flyercanuck Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Hockey is going to turn into soccer real quick if this time of disciplinary action keeps up. "Schenn has a concussion and we don't believe he will be back until next season" - Homer "OMG this is horrible, Asham needs to be suspended 20 games" - Shanny "Our previous diagnosis is incorrect, Schenn will be ok and be able to play tomorrow night" Homer "Awww #$$@, guess I messed that up?" ShannyGive me a break. The discipline should be dished out based off of INTENT not the actual outcome. This disgusts me to no end!This is what bothers me about suspending according to injury. Neals hit on Couturier was every bit as vicious as Torres on Hossa, except Hossa actually had the puck. And to me it's total bs that a "scorer" gets off easier than a 3rd or 4th liner. Let's see what Torres gets, but I bet it's a lot more than a game.Neal has had a fine and 2 warnings this year, to go with a previous suspension. He gets nothing for taking a run at Couturier, who didn't have the puck. And Shanahan gives this ridiculous statement "left feet to prepare for unexpected hit". OK, what? Left feet to prepare for unexpected hit that he charged into from 4 metres away while looking straight at his target the entire time??? Pure bs.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDailey Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Minimal compliance with the letter and intent of the regulationsShanny is another idiot puppet with no moral fiberHere is the story (allegedly)Tony Twist beat Shanny up (as a team mate) years ago for his indiscretions with a team mates wife and beating up the team mate Craig Janney in public when he saw them together. Between Shanny & Brouder you have a couple guys who can not be trusted who are league disciplinarian and someone on the competition committee-another snow job by the league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDailey Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 This is how the hearings went downWow, one of the guys in the coke bust thang looks like league VP Bill Daly/Daley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earle'sGaffe Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Ya gotta wonder what exactly the league said to Neil when they gave him those two previous "warnings:""If you don't clean up your act you're going to need to make up a filmsy, implausible excuse next time." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terp Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) This is what bothers me about suspending according to injury. Neals hit on Couturier was every bit as vicious as Torres on Hossa, except Hossa actually had the puck. And to me it's total bs that a "scorer" gets off easier than a 3rd or 4th liner. Let's see what Torres gets, but I bet it's a lot more than a game.Neal has had a fine and 2 warnings this year, to go with a previous suspension. He gets nothing for taking a run at Couturier, who didn't have the puck. And Shanahan gives this ridiculous statement "left feet to prepare for unexpected hit". OK, what? Left feet to prepare for unexpected hit that he charged into from 4 metres away while looking straight at his target the entire time??? Pure bs..Any sane person can see that Torres was merely bracing himself for an unexpected collision. OK, so he has a history of bracing himself for collisions. He'll probably get at least 4.Also, Hossa didn't have the puck. Edited April 18, 2012 by terp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Bottom line, they have the wrong people for the job.No doubt Shanny (as an ex-player) should be a member of the evaluating team, but the decision-maker should be qualified, such as an ex-referee.Being a player for 15 years doesn't make one an expert on discipline any more than going to public school for 12 years would make you an expert in education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) OK, so he has a history of bracing himself for collisions.LMAO @terp - well done.Also, Hossa didn't have the puck.Maybe not, but he was a lot closer to having it than Cooter was, and it does matter.The time stamp, does matter, as Bob McKenzie was saying last night (which @ruxpin called idiotic). It matters, it matters, it matters. Edited April 18, 2012 by Podein25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 The whole issue of "injury" should be a aggravating circumstance and not the basis for the whole penalty itself.Deliberately slamming another player's head into the boards should be a suspendable offense. If that player is also injured, the suspension should be LONGER. The determination of whether to suspend shouldn't be based on whether a player is injured. That's just idiotic.Bertuzzi attacking Moore should be a suspendable offense regardless of whether or not Moore could ever play hockey again. The injury sustained in the suspendable offense should affect the length of the suspension - like "until the player plays again" in the Bertuzzi case, for example.You also wind up with situations where a player like Shaw gets three games because of Smith's "injury" (Smith played 73 minutes THE NEXT GAME and stopped 35 of 37 shots).But this is a league that gives out an extra two minutes if you see blood so players scrape their faces with their gloves looking for a seam.Ric Flair would have been in heaven.Heckuva job, guys. I've never seen so many comparisons drawn between one of the "four major sports" and "sports entertainment" as in the past week... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Well said, rad.And the worst part is that NO ONE is talking about the great hockey on the ice. All the media - including media that typically ignores hockey like SI - is reporting on the violent hits and inconsistent discipline.Bettman was at the Chicago game last night... wanna bet he was thinking "F**K, here we go again"? Hossa is Chicago's most dangerous offensive threat, and it is the equivalent of the Flyers losing Giroux. It sucks for the Hawks, it sucks for hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinorama Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I would be to the curb at my place of employment if I took this long to make a decision.right? and if you ask me these shoulda been no brainers.At the beginning of the season he was handing out suspensions and fines like they were candy and now he has to actually think about it? Where the league was gaining credibility at the beginning of the season for trumpeting their no-tolerance stance to head shots, it looks like they are once again cheapening themselves by acting inconsistent. Weber anyone? shoulda been an instant call, nope. a player delivers 2 different head shots that are blatant examples of what the league is trying to remove from the game yet they only hand out one suspension? The league, and Shannahan are jokes. If you want something to be called, then you call it when it happens. doesn't matter who it is, you call it. If the NHL ever wants to be taken seriously, they need to get consistent with the play calling. If it is in the rule book as an infraction, you call it no matter what, playoff game, league's best player, whatever. They shouldn't be worried about sending players a message, just call the f u cking game the way it is listed in the rules. Be a little more like other leagues, don't be concerned with wasting a littletime reviewing a possible call on replay to make sure they got it right. If a ref is unsure about a penalty because the game moves to fast then take an official off the ice and have him watching the entire game from TV with replays at his disposal. Get the call right, that should be first and foremost and for this league, they've never seemed to get that focus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedZep Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Neal got off lightly. He commits two infractions after being suspended and getting two warnings. Rinaldo's first suspension came with zero warnings and was only one infraction. "If you it again Neal, we are going to warn you again! Ok, we warned you we were going to warn you! Ok, we warned you twice already, this would make it three (on the hit to Couturier.) NOW we are serious. One game." Serious alright.Asham's 4 games seems reasonable, three for the crosscheck and one for the punch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinorama Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Well said, rad.And the worst part is that NO ONE is talking about the great hockey on the ice. All the media - including media that typically ignores hockey like SI - is reporting on the violent hits and inconsistent discipline.Bettman was at the Chicago game last night... wanna bet he was thinking "F**K, here we go again"? Hossa is Chicago's most dangerous offensive threat, and it is the equivalent of the Flyers losing Giroux. It sucks for the Hawks, it sucks for hockey.well said @radoran and @brelic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 The whole issue of "injury" should be a aggravating circumstance and not based on the whole penalty itself.there are so many ridiculous aspects to the whole supplementary discipline ""system"" (intentional double quotes) and this one is right up there. It's hard to pick a Most Ridiculous candidate but basing the ruling on the injury seems particularly dumb. Use it like you said, as an "aggravating circumstance" or a mitigating circumstance, but to actually base the ruling on it....just dumb. Most Ridiculous Winner in the Neal suspension: Shanahan said the NHL was “willing to accept Neal’s assertion” that he jumped at Couturier “to brace himself for an unintended collision.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Jeez. I can't get over that. "an unintended collision"wow, just imagine if Neal had intended to hit Couturier.Most Ridiculous, we have a winner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyS Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Neal gets ONE game???And the ridiculous explanation of the ruling just makes it worse. Why insult our intelligence?The Flyers need to end the Penguins' season tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke2Leach Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Bettman was at the Chicago game last night... wanna bet he was thinking "F**K, here we go again"? Hossa is Chicago's most dangerous offensive threat, and it is the equivalent of the Flyers losing Giroux. It sucks for the Hawks, it sucks for hockey.Brutal hit by Torres. I do wonder what goes through a player's mind (I'm talking to you Duncan Keith) when you see your own player take a brutal head shot less than a month after you dished one that was even dirtier). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Brutal hit by Torres. I do wonder what goes through a player's mind (I'm talking to you Duncan Keith) when you see your own player take a brutal head shot less than a month after you dished one that was even dirtier).I think Torres gets 3-5.Who did Keith hit? I missed that one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Brutal hit yes but - and I'm sure I'm in the minority here - I see that as a hockey play more than anything else. Hossa had just dished the puck off and Torres lines him up, no question, but it's pretty "split-second" from pass to hit. Raffi gets a little air underneath his skates but I wouldn't call that "launching himself" into Hossa.Neal on the other hand - you watch the hit in real-time and it's 3 seconds after Couturier dumps the puck. Neal clearly jumps for the head and misses, hits Couturier a bit lower.The huge difference of course is Couts played his next shift and Hossa was carted off in a stretcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 there are so many ridiculous aspects to the whole supplementary discipline ""system"" (intentional double quotes) and this one is right up there. It's hard to pick a Most Ridiculous candidate but basing the ruling on the injury seems particularly dumb. Use it like you said, as an "aggravating circumstance" or a mitigating circumstance, but to actually base the ruling on it....just dumb.Most Ridiculous Winner in the Neal suspension: Shanahan said the NHL was “willing to accept Neal’s assertion” that he jumped at Couturier “to brace himself for an unintended collision.”This is a perfect example - along with "understanding" why Weber slammed Zetterberg's head into the boards - of why a former player simply should not be in this situation.Leaving your feet is the DEFINITION of charging. Charging is a PENALTY in this league. Saying you're not suspending a repeat offender longer because he decided the best thing to do when facing an "unintended collision" is to commit a PENALTY is beyond ludicrous.Message sent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 It's really like something out of Bizarro-World.Imagine the PR guy for Shanahan's office - what could he possibly say to spin this so it makes any sense at all?"We felt 1 game was enough. James Neal has the message now."What is that message?"Obviously If he feels he's about to take a bad penalty, he should commit a different penalty...The professionals in Mr. Shanahan's office will sort it out after the incident. Like we did here."Sir, I ... don't understand. You're saying it's ... wait, no, You're saying... hmmm. Wait, what exactly are you saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I think Torres gets 3-5.Who did Keith hit? I missed that one...Torres will get longer because he's a multiple repeat offender. He was suspended earlier this year, and he was suspended last year.Keith concussed Sedin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Jeez. I can't get over that. "an unintended collision"wow, just imagine if Neal had intended to hit Couturier.Most Ridiculous, we have a winner.in other words... the league bought his lame excuse. just because he runs around like a deer in headlights shouldn't. confuse the fact that he was absolutely hunting heads on sunday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 btw, how much you wanna bet the nhl hands down a ruling on torres before 5pm today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Yeah, I guess it helps when you get 2 days to hone your excuse.."So you see Brendan, I had to jump into his face...otherwise I might've hit him." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I really liked this logo a lot.Wait did I just derail the derailed conversation? Carry on...OMG no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.