TP
Global Moderator
- Dec 2, 2008
- 50,458
- 23,768
They didn't sayNot surprising that he's got a hearing. Is it over the phone or in person?
pretty good chance he gets a game IMO. And I get it.
I’m trying to look at all of these plays objectively. People always come up with examples from the past that they think favor their situation to justify more or less games. Looking at this on its own, it seems justified that he gets a game.
I really don’t like it, but the awesome truth is...we have the defensive depth to survive it for a game.
Typically, if it's in person, they specify it's in-person. This means it's most likely a phone hearing. For someone with no history, and the fact that this was not an overtly intentional action, an in-person hearing seems extremely unlikely.
Dom had said a bit ago players can't be fined anymore because they don't get paid after a certain point. They would have warned him over the phone so he's definitely getting suspended one would surmise.
People bring up examples to try to predict what the punishment will be, which is normal.
Given that the DOPS has not shown one iota of consistency in their rulings from situation to situation, it’s pointless.
I believe the point of the “hearing” is so that the player is allowed to plead their case. I doubt it will make a difference.
I would rather have McAvoy miss Game 1 than 5 and the game last night in a Game 6. Silver lining of him getting a game is that it will disprove the notion that the NHL is biased in favor of the Bruins.
The saddest part are the pearl clutching “bruins fans” that think suspension is worthy
I believe the point of the “hearing” is so that the player is allowed to plead their case. I doubt it will make a difference.
I would rather have McAvoy miss Game 1 than 5 and the game last night in a Game 6. Silver lining of him getting a game is that it will disprove the notion that the NHL is biased in favor of the Bruins.
Chest first contact and Anderson’s head goes down. They have to use logic here. Oh and he was completely fineI think he should get a warning with no priors, but how is it not suspension worthy if they wind up going that way? Scott Stevens made a living off those hits, but there are rules in place (not that I agree with them)
I think he should get a warning with no priors, but how is it not suspension worthy if they wind up going that way? Scott Stevens made a living off those hits, but there are rules in place (not that I agree with them)
Chest first contact and Anderson’s head goes down. They have to use logic here. Oh and he was completely fine