News Article: "Revisiting the Marc Savard Incident & the NHL's Response"
- Thread starter GordonHowe
- Start date
There is a clear difference between targeting a player's head [or other body part] and having a hit go awry.
If a player's hands/arms/shoulders are tucked in and he doesn't leave his feet to make the hit I can't see suspending him just because the other guy turned at the last second and caught it in the head. Every player knows or should know to be aware that he could be checked any where any time ["keep your head up"].
But when a player deliberately targets another player's head or knees or deliberately blindsides someone then yes he should be suspended for as many games as his victim can't play. If he does it again he's gone from the league for good. Severe? Damn right. The Matt Cookes of the NHL have got to go.
I've always been an advocate of replacing the boards with more absorbent material. I'm not sure if anything can be done with the glass but if so I'd be all for it.
If a player's hands/arms/shoulders are tucked in and he doesn't leave his feet to make the hit I can't see suspending him just because the other guy turned at the last second and caught it in the head. Every player knows or should know to be aware that he could be checked any where any time ["keep your head up"].
But when a player deliberately targets another player's head or knees or deliberately blindsides someone then yes he should be suspended for as many games as his victim can't play. If he does it again he's gone from the league for good. Severe? Damn right. The Matt Cookes of the NHL have got to go.
I've always been an advocate of replacing the boards with more absorbent material. I'm not sure if anything can be done with the glass but if so I'd be all for it.
LouJersey
Registered User
Its the players union IMO. League would've suspended Cooke for a year Im sure, but not worth the fight...
OldFESeides
Registered User
- May 15, 2014
- 110
- 21
In regards to 'League of Denial' I'm a firm believer that the NHL needs to take a step back and really address the game they play. I always point to rugby as a source for them. The games are similar in terms of physicality and player size. However, Rugby on a whole is a much safer game to play due to the rules they have implemented that revolve around player safety. This is something the NHL needs to explore as well. Player Safety, not policing after the fact.
I actually don't watch NFL football anymore, for several reasons. Chief among them is the concussion issue. The behavior of the owners reminds very much of the tobacco industry's tactics.
PatriceBergeronFan
Registered User
The way the Bruins reacted was sad, but the only Bruin to see it at least went over and pushed him a bit (and he was no fighter).
Horribly disappointed to this day that Cooke didn't need some type of plastic surgery over the next few Bruins-Pens games.
Even more disappointed at how incompetently the NHL handled it, so that to this day Pens fans can troll with "it was a clean, legal hit! The league said so!!" etc.
Love how everytime his small fanbase proclaims him to have become a saint, he does something dumb. Hitting McQuaid from behind in the playoffs. The Karlsson "accident". There was another one last season, no?
What really, really sticks out to me the most was how a week or so after the Savard hit, Cooke, on national NBC TV (Sunday or Saturday afternoon game, I remember I was recovering from a BRUTAL hangover still in bed
) he then headshotted a NYR player. Shows his character and why someone should have ripped him to bloody shreds by now.
Horribly disappointed to this day that Cooke didn't need some type of plastic surgery over the next few Bruins-Pens games.
Even more disappointed at how incompetently the NHL handled it, so that to this day Pens fans can troll with "it was a clean, legal hit! The league said so!!" etc.
Love how everytime his small fanbase proclaims him to have become a saint, he does something dumb. Hitting McQuaid from behind in the playoffs. The Karlsson "accident". There was another one last season, no?
What really, really sticks out to me the most was how a week or so after the Savard hit, Cooke, on national NBC TV (Sunday or Saturday afternoon game, I remember I was recovering from a BRUTAL hangover still in bed
) he then headshotted a NYR player. Shows his character and why someone should have ripped him to bloody shreds by now.
EverettMike
FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
Dom has said that Colin Campbell wanted to suspend Cooke, but that he was essentially overruled.
I trust Dom 100%, so in fairness to Campbell he took the hit on his own and took a beating for it (from me included).
Campbell said that there was nothing in the rulebook to suspend him for. So we can take it that was the league's stance.
Which was always ********. Even if they didn't think it was clearly an elbow (I do) they could always have suspended Cooke for intent to injure.
I will always be mad the league said, "Eh, **** it."
I trust Dom 100%, so in fairness to Campbell he took the hit on his own and took a beating for it (from me included).
Campbell said that there was nothing in the rulebook to suspend him for. So we can take it that was the league's stance.
Which was always ********. Even if they didn't think it was clearly an elbow (I do) they could always have suspended Cooke for intent to injure.
I will always be mad the league said, "Eh, **** it."
Over the volcano
Registered User
Funny because it's the players who are put at risk because of these kind of hits. If anything you'd think they'd be the ones pushing for a safer work environment and getting the scum of the league out of their workplace.
Artemis
Took the red pill
That's what I don't get, and several people, including some national media IIRC, pointed it out. It's in the rule book. I don't blame the on-ice officials (they didn't see it), and as PBF noted, the only Bruin with a view of it was Michael Ryder, and I doubt Ryder would fight anyone if his own mother got assaulted.
I guess if there's any sort of silver lining it's that the NHL finally started cracking down somewhat on head-hunting hits (better than nothing), but that's cold comfort for Savard or any of Cooke's other victims.
I could never understand how they could say there was no grounds for a suspension. The "intent to injure" basis was always something they could have used. For example, if a player deliberately slammed the door to the bench on a players hand breaking it so badly that he could never play again, would he not be suspended? I am pretty sure there is no specific rule that you are not allowed to slam an opposing player's hand with the bench door but I'm just as sure you would be suspended for it. Savard was a fantastic player who was fun to watch and a huge asset to the league. The fact that they turned a blind eye to this incident will always sicken me. Whoever over ruled Cambell should be ashamed of themselves.
