View Single Post
04-26-2013, 12:04 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,666
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by KingsCorona View Post
I don't necessarily think that the reasoning behind the ruling was illogical or wrong so much as I think that, taken alongside all the other suspensions and non-suspensions that have happened, it's misguided and ineffectual.

The goal SHOULD be to discourage blatantly dangerous behavior (like Del Zotto whipping around elbow-first) and punish players whose intent was malicious (like Mike Smith's 2-handed hack job). Instead, suspensions seem to be based only on how "bad" it looked and whether the player was injured which, IMO, are both collateral to the real point of disciplinary action. If someone shoots at you and misses they still go to jail. If someone drops a bucket of bananas on the sidewalk and you slip and get a concussion, they're not liable for anything because there was no intent regardless of your injury and their role in it.

In other words, players should be punished for what they DID, not for what they CAUSED. Even aside from the frustrating inconsistency, this is why I think that the league's disciplinary body is misguided. Punishment should come as the result of actions by players and an action is good or bad of its own merit, not because of what happens as a result of it.
I think I said that. :-)

FrozenRoyalty is offline   Reply With Quote