Le Fils du Roy

Now that Operation Cocktease has reached its inevitably disappointing denoumemnt, shut-ins everywhere will soon be deprived of shinny soaper MVP, unable to find it no matter how hard they twist their rabbit ears. Fear not, however, for a new edition of Hockey Babylon is now storming the airwaves. The Slugfest on the Saguenay had all the ink-stained wretches in a tizzy this week, and their analysis suffered for it.

The usually reliable James Mirtle completely missed the net with his effort, opining that it was only Roy's notoriety that led to such a large suspension:

Let's face it, this story wouldn't have made national news three days in a row if not for the names involved. Junior hockey's not often even on the radar here in Toronto, and certainly not the QMJHL, and the fact this is a story that's drawn so much attention really speaks to Roy's star power.

And that attention, in my opinion, also led to larger suspensions than we would have seen otherwise.

The Q must be so far off his radar that he missed this little incident:

On January 19, 2007, Saguenay Police investigated an incident involving Roy and co-owner of the Chicoutimi Sagueneens, Pierre Cardinal. There were reports that Roy threw punches at the co-owner after he intervened in order to disperse a crowd of hockey fans that were blocking the Remparts bus after a game between the two clubs. A complaint for assault had been filed against Roy who may face assault charges in the matter. MontrealLe Journal de Montreal reported that Roy later apologized to the victim by telephone. ^[15][16] newspaper

In a press conference following a Remparts game on January 21, 2007, Roy said that he was "suffering prejudice on the part of the media" and believed that he was not feeling guilty of the incident. He then questioned his future as head coach and co-owner of the team, even considering resigning from his duties.^[17]  (Wiki)

For someone renowned for his solid reporting, completely missing the precedent which contributed to this latest incident (and these aren't the only times Roy's embarrassed the league- remember his public baiting of a teenage goalie during the Memorial Cup finals) was a puzzler. Of course, maybe he was confused by the NHL's use of precedent, in which suspensions get longer if you have priors except if you are a star player on a Cup contender, in which case you get no suspension followed by a token few games after a public outcry.

Dean of Quebec Mittenstringers Red Fisher took it one further, going from headscratching to almost incomprehensible. The first two thirds of his piece read like a standard takedown, in which one incident is used as a pretext to bring up everything from his nasty history of domestic abuse to the time he lost it over Craig Billington getting credit for a win to the time he returned Weird Science two weeks late. Roy hasn't earned having his number retired, argues Red. It's a fair enough point, although I would quibble with his contention that being up in the rafters with the other 387 retired Habs is as much about being a paragon of virtue as production - Rocket Richard, sainted though he is, did knock out referees on more than one occasion, and McSorleyed Hal Laycoe; Doug Harvey for decades battled the alcoholism which would claim his life; Guy Lafleur was charged with perjury, and worse, released a disco album. To say that we honour our sports greats based on their character is as untrue in hockey as it is with Ty Cobb or Ray Lewis. Roy won two Cups for the Canadiens almost singlehandedly, a feat in its way as impressive as the achievements of his forerunners given the much greater size of the league. I think he should be up there, certainly if Serge Savard is, but that's not the weirdest part of Red's article.

No, it's the last third, in which Red pulls a gearshift worthy of Damien Cox and relates a heartwarming tale of Roy letting a stricken ten-year-old score goal after goal on him (maybe the Leafs have found a way to use Raycroft for good) - and then, nothing. No, "but that makes him being a jackhole even more unforgivable" or "so people are compicated, watch before you judge," just - nothing. What the hell?

And of course, someone had to do the "aren't Queebeckers the most, what with their Jos Louis, cheese curds and Gallic passions?" angle. Sean Gordon, Star Quebec Bureau Chief:

Last Saturday's brawl - during which Jonathan Roy punched out his unwilling counterpart Bobby Nadeau, fought a second player and then taunted the crowd with a middle-fingers homage - is also about more than hockey.

L'Affaire Roy fits in the broader Quebec narrative concerning the children of divorced parents, youth violence, petty rivalries, father-son relationships - hockey fisticuffs as morality play.

So maybe I was a little harsh, but that type of context-free analysis makes me wonder why Sean isn't a toy department regular. Divorce and youth violence are Quebec narratives? Check out a Toronto Sun or a Vancouver Province sometime. Hockey violence ALWAYS plays out as a morality play, from Ace Bailey to Richard Riot to Clarke on Kharlamov to Slap Shot to Bertuzzi - that's why people love it so much. And that's why this story is so huge. It would be just as huge if it was an OHL game involving Glimour or Domi's kids. Hockey, violence, handwringing - everything that leads. If you want analysis, on the other hand, check out this piece at Four Habs Fans (thanks PPP). Where Red confused, it just about convinced. If Roy is to be dishonoured, it should be to take a stand against rage and violence, not because he doesn't meet the imaginary sainthood of the ghosts in the rafters.  And how's that for a 180 of my own?

UPDATE: And as I post, Cherry is showing the Boogard-Cowan fight as an example of some sort of fine moral example. Fucking classic.