• Print

Screen Shots: NHL needs term limit for chief disciplinarian

Whatever decision Colin Campbell makes regarding a suspension, someone is going to be unhappy, making his job one of the league's toughest. (Photo by Bruce Bennett/Getty Images)

Zoom Image

Whatever decision Colin Campbell makes regarding a suspension, someone is going to be unhappy, making his job one of the league's toughest. (Photo by Bruce Bennett/Getty Images)

With the possible exception of Gary Bettman’s call-screener on his XM satellite radio show, Colin Campbell has the toughest gig in all of hockey. As the league’s chief disciplinarian, he’s the last person players want to talk to, and the first guy reporters want to talk to, which may be the most devastating double-whammy in the history of devastating double-whammies.

So I make the following suggestion not as a personal affront to Campbell – who has shown lots of grace under lots more pressure since he took the position some 10 years ago – but as an offering of mercy to the man, as well as a safeguard for his eventual successor.

That suggestion: Once Campbell moves on to take a GM or coaching job with a team, the establishment of a three-year term limit for all future NHL disciplinarians. And in addition, hiring practices that only bring aboard candidates who possess not even the slightest interest in eventually working as coach, GM or a high-level management type for one of the league’s 30 teams.

If you followed those guidelines, you’d wind up hiring a chief policeman unconcerned about burning bridges with future employers. Instead, he or she would be able to concentrate on one job only: doling out the proper deterrents to ensure the NHL’s rules are followed to the letter.

I’m certainly not saying Campbell’s punishments (or those that came from his predecessor Brian Burke) have been based on his career aspirations. But by removing the opportunity for any perceived biases to take root, the league can completely protect itself from accusations their integrity is somehow compromised.

I don’t know you can say the same right now. As things stand, people could throw out the argument – very unfairly, I’ll note – that Campbell might somehow favor the New York Rangers (the team he coached from 1994-98) or the Florida Panthers (the team on which his son, Gregory, currently plays), or for that matter, any team that employs an ex-teammate of Campbell’s from his playing days.

Of course, he has no such bias. Still, perception is nine-tenths of the battle these days, and the optics of someone with such deep ties to the league passing judgment on those with whom he grew up in the game is not the ideal situation the NHL should prefer.

Limiting the time frame of the job also guards against any future disciplinarians using precedents established from previous suspensions before handing out more punishment, as Campbell has done with Chris Pronger and Chris Simon, among others.

Related Links

Some might say Campbell’s wealth of experience in the role is a huge benefit to the supplementary discipline process, as he can weigh past incidents against current ones and emerge with a better sense of what is and isn’t fair punishment.

I completely disagree. To me, suspensions should be automatic for certain reprehensible acts, regardless of (a) a player’s intent, (b) his history of crossing the line, and (c) any regret he may have for his actions.

If the rules are the rules, there should be absolutely no wiggle room for interpretation.

There are other ways to skin this cat. Mark Moore, former player and author of the tremendous Saving The Game, believes the duties of disciplinarian should be carried out by a panel of people, and I wouldn’t have a problem if the league went that route.

I would have a problem, though, if the status quo were maintained. The uproar after Pronger’s latest, too-lenient suspension proved beyond all doubt fans and media are truly at the end of their rope when it comes to cutting the league slack over rule enforcement, and are demanding a better setup as soon as possible.

That window for improvement isn’t far off at all. Campbell’s exit from the role is expected in the relative near future, and he will undoubtedly upgrade the quality of some fortunate team’s hockey department, wherever he lands.

But he’s had the same, draining job for a decade, and that’s long enough.

With very few exceptions, coaches don’t stay with the same franchise that long. GMs don’t last that long. And neither should the person responsible for keeping coaches, GMs, teams and players in line.

Adam Proteau is The Hockey News' online columnist and a regular contributor to THN.com. His blog appears Mondays and Wednesdays, his Ask Adam feature appears Tuesdays and Fridays, and his column, Screen Shots, appears Thursdays.

For more great profiles, news and views from the world of hockey, Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.

COMMENTS (29)

Sort: Oldest | Newest    Filter: All | Videos


Mike Posted
(2009-04-30 06:07:02)



James,I didn't see any racism in Brian's comments and I agree with him, except in my opinion Chris Simon does have some hockey talent.As for Diane,the debate won't die because we're all waiting to see what Chris Pronger gets the next time he snaps.The NHL has painted themselves in to a corner where he is concerned.A stomp is a stomp,Pronger should have gotten 30 games if not for Brian Burke's influence.And don't give me that BS about one incident being a hockey play and one not.Pronger was looking directly at Kesler when he stomped him and he missed his 1st crack at him.
    0



Dan Cochran Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:55)



Campbell's bias showed clearly when he dealt with the Flyers' bad boys. Their punishments were far longer; not surprising considering his Blueshirts background.
    0



Kaspar Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:40)



What about my idea? term limits for suffocating-trap style-play for a point- coaches?? They are the ones that really ruined hockey ( Wilson-Lemaire etc...) Tell them they can only coach 1 season ( or, they need to have their team score 350 goals) You dont think that would "open up the game"?
    0



james boston Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:37)



Racists backing up racists.That all i heard there Brian.If it was a clean cut white boy that owned the Isles,would you still make the same remark about them?Of course you wouldnt.
    0



Kathy Wilson Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:34)



I have three kids who play hockey at various levels. I have no illusions as to how rough this game is--especially at the NHL level. I actually enjoy a high contact game. When it comes to disciplining players though, you cannot depend on panels. They just dilute the actions that need to be taken. Panels eventually turn members into advocates. This then leads to compromises. A single disciplinarian is all the NHL needs. Is there any evidence of Cambell lightly disciplining a member of his son's team, or over disciplining a player injuring any of his son's teamates? Unless those instances occur, I think bias is perceived but not actual.
    0



Brian Kemp Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:34)



I don't really care who holds the post, because as long as they have as much latitude as Colin Campbell does in making these decisions, there will always be the perception that there is bias, whether the suspension is long or short. It won't matter who is doing the job as long as there aren't some fairly stringent guidelines for what a particular infraction will cost a player. A commitee will just add another layer to the process, and will probably, knowing the NHL, add to the confusion and secrecy surrounding the leagues decision making process. Diane, it's not Pronger hate that keeps this conversation going, although I really don't like the guy, it's the lack of consistency from the league over blatant violations of rules and decency. Mr. Boston, Chris Simons suspension was unfair, but it wasn't shorter than Prongers due to racism, as you have suggested numerous times, it's because Pronger is a superstar player and Simon, frankly, sucks. Ted Nolan, if I'm remembering right, got into a power struggle with his GM back in Buffalo. I think that other GM's, at least for a while, didn't think his obvious coaching ability was enough to get them past their fear that the same situation would play out again. Thank god the NYI are a completely insane organization with no connection to reality, otherwise he might not have made it to the NHL again.
    0



Kim Koerner Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:33)



Charges of racism have no place here since they are patently untrue! Chris Simon deserved a long suspension for his stomping incident since it was NOT a continuation of the play whereas Chris Pronger deserved a shorter suspsension since his stepping incident WAS a direct result of Kesler's attempt to put his foot in a scissor lock ala the WWE. IMO if Simon and Pronger switched places in these incidents the length of their suspensions would NOT change. As to instituting term limits on the job of chief disciplinarian, if you are going to do that then I suppose you should also put term limits on all of the jobs in the NHL office including commissioner!
    0



Timothy Andrews Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:33)



Are you kidding me?? Did you watch the same Pronger replay as the rest of the world?? He's a goon and should been suspended for longer. With that said, I don't think Chris Simon should be playing hockey anymore, but I guess we'll see if LeMaire can turn him around, look at Todd Fedoruk!! I think a panel would be the best way to go, it eliminates any biases and makes the screening process easier. Make them 3 or 4 years terms that don't all end at the same time!!
    0



Sulko Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:33)



I for one think soupie has done a great job, he has been fair and strong and as for conparing simon/pronger it is not even close. pronger was being held up and pronger gave him p--- off swatt as for simon he came back and made archie (the stomper) goldie proud with the mind set of putting him out. Having a panel is the wimps way of doing it one person one philosophy and all the ownership that goes along with it. good luck soupie
    0



Mike Lieberman Posted
(2009-04-30 06:06:33)



I can't say that I agree with the point of this article, except that a term limit would save the ongoing grief that the league's disciplinarian has to suffer through at the hands of second-guessing media and fans. As it is, Adam Proteau throws out several stipulations for the position--the person should effectively have no interest in a future position with any team--but at the same time argues that Campbell has perceived biases because of his past playing and coaching stints, plus his son playing in the league. If "perception is nine-tenths of the battle these days", then the author is arguing that the league's disciplinarian should: a) Have no past playing career to taint his judgment; b) Have no past coaching career to taint his judgment; c) Likely should have no other past ties to any organization, to remain above reproach; and d) Should have no aspirations to secure a subsequent position with a hockey organization. In other words, it sounds like the author is campaigning to effectively have a league disciplinarian who has no experience in the league before. The fact remains that experience in the game gives someone in this position the necessary background to be able to judge players. We should invite experience, not shun it because of possible perceptions. If we were so deathly afraid of perception, players wouldn't be allowed to touch each other. All a committee will do is add a layer of bureaucracy to the process and inject more people into the decision-making process. I foresee committee members with dissenting opinions airing their grievances in the media or resigning from their posts in protest; how does that improve the league's discipline or perception. Sure, the longer someone remains in this position, the more he might make enemies by not doling out the penalties self-serving parties might demand. But if hockey personnel can't see past their own self interests and understand what is good for the game as a whole, then the problem isn't with the position, but with the teams and their leadership. The biggest thing a term limit will do is save the league disciplinarian from the constant attacks and barbs from myopic fans, media, and team personnel.
    0



1 2 3

ADD YOUR COMMENT

Register or Login to submit a comment
Player/Injury News - Up to the Minute NHL Updates This Week - Subscribe Now

Which team has been hit worst by injuries this season?










THN Newsletter - Sign Up Now

“I don’t know if I’ll ever feel 100 percent this year.”

- New Jersey's Patrik Elias, who is recovering from hip and groin surgeries and has two points in five games this season.

Our Partners