Fairness Delayed, But Finally Fairness

Welcome to 2009, Hockey Hall of Fame.

The prestigious institution may have been a little late to the party, or in this case, rather slow in understanding the explosive growth of women's hockey in North America and Europe.

But the important thing is that they have managed to get there, and by next year women will finally find themselves honored members in the HHOF.

The hall announced changes today that starting in 2010, a maximum of four men and two women will be eligible for annual induction. Until now, women had to compete directly against men, and given the fact many members of the selection committee either had no knowledge of women's hockey or were sworn against allowing women to be recognized in this way, the secretive organization had managed to keep the doors shut tight to women.

It was embarrassing to women and females who had been pioneers in the game.

But it was, as was argued here many times, far more embarrassing to the hall, an old boy's club if there ever was one.

But they've seen the light - finally - and that's fantastic. There will be those who will quibble with the process, suggesting there are women who are every bit as qualified as men and shouldn't need a separate category.

But at this point, that's quibbling indeed.

In fact, the hall has even made sure the numbers of men and women to be inducted every year will be reviewed every five years. Who knows, maybe down the road they'll be allowing the same number of men and women every year.

But for now this is fair. All those who argued it would never, ever happen and should never, ever happen have been proven wrong.

Hockey, it seems, can evolve. Congratulations to the Hockey Hall of Fame.

Comments

[Michael Sullivan]

I'd say give an honourary salute to Hazel McCallion, for being supportive of women's hockey for a long, long time. Played it too!

[Kevin Reidy]

When would the clock start ticking for eligibility for induction? As an example, Geraldine Heaney continued to play for the Toronto Aeros in the NWHL after she had stopped playing internationally.

[Marijan Kalman]

"Congratulations to the Hockey Hall of Fame"
As long as you have Pat Quinn, Bowman and other dinosaur's running election process as Masonic Lodge, there is no congratulations. For decades they are discriminating against women, foreign players and you are congratulating them.
FIRE THEM ALL. NOW! TWO WOMEN PLAYERS A YEAR!!
HOCKEY WORLD IS ABSOLUTE JOKE!

[Wardo]

The only way this rates as "fair" is because non-NHL hockey players have been inducted into the Hall, so that means any women should be permitted as well. It's a de-facto NHL hall of fame, though.

The fact is, women's hockey in no way compares to men's. A Junior-C boys team would skate circles around the women's Olympic team.

It's nice the women can get recognized someplace, but let's not go too far and label it an "embarrassment" they weren't included from the outset. Rather, it's a generous gesture now that they are. Face it, women's hockey is a niche sport, verging on illegitimacy as an Olympic sport. It's USA vs. Canada, and what is the real embarrassment is watching what happens when the teams from those two countries play any other team in the world. That "explosive growth" elsewhere had better result in actual competition right quick.

[Paul Kishimoto]

@Wardo: female Hall inductees will serve as role models to young players in the same way the male ones do. I know numerous women for whom Roberta Bondar and Julie Payette, Canada's female astronauts, were a strong inspiration for their choice to student science or engineering. The effect here will be the same.

It seems you've mistaken for the chicken for the egg, besides which you sound like a bigot. Instead of putting down women's hockey, why not support its improvement?

[Dennis Regan]

I think it's great that women be recognized. It took a long time for them to evolve in hockey, but they certainly have done it. Now I must speak from the other side of my face. They are definitely great, but against men, sorry, there is absolutely no comparison. Imagine a female hockey player's picture beside Howe, Gretzky, Richard etc.! No disrespect, but sorry, that's another ball game.
Females should have their own hall of fame. They are great at what they do. Why compare them to players of more size, weight, strength, meanness, and a hundred years of hockey evolution?
It takes time to get big and mean, that's what hockey is (sorry to say), and I hope women never go that route.
Just got a fabulous idea! Get rid of goon-hockey and let's enjoy watching the women play!
I'm serious, I would change overnight! NWHL, let's go!

[steve]

Ridiculous. It's the HOCKEY Hall of Fame, and it's for the finest hockey players on the planet, not the finest male, female, Canadian, olympic, major junior, black, gay, disabled, etc. hockey players. If a woman is, without qualification, among the greatest hockey players of an era, then she should by all means be inducted and I will share Cox's indignation, but there should absolutely not be special considerations made for a specific group of less-than-world-class hockey players on any grounds whatsoever. It's an old boys club because there haven't yet been any women good enough to get in, not because there have been but they've been discriminated against.

[Lasher500]

Congratulations and all, seems fair but I gotta tell you.....women's hockey is a bore to watch.

[Flexecutioner]

Surely this is one Cox article that should not generate quibbling and backlash! This is a very big moment and the long-awaited righting of a long-standing wrong; let's all just relax, drink some of Paul Maurice's chamomile tea, and offer our congratulations to the outstanding women in hockey who are finally getting the recognition they deserve.

[Chris Jones]

Hopefully Angela James gets some recognition.

[A-Mar]

I'm going to have to disagree with your Junior C vs Olympic team assertion. The Canadian and US Women's teams are spectacular hockey players, many of whom are capable of playing lower tier men's pro leagues. A Junior C team would lose to any lower tier pro team from Finland or Sweden

[John Cavan]

Wardo apparently missed the last Olympics, but aside from that, women's hockey has seen explosive growth and that is because of many people involved in making it better. There are plenty of truly great women that already should be lined up for this recognition and I'm quite happy to see it.

[Chris]

Oh geez people...it doesn't matter on the quality at all...women have worked hard at hockey, and comparing them to men misses the boat entirely...hockey has to emcompass all, and I mean all who play it, the HHOF has to embrace the spirit of hockey more...Angela James, Geraldine Heaney, Hayley Wickenheiser, Angela Ruggiero, and Cammi Granato are all passionate hard working hockey players who deserve to be celebrated for their passion for the game and their respective countries...

[nativescrapper]

there you go cox you found your true calling,writeing about womans hockey...now stick to it, because you obviously don't no anything about mens hockey...

[chris]

nativescrapper:

At least Damien is intelligent enough to spell "writing" and "know". And seperate commas from words that follow. And placing an apostrophe in "men's".

[Bold Bravado]

Need to know, if a women can play in a men's hockey league, is the reverse true?? Please don't inflate the women's game or deflate the men's. Fact is, if you believe that the Canadian Women's team can compete on the ice with a Junior club, your living in la la land. Truth be told, there is no comparison, and in fact, to compare is not fair on either side of the gender pool. Should there be recognition for women's hockey, most certainly, in the HHOF, yes, take the recognition with a little bit of gratitude, complaining about it really does nothing for women or hockey!!

[kidkawartha]

Well, ladies, apparently, judging from the comments here, it's "you've come a long, way, and that's about far enough, thank you". Like the fight against institutionalized racism in the States, the legislation begets the beginning of the end, but there will always be idiots who think that Wickenheiser et al are something less than Bertuzzi. Ignore them and go on being your magnificent selves, and feel free to win Olympic gold again while your male counterparts are too busy calling their stockbrokers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_national_women%27s_hockey_team

[Nathan]

Marjian,
I really can't see what you're angry about. For a relatively new sport 2 women a year is more than enough.

Also, I really can't agree with this being a good move. Women were never banned before but were judged to see if they deserved to be in based on all individuals eligible. This will further dilute the exclusiveness of the least prestigous Hall of Fame.

[jjmcgo]

I don't see where anyone needs to come in for criticism and there have been all sorts of targets, by the author and the commenters.
Women's hockey has only been an Olympic sport for 11 years, three Olympiads, and the competitiveness of the tournaments has been uneven, with the U.S. and Canada dominating. However, their games have been excellent. Women's college hockey is not that old either.
What woman from before 1990 would be eligible as a player?
Let's just say it was a timely move, albeit one done under pressure and if I was on the pressuring side, I wouldn't be apologetic. Time has come.
Wickenheiser, Granato, Heaney, James, Ruggiero, Kim St. Pierre, Karen Bye, Katie King and Danielle Goyette lead my list. I hope I'm there when the first woman is inducted.

[Johnnyk]

It doesn't mean much if Gil Stein got in.
At least Hayley Wickenheiser and others have done something positive for hockey.

[Dave So]

Wardo's Comment: "The fact is, women's hockey in no way compares to men's. A Junior-C boys team would skate circles around the women's Olympic team."

Reply: If you look at most sports, the same could be said (basketball, volleyball, tennis, golf, etc). Why? Because men and women are just built differently. Men are naturally physically stronger, but if you look at a lot of sports, women are technically more skilled than men because they can't rely on their strength to hit the ball as hard or as far, they've got to develop better technical skills to achieve the same ends.

In regards to the HHOF, if it doesn't explicitly have the "NHL" attached to it, then it should be open to all athletes of all denominations (women, men, foreign, domestic, handicapped) that have excelled at either playing the game, or those who have been ambasadors to the game promoting it, developing it, and being leaders (as so many women in the early years have been and are) in pioneering and putting it on the map. Goals and assists aren't all that matters in the grand scheme of things.

[Tabber]

I was too late to comment on the actual article so came here to say I'm actually surprised there weren't that many neanderthal comments. Unfortunately, some seem to have showed up here. It's unfortunate that there are so many sexists still around, but eventually they'll disappear - not in my lifetime, but eventually. And Johnnyk, Stein was removed. Now, how many of the negative commenters have actually been to the Hall? Maybe you have to go there to see it's not exclusively an NHL Hall. It seems reasonable to me that most of the material is NHL-relevant, since that is the best hockey league in the world, but there are displays not related to the NHL, as there should be. And for those who criticise this decision, should we take your argument that only the best men should be admitted to its conclusion, you would have no place in this world. Think about it, boys, are you among the best in the world at anything?

[Kim McCullough]

Finally, female role models in the HHOF for young girls to look up to. It is sad that so few of the aspiring female hockey players can even name 5 members of either the Canadian or US national team. When asked who their favorite hockey player is, girls will routinely say Crosby or Ovechkin...not that there is anything wrong with that, but it will be interesting to see whether this change in the HHOF starts to turn the tide towards more young female players looking up to the elite players in the women's game.

[steve]

First, it's not about "role models", it's about who the greatest hockey players of a generation are. No one should get in because it will make people feel better.

Second, given how often the "Any junior team could beat the women's team" vs. "No, they'd get creamed" argument is trotted out, you'd think they'd have actually played such games by now. I don't know who would win, but it seems a fairly easy way to settle the question.

Third, the "neanderthal" name-calling is unnecessary. It's not about sexism, it's about objectivity and not lowering world-class standards. When a female is in fact a world-class hockey player and is still not inducted, then you can call it sexism and I'll be the first to agree. But until then, throwing accusations of "sexism" around amount to nothing more than posturing in lieu of a decent rebuttal.

[Dave So]

Steve:

As has already been mentioned, it's not the "NHL Hall of Fame", it's the "Hockey Hall of Fame". The NHL is not the only league out there, and I would think that any player that excels in their chosen league (based on their performance in THAT league) should be worthy of being looked at.

If you're going to only take the cream of the crop in the entire world based on overall skill in comparison with everyone else in everyother league (basically saying the playing field is level across all levels), then of course only NHL players will be inducted from here to eternity as the NHL is the best league in the world. Besides, given that some players may never play in the NHL (some players may choose to stay in their homeland or play in another league by choice, not lack of skill), how can anyone conclusively deduce how that person may have performed in the NHL if the NHL is what you want to use as the benchmark for making it into the Hall?

And as well again, it's not strictly about numbers posted, it's about one's contribution to the game on the whole.

P.S. it's already accepted that the women playing hockey are not phsyically as big, strong, as or fast as the men that are playing at the elite level and they never will be, so you can say it's all about not "lowering world class standards" as much as you want, but given the facts, that automatically translate into a sexist argument because the men will always (by way of evolution, and natural human biology) be bigger, faster, and stronger. This fact should not prevent a woman from excelling against HER competitors throughout her career thus earning herself a spot in the Hockey Hall of Fame.