SUSPENSIONS
Posted 5:52 PM ET | Comments 11
I am not here to say that the Flyers should not have received the suspensions they have received. I am fine with the suspension. My problem is the inconsistency within the league with suspensions being handed down. Why does a player need to be injured for a suspension to be handed down?
Downie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=322zqTkL0-c
Phaneuf: http://youtube.com/watch?v=u7cu3-ObJZQ
Here are two hits that are very very very similar. Both of the guys who got hit had just released the puck and were looking the other way on impact. Both of the guys who supplied the hits left their feet. The only true differences I see between these two hits are that the Downie hit happened with the two players traveling at faster speeds, and that McAmmond was left with more of an injury then the other guy was.
I do not feel that these two hits, in terms of suspension, are 20 games apart. Do you? What were the reasons behind the Downie suspension? He left his feet and hit a guy in the head who was in a vulnerable position. Which part of this criteria doesn't fit the Phaneuf hit? The reasoning said nothing about speed and the power of the impact.
I am not going to compare this clip to the Boulerice clip because this was more instinctual turning around and throwing the stick up then Boulerice's blatant cross check to the face, which I will NEVER defend.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYuIigp9J-M
But you are telling me a crosscheck to the face doesn't deserve a suspension? 1:19 left on the clock, right after getting drilled into the boards, down 5 to 1 and that wasn't an intent to injure with a stick?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g3poEP7_Ec
This could have been a clean check had he stayed low but he elected to go high on the guy. No suspension? Nearly decapitated him.
I can't find a clip of the Sutton hit on Kukkonen, but you run a guy with 2 seconds left on the clock down 3-2 with the puck pinned on the boards and 4 guys around it? He decided to come up above the guys bent over fighting for the puck and drill Kukkonen's head into the boards? No suspension?
Once again, my intention for this post is not to say the Flyers shouldn't have gotten the suspensions they have been given. My intentions are to show the inconsistency within the league.
There is no reason that a suspension should only be handed down if a player is injured and left laying on the ice after the hit. With these hits that dont result in injury not being called, its going to lead to more and more injuries. The league seems to be only looking out for its reputation, not the safety of its players in my opinion.
It looks to me as the only way a suspension is handed down is if there is an outcry about a hit league wide. You will then see Campbell hand down a suspension. And when do these outcry's usually occur? When a player is injured. Thats pretty much the bottom line with the suspensions right now in the NHL. Its an absolute bogus way of handling the situation.
A fellow Flyers blogger pointed out the new high sticking penalty rule, if there is blood you get an extra 2 minutes. This I think sums up the stance of the league.
Once again, don't respond to this blog with hatred towards me like I am defending the Flyers. The Flyers deserved the suspensions they were given, but there are numerous other hits around the league that also deserve them as well if the ultimate goal is to remove head shots from the game.
Downie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=322zqTkL0-c
Phaneuf: http://youtube.com/watch?v=u7cu3-ObJZQ
Here are two hits that are very very very similar. Both of the guys who got hit had just released the puck and were looking the other way on impact. Both of the guys who supplied the hits left their feet. The only true differences I see between these two hits are that the Downie hit happened with the two players traveling at faster speeds, and that McAmmond was left with more of an injury then the other guy was.
I do not feel that these two hits, in terms of suspension, are 20 games apart. Do you? What were the reasons behind the Downie suspension? He left his feet and hit a guy in the head who was in a vulnerable position. Which part of this criteria doesn't fit the Phaneuf hit? The reasoning said nothing about speed and the power of the impact.
I am not going to compare this clip to the Boulerice clip because this was more instinctual turning around and throwing the stick up then Boulerice's blatant cross check to the face, which I will NEVER defend.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYuIigp9J-M
But you are telling me a crosscheck to the face doesn't deserve a suspension? 1:19 left on the clock, right after getting drilled into the boards, down 5 to 1 and that wasn't an intent to injure with a stick?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g3poEP7_Ec
This could have been a clean check had he stayed low but he elected to go high on the guy. No suspension? Nearly decapitated him.
I can't find a clip of the Sutton hit on Kukkonen, but you run a guy with 2 seconds left on the clock down 3-2 with the puck pinned on the boards and 4 guys around it? He decided to come up above the guys bent over fighting for the puck and drill Kukkonen's head into the boards? No suspension?
Once again, my intention for this post is not to say the Flyers shouldn't have gotten the suspensions they have been given. My intentions are to show the inconsistency within the league.
There is no reason that a suspension should only be handed down if a player is injured and left laying on the ice after the hit. With these hits that dont result in injury not being called, its going to lead to more and more injuries. The league seems to be only looking out for its reputation, not the safety of its players in my opinion.
It looks to me as the only way a suspension is handed down is if there is an outcry about a hit league wide. You will then see Campbell hand down a suspension. And when do these outcry's usually occur? When a player is injured. Thats pretty much the bottom line with the suspensions right now in the NHL. Its an absolute bogus way of handling the situation.
A fellow Flyers blogger pointed out the new high sticking penalty rule, if there is blood you get an extra 2 minutes. This I think sums up the stance of the league.
Once again, don't respond to this blog with hatred towards me like I am defending the Flyers. The Flyers deserved the suspensions they were given, but there are numerous other hits around the league that also deserve them as well if the ultimate goal is to remove head shots from the game.
Pretty good read. The only part I'm a little confused with is the Sutton clip. Obviously I have some bias toward this section but Sutton likes to come across the ice looking for the body check and when guys move he uses his hands and catches them in the chest or shoulders. I know the hit against Kukkonen your reffering to and I remember posting on here after the game "don't be surprised if Sutton gets a few games for the hit". Either then that, the League doesn't suspend superstars and are inconsistant on their discipline process and procedures. The whole thing is a joke.
Wow...did Phaneuf receive a penalty?
No penalty on Phaneuf. The Sutton hit was against the end boards in the Flyers zone. He came in from the blueline as time expired and hit Kukkonen who is 5 or 6 inches short. Sutton's elbow was what made contact with Kukk's head. But all Sutton got was a two minute minor.
Holy crap... did you delete my comment? Really?
Really nice FlyersAreBackk. I belive the two most recent suspensions to the Flyers are pretty fair considering the lack of evidence towards malice, and you get extra points for not spouting some drivel about players putting themselves at risk. I think the cross-check to the head should be 10-15 games and probation. Phaneuf should get 15-20 for intent to injure with probation. The dude that threw that high-speed open ice elbow to the head gets 40 games and double-secret probation. Downie's hit was beyond disgraceful as it is blatantly intended to concuss and he's lucky McCammond isn't in a coma or worse. 1 year with threat of lifetime ban. Thanks for the post, well done.
Great post - its a shame a clip of that Sutton hit doesn't seem to exist. I've made the same points in threads previously but just got frustrated and gave up.
The Downie hit and the Phaneuf hit are light years apart. I can't beleive that anyone could think that those two hits are similar. Downie skated half the length of the ice and hunted down a player, in a fit of rage. Phaneuf was playing the game and trying to play the body. You need to go back and review the criteria that Campbell stated in regards to the Downie hit.
wow... Phaneuf didn't hunt him down, he completed a check. Downie left his feet before the hit, Phaneuf came off his feet with the force off the hit. One was legal. Guess what? It wasn't Downie's hit. Phaneuf jsut had a very good hard hit. the Sutton one wasn't so bad. The stick wasn't' to the face, the thing that hit the face was his elbow. Still not pretty and he got a fine and a penalty. That's plenty for that hit.
honestly, MJL is right on here.... Downie flew down toward the net from about the freakin red line... he was like a missle looking for a target, any target. way different than the Phaneuf hit...
there was not a huge difference. like i said the speed of the hit was the difference. Which was a result of him flying down the ice like that. Phaneuf left his feet and went at the head. Thats a suspension.
I just watched the Phaneuf hit on Hudler about 10 times. If you use the pause on YouTube, you can get it paused at the exact moment of impact. At the moment of impact, both of Phaneuf's skates are firmly on the ice. His elbow is down, and contact is made with his shoulder on Hudler. Not only shouldn't there be a suspension, but it's ot even a penalty. That is 100% a clean hit. With the advanced technology the NHL can look at that frame by frame. The Refs got it right. The league got it right. Using that hit to compare with any other hit that resulted in a suspension is completely basis. And to say otherwise is ignoring the facts and the Rules.