The Henrik Sedin Solution to Dangerous Play - Stiffer In-Game Penalties
Jim Jamieson (hockey writer with the Vancouver Province) interviewed Henrik Sedin in the wake of the five game suspension handed out to Duncan Keith for his flagrant elbow to the head of his brother Daniel. Henrik was not interested in commenting upon the specifics of the Keith hit and suspension but took a broader view of the situation.
Henrik believes there should be more in-game consequences for dangerous hits. In his view suspensions are not the best deterrent to curbing dangerous play. Henrik believes missing a few games isn't enough of a deterrent to change players' behaviour.
“If it's five or seven or 10 games, I don't think it matters,” said Henrik. “It's about showing respect. That's my only issue. If a guy that has no history and is supposed to be a standup guy and an honest guy, if he does something like that, it shows that it's going to happen. It doesn't matter how many games he gets. When emotions run high there's always going to be guys who step over the line. That's not going to change.”
His solution to change behaviour.
“I think the only way to get rid of it is to have tougher penalties during the game,” he said. “If you give elbows and charging and boarding and all those dangerous plays four minutes in penalties it's going to hurt the team. And that's the only way you're going to get guys to realize because hockey is a team sport and guys really feel for their teammates. If you're hurting the team, if you're losing games because of an elbow or a charging or boarding, you're going to stop doing it. If you get two games (suspension) and a two-minute penalty, it's still going to happen.”
To give effect to such changes Henrik says you have to start with re-writing the rule book.
“I think the rules have to be changed,” he said. “Right now you get a four minute penalty if your stick comes up and there's a little bit of blood on your lip. But if you run your elbow through someone's head it's two minutes. There's got to be harsher penalties in the game. You can still get two minutes for hooking or holding, but if you want to get rid of concussions and bad hits, that's the way to go.”
Jim Jamieson (hockey writer with the Vancouver Province) interviewed Henrik Sedin in the wake of the five game suspension handed out to Duncan Keith for his flagrant elbow to the head of his brother Daniel. Henrik was not interested in commenting upon the specifics of the Keith hit and suspension but took a broader view of the situation.
Henrik believes there should be more in-game consequences for dangerous hits. In his view suspensions are not the best deterrent to curbing dangerous play. Henrik believes missing a few games isn't enough of a deterrent to change players' behaviour.
“If it's five or seven or 10 games, I don't think it matters,” said Henrik. “It's about showing respect. That's my only issue. If a guy that has no history and is supposed to be a standup guy and an honest guy, if he does something like that, it shows that it's going to happen. It doesn't matter how many games he gets. When emotions run high there's always going to be guys who step over the line. That's not going to change.”
His solution to change behaviour.
“I think the only way to get rid of it is to have tougher penalties during the game,” he said. “If you give elbows and charging and boarding and all those dangerous plays four minutes in penalties it's going to hurt the team. And that's the only way you're going to get guys to realize because hockey is a team sport and guys really feel for their teammates. If you're hurting the team, if you're losing games because of an elbow or a charging or boarding, you're going to stop doing it. If you get two games (suspension) and a two-minute penalty, it's still going to happen.”
To give effect to such changes Henrik says you have to start with re-writing the rule book.
“I think the rules have to be changed,” he said. “Right now you get a four minute penalty if your stick comes up and there's a little bit of blood on your lip. But if you run your elbow through someone's head it's two minutes. There's got to be harsher penalties in the game. You can still get two minutes for hooking or holding, but if you want to get rid of concussions and bad hits, that's the way to go.”
I actually agree with Henrik and his reasoning is sound. We already have double-minors for the bloody lip thing so why not extend that to elbows, hits to the head, etc. Those plays are no less dangerous (likely more) than cutting somebody with a stick.
The fact of the matter is that they blew the call. It should have been a major penalty for Keith. There is a stiff penalty for what he did but they just chose not to call it.
The fact of the matter is that they blew the call. It should have been a major penalty for Keith. There is a stiff penalty for what he did but they just chose not to call it.
I agree. The problem isn't the rules as much as it is the morons with the whistles who are too cowardly to make the right calls.
How about penalizing in game (majors), regular season suspensions (takes salary pay) and playoff suspensions. For example, duncan keith's hit on daniel would have meritted a 5 min major, game suspensions for the next 5 regular season games and the next 2 playoff games.
I do believe that 5 vs 5 is the norm and pp should be exceptions.
I would rather strike at the perpetrator and not the team.
Each penalty, even minors strike at your salary; a major & misconduct will toll twice as much money/minute: match penalty times 4.
What you have to do is to decide how high a percentage of the salary you are targeting with the base value (i.e. the minor penalty).
Then the game will be cleaner and as it is supposed to be played, while the real penalties are dealt on the private economy of the perpetrator and at a certain value on that penalty it will start to matter as it is based on a percentage of your income (i.e. even high paid guys will suffer).
I do believe that 5 vs 5 is the norm and pp should be exceptions.
I would rather strike at the perpetrator and not the team.
Each penalty, even minors strike at your salary; a major & misconduct will toll twice as much money/minute: match penalty times 4.
What you have to do is to decide how high a percentage of the salary you are targeting with the base value (i.e. the minor penalty).
Then the game will be cleaner and as it is supposed to be played, while the real penalties are dealt on the private economy of the perpetrator and at a certain value on that penalty it will start to matter as it is based on a percentage of your income (i.e. even high paid guys will suffer).
So you take a financial hit for tripping or hooking someone?
So you take a financial hit for tripping or hooking someone?
Yes and 2 minutes. I am sure the system can be tuned so that no one of these guys will go broke by tripping, if they do then they might be doing it a tad bit to much.
I don't entirely disagree, his bottom line is the team should be punished for one of their players running someone or giving a dangerous headshot or what ever.
I would have not objection to longer penalties, but using the Keith hit, or the Bourque hit, or what have you, I think that same philosophy should apply to the teams as well.
Yes and 2 minutes. I am sure the system can be tuned so that no one of these guys will go broke by tripping, if they do then they might be doing it a tad bit to much.
Yes and 2 minutes. I am sure the system can be tuned so that no one of these guys will go broke by tripping, if they do then they might be doing it a tad bit to much.
That will just take out all competitiveness and physical play out of the game. Seems like a horrible idea to me.
Henrik's idea works because the players care about their team and their team-mates, and the team will have an incentive not to ice dirty players. In your system, a team could employ pure goons that get higher base salary to compensate for the penalties and suspensions — there would be nothing stopping them.
I love how more outspoken Henrik has been this season. Remember his comments a few weeks ago about how inconsistent reffing was ?
I really think last year's long playoff run, the Bolland "sisters comment" and now finally Keith's cheapshot on Daniel has really hardened the Sedins. You can tell they are really sick of the talk of how the Canucks aren't built for the playoffs. I can totally see the team rally behind what happened to Daniel and this could be the difference to them going all the way this spring. *knock on wood*
The fact of the matter is that they blew the call. It should have been a major penalty for Keith. There is a stiff penalty for what he did but they just chose not to call it.
It should have been five and a game misconduct with supplementary discipline applied.
So what happens if Chicago is down 5-0? They know they aren't coming back, might aswell **** up our players for the postseason. Suspensions should stay, any head hit should get a 5min.
So what happens if Chicago is down 5-0? They know they aren't coming back, might aswell **** up our players for the postseason. Suspensions should stay, any head hit should get a 5min.
Then they get suspended, like normal. Suspensions should also be stiffer.
Dan Ohalleran blew the call. As much as Keith deserves 5 games or whatnot, it would have been an easier and more palatable decision if he got the 5 minute in game major instead of the weak misconduct later on to protect him.
Suspensions need to be clear across board. That`s where I always get pissed off. The inconsistancy.
1st offence
Headshot 4 min penalty for team, Game misconduct for player. plus 3 game suspension plus if team makes playoffs 1 game 1st series.
2-3 offence 4 min penalty for team Game misconduct for player. plus 7 game suspension plus if team makes playoffs miss 2 games 1st series.
4+ offences Out of league 1 year loss of pay, and players Cap still applies to team. This will hurt whole organization and it should having a donkey like that around.
Boarding, hit from behind - same as Headshot
Slew foot 2 min penalty team, 5 min for player I only put this in because this is coming back in games alot and it`s very dangerous.
Clear Goalie interference 4 min player
If defending team is cause of goalie interference 2 min penalty for interference defender.
If not clear goalie interference give each def/off a 2 min
If goalie is out of blue area if he`s hit, he`s fair game.
