Jeremy Roenick Is Part of the Problem; Comments on Neal/Marchand

By
Updated: December 9, 2013
jeremy_roenick

*Co-Written with Ben Kerr, Admin*

Who does not like a good commentary session by Jeremy Roenick? I mean this guy is a quote machine but today he dropped one of the better bombshells in a while. The quote concerned the James Neal knee on Brad Marchand and the subsequent five game suspension.

Roenick appeared on the NHL live where he has a regular spot talking about all things hockey. At one point he was asked if what James Neal did in kneeing Marchand was crossing the line. I think that most hockey fans, players, coaches and commentators can see that the action by Neal was dirty and is not something we need or want in hockey.  So what would Roenick say?

He pretty much admitted that he would have done the same thing!  He basically said that Marchand got what he deserved!!!

I am not sure if this is okay, cool, funny, ironic, or sad. I am just puzzled by that sentence. Why would Roenick admit that he would literally try to knee another hockey player in the head for no reason? I am not even sure what would be the point of this action, but controlled emotions is something that has to be part of this game.

Yeah, hockey is a game where fighting is a mere five-minute penalty and there are some who have even encouraged the on-ice violence, but Neal’s actions were not acceptable.  Kneeing someone with the hard shin pads that players have today is a serious action, and should fit under the definition of intent to injure. That is not to be promoted, glorified, or even talked about as it might of been okay.

I think Roenick, should think about his words and while honesty is great, this is national broadcast and those words could have a very negative impact on hockey world.

You see, it shouldn’t matter if its James Neal, first time offender, 40 goal scorer and possible member of Team Canada’s Olympic team, and the victim is Brad Marchand who has a reputation as a pest and agitator.  This action is unacceptable in every way shape and form.  The teams playing, they don’t matter, the players involved and their reputations, irrelevant.  Even the fact that Marchand was lucky in that he wasn’t injured on the play shouldn’t matter to the discussion.  No player should intentionally knee another in the head.  NONE!  It is not part of this game.

That said, we are not only disappointed in Roenick’s comments, but also the fact that the NHL Disciplinarian Brendan Shanahan sees this as a mere five-game suspension.  If it was up to us, we’d throw the book at Neal.  Clear, deliberate attempts to injure need to be dealt with harshly, first time offender or not; and the reputation of the offender and the victim should not matter.

 

Thanks for reading.  Please give our Hockey Department a follow on Twitter – @lastwordBKerr, @lastwordrick, @TheHockeyMitch, @LastWordBigMick, @crimsonskorpion, @CMS_74_, @TwoTurtleDuffs, @d_rocchi, @dasimonetta, @LWOSDanRussell, @ddmatthews, @CanuckPuckHead@NKonarowski2, @LarryScotti, @PurpleRocktober, @jaynichols11, @meaghannn_, @LastWordOnNHL, and @darrinharmy and follow the site @lastwordonsport and like our Facebook Page.

Interested in writing for LastWordOnSports?  If so, check out our “Join Our Team” page to find out how.

 

10 Comments

  1. shaun

    December 9, 2013 at 11:28 pm

    At what point did he say Marchand deserved it? He also said you can’t do that, there’s no place for deliberate things like that, it was dirty, and that Neal was lucky to only get 5 games. Did you consider maybe what he meant is that he was a dumb player too?

    • Maksim Vasilyev, Admin

      December 9, 2013 at 11:41 pm

      he said that he would do the same thing… at what point would you consider that a rational answer?

    • Ben Kerr, Admin

      December 10, 2013 at 11:12 am

      He said he would do it to a dirty player or rat…. essentially he was implying that Marchand is those things.

  2. Anonymous

    December 10, 2013 at 9:20 am

    Anytime you hit someone in the head by a knee,stick,punch or helmet to helmet is dangerous . However fighting must stay in the game =WITHOUT QUESTION..

  3. Anonymous

    December 10, 2013 at 10:57 am

    He didnt say he would have kneed him for no reason. He basically said he would do it to a dirty player or rat. Therefore implying the reason he would be kneeing them.

  4. You're a Joke

    December 10, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    This is a hilarious exaggeration. First off Neal was only given 5 games because that is the maximum suspension you can give a player in a hearing over the phone. The question is, why wasnt this important enough to warrant an in person hearing? And second, I dont know nor do I care who either of you two clowns are, but the way you dissected JRs commentating shows me 2 things, 1. You probably never played competitive sports at a high level and 2. You don’t really WANT to understand what he is saying.

    Its really pretty simple, JR is saying that in the heat of the moment he may have done something like that (in all honesty I never saw him do anything close to this in his career) because the oppurtunity was there and this particular player, The Rat (everyone knows thats his nickname), is known to be dirty as well as a diver. And in the same breath he then says that it is ABSOLUTELY wrong. The reason this actually DOES make sense is because he’s been in the trenches and has always been a very emotional person on and off the ice, so he knows that when you play on that edge sometimes you make poor decisions because of it, for a better example, see Scott Thornton’s BS move later in the game. JR is in no way saying that this was OK and he agrees with all of us that this suspension is at least half as long as it should be, but he is also man enough to admit that when he was a player he played with the same edge Neal does and he may have done the same stupid thing out there. Go ahead and pick apart what I wrote so you can have the last word, I don’t care because you’ll just make yourselves look dumber

    • Ben Kerr, Admin

      December 10, 2013 at 12:36 pm

      Are you arguing that only people who have played sports at a high level can comment on them? And you accuse us of looking dumb?

  5. You're a Joke

    December 10, 2013 at 12:51 pm

    After all of that, this is what you have to say? How completely transparent of you. That is obviously not what I said at all, but thanks for answering that question! I was just trying to understand how in the world you could so easily misconstrue what he was saying, those were the only 2 explanations I could come up with. Now seeing that this is all you have to say, its obvious that you just dont WANT to understand because otherwise you’d have nothing to scream about from your internet soapbox.

    • Ben Kerr, Admin

      December 10, 2013 at 1:57 pm

      There is nothing more to say than has already been said.

      Saying “yeah i know it was dirty, but I’d do the same thing to a rat” is still a justification of Neal’s actions. Heat of the moment, Character of the victim, none of that is acceptable as a justification.

      And yes, we are well aware that phone hearings carry a max of five games. But there was no reason why it couldn’t have been an in person hearing and longer suspension.

  6. Godish

    December 10, 2013 at 1:08 pm

    I would also suggest that Roenick is a horrible anchor in general. He can barely get sentences off without tripping all over himself. I don’t get why the nhl likes having him around other than the fact that perhaps he fits their model of having the worst dressed TV personalities in all of sports (Cherry, Melrose, etc). Sweet hair bro.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>