Mike Milbury: Being Honest, Un-politically Correct, or Just Plain Rude?

In light of NBC's studio analyst Mike Milbury's comments after the Olympic post-game match between Canada and Russia, where Milbury described Russia's poor performance in the game as " Eurotrash," a wave of angry and shocked responses flooded NBC.

Milbury's full exchange on live television was, "I was shocked that it was this one-sided and I was really disappointed that these guys came with their Eurotrash game. There was just no heart, no guts, no nothing there to back it up. I mean, Alex Ovechkin was an average player tonight. I know they're going to bounce back, but to be that poor, and to be that intimidated physically by the Canadians was really as shock to me."

It was a disappointing loss for the Russians, as 7-3 loss to the Canadians eliminated any hopes for an Olympic gold. What was supposed to be a competitive and highly anticipated match between two hockey powerhouses, became a one-sided massacre.

If there is an A game, then yes, Russian brought its F game to the quarterfinals. But was the Russian team's poor effort warranted for Milbury to call it a "Eurotrash" game?

Not surprisingly, after the crude remark, there were angry demands for Milbury's suspension from analyzing future hockey games on NBC.

But for every indignant response to Milbury's comments, there were criticism of viewers blowing Milbury's comments out of proportion. So what then, is too much? Are Americans too afraid to be honest that they're placing the importance of being politically correct over the importance of being honest? Or should Americans forsake being polite and be rude for the sake of honesty?

For all those nonchalant shrugs that criticize the backlash to Milbury's comment for not having thick enough skin or being unable to handle the truth, what Milbury said wasn't being honest. Being honest is one thing, but being rude of the sake of honesty and controversy, is another.

What made Milbury's comment controversial wasn't just the fact that what he said was un-politically correct on live television, it was rude and inappropriate. There is a line between being rude and being honest. Milbury didn't have to be rude to get his point across. Adjectives like "poor," "uninspiring," "disastrous," "offensive," "shocking," could have all be used interchangeably to describe Russia's performance. Instead, these words are now being used to describe Milbury's comments.

But what makes Milbury's comments ever more offensive, wasn't that he chose to use the word "Eurotrash" to describe a hockey game, it's that he chose to use it to describe an Olympic hockey game.

Despite all the political turmoil and conflicts between countries, the Olympics are supposed to be an event for countries to put aside their differences and promote sportsmanship and peace. NBC's coverage is supposed to reflect and stress the Olympic spirit of sportsmanship. Sportsmanship should not only be for the athletes to acknowledge, it should also transcend down to the broadcasters and analysts. As an announcer for any Olympic game coverage, Milbury's comments were not sportsman-like and it certainly did not reflect the notion of winning gracefully.

Yes, other countries have broadcasts that ignore the concept of sportsmanship and denigrate American athletes far worse than "Eurotrash," but why sink to their level? Promoting sportsmanship is not easy and being considerate is never easy. NBC strives for professionalism, but Milbury's comments were unprofessional. At the end of the game, Milbury could have honestly assessed Russia's performance without using a derogatory term, but he did. And for doing so, he must be penalized because what he said, didn't promote professionalism, which is a responsibility he has as an NBC analyst to do so, nor did his words promote the Olympic spirit of sportsmanship. Instead, all Milbury brought on himself and NBC was unneeded controversy on an already disappointing coverage and broadcast of the 2010 Winter Olympics.