Results of Simmonds Slur

The NHL has ruled on at least one issue I expected them to rule on. And it came from my old friend Colin Campbell. (Where's the sarcasm font?)

Wayne Simmonds will not be punished for the slur "possibly" made on the ice towards Sean Avery, an advocate for gay rights though not a homosexual himself.

Campbell issued the following statement:

"All Players, Coaches and Officials in the National Hockey League deserve the respect of their peers, and have the absolute right to function in a work environment that is free from racially or sexually-based innuendo or derision. This is the National Hockey League's policy and it will remain so going forward.

"It also is important to emphasize that the National Hockey League holds, and will continue to hold, our Players to higher standards with respect to their conduct both on and off the ice. While we recognize that the emotion involved in certain on-ice confrontations may lead to the use of highly charged and sometimes offensive language and commentary, certain lines cannot be crossed. Specifically, we have for many years emphasized to our Clubs and Players that commentary directed at the race or ethnicity of other participants in the game (or even non-participants), or that is otherwise socially or morally inappropriate or potentially hurtful -- including as it may relate to sexual orientation -- is absolutely unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

"With that as background, we have looked into the allegations relating to the possible use of a homophobic slur by a Flyers player in the Rangers/Flyers preseason game last night in Philadelphia. Since there are conflicting accounts of what transpired on the ice, we have been unable to substantiate with the necessary degree of certainty what was said and by whom. Specifically, Flyers Player Wayne Simmonds has expressly denied using the homophobic slur he is alleged to have said. Additionally, none of the on-ice officials close to the altercation in question heard any inappropriate slurs uttered by either of the primary antagonists. In light of this, we are unable at this time to take any disciplinary action with respect to last night's events. To the extent we become aware of additional information conclusively establishing that an inappropriate slur was invoked, we are reserving the option to revisit the matter."

A couple of things. Saying that there are conflicting reports is a bit of stretch. Avery says it was said. Simmonds just said "things were said, but he doesn't recall that". And the officials didn't hear anything. That's one positive, one i-don't-recall, and one i-didn't-hear-nothing.

Here's where things get complicated. I'm referring to the original statements Simmonds made to a pool of reporters after the game. This is that video again, if you want to see it.

And it's not just me that thinks Simmonds didn't give a denial. The New York Post had an article published at 2:08am after the incident. And I quote:

"Though Simmonds implied Avery had provoked him through words of his own, the Flyers player did not deny the charge, stating repeatedly that he could not remember exactly what words were exchanged early in Philadelphia's 4-3 victory."

Again, proof that it is not a denial. But in the official statements sent to the NHL, Simmonds denied saying the statements. ABC News reports, quote,

"Video replay appeared to catch Simmonds making an anti-gay slur against Avery during a preseason game in Philadelphia on Monday night. Avery confirmed that Simmonds made the remark, but Simmonds didn't reveal if he did. However, Campbell said in his statement that Simmonds "expressly denied" making it."

That report came out today after the ruling.

I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I may have to agree with Campbell in not punishing. No official heard it. There's no audio of the slur, just video. And I cannot for the life of me find any footage of the incident.

DO NOT LOOK AT THE YOUTUBE RESULTS IF YOU SEARCH FOR THE SIMMONDS SLUR.

There are about five videos that are labeled in such a way that make you think the video will show the incident. They don't. They are all the same video with still images and directions to a seperate website claiming YouTube has a policy against the posting of the original content. That link will not give you the results you were looking for. The link is corrupt.

The closest I have is this from the CBC which came out before the ruling.

But I must say you can't completely trust the video. Yeah, it may really REALLY look like he made a slur, but "vaccum flag" would look bad if you only read the persons lips. And no, I don't know what Simmonds is accussed of saying. I'm sure that he did actually use a slur, but I can't prove it without a video. Even with video, is that enough to actually suspend someone? It would set a bad level of precidence. This wasn't a gesture gone unnoticed by the officals. You can absolutely confirm that. Without audio for a verbal attack, there is that level of doubt (even if it's minimal) that has to make the video evidence inconclusive. It would be wrong of the NHL to start suspending players without absolute evidence.

So Campbell might be right in saying the evidence doesn't justify a suspension. He did leave the door open to revisit the case, but I can't believe that will ever happen. I think this might be the right move, not even taking into account Simmonds recent victim status of a racial act.

For anyone curious, Campbell made the ruling on this potential discipline and not Brendan Shanahan because Shanahan is in charge of player safety and this incident was not a safety issue.

Now, let's look at the fallout of the decision not to discipline Simmonds. Remember how I said that a lack of discipline against Simmonds could result in the gay rights groups having a problem with the NHL? Yeah. It happened, but not nearly to the extend I thought might happen.

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation called for Simmonds to apologize for the slur and pressed the NHL to educate its fans about such remarks.

"Hate speech and anti-gay slurs have no place on the ice rink," GLAAD acting president Mike Thompson said in a statement. "The word that Simmonds used is the same word that is hurled at LGBT youth on the playground and in our schools, creating a climate of intolerance and hostility.

"He should not only apologize for this anti-gay outburst, but the Philadelphia Flyers and the NHL have a responsibility to take action and educate their fans about why this word is unacceptable."

GLAAD said it has talked to the Flyers and the NHL about what specific steps can be taken. The organization added that it has worked with sports leagues such as the NBA, Major League Baseball, and the WWE to address issues of homophobia in sports.

I agree with GLAAD. They seem extrodinarily level headed with their suggested response to this incident. They didn't call for fines or donations. No speeches or community service. No suspension even. They simply want an apology and to have the NHL educate on homophobia in sports. Their Sports Resource Center doesn't exactly have a set plan readily available for public view, but does offer a few stats:

•Openly lesbian tennis player Billie Jean King was the first tennis start to be named Sports Illustrated’s Sportsman of the Year in 1972.
•When asked if it was okay for openly gay athletes to participate in sports, over three-quarters of Sports Illustrated readers said “yes.”
•Many of the same readers (68%), however, also admitted it would hurt an athlete’s career to be openly gay.
•Even when openly LGBT athletes win big, like Matthew Mitcham’s Olympic gold in Beijing, the media often doesn’t include details about their stories and families like it does for their straight peers.
•There are more than 600 gay teams and leagues across the country, including basketball, rugby, softball, cycling, water polo, tennis, crew, soccer, football, volleyball and ice hockey.
•An openly transgender athlete has never competed in the Olympics, but media have started talking about the policies that make it hard for trans athletes to participate.
•Over 20,000 LGBT athletes participated in the Chicago Gay Games and the Montreal World Outgames in 2006.

While I cannot blindly accept a program without looking at some details, I certainly don't think it would be a bad thing to highly consider it and perhaps use some of their suggestions. But the apology? That's a no brainer. That needs to happen immediately. Even in the event that Simmonds didn't actually say a slur, there is no way he can convience people he didn't. Bite the bullet and talk about how certain phrases are wrong. He might be able to get away with just educating on the harm of words without having to admit he said the slur. You don't have to say there's an elephant in the room, but talk about the harm of animals with trunks and large ears and tusks.

I'm impressed with the tact that the NHL showed in issuing it's response, though I do think they should work with GLAAD in some way. What's the harm? Many will see it as a pure PR stunt and not really listen to the message. Some will actually listen and learn, a win for all. I just don't see it being very negative. In this day and age of such pomp and circumstance with the public relations aspect of professional sports, I can't see an attempt by the NHL to promote anti-homophobic behavior turning a huge number of people away from the NHL. Frankly, people have come to expect such actions and responses to these types of incidents.

The NHL is already taking a step in the right direction in a very small way with Campbell's statement, but more, I'm sure, could be done. I don't have a suggetion on that though at this time.