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

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
47,387
15,720
Bay Area
Except that Lapierre hasn't shown he wants to repent. Being sorry that Boyle is in the hospital doesn't mean that he's gonna stop head-hunting. I'll believe he wants to change when he says he wants to change, like Cooke and Torres. Lapierre hasn't said anything of the sort.
 

SJSquishy

Registered User
Oct 24, 2011
55
0
Hoping he's ok and has a speedy recovery, obviously.

Though I don't think this in this particular case, I'd like to see the NHL take a eye for any eye approach on reckless play:

You injure someone through recklessness and you're out as long as that player is out. You end their career, we end your career.

Jeff Beukeboom comes to mind. Matt Johnson's career should have ended that night. There's no logical reason to ever let him play again. Ever.

Matt Cooke comes to mind. The night Marc Savards' career came to an end, so should have his. Instead he's got a multi-million dollar contract.

It's a rough game and accidents happen, but I'm not referring to those. Dirty plays that end a career should end the instigator's career as well.

Period. Why it isn't handled like this is beyond me.
 

Gene Parmesan

Dedicated to babies who came feet first
Jul 23, 2009
84,758
2,406
California
Hoping he's ok and has a speedy recovery, obviously.

Though I don't think this in this particular case, I'd like to see the NHL take a eye for any eye approach on reckless play:

You injure someone through recklessness and you're out as long as that player is out. You end their career, we end your career.

Jeff Beukeboom comes to mind. Matt Johnson's career should have ended that night. There's no logical reason to ever let him play again. Ever.

Matt Cooke comes to mind. The night Marc Savards' career came to an end, so should have his. Instead he's got a multi-million dollar contract.

It's a rough game and accidents happen, but I'm not referring to those. Dirty plays that end a career should end the instigator's career as well.

Period. Why it isn't handled like this is beyond me.

At the time of Cooke/Savard that play was legal even if its a chicken**** play. Savard came back from his injury way too early as well.

Matt Johnson was the definition of a goon and that was one of the worst sucker punches ever.

Stiffer fines are what the NHL needs to implement.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
15,717
4,975
Except that Lapierre hasn't shown he wants to repent. Being sorry that Boyle is in the hospital doesn't mean that he's gonna stop head-hunting. I'll believe he wants to change when he says he wants to change, like Cooke and Torres. Lapierre hasn't said anything of the sort.

Even on this point...

Torres has played, what, 40-50 games since he declared himself a "changed man"? And Cooke maybe 80-100 (with that whole questionable bit of injuring Karlsson in-what-might-have-been-an-accident/coincidence-but-may-have-also-not-been).

They both have a lot more to prove.
 

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
47,387
15,720
Bay Area
Even on this point...

Torres has played, what, 40-50 games since he declared himself a "changed man"? And Cooke maybe 80-100 (with that whole questionable bit of injuring Karlsson in-what-might-have-been-an-accident/coincidence-but-may-have-also-not-been).

They both have a lot more to prove.

They definitely have more to prove. But they've shown willingness and desire to change, and have done a solid job of it on the ice. Plus, both are pretty solid hockey players, hitting aside (particularly Torres).
 

SJeasy

Registered User
Feb 3, 2005
12,538
3
San Jose
At the time of Cooke/Savard that play was legal even if its a chicken**** play. Savard came back from his injury way too early as well.

Matt Johnson was the definition of a goon and that was one of the worst sucker punches ever.

Stiffer fines are what the NHL needs to implement.

Savard was a flying elbow which was illegal at the time. The play would be even more illegal now.

Just a bit on Lapierre and his sincerity. One game had him diving three times, receiving a warning on the first two. It was a playoff game and the third occurrence was called. It drew enough league attention to send the same ref to the next game involving the same two opponents which is almost never done. Very clearly a message to Lapierre. The second issue was his relationship with another ref. The ref warned him in a friendly and confidential way not to embarrass him again with another dive after getting a pass in the prior game (not a smart move by a marginal ref). Lapierre rewarded the ref by outing him to the league. My take is that Lapierre will never get any love from the stripes, likely persona non grata with them leaguewide.
 

Gene Parmesan

Dedicated to babies who came feet first
Jul 23, 2009
84,758
2,406
California
Savard was a flying elbow which was illegal at the time. The play would be even more illegal now.

Just a bit on Lapierre and his sincerity. One game had him diving three times, receiving a warning on the first two. It was a playoff game and the third occurrence was called. It drew enough league attention to send the same ref to the next game involving the same two opponents which is almost never done. Very clearly a message to Lapierre. The second issue was his relationship with another ref. The ref warned him in a friendly and confidential way not to embarrass him again with another dive after getting a pass in the prior game (not a smart move by a marginal ref). Lapierre rewarded the ref by outing him to the league. My take is that Lapierre will never get any love from the stripes, likely persona non grata with them leaguewide.

From what I recall there was no penalty on the play and Campbell deemed it a clean hit since they didn't think it was an elbow..it was a classic chicken wing move that Messier and Brashear got away with a few times. See Messier/Modano and Brashear/Blair Betts. Its a greasy play that has no place in hockey.

.
 
Last edited:

SJeasy

Registered User
Feb 3, 2005
12,538
3
San Jose
From what I recall there was no penalty on the play and Campbell deemed it a clean hit since they didn't think it was an elbow..it was a classic chicken wing move that Messier and Brashear got away with a few times. See Messier/Modano and Brashear/Blair Betts. Its a greasy play that has no place in hockey.

.

It was illegal by the rules whether it was called or not. And yes, there have been quite a few refs who ignored the issue. Campbell was one of the worst assessors of legal vs illegal and one of the roadblocks to making headshots illegal.

For all those who complain of Shanahan, Campbell was far, far worse.
 

Gene Parmesan

Dedicated to babies who came feet first
Jul 23, 2009
84,758
2,406
California
It was illegal by the rules whether it was called or not. And yes, there have been quite a few refs who ignored the issue. Campbell was one of the worst assessors of legal vs illegal and one of the roadblocks to making headshots illegal.

For all those who complain of Shanahan, Campbell was far, far worse.

I agree with that assessment. Whats really bad is none of them were called penalties.
 

teal

Registered User
Aug 8, 2006
789
139
Savard was a flying elbow which was illegal at the time. The play would be even more illegal now.

Just a bit on Lapierre and his sincerity. One game had him diving three times, receiving a warning on the first two. It was a playoff game and the third occurrence was called. It drew enough league attention to send the same ref to the next game involving the same two opponents which is almost never done. Very clearly a message to Lapierre. The second issue was his relationship with another ref. The ref warned him in a friendly and confidential way not to embarrass him again with another dive after getting a pass in the prior game (not a smart move by a marginal ref). Lapierre rewarded the ref by outing him to the league. My take is that Lapierre will never get any love from the stripes, likely persona non grata with them leaguewide.

wow, um... what? where do you even find out this kind of information?
 

lunarbrian

Registered User
Jan 28, 2009
104
9
I agree with that assessment. Whats really bad is none of them were called penalties.

That is still happening. Jamie Baker discussed the Lapierre hit on Nichol on KNBR yesterday. I went back and watched the video and was amazed that Chris Lee was looking right at the play and no penalty was called. On the Boyle hit, Furlatt was looking right at the play and never raised his arm for a penalty until everybody was already over the blue line and Desi was hunting Lapierre.
 

CrypTic

Registered User
Oct 2, 2013
5,069
81
When I read the CBA, it seems to allow the NHL to consider all prior supplementary discipline (and doesn't matter if it was in the last 18 months) as well as all violations of league rules (not just those that received supplementary discipline). It seems to give more weight to prior suspensions (or fines) but it doesn't seem to limit it to those infractions. And the only place I can find a time limit (18 months) is in the rules concerning fines (18.7(e)) and forfeiture of compensation (18.15), so it seems irrelevant when it comes to deciding a suspension's length (except that prior fines that season must be considered in determining the length of a suspension).

Here's the relevant passage:

18.2 General. It is the parties' intention to impose Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice
Conduct in a swift, effective and consistent manner with respect to conduct proscribed by
League Playing Rules, including the use of excessive and unnecessary force and reckless acts
resulting in injury. In doing so, however, the parties do not intend to alter the basic fabric of our
game. In deciding on Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct, the following factors will
be taken into account:
(a) The type of conduct involved: conduct in violation of League Playing Rules, and
whether the conduct is intentional or reckless, and involves the use of excessive and unnecessary
force. Players are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
(b) Injury to the opposing Player(s) involved in the incident.
(c) The status of the offender and, specifically, whether the Player has a history of
being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct. Players who repeatedly violate
League Playing Rules will be more severely punished for each new violation.

(d) The situation of the game in which the incident occurred, for example: late in the
game, lopsided score, prior events in the game.
(e) Such other factors as may be appropriate in the circumstances.

I believe that the bolded part is a change from the prior CBA.

I'm not sure I'm interpreting the CBA correctly but I hope I am. I hope that they can consider all Lapierre's past hits. Does anyone here know?
 

Gene Parmesan

Dedicated to babies who came feet first
Jul 23, 2009
84,758
2,406
California
That is still happening. Jamie Baker discussed the Lapierre hit on Nichol on KNBR yesterday. I went back and watched the video and was amazed that Chris Lee was looking right at the play and no penalty was called. On the Boyle hit, Furlatt was looking right at the play and never raised his arm for a penalty until everybody was already over the blue line and Desi was hunting Lapierre.

Chris Lee is horrible at game control. He was fortunate that game was close if not Scot Nichol and Jody Shelley would have went crazy.
 

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
47,387
15,720
Bay Area
That is still happening. Jamie Baker discussed the Lapierre hit on Nichol on KNBR yesterday. I went back and watched the video and was amazed that Chris Lee was looking right at the play and no penalty was called. On the Boyle hit, Furlatt was looking right at the play and never raised his arm for a penalty until everybody was already over the blue line and Desi was hunting Lapierre.

Say no more. He's always had it out for the Sharks. /tinfoilhat
 

Barrie22

Shark fan in hiding
Aug 11, 2009
24,796
5,955
ontario
he's a repeat offender, right? how many games do we think he's going to get.

10!

he technically isn't a repeat offender.

but also as i said on the main board, repeat offender means nothing to the league. if it did, no player would receive less of a punishment then his last bad hit (no matter of the severity of the hit).
 

CrypTic

Registered User
Oct 2, 2013
5,069
81
he technically isn't a repeat offender.

but also as i said on the main board, repeat offender means nothing to the league. if it did, no player would receive less of a punishment then his last bad hit (no matter of the severity of the hit).

I think he's a repeat offender for the purposes of section 18.2 (suspensions) where the standard seems to be "repeatedly violate League Playing Rules" but not for purposes of section 18.15. Note that the "repeat" offender definition for fines (past 18 months) is contained in section 18.15(e). That would normally apply only to section 18.15 of the CBA, not to any other section. Unless someone knows that it has been applied to other sections in the past.

[Edit to add:] However, I don't think section 18.2 is clear on the standard. The entire section reads:
"The status of the offender and, specifically, whether the Player has a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct. Players who repeatedly violate League Playing Rules will be more severely punished for each new violation."

It's possible that prior rule violations should only be considered for a player who has a history of prior suspensions or fines, although there does not seem to be a time limit on prior suspensions/fines, as there is under section 18.15.
 
Last edited:

sharkbite3

Custom boozer title
Apr 4, 2009
3,765
0
Seaside, CA
I chuckled a bit while reading Lapierre's apology to Boyle. Yeah, everything is forgiven if you just say you're sorry he's in the hospital and you tried to call him. It's easy to act sorry when you've done something stupid and you're facing punishment for it. To me it was clearly a move so the DoPS would see that "he's sorry". I think he regrets having injured Boyle, but regretting it and actually being remorseful are different. He's not gonna change. He won't. Ever. He's gonna cripple someone like Bertuzzi did and get a lifetime ban. That's the road he's on, and there's no way he'll change. I'm sure he'll make a public apology each time.
 

Linkster

Beard goggles!
Nov 11, 2010
7,184
12
Coastal Sharkifornia
I was glad to hear via Boyle's agent that Boyle “feels great.”

But I wish they'd kept quiet until after Lapierre is sentenced. First, because Boyle isn't healthy until he's medically cleared. Second, because the NHL's subjective system still seems to hand out stiffer penalties to players who cause injury.
 

slocal

Dude...what?
May 4, 2010
16,067
6,904
Central Coast CA
I was glad to hear via Boyle's agent that Boyle “feels great.”

But I wish they'd kept quiet until after Lapierre is sentenced. First, because Boyle isn't healthy until he's medically cleared. Second, because the NHL's subjective system still seems to hand out stiffer penalties to players who cause injury.

Boyle's health is far more important to me than whatever sentence Lapierre is going to get. I care about Boyle as a person and was very relieved to hear that he and his family will be OK.

The incident was very ugly for the NHL. A player, let alone a star player, was stretchered off the ice during a nationally-televised game. I think that is going to have a bigger impact on the hearing.
 

sharkbite3

Custom boozer title
Apr 4, 2009
3,765
0
Seaside, CA
Boyle's health is far more important to me than whatever sentence Lapierre is going to get. I care about Boyle as a person and was very relieved to hear that he and his family will be OK.

The incident was very ugly for the NHL. A player, let alone a star player, was stretchered off the ice during a nationally-televised game. I think that is going to have a bigger impact on the hearing.

Well said. If Lapierre got 3 games for it, but Boyle was back very soon I'd be overjoyed. I'd have my issues with the length of the suspension, but it's far more important that Dan is okay.

And then you're totally right about the game being nationally televised.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->