Asham/Neal hearings - 1 game for Neal, 4 for Asham

[brelic]

PLEASE tell me Keith was suspended for this hit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M25I5rtFjiA

[Clarke2Leach]

PLEASE tell me Keith was suspended for this hit:

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=M25I5rtFjiA

5 games. A fourth liner would have got 25 minimum.

[canoli]

yeah meanwhile earlier in that game Sedin used his elbow to clock Keith right in the jaw. The hit by DK was payback and that's all it was. Keith isn't a dirty player.

But it was more of the same from Shanahan, who deals out suspensions based on ... who knows?

[Lindbergh31]

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...

Bottomline is the NHL is trading players' safety for higher ratings on tv. Somewhere down the road the former players will launch a class-action lawsuit against the NHL the same way the former NFL players are doing to the NFL. If the players have enough balls then they've got to speak up regarding the safety of the players. It must make for some interesting players union meeting when you can have one player sitting near another player who he took out and finished his season because of a questionable or illegal hit/action. Shanahan has to stop being a puppet to the higher ups and grow some balls. The league should have a standard guideline for suspensions based on the intent of the action and not the result of an injury or not to determine how long an offender should be suspended.

[Lindbergh31]

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.

The Flyers have to come out on fire tonight and take it to the Pens, if they get up by a couple of goals just keep piling it on. They have to make sure not give the Pens any hope and just end their season tonight.

[terp]

Keith isn't a dirty player.

At one point does he become a dirty player? This is just more Shanahan-speak that excuses "clean" (read "star" players) and focuses the meaningful supplementally discipline on "dirty" 3rd and 4th line players. The only way to end this is to suspend guys like Keith for 10 games for hits like this. They can end the problem in a couple of months if they do it.

[radoran]

Bottomline is the NHL is trading players' safety for higher ratings on tv. Somewhere down the road the former players will launch a class-action lawsuit against the NHL the same way the former NFL players are doing to the NFL. If the players have enough balls then they've got to speak up regarding the safety of the players. It must make for some interesting players union meeting when you can have one player sitting near another player who he took out and finished his season because of a questionable or illegal hit/action. Shanahan has to stop being a puppet to the higher ups and grow some balls. The league should have a standard guideline for suspensions based on the intent of the action and not the result of an injury or not to determine how long an offender should be suspended.

When does the NHLPA step up and start taking responsibility for their own members who, whether as a result of their carelessness or direct action, are hurting other members of their union?

My first move as the NHL in any enforcement action is to point out that the CBA restricts the league and that the players themselves are not only the primary victims but also the ones committing the offenses. Why is it entirely up to the league to stop the players from hurting each other?

Clean up your own house before riding your high horse into a courtroom. You might find out it's a donkey.

If I'm a former player, I'd consider suing the union long before the league.

The league certainly didn't create the bounty system in New Orleans - or profit from it. It was the members of the NFLPA who did that to their fellow members.

The league certainly didn't tell James Neal it was okay to be completely reckless on the ice and excuse that recklessness by committing a penalty that wasn't called.

Oh, wait. Yes, it did.

Sue them both - the league and the union.

[trevluk]

I hope the Flyers finish off the Pens tonight but if they dont, Neal is a marked man in game 5.

[TedZep]

How many other players are issued multiple warnings without any actual punishment? Neal was essentially given three passes before a token slap on the wrist. If he has learned anything, it is that special rules apply to certain teams.

[flyercanuck]

yeah meanwhile earlier in that game Sedin used his elbow to clock Keith right in the jaw. The hit by DK was payback and that's all it was. Keith isn't a dirty player.

But it was more of the same from Shanahan, who deals out suspensions based on ... who knows?

Ya, if you didn't see the game don't judge a guy on one youtube vid. It's like everyone saying Schenn gave crosby a cheapshot when they didn't watch what Crosby was doing the rest of the game...and every game since.

[Earle'sGaffe]

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.

Insane. You clip a player with a high stick and it's two minutes, intentional or not. You give him a bloody lip and it's another two minutes, intentional or not. You flip the puck out of play and it's a penaly, intentional or not. And so on. But you drop a player to the ice with a vicious hit and, oh, well, that's okay...as long as you didn't mean it.

[canoli]

Yeah that has to be the stupidest excuse I ever heard - "I had to jump into his face...otherwise I might've hit him."

And Shanahan insults us all by telling us he believes that load of crap.

Shanahan is either lying, incredibly gullible or he just doesn't give a damn what the fans think.

Edited April 18, 2012 by canoli

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

I was late for a meeting at work today so I was walking freally fast. I came around the corner and this lady was coming the other way. I jumped into her to try to avoid the collision. I hope she is alright.

Such a bullshite excuse. Look at the tape and see where his feet leave the ice. Neal's jump began 2 feet before impact. He had enough time to stop or turn out of the way of Couts. It was a deliberate attempt to injure.

Shanny, you can't be that stupid, can you?!?

[flyercanuck]

@canoli

Neal is the liar, not Shanahan. Shanahan can only be considered really really stupid. So Neal didn't mean to hit Couturier when he jumped at him, but what was it, 42 seconds later? he goes down the ice and jumps at Girouxs head, which gets him a game. Ya, I can see the sense in this.

[AndyS]

Insane. You clip a player with a high stick and it's two minutes, intentional or not. You give him a bloody lip and it's another two minutes, intentional or not. You flip the puck out of play and it's a penaly, intentional or not. And so on. But you drop a player to the ice with a vicious hit and, oh, well, that's okay...as long as you didn't mean it.

That's a pretty good point.

[JackStraw]

@canoli

Neal is the liar, not Shanahan. Shanahan can only be considered really really stupid. So Neal didn't mean to hit Couturier when he jumped at him, but what was it, 42 seconds later? he goes down the ice and jumps at Girouxs head, which gets him a game. Ya, I can see the sense in this.

I'd say that the real liar here is the league, not Neal. It's the league's responsibility to set the rules, and to tell the players what will happen if they break the rules. They're doing a piss-poor job of it. Not that the league is without blame, but I have no real problem believing that he did something that he thought was more or less ok under the rules. The fact that the league is vague and inconsistent in defining and enforcing the rules is the problem. Neal had to wait 2 days to find out what exactly, if anything, he did wrong. That's absurd.

[pilldoc]

I was late for a meeting at work today so I was walking freally fast. I came around the corner and this lady was coming the other way. I jumped into her to try to avoid the collision. I hope she is alright.

Such a bullshite excuse. Look at the tape and see where his feet leave the ice. Neal's jump began 2 feet before impact. He had enough time to stop or turn out of the way of Couts. It was a deliberate attempt to injure.

Shanny, you can't be that stupid, can you?!?

yes.he can..he is only a puppet ..the puppet master is bettman...enough said

[canoli]

Neal is the liar, not Shanahan. Shanahan can only be considered really really stupid.

I guess. It was that "willing to accept Neal’s assertion..." bit. I figured he had to be b.s-ing about that. Who could be "willing to accept" that crap about jumping into Couturier to avoid hitting him? It makes no sense at all.

But if Shanahan wants to buy that line I guess that's his prerogative. It does indeed make him sound really really stupid.

[ruxpin]

LMAO @terp - well done. 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.

It certainly matters. But McKenzie was hammering away at it over like 10 tweets. While there were people asking him questions that I thought were really pertinent, he is correcting his time by hundredths of a second. ("it was actually .087 seconds, not .086") Just felt it was a little obsessive.

[B21]

I'd say that the real liar here is the league, not Neal. It's the league's responsibility to set the rules, and to tell the players what will happen if they break the rules. They're doing a piss-poor job of it. Not that the league is without blame, but I have no real problem believing that he did something that he thought was more or less ok under the rules. The fact that the league is vague and inconsistent in defining and enforcing the rules is the problem. Neal had to wait 2 days to find out what exactly, if anything, he did wrong. That's absurd.

I don't see why people are getting on Neal's argument. I don't like how the league also disclosed what his argument was. If a player wants to make his case in public, so bet it. But these are closed door hearings/calls.

I'll ask this...does anyone really think a player goes into a hearing (or call) and says, "Yeah - I am guilty. 10 games sound about right?" No. They will make whatever case they can (usually a BS one) to avoid or minimize their suspension. Neal did just that. Blame Shanny for "buying" it. Don't blame Neal for trying.

And I have a real problem with Shanny making Neal's argument public. Where you at Don Fehr?

[radoran]

I don't see why people are getting on Neal's argument. I don't like how the league also disclosed what his argument was. If a player wants to make his case in public, so bet it. But these are closed door hearings/calls.

I'll ask this...does anyone really think a player goes into a hearing (or call) and says, "Yeah - I am guilty. 10 games sound about right?" No. They will make whatever case they can (usually a BS one) to avoid or minimize their suspension. Neal did just that. Blame Shanny for "buying" it. Don't blame Neal for trying.

And I have a real problem with Shanny making Neal's argument public. Where you at Don Fehr?

Officer Barbranahan revealed Neal's "argument" because it was the basis for him getting no penalty whatsoever for being careless and reckless on the ice and deciding to commit a penalty by leaving his feet to make contact as a means of "trying to avoid it."

I do blame Barbranahan for buying this load of crap. I blame Neal for being a cheap, dirty player and lying about it.

[B21]

Officer Barbranahan revealed Neal's "argument" because it was the basis for him getting no penalty whatsoever for being careless and reckless on the ice and deciding to commit a penalty by leaving his feet to make contact as a means of "trying to avoid it."

I do blame Barbranahan for buying this load of crap. I blame Neal for being a cheap, dirty player and lying about it.

In other words, Shanahan bought the argument. My point.

Dale Hunter and the Caps don't think Backstrom should have been suspended for cross checking Peverly in the face. They think that was a legal hit. Is Dale Hunter a liar, too? By you rationale, he is. Hunter said Backstrom was defending himself (sounds familiar?). I'd be willing to bet Backstrom made the same argument during his call. Result? 1 game.

So tell me...Hunter and Backstrom lying, too?

[radoran]

In other words, Shanahan bought the argument. My point.

Dale Hunter and the Caps don't think Backstrom should have been suspended for cross checking Peverly in the face. They think that was a legal hit. Is Dale Hunter a liar, too? By you rationale, he is. Hunter said Backstrom was defending himself (sounds familiar?). I'd be willing to bet Backstrom made the same argument during his call. Result? 1 game.

So tell me...Hunter and Backstrom lying, too?

Does Backstrom "defending himself" sound familiar to a player who claims he was recklessly careening across the ice with no idea where any other player or the puck was during a game in the National Hockey League Stanley Cup Playoffs so he had to leave his feet to make contact in an "accidental" way?

No, not particularly. And we have no idea what Backstrom said to Shanahan because he didn't come out and say it was something smacked *** stupid like "an accident."

Hunter is spinning - which is often close to lying. As was Shanahan spinning when he "understood" why Weber shoved Zetterberg's face into the glass. Neither of them actually *did* the action and were then saying that what they *did* was something other than what *happened*.

I can "understand" why the player did something. I "understand" why Asham cross-checked Schenn (the stick to the face was, let's recall, also an "accident"). I "understand" why Neal took a cheap shot run at Couturier and Giroux. I "understand" why Crosby was physically attacking an opposing player from behind after the whistle before relying on his teammate to take a beating for him.

It doesn't make it right. It's still cheap, dirty play by players who should be above such childishness. And they deserve punishment for it.

At least the Pens organization wasn't as bad as Washington's.

[B21]

Does Backstrom "defending himself" sound familiar to a player who claims he was recklessly careening across the ice with no idea where any other player or the puck was during a game in the National Hockey League Stanley Cup Playoffs so he had to leave his feet to make contact in an "accidental" way?

No, not particularly. And we have no idea what Backstrom said to Shanahan because he didn't come out and say it was something smacked *** stupid like "an accident."

Hunter is spinning - which is often close to lying. As was Shanahan spinning when he "understood" why Weber shoved Zetterberg's face into the glass. Neither of them actually *did* the action and were then saying that what they *did* was something other than what *happened*.

I can "understand" why the player did something. I "understand" why Asham cross-checked Schenn (the stick to the face was, let's recall, also an "accident"). I "understand" why Neal took a cheap shot run at Couturier and Giroux. I "understand" why Crosby was physically attacking an opposing player from behind after the whistle before relying on his teammate to take a beating for him.

It doesn't make it right. It's still cheap, dirty play by players who should be above such childishness. And they deserve punishment for it.

At least the Pens organization wasn't as bad as Washington's.

Kinda getting away from my argument. Is Dale Hunter a liar?

My answer...probably not. Take most of these incidents in the playoffs or anything similar in the regular season and you don't get a lot of "mea cuplas". Once and a while but not often. Yet James Neal does something that numerous players and coaches have done before and he's a "liar". That kind of bias seems to be the only bias going on these days.

Anyone else does it they are making their case; trying to get a lesser suspension.

But a Penguin does it and he's a liar.

There's your bias for you.

[radoran]

I've never claimed bias and I have often decried those that have. You're arguing "bias" with somebody else.

My problem - clearly stated on this thread and others - is with inconsistent officiating and inconsistent application of the suspension rules. To claim bias I would need to feel that there are people involved who have animus against the Flyers and are acting on it (in the case of Colin Campbell, this is demonstrable). I don't believe that. I believe the people involved (Shanahan) should not be the one in charge of handling player discipline. I have given many, specific examples during the course of this thread and others involving many players, teams and situations.

You seem blindly focused on defending your team's player.

As for Hunter, in direct answer to your question I said he was "spinning - which is often close to lying." I then went on, in specific answer to your question, to say that since he didn't DO the actual act, he can't be LYING about what the person who DID the act was thinking when it happened. Hunter BELIEVES that Backstrom was "defending himself" and after the game where he was a specific target of every hit Boston could put on him, he probably was.

Nevertheless, in "defending himself" he committed a blatant stick foul for which he deserves suspension. You CANNOT ALLOW players do use their sticks like that. Period.

As for the Neal brouhaha, I laid out James Neal's version of events - that he "accidentally" hit another player on the ice because he apparently had no idea where anyone else or the puck was at the time and then deliberately charged him (left his feet) to "avoid contact" minutes before deliberately committing another infraction for which he was suspended - what is your opinion about that statement?

Kinda getting away from my argument, aren't you?