|
|
Post by blny on Oct 5, 2015 17:21:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 5, 2015 17:47:34 GMT -5
While I'm glad they FINALLY got it right with this kind of repeat seek-and-destroy goon….that office is as two-faced as it gets.
Silfverberg was stripped of the puck .8 seconds before he was hit….."well past the length of time allowable for legally finishing a check".
Should they review the Chara hit on Pacioretty again? (rhetorical) Still looking for the "unfortunate" clause in the Rule Book.
With Colin Campbell at the helm, the supplemental discipline still depends upon who did the hitting and/or who was hit.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Oct 5, 2015 17:55:12 GMT -5
While I'm glad they FINALLY got it right with this kind of repeat seek-and-destroy goon….that office is as two-faced as it gets. Silfverberg was stripped of the puck .8 seconds before he was hit….. "well past the length of time allowable for legally finishing a check". Should they review the Chara hit on Pacioretty again? (rhetorical) Still looking for the "unfortunate" clause in the Rule Book. With Colin Campbell at the helm, the supplemental discipline still depends upon who did the hitting and/or who was hit. No argument with any of the above from me. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Oct 5, 2015 18:23:21 GMT -5
While I'm glad they FINALLY got it right with this kind of repeat seek-and-destroy goon….that office is as two-faced as it gets. half right . . . and for that blame the players union. nine times now -- NINE -- Torres has been on the carpet. NINE!!! and yet this is treated as a first because enough time has passed so that the others don't count/have been forgiven. the book should have been thrown long ago -- the whole heavy tome . . . and he should be gone period. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 5, 2015 19:38:43 GMT -5
What? Is a 41-game suspension a first-time illegal check to the head ruling?
At first glance, I thought the other incidents factored into the decision.
Regardless, if he doesn't learn after a half-season smack, he'll likely be gone for good after the next barbaric move.
Check that....likely only a full season....ha!
To your point about the NHLPA, I've been in agreement with that for years. Brotherhood looking out for each other across the board?
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Oct 5, 2015 19:56:18 GMT -5
What? Is a 41-game suspension a first-time offender ruling? At first glance, I thought the other incidents factored into the decision. Regardless, if he doesn't learn after a half-season suspension, he'll likely be gone for good after the next barbaric move. Check that....likely only a full season....ha! ya, I know. a bit of hyperbole. perhaps past history was in the back of their minds when they suspended him . . . and maybe the last suspension (2013) counted . . . but it ticks me off that someone with a history is considered not to have one because it was "so long agon" (2 or 3 years is "long ago"?). This is the fifth time Torres has been suspended in his NHL career. FIFTH! by now he should be gone for life. but they don't look out for one another . . . or they'd agree to harsher penalties for head shots -- in fact, they'd lead the charge for them! |
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Oct 5, 2015 20:29:56 GMT -5
What? Is a 41-game suspension a first-time offender ruling? At first glance, I thought the other incidents factored into the decision. Regardless, if he doesn't learn after a half-season suspension, he'll likely be gone for good after the next barbaric move. Check that....likely only a full season....ha! ya, I know. a bit of hyperbole. perhaps past history was in the back of their minds when they suspended him . . . and maybe the last suspension (2013) counted . . . but it ticks me off that someone with a history is considered not to have one because it was "so long agon" (2 or 3 years is "long ago"?). This is the fifth time Torres has been suspended in his NHL career. FIFTH! by now he should be gone for life. but they don't look out for one another . . . or they'd agree to harsher penalties for head shots -- in fact, they'd lead the charge for them! The "history" is wiped out only for purposes of determining how much salary he loses for the suspension. A player's full history is considered when determining the length of a suspension. As mentioned in this TSN article, "By not being suspended in the last 18 months, the determination for a "repeat offender" for monetary forfeiture, Torres saved himself approximately $621,639.71 in salary". |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 5, 2015 20:33:03 GMT -5
There's the NHLPA's real concern.
All about the wallet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Oct 5, 2015 20:42:50 GMT -5
There's the NHLPA's real concern. All about the wallet. What might be interesting would be if a player is suspended for an illegal hit (let's call him "Torres") and the player he hits misses any games (let's call him "Head Case"), then Torres has to pay the greater of whatever fine is imposed by the league and Head Case's salary for the time Head Case is injured and unable to play. In the latter case, the money is paid to Head Case's team to reimburse them for the salary paid to Head Case. Wouldn't that be a hoot. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Oct 6, 2015 8:41:42 GMT -5
 Meet Raffi. I know, you didn't recognize him out of hockey gear. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Oct 6, 2015 9:18:59 GMT -5
I saw him play in junior in Brampton & he was the same player then. He was a 40 goal scorer then so it was tolerated.
Hard to believe this dumbass was a 5th overall pick in 2000.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Oct 6, 2015 13:20:24 GMT -5
They need to give 40 game suspensions on the 2nd occasion not the 7th. That will stop it in its tracks.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Oct 6, 2015 13:30:37 GMT -5
They need to give 40 game suspensions on the 2nd occasion not the 7th. That will stop it in its tracks. Yep. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Oct 7, 2015 21:13:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Oct 8, 2015 11:43:55 GMT -5
Maybe he should file for an appeal ... after all he could get 51 games instead ... Cheers. |
|
