Well i've read more than enough comments since the start of the season about all these suspensions and alot of them have really made me laugh and shake my head. Now after the Bouchard/Calvert thing its mainly just head shaking. Whats clear to me is the majority of you guys really never have played hockey before but still claim to know the intent of every guys actions somehow. When something questionable happens the only people with true knowledge of the intent is the guy doing it and possibly some teammates. Now one thing that is pretty consistent on intent is that you never wanna make it seem like u were doing something dirty with.....intent. (minus james wisniewski) So whats worse...doing something intentional to probably hurt somebody a little bit? Or doing something intentional to probably hurt somebody while making it seem completely unintentional? Watch the Columbus bench right after it happened...i think its obvious that every guy on there who saw it knew PM ********'s only intent was to pop him right in the mouth. Those who say he was aiming for gloves or whatever, watch his stick as he turns towards Calvert before the drop...its never below his waist. In my opinion another factor that proves intent is the slash itself. It wasn't too hard therefor really wouldn't do any damage at all on the body anywhere besides the face...so what woulda been the point?? So to sum it up i really hope next time they meet Bouchard, Clutterphuck, and Heatley all get hurt INTENTIONALLY on clean checks. Just no more 8 gm suspensions. Just my 5 cents.
That's exactly the point, and why we're upset. Bouchard didn't swing his stick that high, Calvert lifted what was intended to be a downswing chop on the hands (and anyone that wants to argue that he shouldn't have been doing that needs to pay more attention, it happens a half dozen times - if not more - a game) into his own face.
It's a plain case of punishing the result, not the intent. Which doesn't strike me as the spirit of what they were trying to remove from the last regime, especially given Bouchard's track record. It's not like we're talking about Matt Cooke or some other multi-incident offender.
Just because it happens very often during hockey games doesn't mean they should keep doing it. Players should know they take responsibility for the outcome of these actions. Sure, these silly little whacks are never intended to seriously hurt anyone, but what if they did, like in the Bouchard incident? Is the victim to be blamed?
Bouchard's intent was to hurt Calvert. It was just unfortunate that he happened to do way more damage than he intended, which got him a suspension.
The idea of this thread is to compile all of the suspensions, associated videos and threads for easy reference. I'll keep this as up to date as I can. I will also include incidents where the NHL releases a video but does not suspend the player.
All dates are in the format of yyyy/MM/dd for sorting purposes. Only regular season games are counted in the First Game Missed and Eligible to Return columns.
If people have suggestions to add for hits let me know, either in the thread or in PM. Also let me know if certain links don't work and I'll update them.
I love this (bolded) Worth at least a couple games...
-- LW Matt Calvert's modeling career took a hit over the weekend. His upper lip will heal, perhaps with a scar. One tooth is gone and two others are cracked, leaving him with a jack-o-lantern's smile and lots of time eahd in a dentist's chair. He's now resigned to a post-hockey career as a supporting actor, not a star. Two points today, though: first, his parents were in the seats in Xcel Energy Center when he went off to the dressing room with blood pouring from his yapper. Second, he said comments on Sunday to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune from Pierre-Marc Bouchard's agent, Allan Walsh, were "embarrassing." Walsh defended his client, saying "the notion that Pierre-Marc Bouchard intentionally swung his stick into the face of an opponent in patently absurd." Calvert said Bouchard stepped into the Wild's training area after the game, while Calvert was being stitched and otherwise treated, and apologized. "He said he was sorry, and he said he intended to slash me, not get me in the face," Calvert said. "I believe him. I did lift his stick a bit, but regardless... you have to have control of your stick." How did Calvert respond to the apology? "I kind of just listened. I didn't have much to say. I respect the fact that he did it, though. For me, it's just simple: if you have a problem, take off your gloves and let's fight about it. Don't do what he did."
One thing that Colin Campbell was rightly attacked for during his reign of error was that he acted as if retaliation and premeditation were nothing to be concerned about. Shanahan, who after did just retire after a lengthy career, is a bit smarter than that.
Retaliation, of course, isn't just a game-to-game thing....it's shift-to-shift and second-to-second. Calvert is jostling with Bouchard for position, so Bouchard...tries to whack him in the hands? Let's say he connects; is Calvert then justified in, say, a sucker punch to the back of the head? Presumably, we could go all the way up to Bouchard using artillery on Calvert.
No one thinks that Bouchard is a dirty player, or that he intended to whack Calvert in the face. That's not the point though. He intended to do something that carried an injury risk, and the fact that the targeted player ended up injured (although not in the target area) has to have been a factor.
2 games is reasonable. And I highly doubt that Bouchard will do anything in the next five years of his career that would warrant additional action anyway, so the idea that "repeat offender" status would ever become an issue with him is kind of strange.
That's exactly the point, and why we're upset. Bouchard didn't swing his stick that high, Calvert lifted what was intended to be a downswing chop on the hands (and anyone that wants to argue that he shouldn't have been doing that needs to pay more attention, it happens a half dozen times - if not more - a game) into his own face.
It's a plain case of punishing the result, not the intent. Which doesn't strike me as the spirit of what they were trying to remove from the last regime, especially given Bouchard's track record. It's not like we're talking about Matt Cooke or some other multi-incident offender.
He has to be in control of his stick at all times. There are no exceptions, and if his slash hits someone in the face and causes injury, it is his fault and he should be punished for it.
He has to be in control of his stick at all times. There are no exceptions, and if his slash hits someone in the face and causes injury, it is his fault and he should be punished for it.
so, no 4 minute penalty for high sticking with blood, just a 2 game shanny suspension.
sorry , that doesn't seem to be in the rule book.... at least the official rule book...just in the new shanny rule book.
so, no 4 minute penalty for high sticking with blood, just a 2 game shanny suspension.
sorry , that doesn't seem to be in the rule book.... at least the official rule book...just in the new shanny rule book.
The high sticking rule does include the possibility of supplemental discipline. I am not 100% sure if this is what the suspension was based on, but it does give it technical justification.
As a note, the play did receive a 4 minute double minor penalty for high sticking, as it should have. The key part of the rule "Players and goalkeepers must be in control and responsible for their stick."
I still think this was nothing more than an unfortunate accident. Like what happened with Nystrom and Fedun. And the punishment should have been nothing more than 4 minutes he served in the box. Are we going to suspend for every minor penalty that results in an injury? What if a player gets tripped and hits his head on the boards, or another player, and gets hurt? Should the player that tripped him be suspended? Because that's what happened to PMB. He committed a minor penalty, slashing a guy on the hands. Happens all the time in hockey. Unfortunately Calvert was lifting his stick at the time, so the stick hit him in the face instead. Was an accident. Give him a penalty and move on.
It's a couple days into the regular season and I'm sick of Shanahan's face in those videos. Give it a year or two and he will be as loathed as Campbell. Bad idea, Shanny.
The explanation was pretty clear and pretty convincing. Shannahan can only judge based on results. The result of the play was an illegally reckless high stick to the head. I agree that players are responsible for foolish decisions with their sticks and should be held responsible for them.
It's about time someone made a move to get the a handle on dirty plays made with the high stick.
The high sticking rule does include the possibility of supplemental discipline. I am not 100% sure if this is what the suspension was based on, but it does give it technical justification.
As a note, the play did receive a 4 minute double minor penalty for high sticking, as it should have. The key part of the rule "Players and goalkeepers must be in control and responsible for their stick."
It was head contact, just with a stick. It's well within his purview.
The explanation was pretty clear and pretty convincing. Shannahan can only judge based on results. The result of the play was an illegally reckless high stick to the head. I agree that players are responsible for foolish decisions with their sticks and should be held responsible for them.
It's about time someone made a move to get the a handle on dirty plays made with the high stick.
So are all high sticking penalties that cause injury to the head going to bring a suspension?
If they're as blatantly reckless as that one? Heck yeah. You're not allowed to hit someone in the head with your stick.
He wasn't trying to hit him in the head. Bouchard tried to whack him across the hands(he admitted to this) and Calvert lifted Bouchard's stick. An accident.
Doesn't matter. He was definitely trying to hit him, and wound up hitting him in the head. That makes this at least "reckless targeting" the way Shanny's been using the term.
Because he deliberately swung, it doesn't matter what he was trying to hit if it wound up hitting his head. It's either intentional, or at least reckless, and either way, he gets a break from the NHL.
He wasn't trying to hit him in the head. Bouchard tried to whack him across the hands(he admitted to this) and Calvert lifted Bouchard's stick. An accident.
The moral? Bouchard seems to do the old two handed baseball slash when he's frustrated instead of dropping the mitts like a man.
Shoulder to shoulder, looks like most of the damage happened when he hit the ice. It was a high hit, but the only reason there was head contact is because the head ragdolled into the player in red's shoulder. Not principle point of contact. Not suspendable under the check to the head rule. Just a high shoulder on shoulder hit gone wrong.
It's a couple days into the regular season and I'm sick of Shanahan's face in those videos. Give it a year or two and he will be as loathed as Campbell. Bad idea, Shanny.
Yeah imagine when it's one of YOUR TEAM's players that is questionably suspended. I'm going to be pretty pissed off when the time comes
