Duncan Keith Response Is Typical
Duncan Keith is giving Vancouver Canucks fans warm and fuzzy feelings once again after making a sarcastic response to a reporter after Monday’s 3-1 loss. They’re throwing a parade in Vancouver after clinching the Northwest Division Championship and beating their hated rival, the Chicago Blackhawks. And Keith gave them some confetti to make it a bit more colorful and festive.
The Blackhawks are not used to losing a whole lot this season, so a 3-1 loss is hard to swallow. But when it’s against the Canucks, it leaves an extra bitter taste. Sometimes reporters relish those sour reactions from players and consider it their job to pick every wound and get every wince for the public to see. Enter the reporter that Keith bit (not literally, because what hockey player does that?) after some prodding.
Keith was on the ice when Daniel Sedin scored on a breakaway to make it 3-0, and the reporter just wanted to get Keith’s feelings on the subject, not harm intended. She wasn’t necessarily satisfied with his first response and suggested he slashed Sedin, showing his frustration in the game. Keith responded with the typical sentiment of “there was no penalty, what happened, happened” but expanded the point that she’s a reporter, not a referee, by sarcastically suggesting that she could be the first female NHL ref with the calls she saw but weren’t made in the game.
So now Keith is sexist because he acknowledged the fact that she was a woman when insinuating that she should leave the calls to the referees. As a woman, and a fan of Keith, the Blackhawks, and hockey in general, I’ve heard this response from players a thousand times. So have you. It’s a hockey player telling a reporter to not make calls after the game and refusing to answer “what if” questions after a tough loss.
Yes, it was a biting response. Yes, he said the word “female”. And yes, it was kind of weird and not nice. But if a reporter wants a nice, polite response about a player’s frustration level during the game, don’t suggest there was “a penalty that went undetected” on a play where the interviewee went -1. That goes for male and female reporters alike.
Here is a link to the reporter’s article along with the audio clip. Do you think Keith’s response went too far?