Thread: News Article: Partying prompted parting?
View Single Post
Old
07-25-2011, 11:40 AM
  #55
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
I don't know how to read Homer's comments. I do wish I could hear the audio, how he says those words can change what I think he's doing here 180 degrees.

At first, no comment would seem to be the appropriate response. Him confirming the policy even existed, and going into such detail with the reporter about it, would seem at first to be his way of leaking info out there in a half-sneaky way to make the two players look worse. Of course, if that is the case, why didn't he do this a month ago? Why did he seem genuinely upset at trading both guys? And why wouldn't he just leak this to a sports writer, as GMs usually do when they are trying to smear a player?

Then I got to thinking that no comment might actually be the worst response. In his statement, he goes to great length to indicate that this wasn't just a Richie & Carter thing, that other players also did not participate. If he just says no comment, it could be construed as a deafening silence, and the only players called out would be those two.

Whatever was going on in what he said, it definitely isn't the way he should have handled it. Even if you think he's not trying to be malicious, he didn't do himself any favors.
This is no different than the way he handled the incident where Pronger was yelling at Giroux. None of the media knew who Pronger was yelling at, for a couple of days all they said was Pronger was yelling "some people never learn" or something like that. Then someone mentioned it to Homer and he said "Claude, yes". Why say anything unless you want it out there? Is it strategy or is he just stupid?

MsWoof is offline