Emery Rule

[King Knut]

If mr. Steinbeck is a poster on this board I'd like it if we heard from him.

Banning fighting on hockey will only result in more dives, more dangerous and chippy penalties and more injuries to star players.

As it is, the protection given to players like Crosby who persist in behaving like childish and dishonorable thugs is sickening and has resulted who knows how many injuries, blown calls, and manipulated outcomes.

Fighting makes me uncomfortable. What Emery did should t have happened, but lets put it in context... The ref got out of the way and Holtby dropping his gloves and started throwing punches too. In the end it simply wasn't that terrible of an incident.

This idea of banning fighting altogether is so short sighted and so pathetically misinformed that even though bettman and shero (who must have been adopted) want to do it to attract more fans, the resulting violence and I juries to stars and general crappy momentum killing style of play that results will end up chasing away more fans than fighting ever could.

Thy want to make the game safer? Put a penguin In The box for diving or slashing every once in while.

[doom88]

Knee jerk overreaction by people with a personal agenda.

[jammer2]

@King Knut  Don Cherry made the most sense when discussing this incident. A lot of people felt the official in question failed miserably at his job, but not protecting Holtby, who obviously was not a willing combatant (at the start anyways). Don pointed out, and I agree 100 % that the officials best play was to sit back and make sure there was not a 3rd man in on the goalie battle. Had a Capital come to the rescue of Holtby (effectively being the 3rd man in), the whole thing would have degenerated to a full scale bench clearing brawl. There is no two ways about it, had a Capital attacked Emery, all hell would have broken loose.....so, the official sitting back and thus getting a full look at the whole ice, actually averted mayhem. Of course, we would have all LOVED that...but it's his job to make sure that does not happen, so great move by the official, forget who it was!!

 

 I MISS the sheer mayhem of a bench clearing brawl....miss it real bad....F You Gary!!!

[hf101]

@King Knut

 

I think I'm missing something here.  IF Fighting becomes a game misconduct penalty at some point.... then, how is Crosby is to blame?  Isn't this more about player safety regarding head injuries from combatants being knocked out cold and hitting the ice with no protection?

 

Where are you getting your info, or stats, that show an increase in the number of dives by star players when there are not any fights in a game?  I've never seen a correlation between the two. 

 

I'm also not sure how putting a penguin in the penalty box affects the outcome of another game in the NHL... For example how does a non called dive or slashing penalty in a Penguins - Rangers game affect a Blues - Hawks game outcome or make that game safer?

 

Your rant is more about a personal dislike for Crosby and the Penguins than a rule that will eject a goalie from a game if say he is the aggressor in a fight in a similar manor to which Emery chose to assault Holtby.

[flyerrod]

Who or what is the judge of someone being the agressor? Does someone have a link to the actual rule?

[hf101]

@flyerrod

 

Tuesday there will be a meeting with GM's in Toronto.  I believe what is being proposed is a 10 game suspension for a goalie who leaves his area and instigates a fight.  The rule will be similar to leaving the Bench, I believe.

[aziz]

@flyerrod

 

46.2 Aggressor – The aggressor in an altercation shall be the player who continues to throw punches in an attempt to inflict punishment on his opponent who is in a defenseless position or who is an unwilling combatant.

A player must be deemed the aggressor when he has clearly won the fight but he continues throwing and landing punches in a further attempt to inflict punishment and/or injury on his opponent who is no longer in a position to defend himself.

A player who is deemed to be the aggressor of an altercation shall be assessed a major penalty for fighting and a game misconduct.

A player who is deemed to be the aggressor of an altercation will have this recorded as an aggressor of an altercation for statistical and suspension purposes.

A player who is deemed to be both the instigator and aggressor of an altercation shall be assessed an instigatingminor penalty, a major penalty for fighting, a ten-minutemisconduct (instigator) and a game misconduct penalty(aggressor).

[aziz]

Tuesday there will be a meeting with GM's in Toronto.  I believe what is being proposed is a 10 game suspension for a goalie who leaves his area and instigates a fight.  The rule will be similar to leaving the Bench, I believe.

 

this is crazy to me, to be honest.  not, like, eating an active hornets' nest crazy, but still.  what emery did was embarrassing, yes, but it wasn't overly dangerous.  it isn't something that has any particular effect on anything, there is no reason for that kind of punishment.  seems to me, a game misconduct is all that is warranted, and that is currently what is handed out.

 

i mean, 10 games.  the vast vast majority of headshot suspensions are less than half that.  crazy.

[B21]

@King Knut

 

I think I'm missing something here.  IF Fighting becomes a game misconduct penalty at some point.... then, how is Crosby is to blame?  Isn't this more about player safety regarding head injuries from combatants being knocked out cold and hitting the ice with no protection?

 

Where are you getting your info, or stats, that show an increase in the number of dives by star players when there are not any fights in a game?  I've never seen a correlation between the two. 

 

I'm also not sure how putting a penguin in the penalty box affects the outcome of another game in the NHL... For example how does a non called dive or slashing penalty in a Penguins - Rangers game affect a Blues - Hawks game outcome or make that game safer?

 

Your rant is more about a personal dislike for Crosby and the Penguins than a rule that will eject a goalie from a game if say he is the aggressor in a fight in a similar manor to which Emery chose to assault Holtby.

 

Thank you.

[B21]

@King Knut  Don Cherry made the most sense when discussing this incident. A lot of people felt the official in question failed miserably at his job, but not protecting Holtby, who obviously was not a willing combatant (at the start anyways). Don pointed out, and I agree 100 % that the officials best play was to sit back and make sure there was not a 3rd man in on the goalie battle. Had a Capital come to the rescue of Holtby (effectively being the 3rd man in), the whole thing would have degenerated to a full scale bench clearing brawl. There is no two ways about it, had a Capital attacked Emery, all hell would have broken loose.....so, the official sitting back and thus getting a full look at the whole ice, actually averted mayhem. Of course, we would have all LOVED that...but it's his job to make sure that does not happen, so great move by the official, forget who it was!!

 

 I MISS the sheer mayhem of a bench clearing brawl....miss it real bad....F You Gary!!!

 

That's a great point.  If one of the Caps got a hold of Emery before or just after Emery got to Holtby then it would have been mayhem - likely emptying the benches (think Pens/Isles/Goddard/Putz from the Islanders).

[aziz]

That's a great point.  If one of the Caps got a hold of Emery before or just after Emery got to Holtby then it would have been mayhem - likely emptying the benches (think Pens/Isles/Goddard/Putz from the Islanders).

 

why?  why wouldn't it have been like when emery and biron went, and then peters stepped in?  benches didn't clear then, as far as i can remember.

 

there is no powder keg waiting to explode here.  this stuff happens sometimes. 

[hf101]

this is crazy to me, to be honest.  not, like, eating an active hornets' nest crazy, but still.  what emery did was embarrassing, yes, but it wasn't overly dangerous.  it isn't something that has any particular effect on anything, there is no reason for that kind of punishment.  seems to me, a game misconduct is all that is warranted, and that is currently what is handed out.

 

i mean, 10 games.  the vast vast majority of headshot suspensions are less than half that.  crazy.

 

One could also say that 10 games for leaving the bench is too much also.  Maybe all instigator penalties should be given a one game misconduct?  

 

If the Rule passes with punishment similar to leaving the bench, it should be rather clear that a goalie doesn't put his team at a disadvantage by skating down to the other end of the ice to initiate a fight.  However if both goalies meet between the blue lines - no extra foul, just a 5min major. each.

[aziz]

One could also say that 10 games for leaving the bench is too much also.

 

one can at least see why they have a heavy consequence for leaving the bench in place, though.  they wanted to stop bench clearing brawls, 40 guys on the ice punching each other in the face, way way way beyond anything the officials can even pretend to control.  so they said, "hey, anyone that leaves the bench, 10 games, don't freaking do it."

 

a goalie fight with an instigator?  how does that threaten the stability of the universe enough to warrant 10 games??  

[B21]

why?  why wouldn't it have been like when emery and biron went, and then peters stepped in?  benches didn't clear then, as far as i can remember.

 

there is no powder keg waiting to explode here.  this stuff happens sometimes. 

 

Your right.  Maybe benches clearing is a bit much.  But I think things would have gotten uglier.

[Phlyer1]

If the gloves must stay on the sticks will come up.

[hf101]

a goalie fight with an instigator? how does that threaten the stability of the universe enough to warrant 10 games??

 

I believe Emery received an instigator penalty in his bout with Holtby.  That is all part of the reason why Emery didn't get fined, or suspended..... because he needs 3 instigators before given a game misconduct. 

 

I'm in agreement with you that 10 games is too much.  That play though had all of the ugliness as a blemish on the NHL similar to a player leaving the bench though.  Clarksons leaving the bench suspension was too much also, imo.

 

I'd prefer the penalty be a game misconduct given as an instigator,  however to have any merit the instigator rule would have to change for all players on the ice...meaning  a suspended game for being an instigator in a fight.  Then if they wanted, ... there could be an option for increasing # of games suspended for increased occurrences over the season.

 

IF the league ever really wanted to get tough on fighting without imposing a negatively received ban it just starts handing out more instigator penalties. 

[flyerrod]

@flyerrod

 

Tuesday there will be a meeting with GM's in Toronto.  I believe what is being proposed is a 10 game suspension for a goalie who leaves his area and instigates a fight.  The rule will be similar to leaving the Bench, I believe.

First, I am not for Emery dragging an unwilling Holtby into a fight but I don't want to see a goalie get a 10 game suspension for crossing center ice while going to have a discussion with someone. For instance, Bryzgalov might not be afraid to fight but the trip skating from one end to the other without his walker might be a little daunting.......

[King Knut]

Crosby isn't to blame for the potential increase in penalties for fighting, but he is the emblem used by Bettman to justify it. 

 

"Where are you getting your info, or stats, that show an increase in the number of dives by star players when there are not any fights in a game?  I've never seen a correlation between the two."

 

Who said that?  If I said that my phone auto corrected it or I mistyped.  My assertion is that the opposite would be happening, but not necessarily in single games, but over the long haul as well.

 

And If you want someone who agrees with me read the open letter from Former player and referee Paul Stewart who thinks diving is ruining the game and making it more dangerous for everyone.  He blames the refs for not calling it and he asserts that in his day players didn't do it as much because they knew they'd get beaten up if they tried it.  It's a good read.  He talks about having to shut down a few divers in his time... Claude Lemieux seemed to have amused him the most.

 

"I'm also not sure how putting a penguin in the penalty box affects the outcome of another game in the NHL... For example how does a non called dive or slashing penalty in a Penguins - Rangers game affect a Blues - Hawks game outcome or make that game safer?"

 

Not on the same night...  who's saying that?  I'm saying that the way the Penguins have been acting and the calls they have been getting (or the calls that haven't been made on them) for 6 or 7 years now has become emblematic of the way the game is called.  Bettman and the league invested a ton in the penguins and needed them to look like winners and a power house.  The way they play and the calls they get have now become the goal and the norm.  That's normal.  Think about it like this, the Devils brought the trap the the NHL in '94-'95 and by '98 everyone was trying it and that lead to clutch and grab hockey.

 

The same is true now.  YOu adapt or you die.  coaches and players saw what was being encouraged and what was succeeding in the new NHL and it was the Penguins who were getting away with crap previous generations of hockey wouldn't have been able to.

 

If the league had called them on their bull **** earlier in this tenure, they would have become a respectable good team and the league could have grown into a positive "new nhl".

 

I do hate Crosby, but for these specific reasons.  This isn't pure jealousy on my part.  I do not like the way he and his team have garnered success.

In contrast:   I liked Lemieux.  I respected those Penguins teams.  I was mildly jealous of them, but they were good and I rooted for them in each of their respective finals.

 

 

 

 

 

@King Knut

 

I think I'm missing something here.  IF Fighting becomes a game misconduct penalty at some point.... then, how is Crosby is to blame?  Isn't this more about player safety regarding head injuries from combatants being knocked out cold and hitting the ice with no protection?

 

Where are you getting your info, or stats, that show an increase in the number of dives by star players when there are not any fights in a game?  I've never seen a correlation between the two. 

 

I'm also not sure how putting a penguin in the penalty box affects the outcome of another game in the NHL... For example how does a non called dive or slashing penalty in a Penguins - Rangers game affect a Blues - Hawks game outcome or make that game safer?

 

Your rant is more about a personal dislike for Crosby and the Penguins than a rule that will eject a goalie from a game if say he is the aggressor in a fight in a similar manor to which Emery chose to assault Holtby.

Edited November 11, 2013 by King Knut

[King Knut]

And therein lies the problem.

 

It's all messed up and inside out... it's feeling really useless anymore.

 

i mean, 10 games. the vast vast majority of headshot suspensions are less than half that. crazy.

[aziz]

I'd prefer the penalty be a game misconduct given as an instigator,  however to have any merit the instigator rule would have to change for all players on the ice...meaning  a suspended game for being an instigator in a fight.

 

well, it was already a game misconduct for being the aggressor.  i'd be ok with changing it so an aggressor call carried an automatic 1 game suspension.  i mean, that was the really ugly thing, right, that holtby obviously wanted nothing to do with it, but emery wailed on him anyway.

[The Quigster]

Maybe Emery felt that two of his teamates got the short end of the stick elsewhere on the ice,so revenge being what it is,he acted. I'm sure Holtby is aware that once in a while things get physical. Does anybody care about the Ref not doing his job?

[aziz]

Does anybody care about the Ref not doing his job?

 

the ref did his job.  what are you talking about?

[The Quigster]

Do you mean the spectator in the striped shirt observing the "Debacle"? I wonder what the Ref would have done if Emery was choking Holtby to death? CPR?

[King Knut]

Oops sloppy thumbs. Repost below

well, it was already a game misconduct for being the aggressor. i'd be ok with changing it so an aggressor call carried an automatic 1 game suspension. i mean, that was the really ugly thing, right, that holtby obviously wanted nothing to do with it, but emery wailed on him anyway.

Edited November 12, 2013 by King Knut

[King Knut]

Stop misrepresenting it.

You're leaving out the part where Holtby gave in and started throwing punches right from the start once he realized he wasn't talking ray out of it.

Ou keep describing it (just like Timmy p did) a if ray skated up up and just started beating a begging Holtby who was already on his knees.

10 games is so far beyond ridiculous.

I don't even know what to say. I think 1 game is too much. I think the idea of penalizing a guy for making a habit if it is probably okay. But only goalies.

If the refs were doing their jobs, I'd feel differently about fighting, but they're just not and as a result fighting is the only thing that can sav hockey. It needs to be refined and used more appropriately right now, not abandoned.

And for the love of god if a goalie has to be the one to do it, what's wrong with that?

Ray and Holtby isn't an example if appropriate fighting, I'm not saying that. But it could be feasible. It's happened in the past.

well, it was already a game misconduct for being the aggressor. i'd be ok with changing it so an aggressor call carried an automatic 1 game suspension. i mean, that was the really ugly thing, right, that holtby obviously wanted nothing to do with it, but emery wailed on him anyway.