Shane Doan

[Goonie]

Attention: Canadians will likely be the only ones this thread applies to.

I wanted to ask this question in the cartoon thread, but thought I should just make a new one.

What do our Quebecois posters think of the whole Shane Doan incident? Do you think it was right to call for him to be stripped of his role? If so, was the timing of that demand (the middle of the tournament) appropriate? What do you think of Hockey Canada's role? Should their decisions be independent of parliament? Since they receive government financing is it reasonable for them to be called to testify? Was the reason why they were called reasonable? What do you think of the NHL's findings that say that Shane Doan did not say "****ing frenchmen" or "****ing french". Would it matter to you if he had said those words given the time and place of the allegation? Does context even matter here? If he said "Cuje, 4 french refs in Montreal, what do you expect," like he claims, does that statement bother you? Ignorance of the French/Quebecois/Montrealer label aside, if the comment he claims he made bothers you, would the statement "Cuje, 4 Torontonian refs in Toronto , what do you expect?". What about an international game played in the states: "Cuje, 4 American refs in the States, what do you expect?" Do those statements bother you? Does context matter here? Or does the label issue bother you? What's everyone make of that hat trick?

I am basically trying to get an idea of how Quebecers viewed this whole incident ranging from parliaments involvement down to on ice etiquette. Please feel free to elaborate away from my questions.

 

[De Lorimier]

Attention: Canadians will likely be the only ones this thread applies to.

I wanted to ask this question in the cartoon thread, but thought I should just make a new one.

What do our Quebecois posters think of the whole Shane Doan incident? Do you think it was right to call for him to be stripped of his role? If so, was the timing of that demand (the middle of the tournament) appropriate? What do you think of Hockey Canada's role? Should their decisions be independent of parliament? Since they receive government financing is it reasonable for them to be called to testify? Was the reason why they were called reasonable? What do you think of the NHL's findings that say that Shane Doan did not say "****ing frenchmen" or "****ing french". Would it matter to you if he had said those words given the time and place of the allegation? Does context even matter here? If he said "Cuje, 4 french refs in Montreal, what do you expect," like he claims, does that statement bother you? Ignorance of the French/Quebecois/Montrealer label aside, if the comment he claims he made bothers you, would the statement "Cuje, 4 Torontonian refs in Toronto , what do you expect?". What about an international game played in the states: "Cuje, 4 American refs in the States, what do you expect?" Do those statements bother you? Does context matter here? Or does the label issue bother you? What's everyone make of that hat trick?

I am basically trying to get an idea of how Quebecers viewed this whole incident ranging from parliaments involvement down to on ice etiquette. Please feel free to elaborate away from my questions.

MAN that's a lot of questions! I'll give you my take on the whole thing.

First, all the politicians involved in this are whores. Duceppe, Layton, Dion, Coderre, even the Conservatives who kept quiet on a subject that you know they would have loved to come out as the ones saving the good Christian captain of the national hockey team. Sadly, everyone had the same goal: gaining votes in Québec.

Wich leads us to the question of wether or not is did affect people here. At first (and that goes back all the way to 2005 now), the knee-jerk reaction was: "The league doesn't care about slurs against Francophones" following the Cormier/Doan incident. Nobody was sure who said the damn thing. Jacques Demers said it was Nagy, the official said it was Doan. Then Coderre got a hold of it for the elections. "I sue you, you sue me". Yadayadayada. At that point, it's already a circus. Doan being appointed captain created what we saw last week.

I think most people here are just tired to hear about it. It shouldn't have ended up in Parliement. Radio hosts were less passionated about it once it became so big. Those guys are in the pro sports business and they probably never taught their little controversy would go so far. Never underestimate politicians who smell an upcoming election. I doubt that anyone made progress vote-wise with this charade.

The NHL disregarded Cormier's report in favor of the player. The official was sure enough about this that his declaration as been submitted in court in the Coderre case. If the official stands by his story, doesn't get reprimanded and the 10-minute misconduct penalty is not removed, then what? Why leave a gray area? The NHL dropped the ball, again. For that reason and the fact that there's an upcoming trial concerning this issue, Hockey Canada should have shown a little more sensitivity and name someone else captain for this year's tournament. Just not even bring the subject up. Just act as if this was the national team even if there's only two players who speak french on the current edition (Lombardi & Toews).

 

[De Lorimier]

As far as the insult itself, let's ignore the Doan case for a moment since it will constantly bring up ambiguity over wether or not he actually said anything bad.

Does calling an official or another player a fukcing Frenchman really that bad? Yes. I know it's not about race, I know it's only hockey and we say horrible things on the ice, but it's bad. The reason why it's bad is that this is not a mere insult about language, but about a minority. Call it a martyr complex, call it survival, minority groups have a thing about being attacked. Call Laraque or Iginla Ni**ers or Monkeys and look at the league's reaction. Or make indian screams at Chris Simon or Aaron Asham and see how the league reacts. The same goes for RoC's media.

For some reason, calling out those pesky frenchies, those french guys that wear visors, those soft frenchies, those fukcing frenchmen that can't call a game in Montréal, is still acceptable. The fact that it's still seen as "no big deal" by a lot of good ol' Canadian boys annoys me as much as the insult itself.

 

[jeps]

I do not like Shane Doan as a player. However, I happen to be a Don Cherry fan. (not really, but it would explain a lot). I think that he does not deserve to be represented the United Canadian Team. If Quebec got their wish (not independance, but a world-level hockey team, like Wales in E. Football), then he could represent Canada. Until then, stick with Burnaby Joe

 

[sysyphus]

It is only alleged that he made such a comment and it was two years ago. I really can't see any grounds for what the politicians are asking.

Besides, if they'll let Bertuzzi and whassisface the drunk driving killer even play on the national team, we've obviously set the standards much lower than having a guy who allegedly made one bigoted slur be its captain.

Add to that, this really is not the kind of thing I want my elected representatives spending (read: wasting) the public's time and money on.

 

[jeps]

I must say, after his hattrick a few days later, most politicians STFUed.

Also, do they muzzle Don Cherry (sure, they tried. he still did it. so they put him on 7-second delay. EVEN THAT doesnt stop him, adn hes still on the air. so why shouldnt Doan get ONE derogatory comment, when Cherry makes tens a night, about Frenchies, Europeans, Americans, and everone other than the leafs/canadian team looking best other than MTL ATM)

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

The entire thing is ridiculous. There are much more important things for the nation's politicians to be occupying their time with than who happens to be the captain of Team Canada.

 

[Esckey]

Ya know I didn't even hear about this till a couple of days ago. Wasn't he named Captian a month or more ago? What took them so long to bring this up? And for crying outloud why is he even on the team? I would rather Canada come in dead last in Hockey then have him, Bertuzzi and any other shmuck on the team. I don't want them representing Canada at any sort of compition, even Bingo should be off limits to them.

 

[sysyphus]

Doan is on the team because the comments he made are only alledged at this time. There's no compelling evidence that he made those remarks.

 

[De Lorimier]

No problem with him being on the team. Not the biggest fan of seeing him as captain while he waits for the trial(s) though.

 

[Rhymes]

The entire thing is ridiculous. There are much more important things for the nation's politicians to be occupying their time with than who happens to be the captain of Team Canada.

Agreed.

Come on guys, its god damned sports. When was the last time one of you played any manly sports without insulting someone else? There is no serious disrespect meant in these situations.

I find it pathetic that politicians would use these situations to make a statement. Grow a pair of freaking balls.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

As far as the insult itself, let's ignore the Doan case for a moment since it will constantly bring up ambiguity over wether or not he actually said anything bad.

Does calling an official or another player a fukcing Frenchman really that bad? Yes. I know it's not about race, I know it's only hockey and we say horrible things on the ice, but it's bad. The reason why it's bad is that this is not a mere insult about language, but about a minority. Call it a martyr complex, call it survival, minority groups have a thing about being attacked. Call Laraque or Iginla Ni**ers or Monkeys and look at the league's reaction. Or make indian screams at Chris Simon or Aaron Asham and see how the league reacts. The same goes for RoC's media.

For some reason, calling out those pesky frenchies, those french guys that wear visors, those soft frenchies, those fukcing frenchmen that can't call a game in Montréal, is still acceptable. The fact that it's still seen as "no big deal" by a lot of good ol' Canadian boys annoys me as much as the insult itself.

French isn't a race. Calling a black person a "*****" or an Indian a "savage" is not the same thing. I wouldn't care if an American called us "****ing Canucks", and I'd expect an American to not care if we called them "****ing Yanks." Although the analogy is not precisely apt, since Canadians and Americans are nationalities, and Quebecois are not.

 

[Babbler]

The part of the whole affair that stood out for me is after the end of the hearings, the committee passed a resolution "supporting Canada's quest for gold".

I think we all can rest easy knowing that our politicians are cheering for the Canadian team - and not those god-damned Slovaks.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

and not those god-damned Slovaks.

See? Now should a Slovakian CFC member take offense at Babbler's remarks?

 

[De Lorimier]

French isn't a race. Calling a black person a "*****" or an Indian a "savage" is not the same thing. I wouldn't care if an American called us "****ing Canucks", and I'd expect an American to not care if we called them "****ing Yanks." Although the analogy is not precisely apt, since Canadians and Americans are nationalities, and Quebecois are not.

It's allright Pasi. You're the last person I was expecting to understand my point anyway.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

It's allright Pasi. You're the last person I was expecting to understand my point anyway.

I do understand it, but your analogies aren't apt. That was what I was contending with, not the overall content or tone of your post. Calling a black person "******" or an Indian "savage" is not the same thing, since an Indian or a black person can be a Quebec separatist, can't they? Quebec separatism is not a white supremacist movement.

 

[De Lorimier]

It never was about race or independance according to me, calm down. I specified it in my post when I said that this it's not about race. It's an attack on a minority. My analogies didn't please you, fine, but my point remains the same. The attack on the minority group is the problem I have with such comments. I can't make it clearer.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

It never was about race or independance according to me, calm down. I specified it in my post when I said that this it's not about race. It's an attack on a minority. My analogies didn't please you, fine, but my point remains the same. The attack on the minority group is the problem I have with such comments. I can't make it clearer.

How is a political group a minority? When political parties produce attack ads against each other, do you feel the same way? The Quebec Separatist movement isn't even a very cohesive political movement, since they are composed of groups across the political spectrum (at least, they used to be, not up to speed on the current situation over here in the LOS) that are united by a single political goal. If I say "****ing conservatives" or if a hockey player says "****ing liberals" or if Don Cherry says "****ing peaceniks" should we get upset? I don't see the Quebecois as a minority, since the Quebec separatist movement is a diverse political group and is not readily identifiable by anything other than its single goal.

 

[De Lorimier]

I'm not talking about a political group Pasi. No one is but you. It's about the language ("frenchmen"). Attacking someone in Canada based on the fact that that person is part of the francophone minority is not something that should be done. Am I being that unreasonable?

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

I'm not talking about a political group Pasi. No one is but you. It's about the language ("frenchmen"). Attacking someone in Canada based on the fact that that person is part of the francophone minority is not something that should be done. Am I being that unreasonable?

I didn't realize that until now because I thought you were associating French exclusively with the separatist movement. But I still don't think you should care, I wouldn't care if someone started ranting about the "****ing Vansterdam pothead lunatics."