| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
semin-rules
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1915 Posts |
 Posted - 01/08/2011 : 09:58:02
|
Last night Ben Eager sucker punched Colby Armstrong right in the eye and did some
damage to it, as you can see in the interview after! Armstrong was pretty casual about it however which I thought was pretty funny!
Not only did the leafs score 4 goals on his penalty, eager also got 4 games for the punch.
And on the same night, in the Detroit/ Calgary game, Brad Stuart suffered a broken jaw after Tom kostopolous had hit him. Stuart is out indefinitely now and for what? The game was tied at four at the moment I am pretty sure, so there was no
reason for that hit as Babcock said after the game.
There's gotta be a way to stop that, what do you guys think?
|
Edited by - semin-rules on 01/08/2011 13:22:10
|
|
|
ToXXiK1
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
696 Posts |
Posted - 01/10/2011 : 01:49:35
|
| The only way, and I mean the only way to take this crap out of the game is to make the suspensions meaningful. 20 - 25 game suspensions not only hurt the player's wallet, but hurts the coach by having a player out of the lineup and the owner for lost (possible) revenues, depending on said player, that fans may have come to the games to see play. Other than that, this crap will not only continue, but will happen with more frequency. Crosby was out for? (may still be out, i'm not sure) and the offending player got what? Matt Cooke got what? Richards got what? It's a joke the minimal penatly for possibly ending a man's career........ |
 |
|
|
Guest9052
( )
|
Posted - 01/10/2011 : 03:44:15
|
A good rule of thumb on hits like these should be a suspension lasting at least as long as the injury inflicted with said hit.
And maybe make the minimum offense for a head shot like 10 Games or something along those lines.
Unfortunately, when you mix that level of intensity with that level of testosterone people are going to get hurt. Thus I believe that increasing the punishment is the only way to curb such unnecessary hits to the head.
T-RAV |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 01/10/2011 : 05:42:07
|
That sucker punch was a bit of a bad cicrcumstance, frankly . . . Armstrong was just unlucky enough to be looking down/away, and with the scrum they had Eagar probably though he was well aware of him, and the punch landed perfect. I thought it warranted a one game suspension, just to send the message that it won't be tolerated . . . but I wasn't too upset about it. They were jostling for the puck, it wasn't totally out of the blue.
And to comment about suspending for as long as the injury - I totally and vehemntly disagree with that. I think it should ONLY be based on the severity of the hit, and how illegal the infraction was, and if it was clearly malicious (subjective, yes . . . but sometimes it's obvious). You don't want to see guys suspended for 40 games for what turned out to be a bit of a bad hit, just because the guy landed awkwardly and broke his collarbone or something . . . that is the opposite of fair.
All that being said, I agree that punishments should fit the crime, and the punishments these days are very minor, and have little to no effect.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/10/2011 : 06:41:41
|
Ya, I don't agree with the punishment lasting as long as the injury. That is basically saying hit people as dirty as you want and take a risk of them not getting hurt. Or, make a mistake and lose the season.
Consider the Thornton hit on Perron. It was a suspendable hit but there is nothing that Thornton being out for the season for the first suspension of his career (that I am aware of).
People fail to see the point of punishment is to manipulate behavior and it's never 100% right for every situation. The current program is too soft(in my opinion) and a player being suspended for as long as the injured player is one means would not change anything either. Once the NHL begins suspending on the action rather than the outcome and the players involved only than things will change.
For a kicker, less throw in a weird rules for kicks. If a player does a suspendable infraction the other team gets to pick the player to serve the suspension. For example, Rupp hits Ovechkin to the head and receives a 5 game suspension the Capitals can then say that Crosby must serve the suspension.
How quickly would you see goons out of the NHL??? |
|
|
|
spade632
Rookie
Canada
247 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2011 : 16:19:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Once the NHL begins suspending on the action rather than the outcome and the players involved only than things will change.
For a kicker, less throw in a weird rules for kicks. If a player does a suspendable infraction the other team gets to pick the player to serve the suspension. For example, Rupp hits Ovechkin to the head and receives a 5 game suspension the Capitals can then say that Crosby must serve the suspension.
How quickly would you see goons out of the NHL???
I agree completely Beans - they need to suspend for the action and not the outcome and be, above all, consistent about it.
Wouldn't if be simple to put in the "World Jr." rule (or a modified version thereof) that read:
"Any hit to the head (and neck), whether intentional or not shall result in a 5 minute major for "hitting to the head," a game misconduct, and subsequent review by the League."
They could also add a minimum penalty clause too - i.e.
1st offence - automatic 5 games (+ any extra as deemed by the League)
2nd offence - automatic 10 games (+ any extra)
3rd offence - automatic 20games (+ any extra)
etc..
Of course, leaving discretion in the mix could put it back into the "suspending for the outcome."
As far as the idea of teams picking who serves suspensions - it'll never happen, but it would definitely be interesting (and would certainly result in more "careful" play)! |
Edited by - spade632 on 01/18/2011 16:21:36 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Unnecessary Headshots 
