The 2010-2011 Suspension Thread

[J22 0]

i'll take your word for it. i've never lived in a non hockey market. the closer to the glass, the more desirable and more expensive. tickets in vancouver that sit you anywhere near the bench say explicitly "view may be obstructed" and thus cost a little less. club section is directly across from the benches (on penalty box side) and command the highest prices in the building. you dont have a chance at sitting any closer than 6 rows from the bottom if you havent been a STH for 10+ years.

but thats just vancouver.

anyways, to add to the discussion, one of his quotes explicity says "i was standing straight up" which is the dumbest thing to say, because you can CLEARLY see him leaning over the railing. as for video proof, apart from what i've heard was said, manny malhotra's reaction would lead most to believe that the dude said more than "way to be professional". rick grabbed him, shook him and let him go. i LOVE that MacT stepped up on tsn and spoke from experience when he kinda/sorta empathised with the experience and reaction.

pat kane had a great quote "if it wasnt for the fans, we wouldnt be playing". and its true, but i have to say that just because you spent $100+ on a seat, doesnt entitle you to voice your opinion or taunt a player. yes, it is the pros responsibility to stay focused, and for losing track of that focus rick will be and should be suspended. in the heat of the moment (JUST AS I SAID and MacT confirmed on air) rick was prepared for a fight and got turned down, he was flying high, just bad timing all around. he said back in the day (during that brawl in NY against the bruins), if a fan taunted or enticed a player, the whole team went after him.

its absolutely true. any lawyer will tell you that its easier to win settlement if you've pressed criminal charges first. the first question they will ask is "have you filed charges". however, they do not go hand in hand, just because one is charged with a criminal offense doesnt automatically mean that the victim will win his civil case.

So much fail in one post. Lets break down the bolded parts one by one.

The Kid is so clearly leaning over the railing that you cant even see his head in the clip. I dont know about you but if i was leaning over the railing im guessing my head would end up about waist level.

Yea Malhotra is so enraged by what the fan was saying that he is looking in the opposite direction, and almost turns around before Rypien is already down the tunnel, almost.

Isnt Vancouver the home of the oh so loved "green men"? Buying a ticket absolutely entitles you to "voice your opinion or taunt a player"

[Chadd 916]

but thats just vancouver.

That clears everything up

Buying a ticket absolutely entitles you to "voice your opinion or taunt a player"

It shouldn't, but every arena allows it as long as you're taunting the other team.

[shotty 7]

So much fail in one post. Lets break down the bolded parts one by one.

The Kid is so clearly leaning over the railing that you cant even see his head in the clip. I dont know about you but if i was leaning over the railing im guessing my head would end up about waist level.

Yea Malhotra is so enraged by what the fan was saying that he is looking in the opposite direction, and almost turns around before Rypien is already down the tunnel, almost.

Isnt Vancouver the home of the oh so loved "green men"? Buying a ticket absolutely entitles you to "voice your opinion or taunt a player"

1:00 on the dot in this vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NrPP2CnidI. pause it. see the grey brace that holds the glass? that is 90 degrees (straight). see the kids hands. they are over the rail, see his arm? over. see his shoulder and head? no because they are out of frame, but you're ignorant if cant see that he's leaning over the rail. at 1:01 hes already starting to lean back because he sees rypien coming, the entire altercation lasted less than 4 seconds.

you're right about malhotra. i am mistaken. i thought he was right there the whole time.

yes, vancouver had the green men. they sat next to the penalty box and pantomimed/danced.

[chippa13 1844]

Streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeettttttttttttttttccccccccccccccccchhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[Justin Liedloff 13]

Sorry shotty, but your homer colors are flying high.

I watched the game live. Physically, the guy didn't do anything. He wasn't leaning over the rail, nothing. He was standing and clapping. Last time I looked, you can stand and clap. Was he chirping the player? No one knows, but he certainly wasn't provoking a physical response.

Rypien gets the book. He's going to get 5 games for the sucker punch, 10 games for abusing the official, and another 10 games for the fan interaction . . . and he deserves every game of it.

[Brian Harte 1]

suprisingly small amount!

[Chadd 916]

Most "experts" were predicting double that length. Usually when Bettman is involved it's a serious suspension, I guess they talked him down on this one.

[Justin Liedloff 13]

They clearly did not factor in the sucker punch or abuse of official. Rypien got of extremely lucky. And I guess this goes to show that if you're willing to sit for 6 games, feel free to initiate altercations with anyone in the building.

Retarded!

[camhockey16 5]

i wonder if the minnesota staff played into him only getting 6 games since they didnt have the stantion pulled all the way out. is there any news of the minnesota staff getting fined or reprimanded?

[Chadd 916]

It's funny listening to every interview where they ask a player, exec or media guy about the suspension and they all sound confused by the fact that it was only six games. None of them will say anything negative, but it is certainly implied in some of the comments.

[J22 0]

Here are the rules straight from nhl.com, pertaining to abuse of officials

40.2 Automatic Suspension – Category I - Any player who deliberately strikes an official and causes injury or who deliberately applies physical force in any manner against an official with intent to injure, or who in any manner attempts to injure an official shall be automatically suspended for not less than twenty (20) games. (For the purpose of the rule, “intent to injure” shall mean any physical force which a player or goalkeeper knew or should have known could reasonably be expected to cause injury.)

40.3 Automatic Suspension – Category II - Any player who deliberately applies physical force to an official in any manner (excluding actions as set out in Category I), which physical force is applied without intent to injure, or who spits on an official,shall be automatically suspended for not less than ten (10) games.

It seems odd to me that had Rypien done this to a ref he would have received 10 games at a minimum and more likely 20. But he only gets 6 games to do it to a fan?

[shotty 7]

He's going to get 5 games for the sucker punch, 10 games for abusing the official, and another 10 games for the fan interaction . . . and he deserves every game of it.

apparently coly and betts are homers too.

[vek 0]

Just give the kid an apology, season tickets and be done with it. If he wants more, then shame on him.

[troy 12]

Dustin Brown ejected tonight for an intentional hit to the head. Nice to see that call being made in a very applicable situation. Is there a mandatory suspension that comes with that penalty or something that will stil be reviewed for length?

[Justin Liedloff 13]

He won't get suspended. The contact to the 'head' was marginal at best. Replays showed the majority of contact was shoulder. That said, it was a lateral and dangerous hit, as the player just finished shooting, didn't see the hit coming, and had to way of defending himself. I think a MAJOR and GAME as the right call, but no further suspension will be added.

[troy 12]

Maybe he won't get suspended, but he should.

[Justin Liedloff 13]

Maybe he won't get suspended, but he should.

I disagree. This is a very fine line the NHL is treading. As the replay showed, the majority of contact was on the shoulder. Does his follow through come up? Yes. Too many people see the height of the follow through and not the impact. They shoulder patches were almost a direct hit. This hit was certainly a blind side hit, but it wasn't directed at the head. The on ice officials made the only call they could, as at game speed, it certainly looked like a high hit. To be honest, I commend the officials for having the balls to be among the first to make that call.

However, since the NHL will have the benefit of multiple replay angles, they'll see the true nature of the hit, and he won't be suspended. The NHL has said from the beginning that they have no intention of removing hitting from the NHL. They are just trying to eliminate blindside head shots.

BTW, here's a link to the video:

[troy 12]

Not my point, the league says they want to get rid of this entire play. When a player is defenseless after releasing a shot just inside the blue and someone comes out of nowhere to drill him. If Miettinen's head is three inches higher he could be in the hospital. i said he might not be suspended because the NHL more often than not punishes the result as opposed to the action. I have never disputed where the contact occurred on Miettinen, but the play itself should be illegal according to the new mandates.

[Justin Liedloff 13]

I see what you're saying. I think the issue here is that the new mandates specifically mention that the main point of contact, or target, must be the head. I think the NHL is trying to draw a very very very fine line between legal and illegal hits. They (the NHL) realizes that hitting is part of the game, and as soon as they start suspending for clean shoulder checks, blindside or otherwise, the PA, along with many hockey purists, will be up in arms.

FWIW, I agree that this type of play should be taken out of the game, but, under the current mandate, I don't think he should be suspended, simply because of the wording.

I do agree wholeheartedly that the NHL punishes the result vs. the actions. It has been that way for years, and I have never liked it.

[chippa13 1844]

Thankfully, Brown didn't grab one of those evil clapping Wild fans.

[troy 12]

I see what you're saying. I think the issue here is that the new mandates specifically mention that the main point of contact, or target, must be the head. I think the NHL is trying to draw a very very very fine line between legal and illegal hits. They (the NHL) realizes that hitting is part of the game, and as soon as they start suspending for clean shoulder checks, blindside or otherwise, the PA, along with many hockey purists, will be up in arms.

FWIW, I agree that this type of play should be taken out of the game, but, under the current mandate, I don't think he should be suspended, simply because of the wording.

I do agree wholeheartedly that the NHL punishes the result vs. the actions. It has been that way for years, and I have never liked it.

Yeah, i just broadly interpreted the rule as "all blindside hits". I didn't realize the finer distinctions the NHL was trying to make, and I'm willing to bet they might not either.

[Chadd 916]

They (the NHL) realizes that hitting is part of the game, and as soon as they start suspending for clean shoulder checks, blindside or otherwise, the PA, along with many hockey purists, will be up in arms.

If those are the same "purists" that applauded Scott Stevens head hunting, they can rot in hell. I agree that this won't be a suspension because there was no injury, and let's be honest, that's really the only criteria the NHL really has anymore.

[chippa13 1844]

Curious in the statement about Brown that the league may look at rescinding his game misconduct if the Kings request it. Not exactly what I would call supporting your officials.

[Justin Liedloff 13]

If those are the same "purists" that applauded Scott Stevens head hunting, they can rot in hell. I agree that this won't be a suspension because there was no injury, and let's be honest, that's really the only criteria the NHL really has anymore.

Even as a Devil's fan, I really didn't like the headhunting that Scott Stevens did . . . except maybe the hit on Paul Kariya. He wasn't hitting to play physical, he was hitting to hurt, and that, in my opinion, has no place in the game. It's one thing to play a very physical game, and a whole other to try and take someone's head off.

Curious in the statement about Brown that the league may look at rescinding his game misconduct if the Kings request it. Not exactly what I would call supporting your officials.

I don't agree with this one bit. The officials made the only call they could at the time. They saw what they did, and called it accordingly. What's the point of giving the officials instructions to call these hits, only to reverse the calls if slow motion replay shows otherwise. Ridiculous.

[Chadd 916]

I don't agree with this one bit. The officials made the only call they could at the time. They saw what they did, and called it accordingly. What's the point of giving the officials instructions to call these hits, only to reverse the calls if slow motion replay shows otherwise. Ridiculous.

You have to remember that Colin Campbell had to have this rule forced onto him by the players and GMs, yet he is the one responsible for enforcing it. He has shown, through his rulings, that he would rather have stars injured than punish marginal players. His enforcement standards, nebulous as they may be, are not in line with a major professional sports league. Especially one trying to (re)gain market share in a crowded sports landscape.