Cooler heads may eventually prevail in the aftermath of the Zdeno Chara-Max Pacioretty incident, but in the six days since "the hit," the debate has only intensified.
Except at a public relations level, I can't find fault with the NHL's decision not to suspend Chara. That's not a position I take cavalierly or without recognizing that it doesn't reflect majority opinion in Montreal, but ignoring due process to pander to popular sentiment isn't something we've done as a society since we stopped burning witches at the stake.
The Internet and radio phone-in versions of torch-bearing mobs demanding summary justice for Chara based on the unproven presumption of malicious intent are peddling righteous indignation based in part on myths and misinformation.
The widely-reported notion that Chara got off "scot-free" overlooks the fact that the game officials assessed a five minute major penalty for interference and a game misconduct on the play.
There's also no basis in fact for claims that Boston gets preferential treatment from the NHL because league vice-president Colin Campbell's son plays for the Bruins. The same allegations of favoritism used to made about the Canadiens when the NHL was headquartered in Montreal, and the argument is as flimsy now as it was then.
The Chara-Pacioretty incident could yet prove to be a watershed moment for improving player safety in the NHL, but for that to happen, we need to move past emotion-fuelled conjecture and speculation. If there's going to be positive change, it needs to be rooted in unbiased perspective and sober reflection.
