From the Colorado perspective, the crucial issue tied to Tocchet’s alleged involvement with a major sports gambling ring is whether anyone associated with the Avalanche knew what he was doing and placed sports wagers through him. Tocchet was an Avalanche assistant coach under Tony Granato from early 2003 through mid-2004.
At this point, it’s only fair to take at face value the various statements from Granato and Avalanche players that they are shocked by the revelations. Their statements have been credible and those involved are either telling the truth or are better actors than roughly half the celebrities who make the cover of People magazine.
From the NHL perspective, the crucial issue is whether the alleged six to 12 NHL players who are said to have wagered through the ring bet on NHL games, or have gotten into such deep debt to the ring that they at least in theory could be susceptible to being asked to take dives of a different sort in their own games. But to this point, the assumption remains that the ring was a football-oriented pastime.
The NHL reaction: Commissioner Gary Bettman was right in moving quickly to banish Tocchet, which is what that “voluntary” leave of absence was all about in the wake of Tocchet’s refusal to specifically address the charges when meeting with Bettman last week. And his appointment of a respected special investigator, with a mandate to get at the truth, also was a positive step.
Gretzky: If we buy Granato’s statements about not knowing what his former assistant coach was doing – and I do – then perhaps it’s unfair to be so cynical and speculate that Wayne Gretzky must have known all along the extent of Tocchet’s involvement with the ring.
Leaked information about Gretzky’s conversations with Tocchet about trying to avoid public exposure of Gretzky’s wife, Janet Jones, as placing wagers with the ring seem to indicate that Gretzky knew about the ring sooner than he initially let on last week. But to assume more than that, or to assume that his wife couldn’t have made the wagers on her own, is unfair.
And finally: The ring was illegal. Period. Yet in the sports world, gambling issues are openly discussed. Coverage, including in this newspaper, regularly mentions odds and lines and at least implicitly acknowledges that gambling is a part of sports’ popularity. Among other things, we run the Latest Line and pick games “against the spread.” Even respected mainstream radio shows give forums to sleazy “touts” with 800 and 900 lines who dubiously claim to have “inside” information. (The “inside” information usually is called “reading on the Internet.”) Sports wagering is legal in Nevada and quasi-legal online, through “offshore” casinos. So as ugly as this is, sports journalism probably should avoid getting too high and mighty in the coverage of this issue.
