Confirmed with Link: Lapierre suspended for 5 games for hit on Boyle

[sr228]

Wasn't sure where to put this but:

Renaud Lavoie @LavoieRenaud
In person hearing for Maxim Lapierre. Hearing will happen in NY. Don't know when yet. He has the option to refuse and do it on the phone.

I wasn't sure if they would request an in person hearing, I'm glad they did though all it means is they have the option to suspend him for 5+ games.

Click to read more...

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Wasn't sure where to put this but:



I wasn't sure if they would request an in person hearing, I'm glad they did though all it means is they have the option to suspend him for 5+ games.

Hes been a grey area guy for years who finally went over the line. I expect 3-5.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Lapierre suspension for hit on Boyle

From Blues beat writer,

League's request for an in-person hearing w/ Lapierre means it will be a minimum 6-game suspension. Phone calls used for 1-5 gms. #stlblues

https://twitter.com/jprutherford/status/390492449946075136

 

[Gilligans Island]

Hes been a grey area guy for years who finally went over the line. I expect 3-5.

minimum 6 games...

Jeremy Rutherford
@jprutherford League's request for an in-person hearing w/ Lapierre means it will be a minimum 6-game suspension. Phone calls used for 1-5 gms. #stlblues

 

[sr228]

minimum 6 games...

While an in person hearing usually means 5+ games, it's doesn't guarantee it, it just gives the DoPS the option.

This is info from Kaleta's hearing:

offered the opportunity for an in-person hearing as required by provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement for any suspension that can exceed five games.

 

[sharski]

i thought in-person hearings only meant that the league was considering giving a 5+ game suspension, not that it committed to a specific minimum length of 5 yet

 

[LadyStanley]

Considering what Kaleta got for his hit (10 games, but repeat offender), this one looks even worse.

So, although Lapierre's not a "repeat offender", he does have a history, I can't see him getting less than 10.




Small fine print at the bottom of the page: any suspension longer than six games can be appealed. (CBA note -- there's an independent arbitrator that can invoked to handle any appeal.)

 

[slocal]

i thought in-person hearings only meant that the league was considering giving a 5+ game suspension, not that it committed to a specific minimum length of 5 yet

Phone hearings allow a 1-5 game suspension. In-person hearings allow 6+. There is a bit a precedent that if you're going in, you'll get the minimum. I can only remember Torres having a weird result from an in-person.

 

[sr228]

I replied in the other thread but while an in person hearing usually results in 5+ games it doesn't mean it will be, it simply gives the DoPS the option.

offered the opportunity for an in-person hearing as required by provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement for any suspension that can exceed five games.

 

[LeftHeartInSF]

Considering what Kaleta got for his hit (10 games, but repeat offender), this one looks even worse.

My guess is 7-8 because his last suspension was outside the repeat offender time period. If Shanaban has any nuts though, he will set a precedent and make it 10+

 

[slocal]

My guess is 7-8 because his last suspension was outside the repeat offender time period. If Shanaban has any nuts though, he will set a precedent and make it 10+

Shanahan has considered the past of a player, outside the 18 months, when handing out suspension lengths (Sutton on Landeskog).

 

[LadyStanley]

My guess is 7-8 because his last suspension was outside the repeat offender time period. If Shanaban has any nuts though, he will set a precedent and make it 10+

All that means is that the $$s are calculated on a per day basis or per game basis.

But the guy has a history, so he may get the book thrown at him.

 

[Mattb124]

This was a dumb hit, but it was more a bad outcome on a marginally dangerous hit than a flagrantly stupid and extremely dangerous hit. Kaleta's hit was more premeditated and was directed at the head. If Boyle's chin didn't catch the dasher, we wouldn't be talking suspension IMO. I would be surprised if he gets more than 5 games.

 

[sr228]

Nick Cotsonika sums it up nicely:

Nick Cotsonika @cotsonika
Lapierre case is interesting. He doesn't have much of a rap sheet officially, but has long history of borderline hits from behind. (1)

Nick Cotsonika @cotsonika
This wasn't the worst boarding incident, but it was an illegal play (suspension) and Boyle was hurt (longer sentence). (2)

Nick Cotsonika @cotsonika
Remember, request for in-person hearing means only that NHL reserves the right to suspend for six or more. Doesn't mean it will. (3)

Nick Cotsonika @cotsonika
Lapierre can waive his right to in-person hearing, but if NHL is in the 4-6 game neighborhood, it will go this route. (4)

Nick Cotsonika @cotsonika
Last thought: Part of point of in-person hearing is to educate. Lapierre could make his case; NHL could go over his history with him, too.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/16/lapierre-gets-in-person-hearing-friday/
Hearing scheduled Friday.



http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=687039

The following grounds are being considered for supplemental discipline: boarding. However, the Department of Player Safety retains the right to make adjustments to the infraction upon review.

(Reading between the lines... if the chirping/threats reported by the players are taken into consideration, "intent to injure" might get added, which could really increase the suspension length.)

 

[Gilligans Island]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/16/lapierre-gets-in-person-hearing-friday/
Hearing scheduled Friday.



http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=687039


(Reading between the lines... if the chirping/threats reported by the players are taken into consideration, "intent to injure" might get added, which could really increase the suspension length.)

It was a savvy move by Couture (and to a lesser extent, Pavelski) to spill the beans about Lappy's yapping. Now it's in the news/blogs. I'm sure that smack talk happens every game but they chose to out Lappy in hopes it results in a longer suspension. WE'll see.

 

[Arrch]

It was a savvy move by Couture (and to a lesser extent, Pavelski) to spill the beans about Lappy's yapping. Now it's in the news/blogs. I'm sure that smack talk happens every game but they chose to out Lappy in hopes it results in a longer suspension. WE'll see.

If it works, that's some of the best gamesmanship I've ever seen.

 

[Gilligans Island]

If it works, that's some of the best gamesmanship I've ever seen.

Obviously, I'm speculating but I'm sure there's some code among the players to not share certain things publicly. You could look at Couture's comments as him ratting on Lappy but I'm willing to bet, other players will shrug it off because it's Lappy, Boyle and the severity of the hit.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.csnbayarea.com/sharks/maxim-lapierre-we-find-defendant-incredibly-guilty

Ratto rants on hit and finds the "defendant incredibly guilty"

 

[SactoShark]

Obviously, I'm speculating but I'm sure there's some code among the players to not share certain things publicly. You could look at Couture's comments as him ratting on Lappy but I'm willing to bet, other players will shrug it off because it's Lappy, Boyle and the severity of the hit.

Yeah, that's normally against the code. But all formalities get thrown out the window when you make good on a threat and put a guy on a stretcher.

 

[Hatrick Marleau]

I'm glad we didn't have Clowe last night. He would have gone crazy. I liked what Tmac said about the PP being the toughness of the team.

 

[anthonyyy]

I'm glad we didn't have Clowe last night. He would have gone crazy. I liked what Tmac said about the PP being the toughness of the team.

Clowe would have destroyed Backes/Stewart, but I'm glad the PP responded. That's exactly how you win in the playoffs.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I'm glad we didn't have Clowe last night. He would have gone crazy. I liked what Tmac said about the PP being the toughness of the team.

He said it was a form of toughness. This is a tough team physically and mentally

 

[lsx]

Although personal feelings really shouldn't have much to do with sentencing, I'm willing to bet that maxim is exactly the kind of player that a tough guy fighter like shanahan hates.

 

[Squeeven]

I knew he'd have an in person hearing, that's no surprise at all. I think he'll get 10+ games to be honest. But then again like I said in another thread Shanahans suspensions are more random than the lottery lol. I don't think he'll get any less than 6 games though.

Also I doubt anyone knows this and I don't expect anyone to fully know the answer to this but I'll ask anyway. Does anyone have any idea as to what is actually said in these hearings? In person or over the phone? Like I'm kinda curious as to how they actually discuss it with the player and the manner in which they discuss it with the player. As much as I'd like to picture Shanahan *****ing out pieces of **** like Kaleta and Lapierre, I'm sure that's pretty far from how it goes down. Anyone have any idea at all? I'd be very curious to know.