PDA

View Full Version : Shanny Layin Down the Law



boredguy
09-22-2011, 07:16 PM
Shelly suspended the rest of pre-season and 5 regular season games.
Pierre Luc Letenametoo-long rest of pre-season and 1 regular season game.

Some serious discipline for dangerous checks is great to see but what might be even better is the videos the NHL released where Shanny describes why and how they came to the decision. Feels weird to praise the NHL but they did a great job with this.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=35&id=124228
http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=35&id=124282

moans
09-22-2011, 07:39 PM
I absolutely love what Shanny's doin with the suspensions. It clearly outlines what the offender did and why they received what they did. FOr once, the NHL picked the right man for the job.

CayugaPosse
09-22-2011, 08:14 PM
Agreed entirely. This is an absolutely brilliant move by Shanny and the NHL...transparency in these things doesn't hurt as all leagues seem to think it does, it helps 100%.

bearcats
09-22-2011, 09:01 PM
luv it....I knew Shanny would do good.....luv the little video as too why as well.....IMO he is the perfect guy for the job....

looch17
09-22-2011, 11:00 PM
Love it. Where was he when Cooke was getting away with being a douche bag.

nyrblue2
09-23-2011, 08:43 AM
That is awesome, but I still don't like the fact that he's basing it on whether or not the guy was injured.

Kyle
09-23-2011, 12:21 PM
That is awesome, but I still don't like the fact that he's basing it on whether or not the guy was injured.


Injuries are relevant. An injury isn't entirely chance-based and left up to random circumstances. Injuring somebody in these situations more often than not reflects the danger of the hit in question.

Yes, occasionally some asshole throws the most dangerous hit possible and a player is simply lucky and avoids injury. Hopefully that guy will still get his just punishment but the fact is a few people are going to have to serve as example cases for the league to get it. A hit from behind that injured somebody was probably thrown more violently and dangerously than a hit that didn't so I don't mind using that as a criteria to increase a punishment as long as it isn't the only fact considered.

Hamsterkill
09-23-2011, 12:46 PM
Injuries are relevant. An injury isn't entirely chance-based and left up to random circumstances. Injuring somebody in these situations more often than not reflects the danger of the hit in question.

It's not exactly that simple. Injuries depend on a number of factors -- how dangerous the hit was, how the player getting hit reacted, body part positioning for both players, the susceptibility of the person getting hit to injury, etc. That's why I understand the argument injury shouldn't need to be taken into account for discipline.

That said, our own civil justice system takes the result into account as well, so it's not without justification.

snoopzen
09-24-2011, 07:15 AM
That is awesome, but I still don't like the fact that he's basing it on whether or not the guy was injured.Hmm. I must have missed that. To me the punishment seemed to be based on whether or not the check was dangerous (i.e., head was targetted), and past history was taken into account.

Dexter
09-24-2011, 07:47 AM
Love it. Where was he when Cooke was getting away with being a douche bag.

Pretty sure that one of the "illegal" hits in the video was when Cooke targeted Evander Kane's head. I smiled knowing that Kane decked him with a solid punch a minute later.

CayugaPosse
09-26-2011, 04:15 AM
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/New-and-improved-Matt-Cooke-boards-a-guy;_ylt=AlvTT13QnDKDH7hwl1lxaYgJfwM6?urn=nhl-wp13351

That should be interesting to see what happens. The hit itself I really don't think is at all suspension worthy. But given the person who threw it...the fact that he just sat out 17 games for being the biggest idiot in the league, who frankly has no business on an NHL rink(and I find it just hilarious that he's still a Penguin even after Mario went so hardline against cheapshots).

He talked so much about being changed this offseason, and it took him exactly 2 pre-season games to run a guy from behind.

I'd like to see him(and only him, because like I said, I don't really think the hit is that worthy of suspension), suspended a few games just to further send the message that he is getting away with nothing this year.

phaneuf6
09-26-2011, 07:48 AM
Don't really think it's that bad a hit at all. I wouldn't at all be impressed with Shanahan if he suspends Cooke for it. I don't care who he is, or what he's done in the past, that shouldn't turn a non-suspension into a suspension.

Kyle
09-26-2011, 08:24 AM
Don't really think it's that bad a hit at all. I wouldn't at all be impressed with Shanahan if he suspends Cooke for it. I don't care who he is, or what he's done in the past, that shouldn't turn a non-suspension into a suspension.

This is pretty asinine. Yes, it should mean exactly that. Just like a habitual offender catches a felony when he continues to repeat the same misdemeanor, you deserve to be punished more harshly for less severe acts when theres extreme repetition involved in your behavior. Thats perfectly reasonable and logical, you took your previous punishments, ignored them, repeated your dangerous play anyway. Now you deserve a harsher treatment than someone who threw that hit with no history.

Ignoring history is the absolute worst thing the NHL can do. Prior history can't possibly be emphasized enough.

phaneuf6
09-26-2011, 08:33 AM
I agree with your last point, history is an important factor. However, I don't think it should turn a borderline hit into a suspension. Based on some of his past plays and the way people regard him in the league, Matt Cooke won't be able to hit anybody this year without someone calling for a suspension. I just don't think your past history should be used to effectively change the rules for an individual.

Hamsterkill
09-26-2011, 08:43 AM
If Cooke gets suspended for this his career is basically over. Everyone will start blowing themselves up whenever Cooke even skates near them.

The hit was not dangerous. It was only even worthy of a 2 minute boarding penalty in the most technical sense.

Kyle
09-26-2011, 01:27 PM
I'll honestly agree with you guys regarding this specific hit.

I was more responding to the point about prior history and ignoring this specific incident.

I agree, Cooke's history (As much as I despise the guy) shouldn't turn a 2 minute minor into a suspension. This one wasn't a huge deal.

I love that the article claims the player embellished to get Cooke in trouble. Like he has eyes behind his head. I do think he embellished that hit big time but I think everyone in the league does there when they feel a push that strong. Its an easy penalty, you take it. I think the players are well aware that they don't need to help the league keep an eye on Matt Cooke at this point, I disagree with the author's cynical plot.

bearcats
09-26-2011, 06:59 PM
staubitz remainder of preseason and 3 reg season games

wiz gets remainder of preseason and 8 reg season games....


not suprised for wiz due to his history but the video replays that shanny views really are not clear that wiz targeted the head....unless the nhl can slow it down and soom in without blurring etc...

in any case the nhl players fund that gets the players suspension money is going to get a huge influx of $$$$$$$$$ this season.....

I like what they are doing but at this rate they will hand out over 100 suspensions this season IMO.....Shanny is going to be videotaped more Ron Jeremy in his hayday...

and no I don't think the nhl players will catch on that quickly.....they have been playing like this all there lives.....it is going to take the better part of the season.....I wonder what will happen in the playoffs.....i would hope they would have the same standards but somehow I think they will be more leniant which would be BS...

Hockeyis#1
09-27-2011, 08:34 PM
Agreed entirely. This is an absolutely brilliant move by Shanny and the NHL...transparency in these things doesn't hurt as all leagues seem to think it does, it helps 100%.
+1

The discipline has gone from this (http://www.nhlwheelofjustice.com/) to this in one offseason. I could not be more impressed
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maozXg_I_eM&feature=related)

Chilly_Willy
09-27-2011, 08:39 PM
I never really understood why the NHL pussyfooted around suspensions so much. The bad hits are going to continue unless there is a consequence. And one or 2 games is laughable. These guys make more money in one game then we do in a year. 8 games, they are more likely to feel that. I am certainly in favor of the harder line drawn here and the clarity in which the ruling is delivered.

two24four
09-27-2011, 11:01 PM
Guessing Chris Neil will be getting a call from Shanny after his hit on Grabo tonight.

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
09-28-2011, 12:01 AM
Think the potentially career ending injury to Marc Savard and the hits that Sid took in a couple of games last season that led up to his nasty concussion have something to do with this ? Yep. Until players start seeing some serious consequences, nothing is going to change. The way guys play isn't going to change over night but I really think this is a step in the right direction. It's a fine line. We all love monster hits but there is a line that should not be crossed. With so much speed, energy and emotion involved in a game, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out and how players will or will not adjust. For now I say lay down the law. I am all for it. :yes:

Hamsterkill
09-28-2011, 12:18 AM
What I'll be interested to see is whether this actually cuts down on injuries at all. The hits on Sid, after all, weren't hits that warranted suspensions.

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
09-28-2011, 12:26 AM
What I'll be interested to see is whether this actually cuts down on injuries at all. The hits on Sid, after all, weren't hits that warranted suspensions.

Really ?

It's been a while but if memory serves me correctly, the hit by 39 during the WC was probably Sid's fault, head down with his eyes on the puck as Steckel came in and took an elbow shot to his head while gunning for the puck himself. Coincidental contact, really. Some may debate it and I am sure at the time I was pissed and called it dirty but I don't think it appeared to be a premeditated hit to the head, intent to injure or anything like that. The hit that happened a game later against TB was a CLEAR boarding call imo and could have easily warranted suspension. Esp in this new day and age. Crosby barely had time to brace and was absolutely in a defenseless position when Hedman took his body/head into the glass. Anytime a guy hits another guy square on the numbers while slamming his body into the glass it is a clear boarding call and potentially a suspension worthy hit if you ask me. how could you even disagree ?

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
09-28-2011, 01:12 AM
This is a step in the right direction and a long time coming if you ask me. Bout time the NHL took a few notes from Mike Pererira and the NFL. Shanahan is the right guy for the job!

Let's hope they keep it up. :yes:

Hamsterkill
09-28-2011, 01:18 AM
Really ?

It's been a while but if memory serves me correctly, the hit by 39 during the WC was probably Sid's fault, head down with his eyes on the puck as Steckel came in and took an elbow shot to his head while gunning for the puck himself. Coincidental contact, really. Some may debate it and I am sure at the time I was pissed and called it dirty but I don't think it appeared to be a premeditated hit to the head, intent to injure or anything like that. The hit that happened a game later against TB was a CLEAR boarding call imo and could have easily warranted suspension. Esp in this new day and age. Crosby barely had time to brace and was absolutely in a defenseless position when Hedman took his body/head into the glass. Anytime a guy hits another guy square on the numbers while slamming his body into the glass it is a clear boarding call and potentially a suspension worthy hit if you ask me. how could you even disagree ?
The Hedman hit was boarding and it was penalized as such as I recall. Suspendable, though? The hit was low-speed (relatively speaking), Crosby braced for the hit, and Hedman didn't target the head. That's not a suspendable hit. Or at least it damn well shouldn't be or else *every* boarding call warrants a suspension.

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
09-28-2011, 03:21 AM
The Hedman hit was boarding and it was penalized as such as I recall. Suspendable, though? The hit was low-speed (relatively speaking), Crosby braced for the hit, and Hedman didn't target the head. That's not a suspendable hit. Or at least it damn well shouldn't be or else *every* boarding call warrants a suspension.

Hmm. :\

So what is the dif between the Hedman on Crosby hit last season and the illegal hit Jody Shelley JUST got suspended for ? Speed of impact ? Aside from the fact that Crosby may have had a half a second more to see it coming, his back was still turned to Hedman going into the boards and he was in a defenseless position. The type of hits laid are nearly identical.

Had Shanny been layin down the law back then, Hedman likely would have been suspended for his hit, no doubt in my mind.

Quote:

"The onus is on the player applying the check, to ensure his opponent is not in defenseless position and if so he must avoid or minimize contact."

Pretty sure Hedman did neither of the two.

CayugaPosse
09-28-2011, 06:10 AM
Just felt the need to vent about the Wayne Simmonds/Sean Avery thing after I logged on Yahoo and saw this headline waiting for me...

"Player accused of homophobia"(on yahoo's main page)

Yes, it's sad that people still use things like "gay" to be meant as a derogetory term. It's kind of silly in that regard. I still do it from time to time. Normally I feel stupid after doing it, but sometimes it just happens and I call something "gay" or a friend gay for doing something stupid. Doesn't mean I equate gay people to being stupid. Doesn't mean I have a problem with gay people, I don't. Doesn't mean I'm homophobic. I'm not.

No one with any brain power whatsoever is actually accusing Wayne Simmonds of being homophobic. Why the fuck is that your headline?

He said something really stupid. It's stupid that gay is still slang for stupid, but it is.

I don't necessarily have a problem with it if he got fined(ala Bryant and Noah last year), but framing this discussion as if he used some hideously immoral vile word is just stupid. He used slang that everyone has used for quite a while, granted it's idiotic, and granted that word would take on a different meaning in certain cases(if he actually directed it at a homosexual person then we'd be having a different discussion).

He didn't though. This is not "homophobia", it's a stupid person calling another stupid person a stupid name. Context matters.

nyrblue2
09-28-2011, 06:33 AM
Just felt the need to vent about the Wayne Simmonds/Sean Avery thing after I logged on Yahoo and saw this headline waiting for me...

"Player accused of homophobia"(on yahoo's main page)

Yes, it's sad that people still use things like "gay" to be meant as a derogetory term. It's kind of silly in that regard. I still do it from time to time. Normally I feel stupid after doing it, but sometimes it just happens and I call something "gay" or a friend gay for doing something stupid. Doesn't mean I equate gay people to being stupid. Doesn't mean I have a problem with gay people, I don't. Doesn't mean I'm homophobic. I'm not.

No one with any brain power whatsoever is actually accusing Wayne Simmonds of being homophobic. Why the fuck is that your headline?

He said something really stupid. It's stupid that gay is still slang for stupid, but it is.

I don't necessarily have a problem with it if he got fined(ala Bryant and Noah last year), but framing this discussion as if he used some hideously immoral vile word is just stupid. He used slang that everyone has used for quite a while, granted it's idiotic, and granted that word would take on a different meaning in certain cases(if he actually directed it at a homosexual person then we'd be having a different discussion).

He didn't though. This is not "homophobia", it's a stupid person calling another stupid person a stupid name. Context matters.
Doesn't necessarily change the fact that "homophobia" might not be the right term to describe it, but he didn't just say "gay", he called him a "f***ing fa**ot".

CayugaPosse
09-28-2011, 08:04 AM
That's true, and that's very shitty.

That's also why I said if they want to suspend him ala Kobe or Noah, that's fine.

It does not, however, mean anyone should writing articles with the headline "Player accused of homophobia"

It's not homophobia. Sean Avery isn't homosexual, it can't be homophobic.

It was stupid and a shitty choice of words.

But people always seem to skew it to the extreme in these cases. Anyone who really saw Simmonds call Avery a faggot and thought that was a display of Simmonds being homophobic is stupid.

Hamsterkill
09-28-2011, 08:47 AM
That's true, and that's very shitty.

That's also why I said if they want to suspend him ala Kobe or Noah, that's fine.

It does not, however, mean anyone should writing articles with the headline "Player accused of homophobia"

It's not homophobia. Sean Avery isn't homosexual, it can't be homophobic.

It was stupid and a shitty choice of words.

But people always seem to skew it to the extreme in these cases. Anyone who really saw Simmonds call Avery a faggot and thought that was a display of Simmonds being homophobic is stupid.
All the headlines I've seen have worded it as "Player accused of using homophobic slur" or some equivalent. If Yahoo had that headline you stated I have to think it was just because of a space limitation.

Hamsterkill
09-28-2011, 08:53 AM
Quote:

"The onus is on the player applying the check, to ensure his opponent is not in defenseless position and if so he must avoid or minimize contact."

Pretty sure Hedman did neither of the two.
Is that quoted from the general rulebook or the suspension criteria?

I'm not arguing that what Hedman did was a legal check. I'm arguing that it's not worthy of suspension. If it is, I just don't see what kind of boarding call *wouldn't* be worthy of suspension.

The Shelley hit did look a little worse, since he actually drove the guy into the boards. But honestly, I'll be incredibly surprised if the NHL's suspension pace keeps up with what it is now, during the regular season. Shanahan's in message sending mode, in my opinion.

Dubz
09-28-2011, 09:25 AM
I agree with Cayuga. If i call you an fucking asshole rimmer does that mean anybody is gay or homosexual? I dont think so....its just insulting. I dont care if you are male or female....straight or gay...being called a fucking asshole rimmer is insulting. Im pretty surte thats all Simmonds was doing...and im sure it happens every game in every arena. Good thing Avery didnt have a banana on the bench or this thing would be really blown out of proportion.

Doctego
09-28-2011, 11:04 AM
Doesn't necessarily change the fact that "homophobia" might not be the right term to describe it, but he didn't just say "gay", he called him a "f***ing fa**ot".

Allegedly. From what I have read, no one can back up the claim other than Avery and he has zero reliability. Not that it didn't happen. Only they know.

Am I the only 1 remembering a Louis CK skit on this same topic?

Hamsterkill
09-28-2011, 11:55 AM
Didn't I read that it could be heard on the broadcast? Shouldn't the ref that was near them be able to confirm or deny it?

phaneuf6
09-28-2011, 12:08 PM
Not heard but seen is what I understood via a bunch of tweets.

nyrblue2
09-28-2011, 12:08 PM
You can read his lips. Hardly concrete evidence, but close enough.

boredguy
09-28-2011, 09:23 PM
Well, little disappointed now in the Neil non-suspension. Not so much the decision, it was rather iffy, but that they don't release a video for this too. Knowing why hits that are borderline aren't suspendable is almost as important as the reasons for why something is suspendable.

snoopzen
09-28-2011, 09:32 PM
Yes, it's sad that people still use things like "gay" to be meant as a derogetory term. It's kind of silly in that regard. I still do it from time to time. Normally I feel stupid after doing it, but sometimes it just happens and I call something "gay" or a friend gay for doing something stupid. Doesn't mean I equate gay people to being stupid. Doesn't mean I have a problem with gay people, I don't. Doesn't mean I'm homophobic. I'm not. Sorry, but as a future broadcaster you have to know that the words you choose matter. When someone does something stupid and you call them "gay," do you say it as a putdown? If you are, then it's a putdown because, at least in your mind, you're denigrating your target somehow.

And if you're trying to insult your target (even in fun) by calling them "gay", then on some level you have an issue with gay people. If you look honestly at it, and put aside your defensiveness, there's simply no way around it.

Does it mean you're homophobic? Well, you're not eight years old, so I assume you know what "gay" means. Let me ask you this... if you don't have an issue with gay people, then why do you even use the term? "Because everyone else does" is moronic, and "I've always used it" is as well.


It was mentioned later on that the term actually used was "f***ing f****t", to which Cayuga replied,

It's not homophobia. Sean Avery isn't homosexual, it can't be homophobic.

It was stupid and a shitty choice of words.

But people always seem to skew it to the extreme in these cases. Anyone who really saw Simmonds call Avery a faggot and thought that was a display of Simmonds being homophobic is stupid.It's the use of a homophobic term. It doesn't matter if the target is homosexual or not... the words used are in and of themselves homophobic.


I agree with Cayuga. If i call you an fucking asshole rimmer does that mean anybody is gay or homosexual? I dont think so....its just insulting. I dont care if you are male or female....straight or gay...being called a fucking asshole rimmer is insulting. Right. Again, Dubz' example term would have been found insulting... why?


The point is, people use terms like "gay" or "f****t" because they're lazy and uncreative. Instead of coming up with their own original slam on their friend who's done something stupid (who doesn't verbally spar with their buddies?) or another player on the ice, they pull out an emotionally charged word instead. Like I said, it's lazy and, quite honestly, a bit pathetic.

"Oh yeah? Well, you're... you're... uhh... you're GAY!!!"
* walks away smugly satisfied with self at having once again verbally outsparred an opponent *

Cornholio
09-29-2011, 09:56 AM
Next one:
Brendan Smith (Det) hit (headshot) on Ben Smith (Chi) - Sept 29, 2011 - YouTube

Looked very bad, and he will get suspended, BUT:

Look at the scene, and try to "read" the thoughts of the D.
He thinks, the the forward ist going to the D's left side, and that's where he plans to throw the check. If so: textbook open-ice hit!
But the forward dekes the the D's right side, just at the moment when the D is about to set the hit, so it's impossible to stop being in the motion already.
The forward's body is already beyond the D-man, just the head is still there, and making the deke, the forward is skating straight into the shoulder of the D-man.

I don't mean to say that hit was clean, but IMO there was no real chance for the defenseman to react after he had decided to throw the hit, because he didn't think of the deke...

What do you guys think?

MrScientist
09-29-2011, 10:06 AM
Next one:
Brendan Smith (Det) hit (headshot) on Ben Smith (Chi) - Sept 29, 2011 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr6Gnhg7GHE)

Looked very bad, and he will get suspended, BUT:

Look at the scene, and try to "read" the thoughts of the D.
He thinks, the the forward ist going to the D's left side, and that's where he plans to throw the check. If so: textbook open-ice hit!
But the forward dekes the the D's right side, just at the moment when the D is about to set the hit, so it's impossible to stop being in the motion already.
The forward's body is already beyond the D-man, just the head is still there, and making the deke, the forward is skating straight into the shoulder of the D-man.

I don't mean to say that hit was clean, but IMO there was no real chance for the defenseman to react after he had decided to throw the hit, because he didn't think of the deke...

What do you guys think?

My real time reaction was "dirty hit, 5-10 game suspension"

After watching the replay several times, I feel more like "unintentional head hit, brushed the shoulder, but still irresponsible at best. Probably 3-5 games"

Kyle
09-29-2011, 01:16 PM
The hit itself looks way dirtier than the replays reveal. Its dirty and suspension-worthy for sure. But I won't beat the dead horse and simply agree with Cornholio that he clearly did not intend to hit the head as it appeared and that it was just incidental and due to the deek.

They'll use this incident to send yet another example without doubt but, going longterm, they need to accept that some contact to the hit is inevitable or they can get rid of shoulder checks entirely. Its a matter of inches that changes a shoulder/high chest hit into a headshot and sometimes the victim is responsible for those inches. I'm not saying this hit is safe but I also don't think its head hunting.

chgorman
09-29-2011, 04:56 PM
The hit itself looks way dirtier than the replays reveal. Its dirty and suspension-worthy for sure. But I won't beat the dead horse and simply agree with Cornholio that he clearly did not intend to hit the head as it appeared and that it was just incidental and due to the deek.

They'll use this incident to send yet another example without doubt but, going longterm, they need to accept that some contact to the hit is inevitable or they can get rid of shoulder checks entirely. Its a matter of inches that changes a shoulder/high chest hit into a headshot and sometimes the victim is responsible for those inches. I'm not saying this hit is safe but I also don't think its head hunting.

Agreed. Shanny will make an example out of him with a big suspension because he's young and won't be starting the season in the NHL anyway, but I don't think this deserves more than a few gms even though he'll probably get 10-15. Obviously the guy laying the hit holds most of the responsibility for it, but at the same time, there has to be some onus on the player being hit to protect himself and not put himself in a vulnerable position, but for some reason 100% of the blame seems to go to the guy laying the hit, which I don't think is entirely fair. If it's a completely blindside hit that the player being hit doesn't see coming, then yeah all the onus is on the hitter, but in this case, it's pretty clear that it wasn't a blindside hit

Just to be clear, I'm not saying Brendan Smith should be let off scott-free, as he did make contact with the head first, which is how the rule is worded and thus how it has to be enforced, however it's clear he didn't intentionally go for the head, and it's also clear that the CHI guy made no attemp to protect himself and avoid the hit, and actually leaned down into smith's shoulder. If the guy is going to try to cut across the front of the net like he did, he has to expect that a hit is coming, keep his head up and try to protect himself/brace for the hit/avoid the hit, at the risk of losing the puck, instead of leaning down into it like he did. If the league isn't going to encourage players to keep their heads up and avoid hits like that instead of leaning into them, and then penalize the hitter because the other guy couldn't keep his head up and protect himself, then they might as well outlaw all hitting in general, because the more they suspend guys for borderline quote-unquote 'dangerous' hits, the less regard players are going to have for their own safety and more and more guys will be skating with their heads down causing more and more unecessary suspensions. It's a vicious cycle.

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
09-29-2011, 08:07 PM
Is that quoted from the general rulebook or the suspension criteria?

I'm not arguing that what Hedman did was a legal check. I'm arguing that it's not worthy of suspension. If it is, I just don't see what kind of boarding call *wouldn't* be worthy of suspension.

The Shelley hit did look a little worse, since he actually drove the guy into the boards. But honestly, I'll be incredibly surprised if the NHL's suspension pace keeps up with what it is now, during the regular season. Shanahan's in message sending mode, in my opinion.

Not sure, entirely. Quoted it from the video of B.Shan laying down the law in a video earlier in this thread....

Smith is def. going to be made an example. Nasty hit in real time video, on the ice though, was it intentional and obvious intent to injure? Probably not. Just a young guy caught up in the emotion and speed of the game trying to make a play.... Interested in seeing what comes of it. As I am sure all of us are.

chgorman
09-30-2011, 03:22 PM
remaining pre-season gms and 5 reg season gms for Brendan Smith. I think that's fair.

chgorman
10-01-2011, 10:23 AM
Interested to see what Shanny has to say in regards to the MacArthur hit last night... my guess is a couple games max, or possible even just a fine since Abs wasn't hurt and didn't get his head up, didn't really do anything to protect himself.

boredguy
10-01-2011, 10:38 AM
Yeah, it really just brushed his head, wasn't much force their at all, actually looked like Abdelkader sold it a bit. It was a hit to the head though so i'm kind of expecting 2 games.

two24four
10-01-2011, 10:50 AM
Yeah, it really just brushed his head, wasn't much force their at all, actually looked like Abdelkader sold it a bit. It was a hit to the head though so i'm kind of expecting 2 games.

Same here, MacArthur does not have a history of this stuff as well.

chgorman
10-01-2011, 11:00 AM
Yeah, def some acting involved on Abdelkader's part IMO. Not sure if Shanny will notice that and/or take it into consideration or not.

two24four
10-01-2011, 10:30 PM
Have a feeling Ryan Malone and Alex Edler won't be starting the season after there hits tonight.

CayugaPosse
10-02-2011, 02:18 AM
Have a feeling Ryan Malone and Alex Edler won't be starting the season after there hits tonight.

Ryan Malone doesn't have a hope in hell of starting the season after his.

Edler likely won't either based on the way the new suspensions are working.

Malone's was really bad though.

boredguy
10-02-2011, 03:32 AM
Edler's looks bad from the one angle but i have a hard time thinking that should be a suspension, though i wouldn't be surprised if he did.
Sturm will most likely miss a couple of games too, didn't hit the dude's head very hard but he was targeting it.

two24four
10-03-2011, 09:46 AM
Wow so they are saying Malone won't get anything for his hit the other night, yet MacArthur gets two games for his hit, ahhh ok :rolleyes:

nyrblue2
10-03-2011, 11:39 AM
Probably because Campoli was stretching out, which lowered his head. Not sure if Malone wouldn't have hit his head anyway, and it seemed like there was a decent amount of time where Campoli was bent down and Malone was still lining him up, so it was probably avoidable. That's probably the reason, though.

b_illin
10-03-2011, 12:06 PM
Shanny is sucking so far in making consistent judgements!

boredguy
10-03-2011, 12:24 PM
Honeymoon ended pretty quick, fucking NHL.

Cornholio
10-03-2011, 02:31 PM
No suspension for Malone
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=590940

Reasonable statement IMO

two24four
10-18-2011, 09:17 AM
Pens Letang has a hearing today at 11:30 for his boarding call last night vs Burmistrov.

Zangetsu
10-18-2011, 03:10 PM
Pens Letang has a hearing today at 11:30 for his boarding call last night vs Burmistrov.
Two games for Letang

http://twitter.com/#!/DarrenDreger/status/126387878585573376

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
10-18-2011, 06:02 PM
Shanny on Tangers 2game suspension

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=60&id=128880

Sponge Bong Beer Pants
10-21-2011, 07:36 PM
Shae Weber fined 2500.00 for his boarding hit but not suspended. Seems Shanny is playing the history & repeat offender card on these suspensions, or lack of. Not sure how I feel about that.

Hmph.

keyboard
10-23-2011, 11:07 AM
From what I've read he bases a portion of the suspension on the severity of the injury, if any. I think that might be the dumbest thing about his whole philosophy.

The result shouldn't determine intent. It's just as bad as the double minor when there's blood.

Kyle
10-29-2011, 09:55 PM
From what I've read he bases a portion of the suspension on the severity of the injury, if any. I think that might be the dumbest thing about his whole philosophy.

The result shouldn't determine intent. It's just as bad as the double minor when there's blood.

I disagree. To an extent you're obviously right but there is an obvious connection with the danger of the play and the result of the play. When you put more effort into a dangerous hit, you're more likely to cause serious injury.

Yes, sometimes more intentional/dirty plays don't produce injury, and less intentional plays produce more severe injuries. In these cases, it is injust that severity of injury be taken into consideration.

But, more often than that, the damage a player incurs on a hit is directly tied tohow reckless/dangerous a player's behavior was.

To deny that would be foolish. Don't sit there and say the hits that break bones aren't likely more dangerous/intentionally dirty plays.

You can't determine everything based on video. How much a player exerts himself or lets up on a play isn't always easy to read on a video replay and the result of the hit most certainly does help you figure that out.

It shouldn't be the key point when deciding the length of a suspension or whether to suspend or not, but yes the extent of injury should ALWAYS be taken into consideration.

keyboard
10-29-2011, 11:48 PM
To deny that would be foolish. Don't sit there and say the hits that break bones aren't likely more dangerous/intentionally dirty plays.
So then do you reduce the suspension if the player is more prone to injury? The whole system is stupid. It's either a dirty hit or it isn't. How durable the player is who received is completely irrelevant.

Kyle
10-30-2011, 01:59 AM
Fair point. Like I said, you were obviously right to an extent. I just think its also dangerous to ignore the extent of injury entirely.

Doctego
01-04-2012, 04:22 PM
Thoughts?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycSf7eYy9KU

ih8music
01-04-2012, 04:30 PM
Hopefully he tore his knee to shit.

Snipes16
01-04-2012, 04:44 PM
Thats the first I've seen of the hit and TBH after seeing the indefinite suspention scrolling across the tube last night I was expecting much worse. Yes it was bad but I was expecting much worse.

Was that an iceing call? Because if it was, thats the biggest rule change that needs to be put in yesterday for player safety. The puck crosses the endline and it should be automatic iceing.

I'll guess he gets 3 games because it wasn't exactly a hit from completely behind.

two24four
01-04-2012, 04:46 PM
He waived an in person hearing with the league which almost always is at least 5+ games, that and I think he's been suspended five or so times before.

keyboard
01-04-2012, 07:51 PM
Hopefully he gets 20 games and some goddamn respect is restored in the league.

Embarrassing what's happening lately.

two24four
01-04-2012, 08:33 PM
7 games for Carcillo.

Dubz
01-05-2012, 03:01 AM
Hopefully he gets 20 games and some goddamn respect is restored in the league.

Embarrassing what's happening lately.


20? Im not saying it was nice but without his record i doubt he gets 3.

Great point b tho

canuckthug
01-09-2012, 12:09 PM
Marchand better get suspended today. Hope he gets 3-5 games...

gogoayane
01-09-2012, 12:23 PM
It's a phone interview so the max is 5 games. I'm hoping it's 5 games too.

alias
01-09-2012, 08:29 PM
well he got 5 games. not sure what was worse marchand's hit or julien's justification of it.


http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=610834

Kyle
01-09-2012, 10:51 PM
20? Im not saying it was nice but without his record i doubt he gets 3.

Great point b tho


Make it a full season. Its getting ridiculous and by now MORE than enough time has passed that we can all conclude players are habitually and instinctively inclined NOT to throw that hit. He made the decision to deliberately make a dangerous hit and injured two players. The lack of respect for the game displayed on a hit like that at this point is disgusting. Without the stanley cup on the line nobody can even begin explaining why Carcillo is even going hard into that play. It was among the most unnecessary displays of that hit from behind into the boards that I've seen in the last few years. Obviously 20-season is excessive but we've all been waiting endlessly for a real example to be made of somebody. It never happens, and these hits never get any less frequent. Its silly!

Marchand is a piece of shit for that play. He was a piece of shit for getting angry at Salo 15 seconds prior for a perfectly clean, legal, and insignificant tiny hit, and clearly projected that anger 20 seconds later as Salo slowly skated in for another harmless shoulder-shoulder bump. That was premeditated and intended to harm in response to a play (In response to virtually nothing). 5 games isn't enough for that garbage, its one thing to overreact to a disrespectful play. To get so angry over literally nothing by Salo (Unless there were comments about Marchand's dead family member spoken by Salo we couldn't hear) and retaliate to that extent - How far will he go if someone truly disrespects him? 5 games now will do nothing to change how far hes going to go later. They're just not sending strong enough messages in this sport.

two24four
01-21-2012, 04:10 PM
Ference will be getting a call I would think for his today.

phaneuf6
01-21-2012, 04:30 PM
Ference will be getting a call I would think for his today.

Yea I would think so, 1 or 2 games tops though. The NESN commentators were making the most retarded comments about the hit and trying to say how it wasn't Ference's fault. What a joke. :rolleyes:

two24four
01-21-2012, 05:20 PM
Yea I would think so, 1 or 2 games tops though. The NESN commentators were making the most retarded comments about the hit and trying to say how it wasn't Ference's fault. What a joke. :rolleyes:

I was watching it on MSG and they were acting like it was the worst hit ever.

two24four
01-23-2012, 06:44 PM
Three games for Ovechkin.

Roy Hinske
01-23-2012, 10:55 PM
Three game suspension but no penalty on the play.

Dubz
01-24-2012, 01:02 AM
Bs

Kyle
01-24-2012, 12:43 PM
Was a horrible hit by Ovy. Fuck him

Rocklobster
01-24-2012, 12:44 PM
just heard he's refusing to go to the all-star game now... what a baby!

chgorman
01-24-2012, 12:46 PM
I'm curious if he actually believes he doesn't deserve to be there, or if he's just doing this to spite the league because of the suspension. either way, douche move.

Hamsterkill
01-24-2012, 01:58 PM
just heard he's refusing to go to the all-star game now... what a baby!
Won't he get another game for that?

Snipes16
01-24-2012, 02:36 PM
Whats his beef? he's a 4 time offender and launches himself at Michalek and makes contact with the guys head. If he stays on his skates its shoulder to shoulder.

What an ignorant arsehole he is.

two24four
01-24-2012, 04:24 PM
Won't he get another game for that?

Nope, NHL has already said they are not going to do anything.

Snipes16
01-24-2012, 04:28 PM
Nope, NHL has already said they are not going to do anything.

Dont invite him anymore :beer:

Cornholio
01-24-2012, 05:43 PM
WTF??? :rolleyes:
Lidström and Datsyuk got suspended one game when they didn't take part in the All Star Game 2 (?) years ago...

two24four
01-24-2012, 06:19 PM
WTF??? :rolleyes:
Lidström and Datsyuk got suspended one game when they didn't take part in the All Star Game 2 (?) years ago...

It's because they played in DET's last game leading up to the all-star game, Ovie becuase of the suspension won't be. The new rule is if you play for your team in the last game before the break they think you should be able to go.

I think alot of players would rather go away on alittle vacation rather then have to go to Ottawa for 4 days, even more so for the players who have been to the game a few times.

Roy Hinske
01-25-2012, 11:55 PM
Good way to get some time off. Its like suspending a kid from school on Thursday for 2 days. They all hate that.

HiStickem
01-26-2012, 02:16 PM
hi all. newbie to the boards. I kind of think Ovechkin is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. There's no way to keep from being a distraction to the event with the Canadian media. And let's face it, the guy hasn't played well for close to two seasons now. Wouldn't it be better to select someone else?

And for the record, I'm a Caps fan.

phaneuf6
01-26-2012, 02:19 PM
hi all. newbie to the boards. I kind of think Ovechkin is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. There's no way to keep from being a distraction to the event with the Canadian media. And let's face it, the guy hasn't played well for close to two seasons now. Wouldn't it be better to select someone else?

And for the record, I'm a Caps fan.

Playing well or not, he's a huge marketing tool for the NHL. The guy has been the centre of attention at both the past All-Star games so there's no doubt the NHL would love to have him there. However, if they make a big stink of him choosing to opt out, it just creates a huge media mess and takes away from the actual event and players that are there, much like the Tim Thomas-White House situation.

PS, welcome to HI!

HiStickem
01-26-2012, 02:28 PM
Thanks for the welcome...yeah, that's true, I see your point. But if he did go, don't you think he'd be hounded by the Canadian media and still create a distraction about being suspended?

Me? I personally don't care that Thomas didn't want to go to the WH, nor do I really care about Ovie opting out of the ASG either. I'm just bored at work and looking for a conversation to jump into!

Snipes16
01-26-2012, 02:50 PM
He's just being a spoiled brat. It was all fun and games when he goofballed in previous years with the skills competition when he was the cats ass playing well and adored by most.

Nowadays he's just a coach killing 4 time offender who's never done shit in the playoffs that just launched himself into Michalek's head and lucky that he wasn't hurt or he'd have gotten even more time off.

The ignorant prick probably thinks he desevered nothing for the hit ala James Harrison so like the pussy he is, he tells the NHL to go fuck themselves by snubbing the game. God, how far has he fallen from grace.

keyboard
01-26-2012, 03:12 PM
He's just being a spoiled brat. It was all fun and games when he goofballed in previous years with the skills competition when he was the cats ass playing well and adored by most.

Nowadays he's just a coach killing 4 time offender who's never done shit in the playoffs that just launched himself into Michalek's head and lucky that he wasn't hurt or he'd have gotten even more time off.

The ignorant prick probably thinks he desevered nothing for the hit ala James Harrison so like the pussy he is, he tells the NHL to go fuck themselves by snubbing the game. God, how far has he fallen from grace.Crushed.

HiStickem
01-26-2012, 05:04 PM
He's just being a spoiled brat. It was all fun and games when he goofballed in previous years with the skills competition when he was the cats ass playing well and adored by most.

Nowadays he's just a coach killing 4 time offender who's never done shit in the playoffs that just launched himself into Michalek's head and lucky that he wasn't hurt or he'd have gotten even more time off.

The ignorant prick probably thinks he desevered nothing for the hit ala James Harrison so like the pussy he is, he tells the NHL to go fuck themselves by snubbing the game. God, how far has he fallen from grace.

So what else don't you like about Ovie? Don't hold back this time :D

Ha! just kind of proves my point---he's damned if he goes, damned if he doesn't. A lot of folks felt he wasn't deserving to be there anyway, right? So why not let James Neal get the honor? or someone like Kovalchuk? And was Ovie ever in everybody's good graces? Seems like he and Crosby get as much hate as they do praise.

I signed up here to get a way from all that tired shit about "Ovie's a cheap shot asshole" and "Crosby's a crybaby dick!" stuff that goes on at some other boards. I guess this place isn't immune.

phaneuf6
01-26-2012, 05:44 PM
I signed up here to get a way from all that tired shit about "Ovie's a cheap shot asshole" and "Crosby's a crybaby dick!" stuff that goes on at some other boards. I guess this place isn't immune.

I think Snipes is just really calling it as many people (including myself) see it.

Snipes16
01-26-2012, 08:01 PM
So what else don't you like about Ovie? Don't hold back this time :D

Ha! just kind of proves my point---he's damned if he goes, damned if he doesn't. A lot of folks felt he wasn't deserving to be there anyway, right? So why not let James Neal get the honor? or someone like Kovalchuk? And was Ovie ever in everybody's good graces? Seems like he and Crosby get as much hate as they do praise.

I signed up here to get a way from all that tired shit about "Ovie's a cheap shot asshole" and "Crosby's a crybaby dick!" stuff that goes on at some other boards. I guess this place isn't immune.

I've given you reasons why he's damned if he doesn't attend but you've gotta come up with better reasoning that he's '"damned" if he goes other than the Canadien media shoving microphones in his face asking him about the suspention. Because if you want to go around launching into somebody's head then you should be big enough to accept questions about it.

How damning is it really if he just goes and says he's not answering any questions about the suspention? Or better yet, how about just showing up to the event and showing a little remorse or class when asked about the hit by the media?...he wasn't damned if he went because of the Canadien media's questioning, thats manure. When the Canadien media gets tough the Russian superstar gets going?:lol:

He didn't agree with the suspention (must've missed the replays) and decided to be a baby about the situation by pulling himself out to say fuck you to the NHL...just as cowardly as the H2H hit he administered...tremendous ambassador to the game.

Kyle
01-26-2012, 10:31 PM
I signed up here to get a way from all that tired shit about "Ovie's a cheap shot asshole" and "Crosby's a crybaby dick!" stuff that goes on at some other boards. I guess this place isn't immune.

Its pretty difficult to find a hockey message board in existence that hasn't featured a lot of hate for Ovechkin in the week following his horrible headshot. It'd be pretty difficult to find a hockey message board in existence that didn't thoroughly discuss (and hate on) that headshot from anybody.

This message board isn't short on respect or praise for Crosby or Ovechkin. Even our Pens and Caps fans are pretty levelheaded about the other. You can sign on here 360 days a year and not find a hateful word about Ovechkin but yes, immediately following one of the cheapest and most intentional headshots we've seen in a while, expect to read it.

PS - Right now Ovechkin is the crybaby dick and the cheapshot asshole ;)

canuckthug
03-23-2012, 01:26 PM
I originally said this (which turns out to be more accurate than i attended):

I'd say 5-6 games for Duncan Keith. (first time offender, might be less/hopefully not)

"The NHL originally indicated to the Blackhawks and Keith that the hearing would be a phone hearing, which would limit any suspension to five games or less. Later on Thursday, the league said that it wanted the hearing to be in person, where there would be a potential for a ban of six or more games."
- tsn

I'll stick with 6, but wouldn't be surprised if he gets 7 which is the remainder of the season.

Kyle
03-23-2012, 01:56 PM
Keith deserves that, one of the more blatant and intentional elbows I've ever seen

gogoayane
03-23-2012, 02:05 PM
I say it'll be for the remainder of the regular season (well.. that 8 game or so left)

alias
03-23-2012, 02:54 PM
keith has declined the in person meeting

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=391155

Dubz
03-23-2012, 04:33 PM
keith has declined the in person meeting

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=391155

AT least he isnt bold face lie telling like Lucic!!

two24four
03-23-2012, 05:05 PM
Keith got 5 games.

Dubz
03-24-2012, 02:06 PM
Dserved them all. If he didnt have a clean slate they would have nailed him im sure. Imagine he did that to Crosby ffs

keyboard
04-14-2012, 06:27 PM
Let's see if he fucks up the Carkner situation. It's so much easier when it's a goon, I bet.

chgorman
04-14-2012, 06:43 PM
Didn't see it and it's not on youtube yet... what happened?

Kyle
04-14-2012, 07:02 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94r8eauXqkU

Kyle
04-14-2012, 07:20 PM
Quick recap for people:

1) Brian Boyle throws dirty, harmless punches on Karlson in game 1

2) Carkner retaliates in game 2 by blatantly attacked Boyle with hard right hooks in the middle of a play, before Boyle has any opportunity to even drop his gloves (Which were still on after the entire pileup)

3) Referee deems this to be a legal fight within the rules of hockey and allows it to continue even after Boyle is helplessly flopped on the ice enduring haymakers from Carkner.

4) Dubinsky, witnissing that Carkner was not being stopped and punching his vulnerable teammate in the face at will, simply skates in and tackles him and ends the fight.

5) Dubinsky gets thrown out for a game misconduct and penalized for roughing.

That, is the sorriest course of events I have ever seen in an NHL game. The ref followed the rules sure, but the big mistake was ever establishing a "Fight". Boyle agreed to no fight, he didn't drop his gloves. That was a vicious attack, not a legal hockey fight, and what Dubinsky did was certainly not "third man in." Third man in can only exist within the context of a fair legal fight. He was defending a helpless teammate from a vicious illegal assault.

The NHL needs to rewrite its rules on this ASAP. Like tonight. That referee had to tell Dubinski "You were supposed to sit there and watch Boyle get destroyed helplessly until us refs were able to stop that enraged man four times our size and throw him out of the game ourselves. You can't help" and thats just pathetic.

keyboard
04-14-2012, 09:29 PM
Ultimately what we witnessed was Bertuzzi/Moore with less damage. As much as Carkner's actions were terrible, Boyle is 6'7", what the fuck did he think was going to happen when he punches a guy like Karlsson? You have to pay the piper, and Carkner wasn't taking no for an answer. And Boyle was being a pussy because he fought Neil afterwards, so it wasn't that he didn't want to fight, he just didn't want to fight a guy his size.

I'm unsure how I feel about the whole thing. While I think Carkner should be suspended for the remainder of the playoffs, I think Boyle deserved the beatdown he got, and he had plenty of time to get his gloves up. Too many players are getting comfortable with the idea of no consequences. It's killing the game, even more so than the actions of Carkner.

Dubz
04-14-2012, 11:35 PM
Looked like harmless body shots for the most part.... after the immediate turtle. He should get a couple games but whats to stop ALL players from pulling out the turtle card? Especially big ones that lay out the dirt? It is sort of a mess and im interested to see how it shakes out. Im sure Don Cherry has an answer:lol:

habsfan1
04-15-2012, 08:37 AM
Wondering what Carl Hagelin will get for that hit on Alfy. He was clearly targeting his head and rightfully got ejected. I think he will get 2-3.

habsfan1
04-15-2012, 07:43 PM
​3 games for Hagelin.

Kyle
04-16-2012, 01:27 AM
Fair enough, its just odd when they didn't punish anyone else appropriately. Weber should've gotten 1-2 if that elbow was worth 3. Oh well.

Doctego
04-16-2012, 07:07 AM
Fair enough, its just odd when they didn't punish anyone else appropriately. Weber should've gotten 1-2 if that elbow was worth 3. Oh well.

Ignoring the possibility that Shanny didn't want to suspend 1 of Nashville's best players, the only other explanation that I can see is that Zetterberg was the initiator of the exchange when he hit Weber from behind. By no means do I think that Zetterberg deserved what Weber did to him but maybe Shanny thought that there was a good chance that Weber wouldn't have done what he did (or at least to the excess that he did) if Zetterberg didn't do what he did. Not a valid explanation, IMHO, but it's possible.

Shanny will be on a NY radio show shortly so I'll see if he says anything about it.

Not sure if anything is new here but what Shanny said was that he talked to Detroit after the incident and they said that Zetterberg was fine. He said that he was really close to handing out a 1 game suspensions but decided against it after speaking with Detroit. As lame as the fine was, he said that was the largest fine that he is allowed to hand out. He confirmed that policy that has been in effect long before he took over is that a resulting injury plays a role in the punishment. My take is that the fact that this was the first incident of the playoffs (that I know of) played a role. I really think that, if this incident happened in game 4, he would have been suspended. As for the Hagelin suspension, I think that the biggest offenses are elbows to the head.