coach from doing what he considers reasonable to achieve the desired result.

3. I also think the NHL should develop a manifesto for coaches, providing one is not already in place.

4. Just a thought but perhaps more responsibility should be placed on captains to defend players from what they perceive as being abused,