The Day We've Been Waiting For

[All Flash 49]

Lets just hope that Shanny's first few rulings are nothing like that of Mike Murphy's Stanley Cup finals ruling.........

[Vinny_R 1]

I'm not totally down with the principle of one guy doing this job. It makes the thing too subjective. It gives too much responsabilities and too much pressure on one guy. Think about if Shanahan have to give a big suspension on a Tampa Bay player, were his friend Steve Yzerman is the GM, maybe he'll soften the suspension (I said MAYBE). I'm more down with a commitee of three guys, one ex-player, one ex-GM and one ex-ref. They could discuss and vote for if they don't agree. I know some analyst talked about that, but I agree with them.

[wrangler 157]

I think with more opinions, you'll get more inconsistency. A committee can fuck up anything.

[Vinny_R 1]

The thing I like about the commitee is that everybody have their own scale on what happens on the ice. Let's say that I'm alone taking decision, so I think that spearing a guy is the worse thing that could be done (not true but it's for the example). So one guy spear another one in the guts. I give him 5 games. The same night, someone jump in the air, hit a guy. Let's say that in my opinion, it's not worse than the spearing, so I gave him 2 games. The thing is it's only one one guy opinion. If more than one guy take the decision, they will fight their point of view and probably the two players will get the same suspension (let's say 4 games), because in the opinion of the other guys in the commitee, jumping to hit is the worse thing.

I just don't see one man having the absolut truth and make every decisions fair enough.

[wrangler 157]

I don't think the league disciplinarian is totally on his own. I believe there is some general guidance from the league, and consultation with staff. But, yes, it's his decision in the end. And he's responsible for it.

With a committee, there's a diffusion of responsibility, making it tougher to focus the spotlight on whoever screwed up a decision. There can also be individual inconsistencies combining for absurd inconsistencies coming out of the committee. And if it seems tough to find one guy who can do the job well, how easily can you find three? And which, if any, do you replace if it's not working? I think it's much more likely to get consistency from one guy, and to isolate the problem if it's not working.

Committees can be nice for discussion and brainstorming, but for efficient and consistent decisions, I'm in favor of giving one guy the job.

[Chadd 916]

Think about if Shanahan have to give a big suspension on a Tampa Bay player, were his friend Steve Yzerman is the GM, maybe he'll soften the suspension (I said MAYBE).

If he shows favoritism to any team or GM he should be fired. Colin Campbell just wasn't consistent enough for anyone to detect a pattern.