Tim Thomas' mistake

by styks on Jan 23, 2012 11:33 PM CST

Tim Thomas's decision to skip the White House meet&greet was the wrong decision for the right reasons. I applaud him for his beliefs and for having the courage to stand up for them, but I can't agree that it was the right scenario to present those beliefs. Even if you don't like the man in the office, you still have to respect the position as well as respect your team and teammates enough to attend.

Tweet Comment 27 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Tim

No one should be mad at Thomas. If he didn’t show up in the finals BOS wouldn’t have been there anyways.

by Boltmister55 on Jan 24, 2012 7:35 AM CST reply actions

Who cares...

His political beliefs are irrelevant. He told the organization quite some time ago that he wasn’t going. This wasn’t a surprise to anyone except those who want to critique it. I don’t think I would want to go to the Whitehouse if asked. I have better things to do with my time… looks like he does too.

Your Photochop Guru
Maker of Movie Posters
Quoter of Nonsense

Want RedWings inspired stuff?
My wife makes some...
byjenniferleigh.etsy.com/

by Josh Howard on Jan 24, 2012 7:53 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

I have better things to do with my time…

Like chat on sports blogs? Nobody believes this for a second.

by meetyourmako on Jan 24, 2012 6:42 PM CST up reply actions

Out of all the ways you could have entered this conversation

you chose this one?

C’mon, man…

by J.J. from Kansas on Jan 24, 2012 6:53 PM CST up reply actions

His right

he did it respectably,as well as gave notice to his management and teammates months prior. Im not much for politics but I agree with Josh above, I probably wouldnt want to go either.

by bond021 on Jan 24, 2012 9:10 AM CST reply actions

I have no issue with it. Of course, I believe the whole White House visit after a championship thing is complete bullshit to begin with, so I don’t think my opinion counts much

by Apocalyptic0n3 on Jan 24, 2012 9:17 AM CST reply actions

That visit is such a waste of time for someone who’s supposed to be doing real work to help the public… not throwing parties or celebrating a Stanley cup MONTHS after it happens. I wouldn’t have went and understand why he didn’t go. I just don’t see why people have such a problem with someone turning down a trip to the whitehouse.

Your Photochop Guru
Maker of Movie Posters
Quoter of Nonsense

Want RedWings inspired stuff?
My wife makes some...
byjenniferleigh.etsy.com/

by Josh Howard on Jan 24, 2012 11:31 AM CST up reply actions

Question to stir the pot

This was considered a “team event” and the Bruins have a policy of mandatory participation in these.

Knowing that Thomas told Chiarelli months in advance, is that enough to get him out of it or should Chiarelli have told him that while he respects his position, it’s team policy to suspend a player who skips a team event?

by J.J. from Kansas on Jan 24, 2012 9:30 AM CST reply actions

I think thats

what people will never know. Reports say he went to his gm and permission was granted. If permission was not granted maybe he would have gone. To me just sound like he followed his chain of command on particular issue.

by bond021 on Jan 24, 2012 9:34 AM CST up reply actions

also thats

what people over at stanley cup chowder seem to be upset about is that seguin was benched for missing team breakfast. So they want some kind of punishment for TT, however how can you punish a guy when you say your own GM gave him permisson to miss the event.

by bond021 on Jan 24, 2012 9:40 AM CST up reply actions

I think there's a big difference here

Going to the WH was against Tim’s personal belief system. He likely just didn’t want to have his image associated with possible campaign ads (it is campaign season). A team breakfast didn’t violate any belief system of Seguin. Two separate things.

Personally, I think Tim was in his rights to not go. He didn’t make a big deal of it, but quietly and respectfully declined (after getting permission). If he had said bad things about Obama and been a total douche about it, then I would criticize him. As it stands, he “respected the office.” Respect doesn’t mean saying yes, you can respectfully decline just as much as you can respectfully accept.

If you want to blame someone, blame the media for going after him. The whole thing would have gone unnoticed if not for the media stirring the pot. But hey, that’s how many (not all) blogs/papers get readers: reporting controversy or creating it when there is none to report.

Manager of the Mursak League's Banzai Bananas. BANZAI!!!

by Dannik99 on Jan 24, 2012 10:00 AM CST up reply actions

I don't like it

but at the same time, I can respect him for stating his beliefs and backing them up.

I think the WH and the President is something / someone you simply don’t say “No” to. It’s good for the sport to have the SC Winner there, good press for hockey, it’s simply not about you, etc., so for me personally, I see it as an honor and you simply don’t decline. Request to be in the back of all the photos, so your face doesn’t get plastered front and center next to someone you didn’t vote for or don’t believe in. But he is the President, this is the White House, you don’t say no. And I don’t care how far in advance you tell your GM either. You don’t have to agree with the policies, but you do have to respect the man, the office and the building.

by Kendal on Jan 24, 2012 10:29 AM CST reply actions

I think its funny that we’re pretending they would use a hockey team in campaign ads. I guess maybe in Boston they might run something, but by and large I don’t think Obama is going be leaning on hockey for campaign support. If I remember correctly, he still hasn’t taken in a Capitals game while he’s been in office.

by NMJ on Jan 24, 2012 11:42 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

Yea thats

not right. No championship team visiting the WH has ever been used for a campaign ad. People are looking to justify it more, however I respect the fact he just didnt want to go.

by bond021 on Jan 24, 2012 11:54 AM CST up reply actions

On the flip side

by not going in silent protest fashion, he got a lot more publicity and made his political views fairly clear. That will end up helping whoever he votes for more than a sign in his yard or a campaign contribution ever could..

by BLOOD RED on Jan 24, 2012 11:49 PM CST up reply actions

So... basically the guy had no choice?

What kind of country would this be if the visit to the White House WAS mandatory?

And if there’s a choice (and should be), why should he be looked down on for exercising that choice and not going?

Did he do it in a disrespectful way? No, there was no name-calling?

Did he do it to draw personal attention? He didn’t give a newsconference or do talk radio. He posted one message and said he wouldn’t be talking about it again.

In what other way could he have exercised his right not to go that would have been superior to the way he did it?

If you don’t like the fact that Thomas decided not to go, you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and decide why, exactly, you feel that way.

by Big Z in Orlando on Jan 24, 2012 2:46 PM CST reply actions 4 recs

Rec'd

by BLOOD RED on Jan 24, 2012 11:51 PM CST up reply actions

you're right

he didn’t have a choice. He should have attended. Like I said, he made the wrong decision for the right reasons. I’m not knocking him for having his opinions, frankly, I agree with them for the most part. I personally don’t care for President Obama. But he’s a leader on that team and needs to be a member of the team not a member of the individuality along with respecting the office of the President. Especially as an American, you can’t skip out on that. In a sport that has so many players that aren’t American, it’s vital that he show solidarity with the nation when there is so much division BECAUSE of President Obama. Whether he likes it or not, he’s one of the faces of American hockey and I believe by disrespecting the Office of the President, he disrespected his own nation. I would love to have the honor of being invited to the White House, whether or not I agree with the politics that are going on at the time.

by styks on Jan 25, 2012 11:14 AM CST up reply actions

We're not going to agreeo on this, obviously

But he’s a leader on that team and needs to be a member of the team

I don’t know enough about the dynamic of the Bruins to speak with a lot of insight about Tim Thomas’ role, but I can say that I know that Goalies typically are not team leaders. Typically, they are a bit odd. And furthermore, they share the least in common with the rest of the team. Most of the time, there are only two guys on the entire team that play goalie, and goalie is very different from either forward or defenseman.

Being a member of the team means a lot of things. You share in the hardships and the successes. But, to me, accepting an invitation to an awards ceremony is not a crucial part of being on that team. He may have some fence-mending to do with some team-mates, but if my guess is correct, they probably won’t give two shakes of a lamb’s tail if he went to the White House or not as long as he continues to do the thing that got them all invited: be the best goalie in the league.

along with respecting the office of the President. Especially as an American, you can’t skip out on that. In a sport that has so many players that aren’t American, it’s vital that he show solidarity with the nation when there is so much division BECAUSE of President Obama.

I’m sorry, but I just don’t follow this reasoning at all. You state that he needs to respect the office of the president, but you’ve not yet convinced me that he disrespected it in any way. He declined an invitation, and did it in a polite way. Neither his actions or words have been disrespectful in my view.

You go on to make some sort of nationalistic argument that solidarity among American born hockey-players is especially important in the NHL, a largely international league. This is where you lost me completely. There is as much variation in opinion between Americans as any other nationality. Do you think all the Swedes agree on everything?

Perhaps a more important question: Do they need to agree with everything? You imply some sort of reaching consequences if Americans do no show solidarity in support of “the office of the President”, yet don’t specifically state what these consequences are, or how they might be achieved by Tim Thomas not going to the White House.

I would love to have the honor of being invited to the White House, whether or not I agree with the politics that are going on at the time.

I think this is really what your argument boils down to. You would love to be invited to visit the White House. You would love to bask in the admiration of the President. And you don’t understand why Tim Thomas doesn’t. That’s fine, but what you would do and what Tim Thomas would do aren’t the same. And unless someone can make a better argument that Tim Thomas hurt anyone by making this decision, it remains a personal preference and should be viewed as such.

by Big Z in Orlando on Jan 25, 2012 1:28 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

His words weren't disrespectful

But some (myself included) could view a refusal to meet the president as disrespecting his office. OF COURSE he had a choice of what to do. But that doesn’t mean the choice he made was the right thing to do (in my opinion). I feel that he should have been there regardless of political views.

Even though he went about it in the most respectable way possible, the act itself was disrespectful (to his team and the president) and nothing he could say would change that. He put himself above all others, regardless of the words he used. We are fortunate to live in a country where we can do whatever the eff we want to…but that doesn’t mean the decisions we make are the right ones . I respect Tim thomas’ right to not participate as a free citizen of this country. But in his choice he opened himself up to criticisim. He could have gone and still made the same FB statement about his personal beliefs.

I hope you don’t take this the wrong way. I love that we live in a free country. But everybody makes decisions, and the decisions we make are constantly open for judgment by others. I mean, you can’t look at a news channel without somebody criticizing the president every 10 minutes! I feel that, given Thomas’ position as a public figure (yes, a Conn Smythe winning American-born goalie is a public figure of sorts), we are as open to criticizing his choices just as we do any other public figure in this country.

by tehGOALIE on Jan 25, 2012 11:46 AM CST up reply actions

Lots of opinions here

the act itself was disrespectful (to his team and the president) and nothing he could say would change that.

I content that it was not. He made a choice that did not deny his teammates the praise they were due in any way. He made no statements or actions to imply he disrespected the office of the President. I would contend the opposite. He respects the office so much, he is saddened and disappointed by what it now represents; a power that has over-reached it’s Constitutional boundaries, and has actively reduced the freedom of the American people.

But in his choice he opened himself up to criticisim

I would never disagree with you here. Fame has a price, and criticism is part of the deal. I’m am not questioning anyone’s right to criticize Tim Thomas for his decision. I’m questioning the reasons why they are.

by Big Z in Orlando on Jan 25, 2012 1:42 PM CST up reply actions

True

And actually, I went back and reread his statement and that’s basically what he says. I still can’t shake this feeling that it was a selfish and perhaps disrespectful act with an unclear purpose. Even though he says it wasn’t about politics, I have a hard time viewing this “boycott” of sorts as anything but a political statement.

by tehGOALIE on Jan 25, 2012 4:12 PM CST up reply actions

Could've been handled a lot better.

Let the media know beforehand, rather than after the facts. And don’t throw a poorly-written rant on Facebook and then say it’s all you’ll say on the matter.

Personally, I feel like he left his team out to dry, kinda. I’m betting he wasn’t the only one with ideologically different viewpoints than the Obama registration. Hell, no one skipped a Bush visit, right? And I’m guessing there was a lot more contention back then.

If you’re gonna come down on Seguin for missing a team-meet (and you should), then you should also come down on Timmy-boy for taking the spotlight away from the Bruins’ day, even if he was the main reason for that day. His responsibilities didn’t end with the Conn Smythe.

by AndroBE on Jan 25, 2012 3:19 AM CST reply actions

+1

by styks on Jan 25, 2012 11:14 AM CST up reply actions

The media reported it at the appropriate (intersting) time

Let the media know beforehand, rather than after the facts.

Tim informed his team months prior to the visit that he would not be participating. The media was only interested once he actually failed to show. This does seem to me to be both the appropriate way to tell the team (prior), and the appropriate time to report he story by the media, when the interest is bound to be the highest.

And don’t throw a poorly-written rant on Facebook and then say it’s all you’ll say on the matter.

Thomas should receive praise for this, not derision. Thomas could have sat down with a traditional paper media reporter, or sat in front of a camera for a news story, but then it would have invariably looked like he was doing this to draw attention to himself. By using Facebook, he focuses on the message rather than the messenger. This is not a publicity stunt. This was an explanation directly from the person, rather than filtered through the traditional news media.

Personally, I feel like he left his team out to dry, kinda.

How so? Did he prevent any of his team-mates from attending? Was the praise they received from the President any less meaningful? Will they have a harder time remembering the trip?

I’m betting he wasn’t the only one with ideologically different viewpoints than the Obama registration.

This is steeped in speculation. Perhaps some of his team-mates feel the same way Thomas does, perhaps they don’t. I’m not sure it’s entirely relevant. The facts are that the rest of them attended, and Thomas did not. Had more of his teammates decided not to attend, would that change Thomas’ actions to being more or less acceptable? That seems too much like ethical relativity to me, and I’m not interested in traveling that particular path.

Hell, no one skipped a Bush visit, right? And I’m guessing there was a lot more contention back then

If someone had skipped a visit to the White House during the Bush administration, should we evaluate him any differently than Tim Thomas? No. I don’t think so. As Thomas stated, this has nothing to do with politics.

This was about one man making a decision about what he felt was right. He hurt no one with this decision, and he should not be vilified because he exercised his rights in a respectful way.

If you’re gonna come down on Seguin for missing a team-meet (and you should), then you should also come down on Timmy-boy for taking the spotlight away from the Bruins’ day, even if he was the main reason for that day.

Thomas informed the team of his decision not to attend well prior to the trip to the White House. While it would have been well within his rights to suspend Thomas for missing an official team meeting, the GM decided not to do this. Why? Because there very clearly is a difference between missing a team function that’s primary reason is to prepare for and do your job, and missing a meeting that’s sole purpose is to praise the team for already doing their job. Peter Chiarelli is smart enough not to cut off his nose to spite his face.

His responsibilities didn’t end with the Conn Smythe.

Finish this sentence: Tim Thomas’ responsibilities at the White House celebration of the 2010 Stanley Cup wining Boston Bruins were _.

Smile for photos? Shake the President’s hand? Take a tour of the building? I’m struggling to come up with something that actually relates to his responsibilities to the team.

I don’t think there were any responsibilities to his team. I think Tim Thomas is not only a good goalie, but a good team-mate, and his decision to skip the White House trip in no way diminishes either.

by Big Z in Orlando on Jan 25, 2012 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs

Much Ado About Nothing

Seems it’s not just a great work of The Bard’s these days…. Damn, I’m a Bleeding Heart Liberal™ and I really don’t see any point to even reporting this. “The team” blah blah blah. Thomas’ responsibility to his team is to play his heart out and win games. That’s it. If some of the guys go out for pizza, and one of them decides to stay at the hotel, is that betraying the team, too? Relax, people!

Detroit needs a fighter like a fish needs a bicycle.

by WingsFool on Jan 27, 2012 1:42 PM CST reply actions

Of course

by that I mean that he is duty-bound to attend team functions that actually lead down the path to the team winning, not something such as this that congratulates the team for already having done their job, as Big Z in Orlando has noted above. Thus, the comparison to going out for pizza—it has no bearing on the team’s ability to play well together and win, and neither does a White House visit.

Detroit needs a fighter like a fish needs a bicycle.

by WingsFool on Jan 27, 2012 2:07 PM CST up reply actions