Tom Wilson episode against the Rangers #3 (UPD: Fined $5k for roughing Buchnevich)

[Neil Racki]

Wilson pulled a helmetless Panarin to the ice by his hair while giving him the can-opener. He was completely out of control, and Wilson (and Panarin) were just lucky that Panarin didn't land on his head. Two careers could have ended on that play.

Are we punishing him bc he "caused death on the ice" or because he threw a guy down?

I think Tom should get suspended a few games, he was dumb but its a slippery slope to start punishing guys for "what could have happened". Any hit to the head could "cause death on the ice". Any fight could "cause death on the ice".

Lets suspend him for what he did do ...

 

[inthewings]

I watched the same slo-mo you did and I'm not close to sure he pulled his hair. Panarin literally jumped on a guy's back that's 70 pounds heavier than him and he got wrestled to the ice. You guys really need to take a step back. It sucks he got hurt, but once you engage a guy with that size advantage, regardless of what preceded it, you're putting yourself in a bad spot.

* jumped on a guy's back because that guy was punching a defenseless man in the back of the head while the man was prone on the ice with a stick under his throat.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Could have ended with death on the ice?

I think we need to bring this discussion back to what actually happened .. this is getting absurd

That’s not how that works though. If I run you over with my car and you somehow don’t get injured, I don’t get away with it because you’re ok. And that’s an analogy -please look up what that is, for all the people who are going to quote this and go “huh??? who ran over anyone???”.

the discussion absolutely should be about the danger of Wilson’s actions , unless our hope is to actually wait until someone is severely injured to do something about it

 

[BlackFrancis]

I'm not saying it isn't possible, but I think the NHL are also cagey about after whistle stuff like this. The CBA says that

Article 18.2
"... 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."

To me, the fact that everything occurred post-whistle generally relaxes the NHL's stance somewhat (for better or worse), as well as the fact that it happened when a guy was inside the paint with the goaltender (again, not me justifying what Wilson did, just thinking through from the NHL's perspective that means it wasn't premeditated, but there was a situational component to it, per (d). Technically any time a guy gets into a fight and the other suffers a concussion, he could be suspended. Or a guy gets injured in a scrum. But that's not how they interpret the rules.

When was the last time a guy faced supplemental punishment for punching a guy in a scrum? I'm not saying it shouldn't happen, but I'm not aware of it if it does?

Shawn Thornton, who had no history of censure by the DoPS, got 15 for this.

He didn't act a tenth of the madman Wilson did last night.

 

[BlueOil]

wilson deserves the raffi torres treatment. being a useful player doesn't outweigh his actions at all. he consistently becomes predatory and tries to injure others. kick him out.

 

[tarheelhockey]

To be clear about something that seems to be increasingly brought into question:

Yes, the league can issue supplementary discipline on this incident. The standard for triggering a review is simply whether the incident violates the league's playing rules.

In this case, at a minimum there was a gloved punch to the back of the head of a prone player, following by a hair-pulling incident (yes, there is a specific rule against that). The slam on Panarin was also arguably beyond the pale of a roughing or fighting penalty. Wilson's behavior in the penalty box also rises into misconduct territory. The fact that a penalty and a misconduct were issued on the ice makes it crystal clear that this incident is eligible for supplementary discipline.

Once it goes to review, these are the factors taken into consideration:

(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.
​

The incident qualifies for supplemental discipline on multiple points, ticks off items A B and C on the review checklist, and involves an especially notorious repeat offender who recently received a major suspension.

There will be no cover for the league if they fail to drop the hammer on this one.

 

[SENSational]

What an extremely unnecessary and beyond stupid move. Literally assaulting a guy just because he's butt hurt over a penalty. It should be pretty clear by now that Wilson has no respect or regard for other players' safety...great player but if you're lacking this much common sense and have extreme anger management issues, you should not be playing this game.

Just to put it into perspective, he's already lost over a million dollars in pay because of suspensions. This incident should result in a massive ban.

No trust in the NHL or DoPS though.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Are we punishing him bc he "caused death on the ice" or because he threw a guy down?

I think Tom should get suspended a few games, he was dumb but its a slippery slope to start punishing guys for "what could have happened". Any hit to the head could "cause death on the ice". Any fight could "cause death on the ice".

Lets suspend him for what he did do ...

Purposeful hits to the head should be punished similarly. 20+ games.

Fights, once again, as many people have already said, are not comparable because both players agree to the event. Panarin was not engaged in a 1 on 1 fight with Wilson. If a player sucker punches someone, yes. Suspend them for 20+ games.

I turn on the NHL to watch a skillful sport, not dumbass meatheads trying to maim people. If I wanted that I’d watch the UFC (and, once again, it would be okay, because in the UFC both guys agreed to the fight)

 

[Dr Pepper]

Wilson pulled a helmetless Panarin to the ice by his hair while giving him the can-opener. He was completely out of control, and Wilson (and Panarin) were just lucky that Panarin didn't land on his head. Two careers could have ended on that play.

Not a tear will be shed on the day Wilson's career ends.

Hopefully soon, tbh.

 

[HecticGlow]

Idk why you think the CBA doesn't cover punching a defenseless player or driving someone's head into the ice while pulling their hair... or the apparent slewfoot in the process...

Just to add to my last post–

51.4 Fines and Suspensions - There are no specified fines or suspensions for roughing, however, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28), provided, however, supplementary discipline cannot be applied to a player for intentionally removing an opponent’s helmet during play pursuant to Rule 9.6.​

Likewise, all the suspendible aspects of fighting appear to relate to instigation, third man in etc. and are automatic based on accumulative incidents. If someone can direct me to where in the rulebook it says this is a suspendible offence I genuinely would be grateful, because I'm not seeing it (and view that as a problem).

 

[MarkovsKnee]

It is a normal scrum if you take out Tom Wilson from the play. His demeanor is on a different level from the other players. He looks deranged and psychotic as he goes on his rampage.

His assault on a helmetless Panarin can only be described as intent to cause severe bodily harm. He pulls him by the hair down to the ice viciously, proceeds to punch him while on the ice and then once again picks him up and attempts again to slam his unprotected face into the ice .

these are acts of a vicious violent person.

Roid rage probably. How has this guy not been suspended for use? They just not bother testing high profile players? No way he's not using.

Disgusting sequence by him all the way around. The Panarin throw down is particularly disturbing. He could've killed him.

 

[WojtekWolski86]

Heat of the moment if a guy jumps on me (and Panarin had every right to do so because what Wilson did to punch the player is entirely unacceptable) I am going to react angrily. I doubt he said to himself "he has no helmet on, let me try to fracture his skull on the ice, here we go."

But the punch was absolutely premeditated. Once he was down on the ice, he thought about it and said take that. And as the poster above said, stuff like that has to be eliminated. Wilson isn't the first or last player to do it, and again as he said, that's not any effort to defend him. I would like to see the NHL start removing all the post-whistle garbage for the most part. Keep hitting, get rid of the garbage.

"Heat of the moment" doesn't qualify when Wilson was running around the previous 2 shifts barking at the refs for a penalty call and having to come back on the ice for an icing. He was looking for an excuse to take his rage out on someone. Worst of all, he does this all in front of the referee who just stands there with his hands on his hips. This is Todd Bertuzzi 2.0 and its not the first time for Wilson and the only way it will be the last time is you make an example out of him. They have gone far too long with this lip service of "we care about head injuries" than look the other way while this guy goes on a gorilla rampage slamming skulls into the ice.

 

[Mez]

Im gonna guess the rest of the season and the first round.

 

[uncleben]

But he was served penalties in game (for roughing, not fighting, I think?). The question is whether his conduct broke rules to the extent the league can step in and issue supplemental penalties. As a Caps fan, you get pretty used to the circumstances in which suspensions can occur over the years and I'm not aware of that being one of them? But happy to be proven wrong, because I'm really not defending that conduct at all.

If what Wilson did calls for supplemental punishment under the CBA, he absolutely should be dealt it – reputation or not. If he isn't eligible for it, him being Tom Wilson shouldn't make him an exception to the rule. But in that circumstance, the league would need to urgently address that problem ahead of next season, because I'm really not comfortable with what happened at all and no-one else should be either.

Short answer, yes.

Long answer, yes, the League can step in and apply supplemental discipline on any play, at their discretion. Their ruling of supplemental discipline does not need to match the call on the ice at the time of the play, and in fact, there does not even need to be a call on the ice.
This allows the DoPS to make the ruling they deem appropriate with the benefit of multiple angles, slow-motion, player and referee interviews, testimonials, and defenses, and without the restriction of missing the play, having an obstructed view, other incidences happening at the same time, game management, etc.

This falls under Rule 28:

[T]he Commissioner may, at his discretion, investigate any incident that occurs in connection with any Pre-season, Exhibition, League or Playoff game and may assess additional fines and/or suspensions for any offense committed during the course of a game or any aftermath thereof by a player, goalkeeper, Trainer, Manager, Coach or non-playing Club personnel or Club executive, whether or not such offense has been penalized by the Referee.

As the DoPS has the carte blanche, players then have the right to defend themselves during a supplemental discipline hearing, or to appeal after a decision has been made (Wilson himself appealed a 20 game suspension back in Sep. 2018, as you'll likely remember, and had it reduced to 14. The suspension was such a large number of games less for the incident on the ice but because of his history.)




As per the Rulebook

Fighting involves "at least one player punches or attempts to punch an opponent repeatedly or when two players wrestle in such a manner as to make it difficult for the Linesmen to intervene and separate the combatants ... The Referees are provided very wide latitude in the penalties with which they may impose under this rule. This is done intentionally to enable them to differentiate between the obvious degrees of responsibility of the participants"

Aggressing involves a "player who continues to throw punches in an attempt to inflict punishment on his opponent who is in a defenseless position or who is an unwilling combatant ... A player who is deemed to be the aggressor of an altercation will have this recorded as an aggressor of an altercation for statistical and suspension purposes"

Roughing involves "Roughing is a punching or slamming motion with or without the glove on the hand, normally directed at the head or face of an opponent"

All three of those rules were broken, and DoPS has the right to enforce discipline on them, regardless of any call on the ice.

Agressing was last used in a suspension last season on Zach Kassian, and in 2018 on Alex Burrows.
Roughing is frequently given as a fine, but has been used in a suspension in 2019 on Milan Lucic, and in 2018 on Maxi Domi and Tyler Bertuzzi






Interestingly, there's also this, which technically could also be applied to both teams

Fines and Suspensions – Clearing the Area of a Fight - Failure by players (or goalkeepers as required) to clear the area of a fight shall, in addition to the other penalties that may be assessed, result in a fine to the team of $1,000 and the Coach of said team in the amount of $1,000.

I don't think I've ever seen that applied publicly though (could be something they apply privately without a press release from DoPS, since it's technically an automatic fine).

 

[Trueblue30]

I watched the same slo-mo you did and I'm not close to sure he pulled his hair. Panarin literally jumped on a guy's back that's 70 pounds heavier than him and he got wrestled to the ice. You guys really need to take a step back. It sucks he got hurt, but once you engage a guy with that size advantage, regardless of what preceded it, you're putting yourself in a bad spot.

Sounds like victim blaming. Jumping on someone’s back who is punching your teammate in an attempt to restrain him is not grounds to do what Wilson did. Panarin didn’t even throw any punches he was literally just jumping on him to pull Wilson off Strome.

Wilson could have just let Panarin go once they were in the corner up against the glass. But instead he decided to carry out an assault

 

[Neil Racki]

That’s not how that works though. If I run you over with my car and you somehow don’t get injured, I don’t get away with it because you’re ok. And that’s an analogy -please look up what that is, for all the people who are going to quote this and go “huh??? who ran over anyone???”.

the discussion absolutely should be about the danger of Wilson’s actions , unless our hope is to actually wait until someone is severely injured to do something about it

If you think he should be suspended for what he did? Im not going to argue.

If you think he should be suspended as if he caused "death on the ice" when he didnt ... thats just hyperbole.

Theres enough red meat to satisfy HF with what really happened ... we dont need to play "what if" to try and stretch this to something it was not.

 

[Kreider Typical]

supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28),

This meana he can be suspended. Just that it isn't automatic except in the other instances. A suspension is supplemental

 

[mrv52]

Shawn Thornton, who had no history of censure by the DoPS, got 15 for this.

He didn't act a tenth of the madman Wilson did last night.

This isn't even close to what happened last night. Wilson was already engaged in the scrum.

Thornton's actions in this video are look more like Panarin's actions last night.

Stop with the hyperbole

 

[andora]

Are we punishing him bc he "caused death on the ice" or because he threw a guy down?

I think Tom should get suspended a few games, he was dumb but its a slippery slope to start punishing guys for "what could have happened". Any hit to the head could "cause death on the ice". Any fight could "cause death on the ice".

Lets suspend him for what he did do ...

this reaction aids and abets dangerous plays.

why is it effective in your opinion to punish the result versus the action?

 

[Skrudland2Lomakin]

I understand the concerns for player safety, especially as they relate to career longevity or even life after hockey. I however always find these threads filled with hypocrisy and mealy-mouth answers. There is a lot of indignation about player health that is then capped with “and I hope he gets cheap shotted” or “can’t wait till my goon gets him”. Like what are we doing? If this is an issue about player safety then stick to those principles even as the extend beyond guys you like. You can’t stand here and give an impassioned plea for change whilst simultaneously hoping that the archaic wheels of hockey justice do their bidding. This is why we’re in this position, we’re watching a game everyone says has changed but we see no actual evidence in the rule book of that change.
This will always be the end result in a sport that openly allows and supports fighting by giving minimal punishments. Fighting by its nature will always result in escalating to the point a line gets crossed and in hockey it’s inherently open to interpretation of “unwritten rules”. You can’t seriously think sitting here and breaking down film like it’s the zapruder film every time this happens is the sign of a healthy sport with clear established boundaries.
If people are committed to change the outcome is clear. One, demonstrate you legitimately care about the things you say by not perpetuating the cycle and wishing for more violence. Two, ask the league to clearly define the scopes of the game as they want it to exist in 2021 and beyond. No more unwritten rules.

 

[leemalk]

That punch is basically the same as the Bertuzzi / Moore incident years ago. Defenseless player, punch to the back of the head. Luckily the outcome wasn't as severe as what happened to Moore, but to me the intent is the exactly the same.

So I hope he gets similar treatment to Bertuzzi and Raffi Torres as someone mentioned. If the league is serious about head contact and taking this goonery out of the game, he should be out for the rest of the season, playoffs, and 20-30 games next year.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

* jumped on a guy's back because that guy was punching a defenseless man in the back of the head while the man was prone on the ice with a stick under his throat.

Here, let me help you: "...once you engage a guy with that size advantage, regardless of what preceded it, you're putting yourself in a bad spot."

Panarin involved himself, good for him for sticking up for a teammate. But don't be surprised when a guy twice your size acts twice your size. Wilson threw him to the ice and he could have done much worse, frankly. That play happens all the time in scrums, typically there isn't a 70 pound weight disparity though.

 

[Kreider Typical]

I have a feeling we're going to be let down

 

[pman25]

Shawn Thornton, who had no history of censure by the DoPS, got 15 for this.

He didn't act a tenth of the madman Wilson did last night.

I mean that was pretty bad, more repeated blows to the head that did result in injury if I remember. Ray Emery also skated the ice to beat up Holtby who was unwilling and punched him in the back of the head. He got no games and the NHL even said "sorry our hands are tied, there's nothing we can do!"

I'm guessing they can't use that excuse again

 

[tarheelhockey]

Just to add to my last post–

51.4 Fines and Suspensions - There are no specified fines or suspensions for roughing, however, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28), provided, however, supplementary discipline cannot be applied to a player for intentionally removing an opponent’s helmet during play pursuant to Rule 9.6.​

Likewise, all the suspendible aspects of fighting appear to relate to instigation, third man in etc. and are automatic based on accumulative incidents. If someone can direct me to where in the rulebook it says this is a suspendible offence I genuinely would be grateful, because I'm not seeing it (and view that as a problem).

Any act (literally -- any act) that violates the rules is technically eligible for suspension.

Once an incident becomes eligible for suspension, the review focuses on the list of factors noted above: degree of unnecessary violence and intent; injury; prior history; contextual factors; and "miscellaneous".

In this case, you better believe Wilson's behavior in the penalty box and (whether it's fair to Wilson or not) the Caps organization's chest thumping on social media are going to be viewed as "miscellaneous" factors, if only informally.

Main point being, once it's determined that a play broke the rules (which is a foregone conclusion here) the supplementary discipline process is no longer about applying specific points in the rulebook. It's about applying the CBA's very expansive and vague mandate to discipline players for unnecessarily violent/injurious behavior with an eye toward dropping the hammer on repeat offenders.