Torres suspended indefinitely pending in person hearing on Friday.
The hearing was initially scheduled for today, but Torres and the NHLPA requested it be moved to Friday instead.
Why the hell did the NHLPA do that? They gonna try to defend his goon ass?
Thats one thing that really gets me about the NHLPA. They have their own players hurting other players on obviously intentional plays like that and yet the PA still defends them and bemoans every suspension. Have the balls to call a spade a spade and join the NHL in hanging someone out to dry for once.
Why the hell did the NHLPA do that? They gonna try to defend his goon ass?
Thats one thing that really gets me about the NHLPA. They have their own players hurting other players on obviously intentional plays like that and yet the PA still defends them and bemoans every suspension. Have the balls to call a spade a spade and join the NHL in hanging someone out to dry for once.
As a union, the NHLPA is legally obligated to provide the best defense possible for each of their members. Regardless of how guilty or innocent they are, each has a right to the same protection under the union.
However, with the NHLPA directly involved, it would seem obvious that either the union or the league expect a huge suspension to be handed down. The PA will argue that other recent acts received lesser suspensions, so Torres should as well. For the only time in his life, Schizo Shanny's complete inability to remain consistent for more than 10 seconds might work to his advantage. If there's no consistency of discipline, the PA can't argue against a punishment because it is inconsistent with other discipline.
As a union, the NHLPA is legally obligated to provide the best defense possible for each of their members. Regardless of how guilty or innocent they are, each has a right to the same protection under the union.
However, with the NHLPA directly involved, it would seem obvious that either the union or the league expect a huge suspension to be handed down. The PA will argue that other recent acts received lesser suspensions, so Torres should as well. For the only time in his life, Schizo Shanny's complete inability to remain consistent for more than 10 seconds might work to his advantage. If there's no consistency of discipline, the PA can't argue against a punishment because it is inconsistent with other discipline.
Legally obligated? Seriously? That does not seem right. Yeah I get that the whole point of a union is to represent its members, but there should be cases in which even the Union can say "Sorry bucko, you screwed up BIG this time, you are on your own".
Legally obligated? Seriously? That does not seem right. Yeah I get that the whole point of a union is to represent its members, but there should be cases in which even the Union can say "Sorry bucko, you screwed up BIG this time, you are on your own".
Not at all. It's not the union's place to judge innocence, guilt, liability, or culpability. They are there to represent the player to the best of their ability and nothing else. It's the arbiter (in this case, Shanahan) whose job it is to pass judgment. Everyone has a right to a defense, no matter how guilty they are or appear to be, and that's really the only way that any justice system can work in the long run.
Canadian website CBC.ca tracked concussions and suspensions during the 2012 season. Its final totals: The NHL lost 1,697 man-games to head injuries. Players suspended for hits to the head sat out 134 games and were fined $2,468,239.60.
Wow. And to think that we think some suspensions are too long, when they should be about 10x longer, just to be fair to those concussed.
Ten times zero is still zero, and it's the multitude of guys who got away with it that I'm more concerned with than the lengths of suspensions for guys who did get punished.
It just comes back to Shannahan being completely ineffective and incompetent as a league disciplinarian.
I wonder if part of the reason the decision on the Torres suspension is taking so long is because he knows that this is his last chance to get it right or let all hell break loose in the playoffs.
It just comes back to Shannahan being completely ineffective and incompetent as a league disciplinarian.
I wonder if part of the reason the decision on the Torres suspension is taking so long is because he knows that this is his last chance to get it right or let all hell break loose in the playoffs.
Yea. Bring...back...Colin Cambell...*puke*...never thought I'd say it.
Last edited by Victorious Secret: 04-21-2012 at 01:48 AM.
Yea. Bring...back...Brian Cambell...*puke*...never thought I'd say it.
Colin Campbell.
But seriously... It's long past time that a neutral third party is brought in. It's clear that Shanahan can't handle the job, and it's continuing the trend of non-stars getting (admittedly still weak) suspensions and stars getting little to nothing.
I don't understand how an ounce of consistency is that much to ask.
"Oh, this guy was high sticked? And we've got a half dozen other high-sticking-related suspensions in the last two years to compare to? Maybe we should do that......... Nah, lets just make a decision based on which team he plays for and whether or not he's a star."
But seriously... It's long past time that a neutral third party is brought in. It's clear that Shanahan can't handle the job, and it's continuing the trend of non-stars getting (admittedly still weak) suspensions and stars getting little to nothing.
I don't understand how an ounce of consistency is that much to ask.
"Oh, this guy was high sticked? And we've got a half dozen other high-sticking-related suspensions in the last two years to compare to? Maybe we should do that......... Nah, lets just make a decision based on which team he plays for and whether or not he's a star."
Honestly, I seriously think we need them to edit the videos to not have jerseys or colors and to not allow them to see what team either plays for. Or find some third party. But to find a third party you have to find someone that doesn't know hockey. And if they don't know hockey, that would be bad. So, if we find someone that knows hockey, they'll probably have preferences. So, we'll need a board of at least 3 making decisions. I think that'd work. Other than that, its stupid. Shannahan has done a terrible job. After he started to not suspend people his decision on Bouchard at the beginning of the year grows worse and worse.
Honestly, I seriously think we need them to edit the videos to not have jerseys or colors and to not allow them to see what team either plays for. Or find some third party. But to find a third party you have to find someone that doesn't know hockey. And if they don't know hockey, that would be bad. So, if we find someone that knows hockey, they'll probably have preferences. So, we'll need a board of at least 3 making decisions. I think that'd work. Other than that, its stupid. Shannahan has done a terrible job. After he started to not suspend people his decision on Bouchard at the beginning of the year grows worse and worse.
Yeah, I think a lot of people, myself included had a good feeling about Shannahan after he got serious with preseason hits and suspensions. Then the Bouchard thing came up where that Blue Jacket hit himself in the face with Bouchard's stick and everything toppled like a perilous house of cards. It only got worse from there with nonsuspensions to people who took cheap shots at our guys like Bogosian and McLeod, and now in the playoffs he is just a complete joke.
If I were an owner or GM I would be DEMANDING he be fired for being a piss poor excuse for a disciplinarian.
Yeah, I think a lot of people, myself included had a good feeling about Shannahan after he got serious with preseason hits and suspensions. Then the Bouchard thing came up where that Blue Jacket hit himself in the face with Bouchard's stick and everything toppled like a perilous house of cards. It only got worse from there with nonsuspensions to people who took cheap shots at our guys like Bogosian and McLeod, and now in the playoffs he is just a complete joke.
If I were an owner or GM I would be DEMANDING he be fired for being a piss poor excuse for a disciplinarian.
Exactly how it went. If there were any way to ruin a career as a first job out of the NHL, this job would be it.
Honestly, I seriously think we need them to edit the videos to not have jerseys or colors and to not allow them to see what team either plays for. Or find some third party. But to find a third party you have to find someone that doesn't know hockey. And if they don't know hockey, that would be bad. So, if we find someone that knows hockey, they'll probably have preferences. So, we'll need a board of at least 3 making decisions. I think that'd work. Other than that, its stupid. Shannahan has done a terrible job. After he started to not suspend people his decision on Bouchard at the beginning of the year grows worse and worse.
I think a third party in and of itself is sufficient. The biggest issues the league faces are that suspensions can affect league appearance and revenue. Suspending Daniel Sedin for trying to murder Heatley means fewer people are going to watch the games he's out for. Same goes for teams and their prominence. There's also incentive to consider how it will affect outcomes on the ice.
Given a sufficiently large third party making the decisions, as a group instead of as an individual, any biases should be more or less alleviated. They don't have a stake in the outcome, only in maintaining their contract, so they should be better able to maintain consistency.
I think a third party in and of itself is sufficient. The biggest issues the league faces are that suspensions can affect league appearance and revenue. Suspending Daniel Sedin for trying to murder Heatley means fewer people are going to watch the games he's out for. Same goes for teams and their prominence. There's also incentive to consider how it will affect outcomes on the ice.
Given a sufficiently large third party making the decisions, as a group instead of as an individual, any biases should be more or less alleviated. They don't have a stake in the outcome, only in maintaining their contract, so they should be better able to maintain consistency.
Who decides who gets the contract tho? If its the league then the league will receive bias because there will be an interest by the commission in retaining the contract. A similar extreme example would be the binding arbitration that most companies put in their service contracts. Biased heavily toward the companies.
The independent commission should be created by the CBA as a truly independent commission that receives money from both the NHL and Players Association and then itself decides on who gets contracts. That way the only bias present is staying within the limitations and scope of the independent commission and neither the NHL nor the Players association is entirely happy with the results. That's how compromise works.
Who decides who gets the contract tho? If its the league then the league will receive bias because there will be an interest by the commission in retaining the contract. A similar extreme example would be the binding arbitration that most companies put in their service contracts. Biased heavily toward the companies.
The independent commission should be created by the CBA as a truly independent commission that receives money from both the NHL and Players Association and then itself decides on who gets contracts. That way the only bias present is staying within the limitations and scope of the independent commission and neither the NHL nor the Players association is entirely happy with the results. That's how compromise works.
The contract should likely be awarded within the CBA itself, so it's negotiated between the players and the league. If not, it would be a contract awarded by the league, but approved by the players. I don't think there's any non-trivial concern about bias due to "who's paying the bills" in this situation. They'll be heavily judged by everyone, and so many people will have a stake in their retention.
Further concern towards that is borderline "corporate conspiracy theory" type crap. Creating additional bureaucracy around the issue just abstracts the decision makers from the decisions, which would be more harmful than good.
The contract should likely be awarded within the CBA itself, so it's negotiated between the players and the league. If not, it would be a contract awarded by the league, but approved by the players. I don't think there's any non-trivial concern about bias due to "who's paying the bills" in this situation. They'll be heavily judged by everyone, and so many people will have a stake in their retention.
Further concern towards that is borderline "corporate conspiracy theory" type crap. Creating additional bureaucracy around the issue just abstracts the decision makers from the decisions, which would be more harmful than good.
The problem is that if either side has individual veto power I could see one side nuking things on a yearly basis just for spite. Thats why I think the NHL and Players Association should both have to pay for and jointly approve and disapprove things. Without that extra red tape you would see one side or the other gaming the system to somehow interfere with things when the calls start going in favor of the opposite side as far as what the players want vs what the league wants. The system has to be ungameable unless both sides say "this sucks, you're all fired, were getting a new comission" like hopefully both sides will say about Shanny at the CBA talks later this summer.
