Hockey’s Culture Problem Goes Beyond Prejudice

What began with the long overdue removal of Don Cherry from television has kicked off a reckoning in the sport of hockey that’s also been a long time coming. The secret is out, the genie’s free from the bottle, and the word is firmly on the street – hockey has a culture problem, and there’s something rotten at its core that needs to be rooted out before the game can truly be said to be “for everyone.”

Much of the focus of this discourse has been on the long-term intertwining of “hockey culture” and some of society’s greatest ills – racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia – and rightfully so. Our very own Jackson McDonald has been on this beat for a good while now, and he’s absolutely correct that highlighting such instances of prejudice in the sport should be a primary focus of all those who cover hockey with the ultimate goal of eradicating such behaviour – or, at the very least, making it so that hatred and ignorance aren’t universal experiences for those who just want to enjoy a little skate-puck.

The issues with hockey’s culture, unfortunately, go beyond prejudice, and there are some core beliefs instilled in most Canadians who play or closely follow the game that have little to do with individual biases – but that are still deserving of being dragged out into the light and thoroughly criticized. These ideas might not be quite as damaging as prejudice, but they’re also something we should talk about in this era of reconciliation.

We should talk about Mike Babcock and his apparent refusal to treat his players like actual human beings, all in the name of winning hockey games. That so many – and for so long – supported Babcock’s notoriously abusive ways because of his success on the ice is exactly what we mean when we say when there’s something evil at the core of the game’s culture – this intense desire to eliminate the human element from consideration when a victory, however meaningless, is on the line.

We should talk about a sport in which the often-violent hazing of teenagers has long been accepted as a way to build “character” or “camaraderie” – or, more accurately, increase compliance through fear and intimidation. Again, this has long been seen as completely reasonable so long as it results in a few more notches in the win column – and perhaps a few more sales at the box office.

We should talk about the fact that Mike Hoffman not only felt that it was normal to chase an opponent all over the ice asking for a fight over a personal dispute – and felt completely comfortable bragging about it to assembled reporters after the game.

Let’s take a moment to really break down the implications of this incident. The true culpability for the harassment of Erik and Melinda Karlsson after the death of their child is still legally ambiguous, and Hoffman and Monika Caryk have every right to defend themselves against those accusations. But that doesn’t change the fact that somebody still harassed the couple about a horrifically tragic event – there’s documented evidence of that. The Karlssons are definitely victims of a crime in this situation, whether or not you believe Hoffman and Caryk were the perpetrators.

In any other context than ice hockey, the notion of wanting to beat someone up over this dispute – rather than leaving it to the courts to settle it – wouldn’t just be considered outlandish, it would be considered downright inhuman. But it’s an apparently rational decision for Hoffman to have made in a sport that encourages its participants to not think of their opponents as human beings, but rather as obstacles on the way to the all-encompassing goal of on-ice success.

This week saw an even uglier display than that, and an even clearer demonstration of the rot at the core of hockey culture.

Niagara IceDogs’ goaltender Tucker Tynan suffered an awful injury on Thursday night in a game against the London Knights. A collision in his crease caused a deep cut to open up on Tynan’s leg, but quick action by medical staff was able to save the 17-year-old rookie’s life – leaving behind an ugly scene of blood and discarded equipment on the ice.

Then, as Tynan was being stretchered off, a London fan began yelling at him and the individuals who had just provided emergency life-saving medical treatment. That led to security becoming involved, which touched off a brawl in the stands.

AUTHOR’S EDIT: More information about this incident has emerged since the writing of this article, as per the Niagara IceDogs Twitter account. It seems that the fan in question had positive intentions beyond heckling Tynan and the medical staff, and that they were attempting to encourage the staff to get Tynan off the ice as quickly as possible. This certainly escalated an already emotional situation, but that does not seem to be what the individual was aiming to do, and we apologize for any unintentional maligning of their character.

In any case, the overall points still stands: as a teenager exited the arena and was rushed to hospital under uncertain circumstances, several Knights and IceDogs supporters could think of nothing better to do than to throw knuckles at the “other side” – enacting further violence on those who had the audacity to cheer for a different junior hockey club.

Such an event should not be normal – but it is, and that’s the problem.

Obviously, this is a particularly egregious example of the lack of empathy present in hockey culture – but it is not all that unusual. Who among us hasn’t been at a hockey game in which an injured player has been derisively shouted at on their way off the ice? This author is sure that every Vancouver fan over a certain age will remember the reaction of the Boston crowd as Mason Raymond was carted off with a broken back during the 2011 Stanley Cup Finals – it didn’t feature an abundance of sympathy.

Moments like this should remind us all that there really is no “other side” when it comes to a fan’s perspective of the game. Friendly rivalries and trash talk are all well and good – to an extent – but surely that should end when the health of a human being is in peril. But it doesn’t, and that’s something that is ingrained in anyone who grows up in the game.

Who hasn’t had a coach tell them at a young age that there are “no friends on the ice?”

Who hasn’t seen grown men brawl in the stands with other grown men that just happen to be wearing a different-coloured jersey?

Who hasn’t seen individual players harassed, shamed, and even threatened on social media when their on-ice performance is perceived as lacking?

The message is as consistent as it is troubling – that hockey is a place where ignoring human decency isn’t just welcome, it’s encouraged.

Those of us in the liberal bastion of British Columbia sometimes like to think we’re above such ills of society, but we’re really not. Look no further than the recent reaction to news that Loui Eriksson may have injured Thatcher Demko in practice.

Few of us would think of taunting one of our co-workers or acquaintances about something they did accidentally that they likely feel terrible about, but many of us don’t think twice before publicly lambasting Eriksson – who remains a living, breathing human being with the same set of emotions and vulnerabilities as the rest of us.

It should be made clear at this point that discussion of this aspect of hockey culture should not take place in lieu of the important sociopolitical discourse already occurring – but the two subjects are also not entirely unrelated. There are countless individuals who would never express their racist, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic thoughts in their everyday public life, but who don’t think twice about doing so under the auspices of a sport in which dehumanizing the opponent is celebrated and encouraged.

This author acknowledges that empathy and competitive sport don’t exactly mix well. We might not want Antoine Roussel taking the opposition’s feelings into account when he’s bearing down on the forecheck – it would probably take away from his ability to perform his official job of misery-maker. Then again, consider Elias Pettersson’s actions when Matt Calvert went down with an apparent head injury back in November.

Wherever one falls on the necessity of player empathy, something that we should all be able to agree on is the sport would be better off if fans treated all players – both on the teams they support and those they do not – like human beings on a more regular basis.

This may be a stupid thing for an author who prides themselves on writing “for the fans, by the fans” to say, but it needs to be said – fans really don’t have that much of an impact on the outcome of a hockey game. Certainly not enough to justify some of the outright inhumane actions that hockey enthusiasts have taken in the last calendar year alone under the guise of cheering for their team.

If you haven’t committed those actions yourself, you’ve almost certainly seen someone else doing it. It’s time to ask ourselves where people keep getting the idea that it’s okay to dehumanize athletes – and what we can do to change that.