News Article: Eye for and Eye Discipline for head shots/suspensions

[deeshamrock]

This is an article from Puck Daddy with a chart of the illegal infractions (16 already for Oct) that Shanny has ruled on.
It presents the theory (which I support) of an eye for an eye. Losing John Scott for 10 or 80 games won't affect the Sabres but losing the man he hit, Erikkson to a head injury for any length of time would affect the Bruins as he is a top player they depend on to contribute to their success.

Putting it closer to home, What if Scott had done that to the a top Kings player? What if the Kings lost Richards, Carter or Kopitar, or Doughty for an extended period of time? It would be a far greater loss than the length of Scott's suspension.

The article/chart suggests that a player of equal value to the one injured from the team that caused the infraction would miss as many games.
Then maybe those enforcers would think twice before they act, esp the repeat offenders.

From the below artilcle
... using this season as an example: The San Jose Sharks lose Logan Couture because Brad Stuart concussed Rick Nash;

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...plemental-discipline-look-195223979--nhl.html

Click to read more...

 

[damacles1156]

NHLPA would never agree to that. So that kills the idea.

Also I doubt GM's would sign on for that. (example)The Kings would not want to lose Kopitar or Richards for a hit Nolan caused.

One sure fire way to stop stupid hits, is make it financially stupid for enforcers to do it.

Heavy fines, I am talking 500k plus, That's half or more of these guys salaries.

They will think twice.

 

[deeshamrock]

NHLPA would never agree to that. So that kills the idea.

Agree, but maybe if the league puts pressure on the NHLPA, then the NHLPA would have to address the issue.
Because it's really getting out of hand. 16 suspensions and we're not out of Oct yet.
And players like Scott serves only one purpose, and suspending them for 10 games won't change anything. They'll be back in Shanny's court and some other team will lose a key player.
Something has to change..

 

[damacles1156]

Agree, but maybe if the league puts pressure on the NHLPA, then the NHLPA would have to address the issue.
Because it's really getting out of hand. 16 suspensions and we're not out of Oct yet.
And players like Scott serves only one purpose, and suspending them for 10 games won't change anything. They'll be back in Shanny's court and some other team will lose a key player.
Something has to change..

I think of it this way, am I ok as fan losing Kopitar/Richards/Carter. Because of a stupid hit Clifford/Fraser/Nolan made ?

Hell no!!!, and I bet 30 GM's/200+ NHL players are not ok with that as well.

The league just needs to hand out more severe punishment, Refs need to handle games better too.

Need to start hitting these guys where it really hurts, the pocket book.

You start screwing with these guys money (seriously) and they will knock this shi$%6 off.

 

[tsanuri]

But even getting tougher punishment is held up by the NHLPA. I can't seem to find it but I remember reading that the league wanted stiffer fines during the lockout but the NHLPA stood in the way.

Part of it is that things are being looked at much closer and suspensions are being handed down on things in the past they wouldn't have. Which will raise the number but also as players adjust to it then the plays that are causing it should stop.

 

[The Butcher]

I think they just really need to find a way to start kicking these people out of the NHL. Pure and simple.

 

[Papa Mocha 15]

Agree, but maybe if the league puts pressure on the NHLPA, then the NHLPA would have to address the issue.
Because it's really getting out of hand. 16 suspensions and we're not out of Oct yet.
And players like Scott serves only one purpose, and suspending them for 10 games won't change anything. They'll be back in Shanny's court and some other team will lose a key player.
Something has to change..

I think you might be mixing roles between enforcer and dirty hitters. Scott does not have the same history of questionable hits like Torres or Cooke and has only been suspended one other time (recently for what happened against Toronto when he tried to fight Kessel). He has a role for a team that chooses to employee enforcers.

Also, I don't know if the league would have any success in placing pressure on the NHLPA because the NHLPA acts a check and balance. The GM's would need to propose a rule change to allow the penalties to stiffen and it would need to be accepted by all parties.

 

[Muzzinga]

Seems dumb. The team should just lose a roster spot while the suspension is being served. So if Scott gets a 10 game suspension, Sabres can only dress 17 skaters for the next 10 games

 

[tsanuri]

Seems dumb. The team should just lose a roster spot while the suspension is being served. So if Scott gets a 10 game suspension, Sabres can only dress 17 skaters for the next 10 games

That is not a good idea. It would lead to more injuries from just the amount of playing time.

 

[kingsholygrail]

How is that fair to a Kopitar, a Richards or a Carter? They didn't make the hit.

 

[Trolfoli]

There is a solution



Not pretty, but for guys like Torres take head shots on them... or target the offending teams top line/goalie....

 

[Dawdler]

There is a solution



Not pretty, but for guys like Torres take head shots on them... or target the offending teams top line/goalie....

not a solution at all, Johnson pretty much ended Beukeboom's career, as much as some guys like Torres deserve something like that you never want to see that happen, especially if one of your guys is the victim or aggressor.

Heck, I still despise bertuzzi for what he did to Moore, deserved or not and the fact that POS is still playing still irks me to this day.

 

[Muzzinga]

That is not a good idea. It would lead to more injuries from just the amount of playing time.

Exactly, which would immediately cut out the reckless hits. Maybe limit it to like 2 games max though, or just 1 would be a good enough punishment for the team

 

[kingsfan]

I get the idea behind it, but suspending one guy for what another did is just wrong on so many levels.

If Dan Carcillo did something wrong, we lose Kopitar? That's just dumb. Kopitar can be sitting on the bench and then he's suspended for doing nothing. Imagine if our justice system was like this? Your brother got caught peddling meth, so you go to jail for three years?

An idea I'd like to see explored is to something Jay McKee (the retired fomer NHL defenseman) said the other day. It's along with something I've thought for a while. I've said that the NHLPA should hand out the punishment. McKee took it further and said that a select committee of NHL players who have played at least 500 NHL games should be able to decide on the league of the suspension.

As long as they leave an out for the NHL to appeal or overrule the suspension if it's deemed to light (not if it's deemed to heavy), this could work. Put rules in that any player on the committee who also plays with the offender (in this case if any Sabres were on the panel, then they couldn't rule on Scott's suspension) and they can hand out the suspension.

The NHLPA is responsible to both players (the hurt and the offender) so they are accountable to both, and because they are handing down the ruling, they aren't inclined to appeal any suspension and try to defend their member (Scott in this case).

The players play the game. They know what is fair. they know when a player could/couldn't hold up. And, unlike Shanaban, theya ren't worried about finding that sweet spot for a number of games where they are appeasing everyone without pissing off the NHLPA or the team.

 

[BigKing]

Insanely effing stupid.

Anyways, a couple freak eye injuries and now we have mandatory visors. NHL and bleeding hearts in the hockey media think there is a fighting problem so you get the instigator, third-man-in and all the other rules used to curb fighting.

Now players skate around with their heads down because they are strapped to the gills in Kevlar pads and visors while thinking that nobody will hit them because you get suspended now for hitting too hard (Gryba on Eller). You negate the enforcer with roster reductions and excessive penalties so you get two issues: punks like Cooke, Kaleta and Lapierre who do not have the fear of God instilled in them anymore along with the few enforcers who are left having carte blanche on other team's skill players because most teams don't carry a deterrent anymore.

This wasn't a problem before, so why now? There are fewer enforcers in the league so hyping the Scott hit and tying it to goons is ridiculous. You used to need to know who you were on the ice with and to keep your head up...the Scott hit would not have been a big deal even five years ago but now it seems like we need to shut down the NHL until a solution is figured out to stop hard hits. The wimps are getting what they want with phasing out fighting and enforcers but now they are having to deal with the consequences of that.

The only "solution" is to ban hitting. It's effing hockey.

We used to have "eye for an eye" but a bunch of suits and Drydenites thought that guys in the heat of battle will stop and think about money they may lose from suspensions. Well...how is that working out?

 

[Omni Owl]

Just stop the vicious headshots and we can work from there. I'm still miffed about Bergenheim's hit on Richard's dome (even though he seems to be paying for it now).