How stupid is Chris Simon?

[Wolfpack_1986 146]

*snicker*.... tootoo

[Chadd 916]

I still believe this wouldn't have been any more than 10 games, at the very most, had it not been Chris Simon. The only reason it ended up being this long is all of the media attention forced Bettman to get involved.

The play was stupid and dangerous but much less so than a number of plays this season.

[TBLfan 25]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

[Chadd 916]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

I don't believe there was any real intent, nor do I believe there was any real potential for injury. Had there been a desire to hurt Ruutu, Simon would have stomped on him just above the boot and not square in the middle of it. All I'm saying is that the NHL is punishing Chris Simon for doing something dumb and dangerous again. The next guy to do something like this isn't going to get anywhere close to 30.

[Krev 86]

*snicker*.... tootoo

Absolutely hate the sonuvabitch.

[chippa13 1844]

I wanna know exactly what it is, as I'm watching the Islanders feed on Center Ice, I want know exactly what it is that he's 'going through' that is 'a really hard time for him' that made him snap like that. Apparantly he's not going to Drug/Alcohol counseling, so what is it?

Everyone on the TV, announcers, players they interviewed from the Isles are making it sound like something else is going on in his personal life that makes him an idiot. He just find out is son is gay or something?

The racial background card does not fly here at all cause he's apparantly had to deal with that his whole career, and as such this far into his career should be able to handle anything that comes about because of that.

What does it matter what his personal issues are? They are his issues. If he wanted you to know then you would know.

To quote a famous movie..............

"Where's Principal Rooney?"

"He left school grounds on personal business."

"What the hell does that mean?"

"That it is personal and none of your business."

Quote all the bullshit movies you want, I want to know why people are defending a proven scumbag and why he still even has a chance to play in the NHL.

I want to know because if he can't control his personal issues he should not be given the right to play in the league, and he's lost that privledge once again. If he's got these issues and yet they're going to continue to allow him to play then we should know what is tolerable and what is not by the league. Drugs/Alcohol are not supposed to be, Simon has a history with that, yet they say it has nothing to do with this case. All signs are pointing to yes it does at this point, partly because Campbell slipped and said it was, then retracted his statement. So, if its not drugs/alcohol, which results in some pretty lengthy penalties (Theo Fleury), yet its something that causes a man to attack fellow man on several occasions, what is it that he is still allowed to be in this league.

Personally I think we have the right to know why the league is giving him a free pass on his 'personal demons'. Essentially that is what they are giving him for this. Yeah 30 games is 30 games, but we all know he should be gone for good.

First, anyone who spent much of their formative years in the 80's will tell you that Ferris Bueller's Day Off is anything but a bullshit movie.

Second, you have zero right to know just like everybody else. If Simon's issues are such that he requires medical or mental treatment then you have zero right to that information. In fact, there are extremely strict statutes that say so. Without Simon coming out and telling you, don't expect to ever hear.

[trevor13478 1]

First, anyone who spent much of their formative years in the 80's will tell you that Ferris Bueller's Day Off is anything but a bullshit movie.

Second, you have zero right to know just like everybody else. If Simon's issues are such that he requires medical or mental treatment then you have zero right to that information. In fact, there are extremely strict statutes that say so. Without Simon coming out and telling you, don't expect to ever hear.

while that is true, if Simon wants to cite these problems as his reason for being a jackass, then he should back them up. otherwise i will look at them as just bullshit excuses.

[#96 0]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

I don't believe there was any real intent, nor do I believe there was any real potential for injury. Had there been a desire to hurt Ruutu, Simon would have stomped on him just above the boot and not square in the middle of it. All I'm saying is that the NHL is punishing Chris Simon for doing something dumb and dangerous again. The next guy to do something like this isn't going to get anywhere close to 30.

Chadd I'm gonna have to completely disagree with you on that. He saw Ruutu was down because he had just slew footed him, saw he was exposed, clearly looked at his leg (you can see him looking down) and then lifted his leg and stomped straight down.

I think that was just as bad as the Hollweg hit in terms of intent. I think what was lacking was the actual damage that was done. He obviously meant to hit Hollweg in the face because he aimed and swung high. And he obviously meant to use his skate blade on Ruutu's leg.

He got lucky both weren't uglier IMHO.

[RadioGaGa 162]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

I don't believe there was any real intent, nor do I believe there was any real potential for injury. Had there been a desire to hurt Ruutu, Simon would have stomped on him just above the boot and not square in the middle of it. All I'm saying is that the NHL is punishing Chris Simon for doing something dumb and dangerous again. The next guy to do something like this isn't going to get anywhere close to 30.

But, doesn't the fact that Simon slew foots Ruutu down then steps on him imply a certain amount og intent? He does pull his leg to cause him to fall.

[Theo 1]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

I don't believe there was any real intent, nor do I believe there was any real potential for injury. Had there been a desire to hurt Ruutu, Simon would have stomped on him just above the boot and not square in the middle of it. All I'm saying is that the NHL is punishing Chris Simon for doing something dumb and dangerous again. The next guy to do something like this isn't going to get anywhere close to 30.

But, doesn't the fact that Simon slew foots Ruutu down then steps on him imply a certain amount og intent? He does pull his leg to cause him to fall.

I'd say the 1st step as you say in slewfooting him, and then Simon actually to step down on his skate (keep in mind he was not vividly looking down to see exactly where he got him), combined with his past inability to control himself out there pretty much shows the extent- which obviously is there

[Chadd 916]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

I don't believe there was any real intent, nor do I believe there was any real potential for injury. Had there been a desire to hurt Ruutu, Simon would have stomped on him just above the boot and not square in the middle of it. All I'm saying is that the NHL is punishing Chris Simon for doing something dumb and dangerous again. The next guy to do something like this isn't going to get anywhere close to 30.

But, doesn't the fact that Simon slew foots Ruutu down then steps on him imply a certain amount og intent? He does pull his leg to cause him to fall.

Intent to stomp him, yes. Intent to do serious damage, no. It wasn't accidental and I'm not trying to justify his actions. In fact, I won't miss him if ne never plays another game in the NHL. My point was simply that this is a suspension based on who he is and the media attention that has surrounded this situation more than it is based on the act itself.

[RadioGaGa 162]

Intent to stomp him, yes. Intent to do serious damage, no. It wasn't accidental and I'm not trying to justify his actions. In fact, I won't miss him if ne never plays another game in the NHL. My point was simply that this is a suspension based on who he is and the media attention that has surrounded this situation more than it is based on the act itself.

I'd think whenever you knowingly step on an opponent wearing a sharpened metal blade on your foot you are intending a certain amount of damage/injury.

I also think that at some point you have to assess punishment based on character/past actions. A 4, 5 or 6 time offender has to have a harder punishment than a first timer (even if the action it self is the same).

[D aka speck 0]

I think that punishment is an attempt to modify behavior. It's supposed to make one realize that what they did was wrong and stop and think before doing it again. At what point does the NHL decide that it's just not working with Simon (and probably a couple others).

[chippa13 1844]

Just a question: Would you change your perspective if the stomp led to a serious injury?

They way I feel is that if you intend to injure someone you should get a heavy suspension and it's a 3 strikes rule. Intending to injure someone shouldn't be swept under the rug just because he didn't injure someone... It's the NHL's job to protect their players, who's to say that next time Simon is in a scrum that he might stomp on someone's arm... or maybe even throat? At this point we know he doesn't mind swinging for the fences at someone's head.

Of course that "intent" is all subjective but when you see something like this you can make a pretty good judgement.

I don't believe there was any real intent, nor do I believe there was any real potential for injury. Had there been a desire to hurt Ruutu, Simon would have stomped on him just above the boot and not square in the middle of it. All I'm saying is that the NHL is punishing Chris Simon for doing something dumb and dangerous again. The next guy to do something like this isn't going to get anywhere close to 30.

But, doesn't the fact that Simon slew foots Ruutu down then steps on him imply a certain amount og intent? He does pull his leg to cause him to fall.

Intent to stomp him, yes. Intent to do serious damage, no. It wasn't accidental and I'm not trying to justify his actions. In fact, I won't miss him if ne never plays another game in the NHL. My point was simply that this is a suspension based on who he is and the media attention that has surrounded this situation more than it is based on the act itself.

Yes, as a multiple suspendee, of course who Simon is factors into the suspension. The guy has a history of stupid acts and that tacks some games onto the suspension. However, the act itself included intent. A guy I played with had a similar action occur and he wound up with a broken ankle in the process. So yes, despite the protection of the boot, serious injury can occur when someone stomps on your foot. Ruutu was lucky that his leg was not at an angle or he could have suffered a similar injury.

[ctaz 0]

Chadd, I'm going to disagree with you on the intent. Simon meant to hurt Ruutu, but what I don't think is that Simon intentionally stompped where he did on Ruutu's foot. Simon just stomped and didn't care where he hit Ruutu just so long as he him him.

[#96 0]

Chadd are you a Liberal? You sound like the liberals after 9/11:

"We need imperical evidence before we go crusading around the world. We need to prove unequivocally who caused this disaster before we continue this violence"

Who the F cares about perceived intent, or what the guy was thinking, or if the stars are in perfect alignment! You take a homerun swing to someone's face, I think it's pretty safe to assume you knew it was going to hurt the guy. You weigh almost 300lbs, know a skateblade is like a razor, and proceed to stomp on someone's leg, there's a pretty good chance you know it might hurt.

[Chadd 916]

Chadd are you a Liberal? You sound like the liberals after 9/11:

"We need imperical evidence before we go crusading around the world. We need to prove unequivocally who caused this disaster before we continue this violence"

Who the F cares about perceived intent, or what the guy was thinking, or if the stars are in perfect alignment! You take a homerun swing to someone's face, I think it's pretty safe to assume you knew it was going to hurt the guy. You weigh almost 300lbs, know a skateblade is like a razor, and proceed to stomp on someone's leg, there's a pretty good chance you know it might hurt.

Actually, I'm the guy who bitches the most about suspensions not being severe enough. I just think this one was blown out of proportion by the media and Bettman reacted accordingly.

[#96 0]

Chadd are you a Liberal? You sound like the liberals after 9/11:

"We need imperical evidence before we go crusading around the world. We need to prove unequivocally who caused this disaster before we continue this violence"

Who the F cares about perceived intent, or what the guy was thinking, or if the stars are in perfect alignment! You take a homerun swing to someone's face, I think it's pretty safe to assume you knew it was going to hurt the guy. You weigh almost 300lbs, know a skateblade is like a razor, and proceed to stomp on someone's leg, there's a pretty good chance you know it might hurt.

Actually, I'm the guy who bitches the most about suspensions not being severe enough. I just think this one was blown out of proportion by the media and Bettman reacted accordingly.

My comment was about your idea on intent, not on the severity of punishments. I know that you are the one guy who most often says guys deserve more than they get.

[Chadd 916]

Chadd are you a Liberal? You sound like the liberals after 9/11:

"We need imperical evidence before we go crusading around the world. We need to prove unequivocally who caused this disaster before we continue this violence"

Who the F cares about perceived intent, or what the guy was thinking, or if the stars are in perfect alignment! You take a homerun swing to someone's face, I think it's pretty safe to assume you knew it was going to hurt the guy. You weigh almost 300lbs, know a skateblade is like a razor, and proceed to stomp on someone's leg, there's a pretty good chance you know it might hurt.

Actually, I'm the guy who bitches the most about suspensions not being severe enough. I just think this one was blown out of proportion by the media and Bettman reacted accordingly.

My comment was about your idea on intent, not on the severity of punishments. I know that you are the one guy who most often says guys deserve more than they get.

As I've said before, I won't miss Simon if he never plays again. I just think it's completely fucked up that everyone is jumping on the "what if" bandwagon on this one case, while the "what if" factor is completely ignored. 16 games for Bertuzzi, 30 for Simon?

[#96 0]

Chadd are you a Liberal? You sound like the liberals after 9/11:

"We need imperical evidence before we go crusading around the world. We need to prove unequivocally who caused this disaster before we continue this violence"

Who the F cares about perceived intent, or what the guy was thinking, or if the stars are in perfect alignment! You take a homerun swing to someone's face, I think it's pretty safe to assume you knew it was going to hurt the guy. You weigh almost 300lbs, know a skateblade is like a razor, and proceed to stomp on someone's leg, there's a pretty good chance you know it might hurt.

Actually, I'm the guy who bitches the most about suspensions not being severe enough. I just think this one was blown out of proportion by the media and Bettman reacted accordingly.

And by the way, you can leave all the bitching to me. I do enough of if for the both of us.

[chippa13 1844]

Chadd are you a Liberal? You sound like the liberals after 9/11:

"We need imperical evidence before we go crusading around the world. We need to prove unequivocally who caused this disaster before we continue this violence"

Who the F cares about perceived intent, or what the guy was thinking, or if the stars are in perfect alignment! You take a homerun swing to someone's face, I think it's pretty safe to assume you knew it was going to hurt the guy. You weigh almost 300lbs, know a skateblade is like a razor, and proceed to stomp on someone's leg, there's a pretty good chance you know it might hurt.

Actually, I'm the guy who bitches the most about suspensions not being severe enough. I just think this one was blown out of proportion by the media and Bettman reacted accordingly.

My comment was about your idea on intent, not on the severity of punishments. I know that you are the one guy who most often says guys deserve more than they get.

As I've said before, I won't miss Simon if he never plays again. I just think it's completely fucked up that everyone is jumping on the "what if" bandwagon on this one case, while the "what if" factor is completely ignored. 16 games for Bertuzzi, 30 for Simon?

A player's history is a factor in length of suspension. Plus, I don't think an outright comparison with Bertuzzi's "timeout" works. That happened at a strange time for the league with the lockout following that season. Bertuzzi seemed to self-honor the suspension during the lockout as, if I recall correctly, he didn't skate anywhere that year.

[Chadd 916]

A player's history is a factor in length of suspension. Plus, I don't think an outright comparison with Bertuzzi's "timeout" works. That happened at a strange time for the league with the lockout following that season. Bertuzzi seemed to self-honor the suspension during the lockout as, if I recall correctly, he didn't skate anywhere that year.

No, Bertuzzi and honor don't belong in the same sentence. He complained that the European leagues chose to uphold the NHL suspension. He made several attmepts to sign during the lockout.

[JPB_69 0]

This

A breakdown of Simon's 7 previous suspensions:

- 25 games for a high stick on Ryan Hollweg

- 2 games for kneeing Sergei Zubov

- 2 games for cross checking Ruslan Fedotenko

- 2 games for elbowing Anders Eriksson

- 1 playoff game for cross checking Peter Popovic

- 3 games for verbal comments directed at Mike Grier

- 5 games for slashing Dennis Vial

is way too much.

I was talking with my brother-in-law about this situation. He never played hockey but likes watching it. I thought everyone might be interested to hear an opinion from someone that never played. He brought up the above post of suspensions. He wondered how Simon is still in the game. He brought up that this is the stuff he sees on the news when hockey is brought up, rather than tic-tac-toe passing and scoring. He went on to say: "Hockey is a sport where you are on a sheet of ice, flying around with a stick in your hand and wearing knives on your feet. And there's a guy that's what, 250lbs stomping on another players foot??". For all the talented players in this league, a dipshit is getting all the press. This is why the NHL needs to do something to rid this crap from the game. Throw Simon out and send a message to the rest of the players, do this and you're out.

[cxo 0]

We all have ESPN. The fact that hockey is unpopular in the United States, and only gets negative press, are things we are well aware of. This entire thread is basically full of people who wouldn't care if Chris Simon never showed his face inhockey ever again. Have you seen anyone post here that doesn't think his punishment was fair? No one wants to see these things happening, whether the victim was injured or not.

[Wolfpack_1986 146]

afinigenov slew foot and kicks on friday