Duncan Keith responds to question from female Vancouver reporter with sexism

Daniel Sedin scored the third and final Vancouver goal in the Canucks’ 3-1 victory over the Chicago Blackhawks, getting in behind the Blackhawks’ defence before beating Corey Crawford on a breakway.

The last man back for Chicago: Duncan Keith, who let the Canuck winger know he was right there with a slash just prior to Daniel’s shot.

Little was made of the slash at the time. That makes some sense, I guess. If an arm had gone up for a delayed penalty, it would have come right back down when Daniel scored anyhow. (Edit: It did and we missed it. Watch the referee at the left side of the screen. If Daniel didn’t score, he would have called a penalty.)

Now, it’s possible Keith was fully aware of that when he swung the lumber in the first place. Or maybe he was just trying to cause Daniel to slip up and lose control of the puck. I’m not going to pretend to know his intent. Better to just ask him, which is what the Team 1040′s Karen Thomson did after the game. Her reward: an earful of completely uncalled-for sexist rubbish.

“It looked like there was a penalty,” she said to Keith, in explaining why she was asking about the play.

“Oh no, I don’t think there was,” Keith responded. “I think he scored a nice goal. The ref was right there. That’s what the ref saw. We should get you as ref, maybe, hey?”

“Yeah, maybe,” Thomson responded. “I can’t skate, though.”

Keith continued. “First female referee… can’t play probably, either, right? But you’re thinking the game like you know it? Okay, see ya.”

You can listen to the audio here, and wow. As if Vancouver didn’t have enough reasons to dislike this guy, now there’s that.

Obviously, the issue here is the way Keith dragged gender into the brushoff.

The “you never played the game” card is a common one in these postgame reporter/athlete duels, and while it’s scummy, there’s really nothing gendered about it. That’s the sort of surly, pointed attack you’re always at risk of getting from a player on the losing side. Unpleasant players are an unpleasant part of the job.

But when gender’s at the heart of it? That’s something else entirely, and it should never be part of the job. Keith’s shot was framed in the context of Thomson’s womanhood — the suggestion was that she doesn’t know the game because she’s a woman, and that’s just inappropriate and unprofessional on his part.

I’m not sure what sort of importance the league will place on this but, to me, this is the sort of thing that needs to be addressed in some way. I’d even be okay with a fine, just as a reminder to all the players that bringing someone’s gender into it in this way — or bringing any element of otherness, be it colour, sexuality, or something else — is completely unacceptable.

Tags: ,

186 comments

  1. sarah
    April 23, 2013

    Yet again, thanks for calling out an example of sexism in hockey.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +34 (from 118 votes)
    • Camden X
      April 23, 2013

      Give me a break. This is nothing sexist – he’s stating the obvious. And why, Mooney, don’t you post the full exchange between the reporter and Keith? You know, the one where it’s clear she is baiting him and when he asks her what she is talking about, she says “Nothing. Just checking.”

      Give it a rest.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -3 (from 79 votes)
      • john
        April 23, 2013

        I’m with you Camden X…Mooney is a hack and this article is garbage because of him being a hack. Why would he want to run an objective editorial story? An article such as this would only be blown up in a place like Vancouver. You have one of the dirtiest, class-less pro teams in all of sports with a well documented history of unsportsmanlike play, but yet WORDS, not actions….WORDS spoken by Duncan Keith after being provoked are some how the greatest travesty of all time and he should be sentenced to jail for his comments….This article is exactly why NHL fans hate the Canucks…..it helps to perpetuate the “whiner” perception that the Canucks have in sports…I will say I at least like Kesler and Schneider, but after that this franchise is despicable and plays a poor brand of hockey not worth watching.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -19 (from 35 votes)
        • Jack
          April 23, 2013

          John, real hockey fans think the Canucks (and the Hawks) have been GREAT teams for a number of years and love watching them play. In short, you don’t know Jack.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +4 (from 8 votes)
    • Anthony
      April 23, 2013

      While it’s important, I think this article is trying too hard to find more reasons to hate on Keith and leading a lot of other fans with it. I agree with another commenter that the full interview (interaction between the two at least) needs to posted for proper judge of context.

      Yes we are Vancouver fans and we hate Chicago but lets keep it factual rather than reaching.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 25 votes)
      • Daniel Wagner
        April 23, 2013

        It was in a media scrum with a number of people asking questions. As far as I know, what we’ve posted here is the full extent of her interaction with Keith.

        VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +1 (from 15 votes)
        • Anthony
          April 23, 2013

          Thanks

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)
      • Anthony
        April 23, 2013

        I didn’t hear the full interview but could’ve asked straight out, “What were you trying to achieve with the slash to the back?”

        That’s what should be hated on, a cheap slash to the back, Hjarmalsson’s flying whatever you want to call it to to D. Sedin (however that was a ridiculous suicide pass that shouldn’t have happened in the first place)

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +2 (from 10 votes)
  2. Brent
    April 23, 2013

    Be assured the league will do nothing about this. They should, but they wont. They talk the talk with this kind of stuff, but won’t walk the walk. Has anyone been disciplined for making homophobic remarks?

    Wonder what Chicago press would think of this. I assume you will send them this link.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +19 (from 89 votes)
  3. Nixnihil
    April 23, 2013

    I love to hate the Hawks. Even the arrogant Toews and Kane have some incredible skill that makes for exciting games. But, Keith goes too far. He really is a classless player, and a pretty crumby human being in general if this is any indication of his character (it is).

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +29 (from 101 votes)
    • Stanley
      April 23, 2013

      Get over yourself. I’m guessing you root for Alex Burrows the hair puller and finger biter (Keith’s hair BTW). Toews has more class than all the pathetic Canucks put together. Keith handled the situation poorly. He should have let it go. But the reporter baited him. That’s how the media works. One person gets the quote, then a pinhead named Harrison Mooney rants about it. Sad.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -41 (from 75 votes)
      • amk176
        April 24, 2013

        Agreed. If you read her tweets from after the interview you would see that she got exactly what she wanted out of it. It’s not often that you see “journalists” troll like that.

        Either way Mooney is just trying to blow something so small out of proportion but, hey, I guess that’s how he operates. Stir something up, create some controversy and try to gain popularity. Pathetic.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 6 votes)
        • Harrison Mooney
          April 24, 2013

          Ha. You gents need to check my timeline. I was trying to downplay this story hard until I heard the audio.

          In the meantime, it’s always amazing to see guys going out of their way to blame the woman when something happens to her.

          VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: 0 (from 12 votes)
    • ChicagoPatrick
      April 25, 2013

      Duncan Keith is a good, good guy. In fact, I would say he’s one of the most decent guys in the NHL. Would he want to rephrase this exchange? Maybe. But the Canucks have been a baiting, if very skilled, team for a long time. What happened with Daniel last year was a bad thing for a good guy to do, and that’s the truth. But Keith was severely provoked, and he is the farthest thing from a dirty player you’re going to get in the NHL. He’s a skill guy, not a hack. Actually, the Hawks’ biggest problem is they are one of the least physical teams in the league. Look at the number of hits every game – they get outhit almost every time. And they win almost every time. Maybe the Nucks should take note. Nothing the Hawks have done compares to Raffi Torres’ goondom against Seabrook on behalf of the Canucks.

      But I appreciate rabid fandom. You’re gonna believe what you want about Dunc. And that’s fine. Personally I wish the hair-pulling Alex Burrows would trip and fall into a giant blender. But I recognize that may be a tad irrational. ;)

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)
  4. CodeCanuck
    April 23, 2013

    Keith’s comment was absolutely brutal and indefensible, and it is actually really startling to see just how many people on twitter seem to be trying to defend him. This kind of stuff is not okay. They are also very talented, hardworking and skilled. This isn’t just an insult to Karen Thompson, it’s an insult to every female hockey player out there, of ANY skill level. Shameful. There are plenty of women hockey players out there. I don’t know the numbers, but it’s not a small thing anymore by any means.

    Besides which, to suggest that you can’t have a really good understanding of the game of hockey without ever playing it is absolutely absurd. If this doesn’t fall into the realm of supplemental discipline, the league is in even worse shape than I thought.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +30 (from 100 votes)
    • shoes
      April 23, 2013

      Plenty of women refs in hockey as well. Keith shows his cluelessness as well as his lack of class. I can see why he appeals to Hawks fans though. Lack of class seems to be a selling point in some hockey markets.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +5 (from 25 votes)
      • dKim
        April 23, 2013

        THE IRONY BURNS…

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -3 (from 7 votes)
    • NicT
      April 23, 2013

      “it’s an insult to every female hockey player out there, of ANY skill level.”-yep, like me and all the other women I play with. 8 divisions at Burnaby 8 Rinks alone. We’re certainly not small in number anymore.

      I agree with those that say you can’t disconnect the “first female ref” comment from the follow-up.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 15 votes)
  5. Duncan
    April 23, 2013

    I think it’s important to mention the order of those comments. Keith says the thing about “first female referee” which was obviously stupid then the reporter says ” I can’t skate though” then Keith goes into the “you can’t play either” stuff. The first part was definitely a comment on her gender but I’m not sure exactly what he meant by it. The rest though could go either way. It was either a continuation of his gender based comment or it was a response to her saying she can’t skate. I’m not certain that this is something that can be commented on in such a definitive manner as labeling it as an outright gendered comment.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +10 (from 50 votes)
    • best behaviour
      April 23, 2013

      I see what you are saying, but I don’t agree that the rest could go either way.

      Seriously, if he’d said “hey, the first black ref, right?” then gone right on to express that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about and isn’t worth talking to, you would seriously say it could read as being disconnected to the comment about being black?

      The comment on the first female ref is not a joke or a “hey, that would be neat” – he’s using it as an opener to lead in to and stress his opinion that she doesn’t have the ability to make a call on what she sees, can’t state an informed opinion, & should just be walked away from.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +12 (from 36 votes)
      • Duncan
        April 23, 2013

        But there’s reason to believe that he isn’t continuing his first statement. She interjects with “I can’t skate though” after Keith said she could be the first female referee. His next comments are either a response to her saying that or are a continuation of his gendered comment. One supports the notion that he is a sexist the other supports that he has an issue with her admitted lack of experience playing game.

        Either way I’m fairly confident the first comment was sexist but I would like to hear him explain himself before I’m willing to have an opinion on the rest of what he said.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -4 (from 32 votes)
        • best behaviour
          April 23, 2013

          I guess if he made a sexist comment, it needs to be addressed… he isn’t likely to admit any sexist intent when he cools off. It would take quite a strange man to *not* backpedal at this point. It would take a Tim Thomas.

          I think in saying “I can’t skate” instead of calling him out on the sexist comment, she was trying to let him off the hook a little bit there, redirect him with a little self-deprecating joke. He could have taken her cue, but instead he gives her a string of put-downs in exchage. I think she handled it well – props to the reporter.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +17 (from 37 votes)
        • RicardoB
          April 23, 2013

          No, he doesn’t.

          She says “I can’t skate though” after his suggestion that she be a ref. She tries to say something after “first female referee” but he continues his bawling.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: -7 (from 9 votes)
        • Not really incorrect
          April 23, 2013

          Im sorry, I wasn’t aware that there are female refs in the NHL. Maybe his comment wasn’t said exactly the way it should have sounded, but he is right. As soon as she says she cant skate, he makes the barb that she probabaly doesn’t play either. It stands to reason if she cant skate, she cant play. People are too damn sensitive these days, and always try and look for some hidden insult.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: -4 (from 16 votes)
          • Sonia
            April 23, 2013

            I agree that while the “You probably can’t play either” comment was not a remark at her gender ut a remark at her self-proclaimed inability to skate, the fact that he said “But you’re thinking the game like you know it?” and that is sexist and stupid. She’s obviously a hockey reporter so why wouldn’t she understand the game? Since when do we have to play hockey to understand it? He implied that because she was female and didn’t play meant that she didn’t understand the sport which is not true. Regardless of whether he was intentionally or unintentionally sexist, he was sexist. Comments like this are not okay.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: +11 (from 19 votes)
          • Habfan26
            April 30, 2013

            You took the words right out of my mouth. He was making a comment about her being the first female ref in the NHL. How is that sexist? Was it sexist to call Manon Rheume the first female to play in the NHL then? What about the first woman anything? This is a perfect example of people getting out control with their political correctness.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  6. johndoe
    April 23, 2013

    i’m a nucks fan, but calling for a fine here is stupid. give the guy a break

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +6 (from 68 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      I just want the league to address it in some way.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -1 (from 81 votes)
      • Kate
        April 23, 2013

        I mean, the league is (through YCP–which, even though it sounds like YCP decided to deal with it on their own, I would argue their recent partnership implies that the league is backing it) addressing Seguin’s comments earlier tonight; why shouldn’t they address this as well? And Keith hasn’t apologized for it yet, unlike Seguin.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +12 (from 22 votes)
      • Duncan
        April 23, 2013

        I think you’re right that there was sexism present in this situation but I’m not certain it was as overt as you’re making it seem.

        Keith’s first comment about her being the “first female referee” is what I can pretty confidently identify as a sexist comment. I’m assuming the majority of the media scrum was comprised of male reporters and this comment seemed to be saying “look at the precious woman trying to act like one of us, right guys?”.

        The rest of it though is one of two things. He was either responding to her comment “I can’t skate though” with the same kind of disgust he might have for a male reporter who admitted that and is trying to be a credible hockey reporter, or he is continuing to insinuate that as a woman she has no place in hockey.

        To be clear, the comment on her being the first female referee was a boneheaded sexist thing to say but I’m not convinced that his further comments were gender based. I think he should at least be given the opportunity to explain himself before he is labeled as a sexist to the degree that you have labeled him.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 20 votes)
      • Stevsie Zissou
        April 23, 2013

        Food for thought, this comment compared to GMMG basically calling the Moj (sic? probably) for being fat. (that comment he made about eating all the food in the press box.) It was a cheap shot, yes. As a member of the press, you have to be prepared for an athlete getting his hackles up over, let’s be honest, a fairly inane question. (After all, Danny still scored.) Losing to a bitter rival, probably in front of his family (pretty sure they live in Penticton) it must be frustrating to have to field questions like that. Sexism is crap, but really, if it was a male reporter who tossed that question out there, would you be as surprised if he insulted his weight? (“First overweight referee.”) Height? (First midget referee.”) Gender and race seem to be the only tinder boxes for controversy. And anything Sean Avery used to say. Athletes are pricks sometimes, that is all. P.S. I love parentheses.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +7 (from 15 votes)
      • BurrowsHairPull
        April 23, 2013

        Are you guys, (sorry gals too) always whining about something? I mean you clearly beat the Hawks in every aspect last night and still have something to gripe about this morning. What is the league going to do? Suspend a past Norris trophy winner going into the playoffs for a comment that is borderline sexist at best? Fine him? I have heard these comments about refs before regarding the fact that they cant play the game, and also that reporters dont know the game. The combination of these two comments, and the fact it was a female reporter didnt help Keith”s case. But seriously, relax and worry about winning in the post-season instead of locker room conversations that shouldnt concern you.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -9 (from 53 votes)
      • Frank
        April 23, 2013

        Really?? How about the league do something about Bieksa biting his finger a couple of years ago? How about the league do something about you being a loser from Vancouver. How about you ask the Canucks fans to not riot after you lose again this year. Get a clue dumb-ass

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -38 (from 56 votes)
      • Greg
        April 23, 2013

        Are you really this sensitive? Grow a pair (yes that’s me being sexist, sue me) and realize that these men chirp anything and everything that’s on their mind during the game. You think your spineless ‘Nucks are innocent of that behaviour? (I’m American, from Boston actually and enjoying that you’re all still so butthurt over losing two summers ago, but put the U in there so you’d understand me) The female reporter got to where she is by doing something of credit so relax and let her fight her own battles. We are either equal and women are capable of standing up for themselves (just as men are), or we are not and some men need to protect them still. I would like to think the former, but you are choosing the latter.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -16 (from 30 votes)
    • bentheflamesfan
      April 23, 2013

      so she wouldnt be the first female ref…?

      you are making such a big deal out of nothing, and before you say i am biased against the nucks (i am, i hate you freaking sea-loving tree-hugging liberals, but that is besides the point) i hate duncan keith as well, for winning the norris trophy purely based on points and not on defensive merit. if larry robinson and ray bourque were suddenly struck dead they would both turn over in their graves for him winning the norris) but to call this sexist is to grasp at straws to label a rival in any way possible. if this were kevin bieksa, understandably angry at throwing away a chance to clinch (possibly, we all know iggy is gonna lead the pens to the prez) being the top team in the league, would he not have been emotional as well? why dont you focus on more important things than this throwaway of a comment

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -9 (from 55 votes)
      • Westisbest
        April 23, 2013

        Ben, I am a ‘Nucks fan, but I have to agree with you here. Yours is the first voice of reason..on the sexist issue…the rest of your comment reeks of red-neck . This is a mini tempest in a tea cup. Is she not a female? Is calling her a female now a no-no?

        This ‘PC’ world is becoming too sensitive….whatever happened to calling a shovel a shovel?

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -2 (from 24 votes)
    • shoes
      April 23, 2013

      Why is calling for a fine stupid…..the NHL has fined many before for saying things out of turn. Burrows had to pay 2000.00 bucks because he said Auger talked about something other than the weather in a pre-game skate with Burrows.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -3 (from 5 votes)
  7. Mitch
    April 23, 2013

    The thing that bugs me most about Keith is, he’s undoubtedly one of the most skilled players in the game at his position. And he’s achieved an enormous amount of personal and team success. And he’s just such a douche about it. He’s taken his skills and achievements and parlayed them into this holier-than-thou, I’m Duncan Keith so I can pull whatever sh*t I want attitude that runs counter to hockey culture as a whole. No doubt if he read this his response would be “Oh yeah, where’s your Norris? Where’s your cup ring? Yeah, thought so, see ya”.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +32 (from 52 votes)
  8. CalmDownNucksFans
    April 23, 2013

    I don’t like the Hawks as much as the next guy but being sensitive about this is ridiculous. Most of the angry people are Canucks fans who should calm down. He didn’t mean that she couldn’t play because she was a women. He commented that, then realized he had a better response that was entirely unrelated. (Thus the pause and elevation in loudness in his speech.)

    If she can’t play the game, chances are she has no right to be calling something a penalty in the first place.

    The amount of “omg this offends me” needs to be toned down. In everything, not only this. He didn’t even say anything blatantly sexist. She said she couldn’t skate, he points out she probably can’t play either. Just because he also points out a fact doesn’t mean he’s sexist.

    Get out of here.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -27 (from 89 votes)
    • best behaviour
      April 23, 2013

      In hockey, it’s always the same: if you want to insult someone, compare them to a female. The message is that females are inferior.

      That is what needs to be toned down.

      Out of respect for female athletes.

      Out of respect for well-informed female fans who love the game.

      And out of respect for the values of equality that Canada and USA both defend (or claim to…)

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +57 (from 85 votes)
    • best behaviour
      April 23, 2013

      PS- This is a Canucks blog. Canucks fans are unlikely to get out of here anytime soon, just FYI, though you’re welcome to post as long as you keep it clean.

      Actually, I don’t see why anyone thinks this has to do with Canucks fandom, since it was a comment made by a guy on another team to a reporter who is neither Shorty nor Garret nor even that Scott Oakes/Oates guy who made possible the “Shots” video tribute to Kevin Bieksa. I don’t think Canucks fans generally feel any special relationship to any other reporters (not counting bloggers).

      It’s not a team issue.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +17 (from 25 votes)
    • John
      April 23, 2013

      “If she can’t play the game, chances are she has no right to be calling something a penalty in the first place.” – seriously? You think Scotty Bowman could skate circles around Gretzky, Lidstrom, Orr, et al? Knowing the game and playing the game at a high level are mutually exclusive in many cases. Obviously, you need to know the game (or be conditioned to know the game) to be great at it (as Keith is).

      Sport is rife with people who “know how it should be done properly and be able to analyse those who do it at the highest level, but can’t do it”. eg: hockey coaches, soccer coaches, baseball gm’s/coaches, track & field coaches, etc, etc, etc, etc.

      Keith is the epitome of the spoiled athlete. He figured out he was a fantastic hockey player at a young age, and everything fell in his lap afterwards. Not saying he didn’t work hard, but 99.99% of people (including me) could work harder, and never, ever scratch a living out of playing hockey.

      Like Kevin Lowe (and oh so many others), he needs a bit of humility when he is dealing with the fans’ proxy – ie: the press (+ the few lucky bloggers that are allowed access).

      Keith just thinks that women (and a lot of the non-athlete men) are around to suck (up) to him and make him feel great about himself. I’ve been there on the road with a “high” level team (way back when). The best of the best always feel entitled and it is despicable how some of them treat people. Not all – just a select few. Keith seems to be taking humility lessons from Kane, instead of Toews…. Big mistake.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +31 (from 45 votes)
    • ryles
      April 23, 2013

      Even if Keith’s comments were sexist or not, he still had a douchy “im better than you” attitude in that interview. Pure class. It doesn’t take Wayne Gretzky to figure out he clearly gave Daniel a dirty 2 handed chop to the back. Theres a difference between playing the game and understanding the game. If she’s a bloody hockey reporter its a safe bet she knows the rules of the game.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +29 (from 43 votes)
  9. Dan
    April 23, 2013

    I have often thought that the NHL (and sports leagues at large, really) need a You Can Play type project for sexism because that crap is rampant and so quickly brushed off.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +34 (from 44 votes)
    • 87
      April 23, 2013

      I wanna see NHL players honestly encourage girls/women on the record that they believe and support women playing in the NHL.

      With a serious face.

      And mean it.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +20 (from 36 votes)
    • eightyseven
      April 23, 2013

      I wanna see NHL players honestly encourage girls/women on the record that they believe and support women playing/refereeing in the NHL.

      With a serious face.

      And mean it.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 8 votes)
    • Abby
      April 23, 2013

      Well yeah. Even consider the Sedins and the heck of verbal abuse they’ve had being called “sisters”, both by the media, the public, and other players.

      Sexism rearing its head needs to be addressed just as much as any other discrimination that happens, whether it be race or religion or sexual orientation, and the fact that the league will (probably) let it slide says a lot. (And it’s not flattering.)

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +18 (from 30 votes)
      • best behaviour
        April 23, 2013

        Years ago, one of the Sedins was asked by an interviewer to comment on the put-downs they get in always being called sisters. As I recall, he answered that they have respect for all the women athletes out there and so they didn’t really consider it a putdown.

        No wonder the NHL doesn’t really like the Canucks – not really upholding the league’s culture there, Sedin!

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +50 (from 58 votes)
        • mike
          April 23, 2013

          Who said the NHL hates Canuck fans ?! Piece of garbage !

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)
  10. Smokey
    April 23, 2013

    I still have a bigger problem with his complete failure to own up to his cheapshot and drop the gloves like any hockey player with any character would. Totally gutless. Sure, he’s willing to call out a woman but when anyone tries to call him out he bails out and skates away.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +14 (from 30 votes)
    • Cheech
      April 23, 2013

      If I remember correctly, Keith’s flying elboy on Sedin last year was a direct retaliation to a vicious elbow that he received from Sedin a little earlier in that game. How else was he supposed to get Daniel to own up to his own cheapshot? Do you think that if Duncan Keith challenged Daniel to drop the gloves that they would have gone toe to toe? I think not. Duncan Keith retaliated on Daniel Sedin in the only way that he could. How frustrating it must be to take all the hacks and crap that the Sedins dish out (and if you watch them, they really do some dirty stuff under the radar), knowing that they will never man up and “Own up to their cheapshots”?

      In today’s NHL you simply cannot respond the way that Duncan Keith did to Sedin’s earlier cheapshot, but with the Sedins I am not really sure how you get them back for their own dirty play when they will not drop the mitts. If Sedin woud have fought Keith after running him in the corner then maybe he would not have been concussed by the payback.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -17 (from 29 votes)
      • Bent
        April 23, 2013

        You are kind of funny in a pathetic sort of way.

        It was not an elbow, but incidental contact of Daniels shoulder into Keith on a slightly late hit. It was not a cheap shot, the only person in the whole rink who noticed it was Keith. Shannyboys looked at it and said it was fine, just incidental contact. I don’t agree with your point on dropping the gloved but if it was true, why didn’t Keith drop the gloves when he was challenged after?

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +14 (from 22 votes)
      • Daniel Wagner
        April 23, 2013

        You don’t remember correctly.

        VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +16 (from 20 votes)
      • Pete
        April 23, 2013

        Yes, Keith’s elbow to Sedin’s head last year was in retaliation to the uncalled (and late) shoulder-to-head (it was definitely a shoulder, not an elbow) hit that Sedin laid on Keith a few minutes earlier. And yeah, you’re right that Sedin probably wouldn’t have dropped the gloves if Keith had challenged him. But none of that in any way excuses Keith’s retaliatory elbow. I love the ‘Hawks, but Keith’s elbow to Sedin’s head last year was sickening and inexcusable regardless of any potential mitigating circumstances. There are much better ways to seek revenge, like a nice stiff cross-check to the small of the back the next time he’s in front of the net – gets the point across, rarely called a penalty (even if it should be), and doesn’t put another player needlessly on the shelf with a concussion. Head injuries are no joke, there’s no good reason to target a guy’s noggin like that.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +9 (from 11 votes)
  11. rk17
    April 23, 2013

    Won’t be addressed oh well but things like this are bound to happen when questions like that are asked to a player who’s team just lost and greatly outplayed in all facets of their game tonight. Like you said, unpleasant players is an unpleasant part of the job. All I can say is it is what it is and it would be cool if Keith acknowledged what he said was offside but what can we do? Can we just have IWTG already? hah

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +1 (from 9 votes)
  12. Tom 1040
    April 23, 2013

    I think the ‘never played the game’ “card” is often in response to an asinine observation. :)

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -10 (from 26 votes)
    • am176
      April 23, 2013

      Yeah, if you look at Thompson’s tweet after the interview she seemingly got the sound bite she was looking for. You don’t often see a “journalist” troll like that.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -5 (from 21 votes)
    • Daniel Wagner
      April 23, 2013

      Really? Pointing out that Keith took a two-handed chop to Daniel Sedin’s back instead of trying to make any sort of defensive play whatsoever, that’s an asinine observation?

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +19 (from 27 votes)
      • Pete
        April 23, 2013

        Yes, it is an asinine observation. 1) It’s an incredibly common move, every single defender in the league would do the same thing when chasing down a breakaway and right or wrong it is RARELY called. 2) More importantly, even if the ref had raised his hand to call a delayed penalty it would have immediately gone back down as Sedin’s goal would have nullified it. The fact that that’s what she keyed in on and chose to ask about makes it pretty clear that she lacks a fundamental understanding of the game.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -16 (from 26 votes)
        • Dougster
          April 23, 2013

          You should have said “every single weenie defender”. Keith got caught, he was embarrassed, and he took it out on Daniel like a poorly behaved 5 year old, with no respect for the game. Did you see the Detroit game? Lots of great defending without the 2-handed slashes.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +10 (from 18 votes)
        • Daniel Wagner
          April 23, 2013

          Or, y’know, recognized the history between the two players.

          VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +10 (from 14 votes)
          • Pete
            April 23, 2013

            Yes, because anywhere in the line of questioning did she even hint at being aware of a history between the 2 players. If that had been her angle, fine, but it clearly wasn’t.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: -3 (from 9 votes)
  13. StevenReddy
    April 23, 2013

    Yeah, my girlfriend and I were both at the game and listened to his comments on Team 1040. We both had a jaw-drop reaction to it. At first, I was a little bothered that Blake Price seemingly glossed over it.

    But after one person called in and so did my girlfriend (aka Karen from Vancouver) saying it was “a half-step above Sean Avery’s ‘sloppy seconds’ comment” did Price truly address the issue.

    I don’t care what context this may seemingly be taken out of; it was a short snippet and it seemed pretty blatant what his intent was. Keith only further cements his image as a toothless hick with his ignorant salvo. Lets just say if he wasn’t missing much of his front teeth that the Hawks’ PR person would be aching to break them!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +14 (from 30 votes)
  14. johnny123
    April 23, 2013

    I think you’re reading this in one of at least two possible ways and presenting it as the only reading. For one thing, she would be the first female ref, which probably just occurred to him after he said she should be the ref, i.e., he probably realized his original comment didn’t make sense because there are no female refs. So, it does reference her gender, but it’s completely grounded in reality. Second, it’s not all clear that the rest of what he says is tied to the gender comment. So, it’s not as black and white as you present it. Yet you go off judging him as if he’s some kind of monster!

    And another note: you should probably get off your high horse and stick to commenting about hockey. We get that you’re morally superior to the rest of humanity and it makes you feel good. But, seriously, stop bullying people like a PC thug.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -21 (from 41 votes)
  15. paul wodehouse
    April 23, 2013

    mooney… whata nightmare bit of reporting…sexism isn’t in hockey…the lil girl held her own in a mans room …ah poor sis sedin gotta owie on the bum as he scored the goal…even if the play was worthy of a penalty it woulda been nulified anyway… harrison = feckless

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -50 (from 60 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      …. wow.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +28 (from 36 votes)
    • Pete
      April 23, 2013

      Paul – you realize that you’re a complete douchenozzle who’s bringing less than nothing to this discussion right? The ignorant crap you’re spewing makes everyone look bad, especially those of us who are trying to calmly and reasonably argue the counterpoint.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +14 (from 24 votes)
    • C
      April 23, 2013

      “sexism isn’t in hockey” No, but its alive and well right here in this comment. You claim sexism isn’t in the sport, and then go on to call Daniel Sedin a “sis”.

      The problem is people like you.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +19 (from 23 votes)
  16. Andre
    April 23, 2013

    Good for Keith. And this has little to do with sexism. What a crock. Her PURPOSE was to bait him (have you heard the ENTIRE interview or only the part included in this article?), it’s OBVIOUS, so maybe she deserved what she got because the INTENTION of her fan-girl question was to draw a reaction that would throw even more gasoline on the Black Hawks-Canucks rivalry. But hey, it makes good copy, right Mooney? SHAMELESS all the way around, but the person deserving of the LEAST blame here is Keith, who simply gave back to the reporter some of her own medicine. REGARDLESS of which sex asks such absurd questions, if you’re gonna try to bait a player, you’d better brace yourself for whatever comes next.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -22 (from 46 votes)
    • Brent
      April 23, 2013

      I think that a reporter has the right to ask a player about a cheap shot, especially when that same player got suspended for 5 games for a head shot against the player he slashed. Sounds like basic reporting. Keith is good enough to know that nothing he could do fat that time would help. The shot was already away. He just wanted to hurt Sedin. It reflects badly on him and his comments even more so.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +12 (from 20 votes)
  17. amk176
    April 23, 2013

    You mean to tell me that Vancouver fans have turned a meaningless win into drama over the refs and Duncan Keith? No way…

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -16 (from 36 votes)
  18. J21 (@Jyrki21)
    April 23, 2013

    I love how you “have to have played the game” to know that two-handing a player from behind is a penalty.

    The rest of us just see pretty shapes and colors moving; it’s really all a big mystery what this “hockey” thing is.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +42 (from 50 votes)
  19. Cathylu
    April 23, 2013

    From the amount of downvotes I can see that the ‘Hawks trolls have been here in full force. Hey Duncan Keith…you mad bro?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +24 (from 38 votes)
  20. Pete
    April 23, 2013

    Harrison – I generally enjoy reading your work at Puck Daddy (and here when I stop by on occasion), but today is not one of those days. Your argument here is asinine and unfounded. Duncan Keith was not dismissive of Karen Thompson because she’s a woman, he was dismissive because she was asking stupid questions (“Mr. Keith, don’t you feel you deserved a penalty for doing something that literally every single NHL defenseman does in that position? Let’s ignore the fact that you had no discernible effect on Sedin’s scoring opportunity, and that had the ref had decided to call a penalty it would have been wiped out by the goal anyways”).

    The only way that you can conclude that he’s suggesting her gender is any way connected to her (lack of) knowledge of the game is if you ignore most of the conversation. Keith did not exactly express himself eloquently, but the “first female ref” comment is meaningless – a) if she were a ref, she WOULD be the 1st female ref, and b) at no point does he say or even imply that there would be a problem with a female ref or that her being a woman disqualifies her from being knowledgeable about the game. Your argument that this one-off comment is Keith implying she doesn’t know the game because she’s a woman is both taking the comment out of context by ignoring the rest of the conversation and putting words in Keith’s mouth.

    Duncan Keith has a perfectly good and respectful relationship with other female hockey reporters, just ask Tracy Myers of CSN Chicago. I’m sure I’m going to get shouted / voted down because everyone here is a Canucks fan and you have plenty of other (and actually valid) reasons to hate Duncan Keith, but you’re grasping at straws on this one. Stick to hating Keith because he elbowed Daniel Sedin in the head, at least there’s nothing to misinterpret or twist there.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -7 (from 39 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      Hey Pete. I have no doubt that Keith has a good relationship with Tracy Myers. I don’t think he’s a sexist. But in this moment, what he said and how he said it was sexist, in my opinion. It’s not the end of the world, really. A simply apology would suffice (although I would like to see the league do something about it, but I’m probably grasping at straws there).

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +13 (from 27 votes)
      • Pete
        April 23, 2013

        I agree that some sort of follow-up from Keith would be a good idea, though I don’t think it needs to be an apology. At least not an apology to Ms. Thompson. He doesn’t have to apologize for a comment taken out of context, and he doesn’t have to apologize for being dismissive of a reporter who was asking really poor questions. He should clarify though that the comment is in fact out of context, that women have the same right to participate in all aspects of hockey as men do, and that his dismissive attitude towards Ms. Thompson had everything to do with her frankly stupid line of questioning and nothing to do with her gender.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -9 (from 19 votes)
        • John in Marpole
          April 23, 2013

          You do some damage to your position when you imply, via the misuse of quotation marks, what it was that the reporter said. If the question was as stupid as you assert it to be there would be no need to make up a false version of it.

          The personal editorial commentary you insterted into your imafinary version of the question is, in fact, spot on. You are 100% correct, that slash happens often and is usually not penalized.

          A player with class would have said just that in response to the real question as asked.

          A player with no class would fire back with a snide remark, and many other people would then decide they know exactly what that snide remark truly meant and argue about it online. Without knowing really what they are talking about.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +12 (from 18 votes)
          • Pete
            April 23, 2013

            I wan’t implying that the reporter said that specifically, I was paraphrasing her question to show how terrible it was. I would have used italics instead of quotation marks, as I agree that’s technically not the correct use of quotation marks, but it does not appear to me that you can format text like that in this comment section hence the need for quotes instead.

            But the facts are:
            a) Duncan Keith is not exactly the friendliest or most outgoing guy in the league. His nickname is (or at least his teammates called him this during the cup run in 2010) “Jigsaw” – if you’ve seen any of the Saw movies that should give you a little insight into his (mostly lack of) personality and social awkwardness.
            b) He was probably not in a very good mood. The ‘Hawks had just put forth arguably their worst performance of the season and were thoroughly outplayed en route to losing to a bitter rival.
            c) It was a truly terrible and pointless line of questioning.

            Yes, Duncan Keith was a jerk to this reporter, and he clearly does not respect her knowledge of the game. But my point is that his lack of respect was founded in the inane line of questioning she was subjecting him to, not in her gender.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: -2 (from 12 votes)
  21. Concerned Dad
    April 23, 2013

    This is a comment that you can’t tell tone without listening to it. If you hear him speak the words instead of just reading it, it becomes clear he is trying to belittle her.

    I appreciate the people trying to give the benefit of the doubt but it is pretty clear.

    He went from speaking on her ablility to be a ref, to play, and then to think. I am sorry but with the previous comment of on a womens ability to ref you should not get to the line of thinking of whether she can think the game.

    We all know there should have been called a penalty so his behaviour because he did not want to talk about this play is unacceptable. Players are made available to the media to talk about the game and to effectively give fans access, This kind of thinking is a black eye to the game and very disappointing

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +26 (from 36 votes)
    • very disapointed in this concerned dad
      April 23, 2013

      you obviously dont know the rules of the game. even if it was called a penalty, which im pretty sure the ref did put his hand up for one, it would have been cancelled out because he scored a goal right after the penalty call.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -2 (from 4 votes)
  22. Paul
    April 23, 2013

    Being a jerk to a reporter, no problem.

    Being a jerk to a woman reporter, SEXIST!!

    Maybe you guys have it backwards. Sexists are the ones who think sweet little reporter needs the league to step in to protect her from jerk player who was mean to her.

    It’s a rough world interviewing the opposing team, male or female. If you can’t handle insults along the way, male or female, time to get a new job.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -9 (from 29 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      As I said, this isn’t just about him being a jerk to her. Whatever about that. That happens sometimes in this business and her gender need not come up. But he brought it up, and it charged his comments.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +13 (from 29 votes)
  23. Mel
    April 23, 2013

    It’s tough to determine something on audio alone, but I think that the most offensive part was “Okay, see ya.” Because that indicated that he wasn’t joking, he had no respect for KT and he wanted to dismiss her so she couldn’t do her job.
    It’s all of one piece, looking down on anyone, male or female, who hasn’t played hockey at the highest level and dismissing women, it’s a bullying behaviour. It works when playing a game, but not when analyzing a game.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +22 (from 26 votes)
  24. Not Sexist But Not Smart
    April 23, 2013

    I really don’t think this is telling of Keith’s character, as some mentioned. Most of us have something that gets under our skin and for Keith it’s the Nucks. I personally am not a Keith fan when it comes to hockey but I’m sure he’s a nice guy in the dressing room (wears an A on his sweater) and off the ice (he is married). I don’t think that I could handle the constant nagging of reporters game after game and even though that isn’t an excuse, most would lash out from time to time, especially following an emotional game against a rival. Wasn’t smart by Keith but we are all human. Give ‘em a break.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -3 (from 11 votes)
    • shoes
      April 23, 2013

      Guess what, Keith is showing he cannot control his emotions on or off the ice. He is going to seriously hurt someone (already has actually) if allowed to go unchecked. He is getting worse as time goes on and I hope his career ends before he ends someones elses. He needs help.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 10 votes)
  25. Chelsea Dagger
    April 23, 2013

    Sexism? Really? Harmless comments. Don’t you have better things to worry about? Shouldn’t you be planning how you’re going to trash your city after losing in the playoffs…again??? Looting, rolling vehicles and torching things?

    Peace out.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -29 (from 43 votes)
    • EllynBleu
      April 23, 2013

      Really Chelsea? “Don’t you have better things to worry about?” Making a mealy-mouthed comment about “looting … ” is sooo lame. Is this how you respond to every team that beats your team? What a way to make yourself feel better. Graciously accept the fact that Chicago lost to our Canucks who played better in yesterday’s game, and get over it. No need to trash-talk.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +14 (from 22 votes)
  26. Pete
    April 23, 2013

    Harrison – I generally enjoy reading your work at Puck Daddy (and here when I stop by on occasion), but today is not one of those days. Your argument here is asinine and unfounded. Duncan Keith was not dismissive of Karen Thompson because she’s a woman, he was dismissive because she was asking stupid questions (“Mr. Keith, don’t you feel you deserved a penalty for doing something that literally every single NHL defenseman does in that position? Let’s ignore the fact that you had no discernible effect on Sedin’s scoring opportunity, and that had the ref had decided to call a penalty it would have been wiped out by the goal anyways”). I mean, c’mon Harrison – you point out yourself that any penalty called would have been nullified by the goal, why does Thompson get a free pass for asking a stupid and pointless question?

    The only way that you can conclude that he’s suggesting her gender is any way connected to her (lack of) knowledge of the game is if you ignore most of the conversation. Keith did not exactly express himself eloquently, but the “first female ref” comment is meaningless – a) if she were a ref, she WOULD be the 1st female ref, and b) at no point does he say or even imply that there would be a problem with a female ref or that her being a woman disqualifies her from being knowledgeable about the game. Your argument that this one-off comment is Keith implying she doesn’t know the game because she’s a woman is both taking the comment out of context by ignoring the rest of the conversation and putting words in Keith’s mouth.

    Duncan Keith has a perfectly good and respectful relationship with other female hockey reporters, just ask Tracy Myers of CSN Chicago. I’m sure I’m going to get shouted / voted down because everyone here is a Canucks fan and you have plenty of other (and actually valid) reasons to hate Duncan Keith, but you’re grasping at straws on this one. Stick to hating Keith because he elbowed Daniel Sedin in the head, at least there’s nothing to misinterpret or twist there.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -6 (from 12 votes)
    • Pete
      April 23, 2013

      Sorry about the double post, my internet connection is wonky this morning

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
      • Brent
        April 23, 2013

        It’s not you it is the server. Did you get the “forbidden” message. It is my favorite.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)
        • Pete
          April 23, 2013

          Might’ve had a server hang-up, but also had a 30-minute window this morning (exactly when I was trying to post this comment) where the internet in my office kept going in and out

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  27. TheWellwoods
    April 23, 2013

    As a female who knows and plays the game, that statement made my blood boil. Or maybe it was just a PMS hot flash because I’m just a woman. Who knows.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +37 (from 47 votes)
  28. adam
    April 23, 2013

    The Canucks being, of course, the first team to have women play on their team. they have been at the forefront of the war on sexism.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -29 (from 35 votes)
    • Timmy Wong (@timmywong11)
      April 23, 2013

      When you put it that way, two women just beat Crawford on the 3-0 goal. What does that say about the Hawks?

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +7 (from 7 votes)
  29. jeff
    April 23, 2013

    it is really too bad that every thing comes down to gender bias. The way most of you would have it would be to remove any words from the english language that refers to gender. Lets make everything neutral. No he’s or she’s, him’s or her’s, anything that refers to sex. Also why don’t we make it so that you can only name people names like Pat or Shane. Nothing gender specific. Get a LIFE and stop worrying about whether someone’s feeling got hurt.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -10 (from 16 votes)
  30. Joe
    April 23, 2013

    I think you Vancouver fans are way tooo sensitive. I don’t think for a minute that duncan keith was being sexist. i think he was just speaking to a reporter, who happened to be female. he would have given the same answer to a male reporter… light up Vancouver…

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -15 (from 25 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      Again: nothing wrong with what he said beyond it being dickish UNTIL he brought her gender into it and it charged his comments. Would he have done that with a male reporter? Probably not.

      When I originally heard of these comments without the gender aspects, I defended Keith on the same basis you are now. Check my Twitter timeline. But I changed my tune once I listened to the audio, at which point it seemed clear to me that what he’s saying isn’t the same thing he’d say to a man.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +10 (from 20 votes)
      • MB13
        April 23, 2013

        Yawn – how did I know everyone would make such a big deal out of this.

        It’s a nothing story until Harrison gets his panties in a bunch.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -26 (from 38 votes)
        • Daniel Wagner
          April 23, 2013

          And of course the person dismissing the sexism casually uses a sexist insult…

          VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +31 (from 35 votes)
          • MB13
            April 23, 2013

            was intended :-)

            But seriously – there are two ways to interpret the conversation. I don’t think it was sexist at all.

            He says she would be the first female referee (like wouldn’t that be something) then suggests she can’t play – not because she is female but because she can’t skate – in the transcript above you even have a “…” between his female comment and his can’t play comment to suggest he changed his train of thought from the female aspect to the “can’t skate” she just suggested… it took him a beat to process that. If anything, he is guilty of opening a door for people like Harrison to run through with cries of sexism.

            Anyways – this is so typical of a Vancouverite. over sensitive and self centered.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: -31 (from 33 votes)
            • best behaviour
              April 23, 2013

              Thanks to you, and all the posters above, for your bias disclosures in making this a “Vancouverite” or “Canucks” issue. It really, really isn’t. No Canucks players were harmed in the interviewing of Duncan Keith.

              I think a lot of us agree that we don’t want to scapegoat someone and then dust off our hands and say we’ve dealt with sexism in the NHL now. Keith is probably no worse than a lot of guys, even favourite players of mine who I would defend. Even if the reporter has a nice thick reporter skin and didn’t get hurt feelings, I think it’s the right thing for other people who are trying to make hockey be for everyone to call it out when we see the underlying sexism rear its head from under the surface for a moment. I do think a player who feels like hockey is for everyone would own up, though not everyone is the same and some guys would see it as better stand by their words through thick and thin. But a league that respects all its fans (?) equally (?) would indicate that somehow, not necessarily through a fine or hearing or anything, but surely they would find a way.

              VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
              Rating: +8 (from 10 votes)
      • bobchawksfan
        April 25, 2013

        coming from a fan of one of the dirtiest teams in the league your comments dont hold alot of weight.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
        • Harrison Mooney
          April 25, 2013

          You mean my comments about sexism that have nothing to do with hockey?

          VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  31. rsen9
    April 23, 2013

    It helps to listen to the audio clip to have a better idea on how it might have come across.

    To me, Keith is very obviously frustrated with how the game went which was then made more so by a pretty silly question about the slash he did to Daniel. It leads to sarcastic comment about her perhaps reffing an NHL game for them which he quickly goes into the suggestion that the first female ref in the league probably can’t play hockey either.

    Just suggesting that a woman can’t play there is sexist. Had that been a male reporter, he might have just shot back his awards and achievements because you can’t say First Male NHL Ref. He could have just replied with that too and avoided the whole gender thing.

    This has probably been mentioned over and over again here but the main problem here is not about hurt feelings. It’s about how a lot of people still insult others by comparing them to women as if they were lesser than men. Thomson handled this pretty well too but probably because she expects this kind of stuff to happen to her while she is doing her job. The expectation that her gender will be belittled needs to stop and not just for her but for everyone in anything and everywhere.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +21 (from 23 votes)
    • fivehole
      April 23, 2013

      She said she can’t skate. How can she play if she can’t skate?

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -5 (from 9 votes)
      • rsen9
        April 23, 2013

        She did mention that but I feel from listening to the conversation that Duncan already had what he was going to say in mind but was just interrupted by that comment from her very briefly.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  32. Karen
    April 23, 2013

    This makes me sick. I hate that players like him make these comments – it just perpetuates the idea that this isn’t a world with room for girls. Thank you, Harrison, for demonstrating that at least some of the professional sporting world (and the media surrounding it) in Vancouver is not just an old boy’s club.

    I also want to point out (ask) that this has complete overshadowed something that was really quite shameful last night. What was that the Green Men had? A poster for the movie Couples Retreat – but I didn’t see the faces on it. I’m going to assume it was two Chicago player faces posted on the bodies (and please correct me if I’m wrong). I think it’s just as wrong, and particularly considering recent conversations in the professional football world, completely inappropriate. I expect it from a classless Hawk, but not from Vancouverites.

    … like the Wellwood, though, I’m probably just PMSing.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +11 (from 15 votes)
  33. Mountain meet molehill
    April 23, 2013

    This is being overblown to epic proportions. The Chicago Tribunes headline on this story would make you think he killed her. I think she was trying to bait him a little bit. Her tweet afterward doesn’t help with my opinion of her either. The Hawks had just been run over by the reviled Canucks. He probably wasn’t in the greatest of moods. He could have handeled the situation better. But, I wouldn’t call what he said, sexist.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -9 (from 13 votes)
  34. lois
    April 23, 2013

    As a reporter, hockey player/fan and feminist, I can’t believe people are making such an issue out of this.

    I would expect to hear that same thing back if I asked questions the way she did. She was clearly baiting, and her follow-up Tweet about the conversation is proof. Now she gets further media attention for being a subpar reporter.

    If you say you can’t skate, of course he’s going to say you can’t play. If she did play, she could’ve thrown that right back at him.

    Very few hockey players give good interviews. Some, usually captains or faces of the game, are trained to do so.

    I wouldn’t be proud if I were him. But does it warrant an apology? No, this is what she was hoping for. People are seeing her face, reading her awful interview and taking her side all over Canada and the US right now.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -7 (from 19 votes)
  35. lois
    April 23, 2013

    Meanwhile,
    Where is the homophobic rage over the Green Men’s poster from the game?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -1 (from 9 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      I didn’t even see it. What was it?

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)
      • MB13
        April 23, 2013

        I can’t wait for your post about this one… will you be defending the green men?

        probably because anything to do with the Canucks is infallible… even the most annoying idiotic spectators in the history of sport.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -19 (from 19 votes)
  36. Jeremy
    April 23, 2013

    your all a bunch of cry babies. not unusual for canucks fans though. back in 2011 when the bruins whooped you for the cup you cried so hard you burnt down and trashed your own city.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -23 (from 35 votes)
    • Christopher
      April 23, 2013

      Jeremy, It’s you’re, not your. Try and lead off with proper writting skills before you make a point. Also, only a small percentage of people in Vancouver were part of the riot, and it has been proven that many of those charged had preplanned to come to Vancouver from outside to steal and loot, regardless of the outcome of the game, taking advantage of the large numbers of people in the streets. This was not a case of fan that rioted.The number of people who showed up the next day to clean up and support our Canucks were far more a fair representation of the respect we feel for our city and our team.

      Also, I feel that Duncan Keith was baited, but he sure fell for the bait, and showed himself to be an ass. I think he should make ammends for his trashy attitude towards woman in that particular moment, but I do agree that verbal battles are a part of post game interviews, so it’s not a huge deal. Enough of the drama, let’s bring on the playoffs! :)

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +4 (from 12 votes)
    • shoes
      April 23, 2013

      Is that your best shot? hahahaha

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -6 (from 6 votes)
    • jeremy
      April 23, 2013

      back off, ‘jeremy.’ this is my turf.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  37. paul wodehouse
    April 23, 2013

    …pete…douchenozzle? ignorant crap spewing? that’s your brand of calmly and reasonably arguing the [counter]point?pick an arguement and stick with it goober…y’go after mooney with how stupid the girls’question was AND that the penalty woulda been nulified because of the goal which was my argument in he first place but you need to call me names?

    as for concerned dad…and his buddy harrison… have you ever been close to the ice when there’s a game going on ? i mean close when you can the chirping from one player to another at a face off or between the benches when they cuss and swear at each other to include wives and gfriends as topics of abuse? … this woman should have know that the idea of a penalty meant nothing because of the goal …she was simply too simple to try to stir the pot with such an uninformed question…Keith didn’t take the bait because he wanted nothing to do with her amateur approach…seeya

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -24 (from 24 votes)
  38. Abby Heat
    April 23, 2013

    This reminds me of ads up around Abbotsford skating rinks that say “Girls can play hockey, too!” I appreciate the campaign, but what is that implying, exactly?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  39. Smithereen
    April 23, 2013

    Settle down Mooney….Way too touchy!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -7 (from 11 votes)
  40. Dan
    April 23, 2013

    Canuck fans are hilarious. Have to be the most bitter fan base ever to consider Duncan Keith classless. The guy is total class, and his comments here clearly were not meant to be sexist. I guess it’s easy to be bitter when you can’t win the Cup. See ya when we beat you in May.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -24 (from 24 votes)
  41. paul wodehouse
    April 23, 2013

    oh abby…exactly?

    it’s SEXISM girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -9 (from 9 votes)
  42. Maurice Richard
    April 23, 2013

    It sure didn’t sound sexist to me, and quite an attitude that bimbo had with Mr. Keith, eh? Maybe if she had some manners and approached man with a little respect she wouldn’t have had a problem. Women shouldn’t be allowed in the locker room anyway. How many guys are in WNBA locker rooms after games???

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -19 (from 23 votes)
    • Daniel Wagner
      April 23, 2013

      Personally, I am shocked that a person who calls women “bimbos” and thinks they shouldn’t be allowed in the locker room didn’t find Keith’s comment sexist. Shocked, I say.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +27 (from 29 votes)
    • iceman
      April 23, 2013

      I guess not many… especially not a brain-damaged, a-hole male chauvinist pig like you.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +3 (from 9 votes)
      • MB13
        April 23, 2013

        LOL – I think it’s iceman with his panties in a bunch. LOL

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -3 (from 7 votes)
    • iceman
      April 23, 2013

      Not many I guess… Especially not a brain-damaged, a-hole male chauvinist pig like you.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 6 votes)
  43. CJV
    April 23, 2013

    Keith had a good answer to a stupid question by a stupid reporter. If he has a smarta$$ answer to a guy reporter its OK , but not to the poor little female reporter. I guess Vancouver is the sensitive city.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -5 (from 19 votes)
  44. cjv
    April 23, 2013

    If you look at the video on the left of the screen the ref puts his arm up after the slash. So the reporter showed she know nothing of the rules so it was a stupid questions.

    15.2 Calling a Minor Penalty – Goal Scored – If the penalty to be imposed is a minor penalty and a goal is scored on the play by the non-offending side, the minor penalty shall not be imposed but major and match penalties shall be imposed in the normal manner regardless of whether or not a goal is scored.

    Actually I like Keiths response but I think he should have ripped her more.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -6 (from 20 votes)
    • Daniel Wagner
      April 23, 2013

      Or she, like everyone else watching the game including the play-by-play crew, didn’t see the ref’s arm go up and thought the ref missed it.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +8 (from 14 votes)
      • MB13
        April 23, 2013

        she should have her facts straight before baiting a player.

        Any time another city’s reporter doesn’t have their facts straight – the Vancouver media is the first to run out and call them unprofessional or lack hockey knowledge- no matter what their sex.

        Good catch cjv – maybe you should work for 1040 or have a blog. clearly you understand the basics of hockey.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -2 (from 16 votes)
        • iceman
          April 23, 2013

          Jerks of a feather, troll together. It always makes you feel better when you meet a dumber.

          Clearly you two have mastered the basics of self-mockery.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +2 (from 6 votes)
          • MB13
            April 23, 2013

            yes – when someone has an opposite position from the idiotic comments being posted here, they are a troll.

            I can’t wait for the Harrison Mooney expose on the homophobia displayed by the Canucks green men and the organization for allowing that sign into the rink. I think that was much worse than Keith’s comment to a stupid reporter baiting him when his team lost a game.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: +1 (from 7 votes)
    • shoes
      April 23, 2013

      Of course you loved his comments.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
    • shoes
      April 23, 2013

      Listen up for hockey lesson. Normally on a breakaway somebody slashes the legs, arm goes up, goal is scored and penalty is waived as it was a delayed call resulting in goal.

      What made this play different was it was a two-handed slash to the head area, connected with the upper back or neck and possibly the side of the head on the way down for Danny. It could have been a 5 minute penalty and most certainly would have been had it caused injury. No two handed slash to the head area is acceptable, whether a goal is being scored or not. You have to accept that. The refs had many options and chose to let it go, but nobody would have blinked if they would have given him 5 and a game.

      What is appalling is posters trying to turn it into a “hockey play”. That is pure ignorance of the game.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 6 votes)
      • bobchawksfan
        April 25, 2013

        you are so full of it i replayed it at least 10 times and the stick never gets even close to his head, your team is one of the dirtiest classless teams in all of hockey so stuff it

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  45. shoes
    April 23, 2013

    Not sure I have ever seen such ignorant comments as those made here today, defending Duncan Keith. Hawks fans need to accept the fact they have their own version of Matt Cooke or Torres and he needs to get some control of his game, before somebody gets badly hurt. His comments to the reporter further prove that he has no control over his own emotions or actions. A train wreck waiting to happen and I just hope that he does not end a Sedins career because all those around him are too cowardly to speak up and get him help.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +11 (from 13 votes)
    • Jeremy
      April 23, 2013

      what about when vancouver had their own version of cooke or torres in aaron rome. you are incompetent shoes. and you say no two handed slash to the head area is acceptable, its a good thing he didnt slash him in the head then. the game announcing even said it wasnt as bad as he thought when he first saw it if you go and watch the reply. so stop talking out your ass. it was clearly to his back and he fell cause of the goalie not the slash. all canucks fans do is cry and complain.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -10 (from 10 votes)
      • shoes
        April 23, 2013

        Pete: for you to suggest “that every other defenseman does that play” is ridiculous. Please name one other D-man that has two handed slashed in the upper back/head area on a breakaway. You are getting yourself confused between tripping, hooking and two handed slash to upper body.

        This was truly a goof-ball move by Keith and true to his nature he cannot control his emotions on or off the ice. Becoming a sad version of his Norris self.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +4 (from 6 votes)
        • Pete
          April 23, 2013

          Shoes, are you trying to say that Daniel’s head is lodged in his ass? Because that’d be the only way that Keith’s slash was anywhere near Daniel’s head.

          Aside from that, your attempt to put Keith in the same category as Cooke and Torres shows your complete inability to argue objectively. I’m not going to try to defend Duncan Keith’s elbow to Daniel’s head last spring because it is indefensible. Regardless of my belief that Daniel’s late shoulder-to-head hit on Keith a few minutes earlier should have been penalized, there are no circumstances even close to mitigating enough to defend or excuse the elbow that Keith threw. I am a ‘Hawks fan and I was absolutely sickened by Keith’s actions. But you take away that one single incident, and what else has Keith done that’s even close to that same level? Both Cooke and Torres are many-times-over repeat offenders who both boast histories rife with multi-game suspensions and maximum fines, on the other hand Keith has faced supplemental discipline exactly once in his career and that was for the aforementioned elbow to Daniel Sedin. To put him in the same category as guys like Cooke and Torres makes about as much sense as equating the WWE and the UFC.

          I’m not trying to say that Dunc’s slash on Daniel was honorable or something like that, but you’re going WAAAAAY overboard on your attempted takedown.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)
          • shoes
            April 23, 2013

            You may want to peep at the video again and watch the stick of dumbo go up over the shoulder of Sedin. But I agree Sedin bumped into him at the other end when he had the puck and made him very, very, very angry and rightfully so……he won a Norris you know!

            I think a hissy fit is an appropriate response and you making Keith into a victim is very cool.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)
      • shoes
        April 23, 2013

        huh? Aaron Rome, the only guy to get suspended ever for hitting .014 second too late as per the official Mike Murphy press release. Pulease Mr…….don’t compare a two handed slash to the upper body/head area to anything else …..except a two handed slash to the upper body head area. My point being is Duncan Keith CANNOT control his emotions on and NOW off the ice and should be reigned in by those who love him, if any such persons exist. Matt Cooke and now Torres have been reigned in and both are grateful. Maybe its possible that instead of defending Keith you should become part of the “calming” program for him. And please stop with the Canucks fans whining……..no team whines more on or off the ice than the Hawks, except for the Bruins, of course.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
        • Jeremy
          April 23, 2013

          .014 too late? that would be him hitting horton instantly but that isnt how it happened and not only was it late he targeted his head and left his feet on the hit, you obviously most not have seen it happen or you wouldnt make such stupid statements. and once again shoes, it wasnt a slash to the head, you must need some serious glasses.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)
  46. malcolm
    April 23, 2013

    Watch the whole clip and see Daniel take out Keith along the boards in the Vancouver end to start the play that was as much an interference call as Duncan’s two hander. Keith could have hustled back a little more after getting up so he was probably more than a little frustrated with the initial non-call and then the goal… but lets not talk about the game that would be boring.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -4 (from 6 votes)
  47. Nee
    April 23, 2013

    Female Canucks fan here. 25 yrs old, if that’s relevant. My 2 cents:

    Yeah, it was dickish, but I don’t see the huge issue. He’s just doing what any grumpy player would do, by questioning a reporters creds. It’s absolutely rude…but I don’t see a huge issue, personally.

    Now, if he had been mocking her with sexual gestures (which apparently isn’t all that un-common in NFL and NBA locker rooms with reporters) then I would be angry. This doesn’t bother me, to be honest…

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +2 (from 6 votes)
    • Nee
      April 23, 2013

      Just wanted to add: the rudeness of some of the posters here, just because they disagree with Mooney’s take, is pretty appalling. We can’t disagree and still be respectful? Dear lord. Though this post is lined to Puck Daddy’s post, which has over 3000 comments, so I imagine alot of these people are visitors just passing through…

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +8 (from 8 votes)
  48. Pam R.
    April 23, 2013

    Considering the discussion of sexism and hockey here, I’m surprised no one has commented on the Ashley Madison ads that ran on TV during last night’s game. I’m shocked that Sportsnet and the Canucks would think that they were at all appropriate. For male or female viewers, actually, or especially anyone watching the game with their kids.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +3 (from 7 votes)
  49. Kai
    April 23, 2013

    Only a sexist jerk would make remarks like this because you know in a million years he wouldn’t have had that exchange with a man.
    Lots of sports reporters haven’t played a game of hockey in their lives let alone reffed a game.

    But what do you expect from player that plays on a team whose mates chirps at Brendan Morrison when he left the ice with a season ending injury and one of them assaults an old cab driver? It wasn’t the first or last time some of the team members dissed a player that left the ice with an obvious injury. Obviously their captain is just as classless because he should have ripped them a new one the first time it happened. He didn’t because it happened again. I’ll be they were more than a bit embarrassed when Morrison got traded to their team.
    What a classless bunch of little pukes they are.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +1 (from 7 votes)
  50. justin
    April 23, 2013

    OMG this is the COMPLETE POLAR OPPOSITE to SEXISM. He would have said the same thing to any guy reported asking such a IDIOTIC QUESTION.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -4 (from 12 votes)
    • Daniel Wagner
      April 23, 2013

      He would have said that a guy would be the “first female ref,” eh?

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  51. goathedxxx
    April 23, 2013

    I believe it was sarcasm. And what people are forgetting is that the referee did call the penalty. The ref had raised his arm and then dropped it once the goal was scored. Male or female, it doesn’t matter; she asked if there should have been a penalty called (implying that the ref missed the call). I think she didn’t realize that the penalty had actually been called and that once Sedin scored; the penalty is negated. Again, male or female, if you don’t understand the rules and you ask a silly question then expect a silly answer. This is why reporters should NOT be allowed in the dressing rooms immediately following the game. If the media wants to talk to players they shouldhave to wait in a press room after the players have had a chance to shower and calm down. It is completely unfair to expect people to lose their humanity just because they’re famous or play a game for a living. It is just as unfair to judge a person’s character based on one statement given after an ignorant question; immediately following a frustrating situation. Relax Mooney, I’d like to see you handle questions about typos and grammar immediately after you’ve written an article around 2:00 AM. Every single time you write.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)
  52. Mike Lee
    April 23, 2013

    WOW. Glad I don’t live in Vancouver. PC liberals (especially men!) crying sexism like children. This was not sexist. The sexism is by all of you who expect a different treatment of the reporter from the hockey player. When he said “first female ref” obviously he was referring to the NHL This was the standard “You don’t know what you’re talking about – you’re a reporter and I’m an NHL player” putdown. Far more disturbing is how many of you are so quick to criticize others’ free speech in the name of political correctness. Quite frightening.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -6 (from 16 votes)
    • Brent
      April 23, 2013

      We are glad too!

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
  53. Praise the Indian Head
    April 23, 2013

    Canuck fans are nothing but whiners who constantly complain when their players are the victim of a questionable play or action.

    What about all of the instances where their players crossed the line? The examples are legion. What do we hear then? Crickets.

    Let’s get down to brass tacks here. You are all a bunch of hypocrites.

    Vancouver prides itself on its genteel nature and liberal progressivism.

    What did you do when the Boston Bruins rolled over your beloved Canucks in game 7 of the 2011 Stanley Cup Finals? You went out on the streets of your beloved city and rioted, started fires, damaged public and private property and created mass civil unrest.

    This is not the kind of behavior that we Chicagoans exhibit when our teams win.

    Tisk Tisk Vancouver. Take a long look the mirror.

    People who live in glass houses should not be so willing to throw stones.

    Rest assured that we will have the last laugh by raising the cup.

    Long live the Indian Head.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -12 (from 20 votes)
    • Christopher
      April 23, 2013

      Praise the Indian Head, only a small percentage of people in Vancouver were part of the riot, and it has been proven that almost all of those charged had preplanned to come to Vancouver from outside the city to steal and loot, regardless of the outcome of the game, taking advantage of the large numbers of people in the streets. This was not a case of fan that rioted.The number of people who showed up the next day to clean up and support our Canucks were far more a fair representation of the respect we feel for our city and our team.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -2 (from 10 votes)
  54. Tom Lewis
    April 23, 2013

    Holy political correctness, batman. She admits she can’t skate (which also means she can’t play). If she were to ref, she WOULD be the first female ref. Was it a flippant remark? Yes. Was it sexist? No.

    I know Canadians are polite, thoughful people, but I really can’t believe these remarks. Incredibly oversensitive!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -3 (from 15 votes)
  55. ron p
    April 23, 2013

    The accusation that Duncan Keith’s retort is sexist is sexist in itself. If anything it shows that there is equality in regards to female reporters in the dressing room. His response was sarcastic and he would have said the exact same thing to a male reporter that asked such a stupid question and also admitted that he can’t skate. This is a perfect example why the canuck fans are the very worst in the league. Nobody like a crying, whining team and fan base. Get over it Vancouver

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -1 (from 9 votes)
  56. Boo Hoo
    April 23, 2013

    All you feminists do is whine… This is just ridiculous

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -3 (from 15 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 23, 2013

      We don’t whine so much as we expect equality… but, you know, semantics.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +7 (from 23 votes)
      • Brent
        April 23, 2013

        Equality! Kind of demanding don’t you think?

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
  57. Patricia
    April 23, 2013

    I think everyone should take a step back and focus on the words and not try to guess at intent. The suggestion that the reporter who spotted the penalty could be the first female referee is not in and of itself sexist. (And I say this as a 35-year old independent professional woman.) Let’s simplify the gender issues by imagining for a moment that this conversation took place with Karen the reporter interviewing Cammi Granato, one of the first female players inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame (and Vancouver resident), using the actual complete transcript, which Mooney has conveniently omitted (thanks, Greg Wyshynski for the details). [I've changed Daniel to Danielle so as not to distract from the idea of this interview occurring after a womens' game; no disrespect intended to Mr. Sedin.]

    Karen: “Can you talk about what happened after the Danielle Sedin goal?”

    Cammi: “Which one was that one?

    Karen: “The third goal.”

    Cammi: “The third one? Well, we scored one goal after that I think and the game ended 3-1.”

    Karen: “Right after the goal when you were on the ice with Danielle. Right after she scored. You remember?”

    Cammi: “I went off the ice and took a minus. I don’t know. What are you talking about?”

    Karen: “Nothing. Just checking.”

    Cammi: “What did you see?”

    Karen: “It looked like maybe there was a penalty that went undetected. You seemed a bit frustrated.”

    Cammi: “Oh, no. I don’t think there was anything. I think she scored a nice goal. The ref was right there. That’s what the ref saw. We should get you as a ref maybe, eh?”

    Karen: “Yeah, maybe.”

    Cammi: The first female … ”

    Karen: “I can’t skate, though.”

    Cammi: “The first female referee.” (continuing where she was cut-off)

    Cammi: (now responding to Karen’s comment about not being able to skate) “You can’t play probably either, right? But you’re thinking the game like you know it? Okay, see ya.”
    ————————————————————————

    So, what do you think now? “Cammi” continues the interview despite Karen admitting that she’s asking questions about “nothing”. That’s kindness, not patronization. Cammi easily could have ended it there since Karen was clearly wasting everyone’s time. Karen suggests there was a penalty the refs should have called immediately before the goal, revealing an apparent gap in her understanding of the rules of hockey. Remember, having been on the ice, Cammi has no reason to know the delayed penalty call was easily missed. Cammi does not comment on Karen’s apparent lack of knowledge, but instead makes an unoriginal joke that maybe Karen should be the referee. This is another apparent kindness by Cammi. Karen says “yeah” and Cammi points out she would be the first female referee. A true statement. Not at all sexist, but actually a comment on the state of the NHL vs. its peers such as the NBA and NFL where there are female officials. Karen then admits she can’t skate and therefore hasn’t played. Cammi points out that Karen doesn’t understand the game as well as Karen thinks she does, and ends the conversation, which is going nowhere, before Karen does anything else to embarrass herself in front of the other reporters. Curt, yes. Rude, maybe. Sexist, no. A broad statement that anyone who hasn’t played can’t understand the game, no.

    If the words weren’t sexist when stated by a woman, then they aren’t sexist when stated by a man.

    Before you all continue to assume the worst about Keith just because he plays for Chicago, you should remember that he was born in Winnipeg and currently lives in British Columbia. Growing up in Canada he is well aware that hockey is played and played well by both men and women, including his own sister, and that people all over Canada understand the game even if they haven’t played it, like, for example, his own mother. And probably yours if you spent a significant amount of time in the youth leagues and your mother is from the generation that didn’t play sports.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -2 (from 12 votes)
    • Daniel Wagner
      April 23, 2013

      We linked to the actual audio, however, and the audio itself is far more damning than the words by themselves.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 10 votes)
  58. ron p
    April 23, 2013

    Athletes react to reporters questions in this manner all the time. His response was not sexist. It was rude and sarcastic but not sexist. His response shows that there is equality in the dressing room. He would have said the exact same thing if the reporter was male.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)
  59. Blackhawksfan
    April 23, 2013

    What was sexist about it? She’s the one who implied she couldn’t skate.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -5 (from 7 votes)
  60. Lyg
    April 23, 2013

    I cannot believe people are making this out to be a Canuck-only issue, that Canuck fans are making a big deal of it only because it’s the hated Duncan Keith. I for one can say without a doubt, I would be as disgusted and pissed off if it had been one of the Canucks players making such comments to any female reporter.

    It Keith had stopped at “We should get you as a ref, maybe, hey?” it would have been a childish and dickish thing to say. However, the only reason he goes on after that is to make clear that Thomson’s gender makes a difference to him. And THAT makes the exchange sexist and utterly unacceptable.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 8 votes)
  61. akidd
    April 23, 2013

    wow, lotsa action on this board. keith shouldn’t have said what he said. he got caught. i guess he just couldn’t keep that slick pr sheen going after getting his azz kicked in his hometown and being booed and jeered every time he touched the puck.

    that’s gotta hurt, no matter how macho and tough he tries to seem on the surface. he’s just trying to compensate for his insecurities. silly humans.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)
  62. MB13
    April 23, 2013

    Well PTIB successfully managed to get traffic to their blog today – so no matter how stupid their position is on the matter (along with most Canucks fans), PTIB won.

    Congrats :-)

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -4 (from 12 votes)
    • iceman
      April 23, 2013

      Yes, and in large part thanks to your narcissistic personality disorder.

      Congrats. Job well done. Now you can go back and keep adoring yourself in the mirror.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 11 votes)
  63. DEE
    April 23, 2013

    To be honest I think Keith owes the Blackhawk female fans an apology. It isn’t so much about the quote that bothered me, it is the tone he said it in. There are so many smart female fans out there forking out money on tickets and merchandise to see him play and they are going because they love the sport. Just because someone hasn’t played a particular sport or played at a higher level doesn’t mean they can’t grasp the rules. I don’t care if he doesn’t say anything to Vancouver fans or the media but you make sure to let your lady fans know that you didn’t mean it in a derogatory way.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +7 (from 9 votes)
  64. jonny
    April 23, 2013

    How many times do women throw sexist comments at men? Plenty!!! In fact it happens all the time in media, in the workplace, but that’s ok right? I don’t think his comment is out of line. I personally don’t like the guy but it’s not inappropriate. It’s ok to parade women around half naked in the media and make profit from selling sex but it’s not ok to mention gender in a profesional hockey interview? How many female refs are there in the NHL? Maybe the whole league is sexist! Why are there no female refs or commentators? The fact that your taking offense to it is sexist. Maybe next time all players will just say “no comment” when addressed by female reporters and there won’t be any female reporters in the NHL either. Suck it up buttercup! I’d say that to woman or man alike!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -3 (from 7 votes)
  65. summers
    April 23, 2013

    I don’t think there should be a fine or anything for keith, maybe a stern talking to by the NHL or something. But for the sake of his fans that watch and defend his every move, I hope he gets a PR person and/or learns how to conduct himself better in ”hostile” situations. It’s not okay to be rude and disrespectful. I get that it’s kind of hard because reporters ask stupid questions, but athletes such as Luongo, have handle those questions and reporters without coming off as a prick–so, so can keith.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  66. shoes
    April 23, 2013

    Lets take a look at Duncan Keith. 3 years ago he won a Norris and a Cup. He was hard working and humble. Now he appears to be a self-centered boor that thinks he is above the rules of hockey and with his comments society. His main body of work in the last 3 years since his glory days has been to attack one the mildest mannered players in hockey from behind, not once but twice and both times with intent to injure. This makes him a coward to go with his boorishness. Truly he has fallen from a likable person and likable hockey player to a buffoonish caricature of his former self.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)
  67. Dawg
    April 23, 2013

    I don’t care about what he said to KT, she’s fine, he just looks like a douche cause now it’s a national story. My problem is that he denies the slash entirely, basically saying it never happened. I knew he was a classless punk, now we can just add either liar, or idiot to the list.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)
  68. Sand Rippa
    April 23, 2013

    Imagine if Keith had something truly sexist, like telling her to stop bothering him and get back in the kitchen/bedroom where she belongs…set phasers to “White Knight.”

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • snowcap
      April 28, 2013

      Right. Change his retort to, “You’re black so what would you know about hockey?” Waiting for bigotry to die off is just so tiring. The woods are dark, the snow is deep, and miles to go before we sleep.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  69. sox/canucks fan
    April 23, 2013

    Seems pretty simple, though it requires some substitution. Read the exchange, and ask yourself: What if the -ism here was race and not gender? Would anyone defend Keith?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
  70. Bun
    April 23, 2013

    Disclaimer: Im’m a huge Canucks fan.

    It wasn’t much of a hack. Cheech said as much in the video. It looks much worse at full speed, but in slow mo you see he got him on the thick hip padding of his pants. He was probably trying to mess up Daniel’s timing on the move to the net. It’s pretty clear from the replay that Daniel went down as a result of the move, not the hack.

    As for the comments, they’ll probably get him in trouble with his wife, and that’s about the extent of what should happen. I actually can’t believe this has made the news. Must be a slow day.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  71. BBoone
    April 23, 2013

    I don,t understand why the league “player safety ” dept thinks this slash is ok. ” No harm ,no foul ” is an irresponsible policy when the foul would be as serious as a Wayne Maki two handed stick to the head. He got away with assaulting Sedin last year . His next act of frustration may permanently injure or kill someone.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)
  72. evangela
    April 24, 2013

    I see a lot of dismissive comments here, saying that as responses go, Keith’s wasn’t that bad. Problem is, it’s perpetuating the concept that it’s okay to see women as second-class participants in sports (both in terms of playing or watching). It’s the idea that when a woman is less knowledgeable or not as good of a player as another, it’s because of her gender that she sucks, rather than just the fact that she’s less experienced/less practiced/some other reasonable explanation.

    Let me share some examples that I’ve faced.

    If I go out to catch a Canucks game at a bar, or watch a game with friends of friends, I will inevitably be forced to prove my worth as a fan. I will deal with dismissive comments along the lines of “So… do you need icing explained to you?”, “So your favourite player must be Kesler, right? Because he’s attractive?”, or “Oh, I can’t believe you knew that was offside, girls don’t usually understand the fiendishly complicated concept of offside.” Every. Time. If the (male) friends I am with are also meeting these people for the first time, they will likely be greeted with a “Yeeeah, go canucks”, or a genuinely interested “So, your favourite player is who? Oh that’s cool, yeah he’s awesome. High five!” Because they have a penis, they don’t have to prove their worth as a fan.

    I used to play hockey in school, on a girl’s team. We sucked, but we were beginners. We sucked just as bad as anybody learning to play hockey. Most people would remark how “cute” it was that we were trying to play “real” hockey, or they would say things along the lines of, “you do know that you’ll never play in the NHL, right?” Yes, I know. Doesn’t mean that I can’t enjoy learning and playing the bloody game.

    Sometimes I would try to play pick-up street hockey with people at the ball hockey rinks. Comments ranged from, “oh you’re doing pretty alright.. FOR A GIRL”, to “oh be gentle with her, she’s a girl”. I also got dirty looks whenever I did something wrong, which none of the guys received. I realized that in their eyes, I was sucking simply because I was a girl, not for any other reason. There was no way I could redeem myself. This made me more anxious, and made me screw up more. Eventually I stopped trying to play, because I didn’t want to perpetuate the idea that women suck at hockey simply because they’re women. I was terrified that I would contribute to building that idea in their heads.

    Now we get to the point of this long-winded ramble. Where did that idea come from? We aren’t born thinking that women suck at sports, and have no place in it. We don’t naturally know that a girl has to prove her worth as a fan simply because she has girly bits. Where does that poisonous, insidious concept originate? It starts with people like Keith, making dismissive comments about women in sports. It starts with commentators calling the Sedins ‘sisters’. It starts with players and fans and the media using the idea of somebody “playing like a woman/girl/pussy” as a pejorative, and it grows. And it sticks. And most men can’t see it because they don’t have to deal with the the stink-eye, hear the snide comments, and have their options of playing the game that they love be limited because as a woman, they will be judged at a much higher standard.

    And that’s why this sort of posting by Mooney is important. Because while it’s something that may seem tiny and blown out of proportion to many of you, it’s still evidence that there is a problem. And that it’s something that should be thought about. Even with the hateful comments, some readers may have at least thought about the concept, however briefly, and that’s at least a start.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +12 (from 14 votes)
    • Brent
      April 24, 2013

      Awesome comment. The only thing it is lacking is a mention of Clara Hughes. In terms of Canadian athletes she is #1, by a long shot.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +5 (from 7 votes)
    • EllynBleu
      April 24, 2013

      Hear! Hear! Well-said!

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)
    • mac 'n cheese
      April 24, 2013

      Well said.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +4 (from 6 votes)
  73. Russ
    April 24, 2013

    Mooney needs to put his Big Girl Panties and deal with it!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -8 (from 12 votes)
  74. ???
    April 24, 2013

    She plainly said that ‘she can’t skate’. Therefore no, she clearly has not played the game. Its not sexist, its just a fact.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  75. Falkland
    April 24, 2013

    Yeah, you totally need a penis to know what a hockey penalty is. Keith is such a schmuck.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)
  76. canuckssuck
    April 24, 2013

    there was nothing sexist about the remark. women do not belong in a men’s locker room in the first place. secondly, she got just what she wanted with her baited question

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -2 (from 4 votes)
    • Harrison Mooney
      April 24, 2013

      A sexist comment followed by blaming the victim. Your comment is disqualified.

      VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +2 (from 6 votes)