| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/17/2007 : 11:09:19
There have been a number of situations this past season that have sparked the debate on discipline in the NHL. Some say that the discipline has been fair, others say too firm, and yet other say not firm enough. I want to hear your thoughts. Think about the suspensions that were handed out in the 06-07 season and playoffs to this points. I am looking for a list of the suspensions this year and have not had luck finding it, so if anyone has found it, please post it. So we will have to use what is in our heads for now.
Please put some rationale behind your opinion. A little more than "just right dude." Or, "Not even close to harsh enough!" A little thought will be appreciated.
Do you think the NHL's current practices of discipline are:
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
| 13 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/31/2007 : 18:14:57
See, that's the wrong perception in my opinion. No one said anything about not having hitting or fighting. In fact, I encourage both in the game. What I am talking about is intentional hits to the head, hits from behind, and sticks to the head/face.
The NHL needs to punish the action, not the result. That is the only way to change things.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
| SlowShot |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 16:02:12
Hey don't get me wrong i love europeans and there skill but they need a little bit more roughness in the NHL
GO DUCKS. YAY GIANTS |
| stastnysforever |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 15:53:16
quote:
Originally posted by SlowShot
I vote to harsh because hockey is supposed to be a canadian game but the way the NHL is setup its a European. Rarly any hits and fights any more and penalties every 20 seconds. IF it stays with this style they should at least be consistant.
GO DUCKS. YAY GIANTS
That was racist, kind of. but in european hockey they do call like everything so your kind of right
what do Calgary and a tea bag have in common- they're both only good for one cup |
| SlowShot |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 15:19:07
I vote to harsh because hockey is supposed to be a canadian game but the way the NHL is setup its a European. Rarly any hits and fights any more and penalties every 20 seconds. IF it stays with this style they should at least be consistant.
GO DUCKS. YAY GIANTS |
| manninm |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 13:13:37
My vote is too harsh and not harsh enough. The NHL has decided to be reactionary rather than proactive, and that's the problem. If you're going to punish players, do it right. You hit someone from behind, it's a boarding penalty. Do it with intent, it's 5 and a game, or a match, pending scenario. None of this gray area, "oh, well he wasn't hurt, so no harm no foul." You'll curb it if you start penalizing players during the game for the small penalties.
Or the NHL can go back to the way it was, which is fine too. Take out the instigator and let the teams handle it themselves. Alright Pronger, you want to hit Holmstrom like that? Fine, but Detroit's gonna make you pay for it. Granted, it's barbaric, but I guarantee you it'll cut down on cheap shots and the injuries resulting. Self policing is the old school way of discipline.
Personally, I'm a fan of the latter, but I recognize that in today's society the aforementioned self-policing system is taboo. Therefore, I am in favor of either, as long as the NHL picks a path and sticks with it. I agree with OIL. They were (somewhat) effective at curbing obstruction hooking and holding, I'm sure they could be successful at curbing hits from behind and elbows.
Because the demands on a goalie are mostly mental, it means that for a goalie, the biggest enemy is himself." ~Ken Dryden |
| OILINONTARIO |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 11:21:40
I also agree with you, Beans. It seems to me that it is very easy to identify such situations where there was obvious intent to injure. These are the ones that should be focussed on and eliminated through discipline. The obstruction crackdown has had some success in its purpose, so why is it such a stretch to try to eliminate intentional attempts to injure? With the rampant talk of taking fighting out of the game, the players should start having a bit more respect for each others' health, before their only outlet is bodychecking. |
| andyhack |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 21:20:12
I am 100% in agreement with you! Does this make me insane? Hold it, I am already insane! |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 21:02:12
I am definately on the side of not harsh enough. The NHL, in my opinion, has lost track on what discipline is. Discipline by definition is any training intended to produce a specific character or pattern of behavior. The NHL should be no different. Discipline should be designed to reduce or eliminate certain actions that are not part of the game. Examples of such are hits from behind, hits intended to injury, and stick work.
What the NHL does is not discipline. It does nothing to stop these actions from happening. Strick and consistant suspensions should and must be put into action to reduce or stop the actions that hurt the game.
I will use the Pronger hit as an example. The hit was clearly intended for something other than hockey. Regardless if it was to hurt the player, send a message, release frustration. Whatever. It was not part of hockey. So what does a one game suspension do to stop this?? Worst case senario, the one game suspension could cost the Ducks the series. But does that do anything to stop that kind of action from happening again?? Nope.
The NHL has not been consistant with the discipline either. They take into account the players involved, the injury that occured, and the situation. All should be taken into account, but not the way the NHL does it. Because Pronger is a Norris candidate and it's a playoff game and the fact that Holmstrom came back to the game, they only gave him one game.
What happens next time. What happens if a player gets hit just like Holmstrom did and he breaks his neck. What if some poor guy dies right there on the ice.
This is avoidable, and the NHL discipline will have blood on their hands if and when this happens.
My vote, not even close to harsh enough.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
| stastnysforever |
Posted - 05/18/2007 : 14:14:48
I'd say just about right because they never really let anything slide completely or give suspensions for more than like 10 games, (unless it's something really serious) |
| GOWINGS19 |
Posted - 05/17/2007 : 21:29:55
they seem to go with a play by play situational decision...some are to harsh...others aren't harsh enough
"I don’t need to score the goal. I need someone to start thinking about me and forgetting about scoring goals." -Vladmir Konstantinov |
| bonfire420 |
Posted - 05/17/2007 : 14:22:11
I couldn't really answer because I think the NHL's discipline committee is quite inconsistent. Like we were talking about in the Pronger forum it depends on what player is getting hurt and what player is responsible. I think for the most part they get it right but there are definitely some glaring discrepancies... Actually I will vote just right but lean towards not harsh enough. |
| I´m also Cånädiön |
Posted - 05/17/2007 : 11:34:14
Not harsh enough on some occations like the head hit by Pronger on Holmstrom he deserved more than 1 game suspension.....and yes you are insane |
| Pasty7 |
Posted - 05/17/2007 : 11:18:47
I selected just right but i think i lean slightly toward to harsh, I think hockey is a game made for tough guys i think the game is suppose to involve injury's and stitches, i mean if the chance of loseing your front teeth is something you don't want to risk go bowl or play golf,, hockey is a tough mans game perhaps the toughest, , the problem is no two hits or cheap shots are a like,, personaly neil's hit or drury i think to be extremly cheap and deserving of game misconduct but no suspension,, i find though that there is some bias in these decisions that i hate,, like earlier in the season when ovetchkin took out brierre as he was trying to get off the ice,, that deserved 5 games easy,,,,,, that could have been the most ridiculous hit of the year,, but brierre wasn;t hurt so no big deal right? Hell no, the only reason brierre was ok was because the door was open to the bench if he had gone into the closed door that could have been his career, bt because ovechtkin sells and at that point and time the caps were streaking ,, no action was taken,,, disgusting!!!!
Pasty |
|
|
