Jump to content

Disciplinary decisions by Brendan Shanahan


brobin

Recommended Posts

One game is about right. It would be two games, minus one for a Bruin, plus one for a Hab.

Seriously, that would be two games for most guys. I am surprised they gave him anything but when you have Bruins fans becoming embarrassed by the lack of suspensions for Marchant, etc, it was time to give them a slap on the wrist.

At least it is the game against the habs. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One game for a hit that has gotten everyone else 2 games. The only reason Shanny handed out this 1-game suspension is to make people believe he;s not favoring the Bruins. This, if anything, shows more-so how much the Bruins are favored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I'm shocked he got a game. He deserved at least two, but with no injury I'm satisfied with one game... especially since it's a Bruin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone see the Kronwall hit last night?

Yeah that was some shitty reffing.

Kronwall jumps, hits Kesler... Kesler comes up angry and gives him a shot.... no penalty to Kronwall, 2 minutes to Kesler.

Canucks come down shorthanded... Hansen runs over the goalie, Edler puts it in to the open net while Howard has been wiped out. Good Goal.

It benefitted the Canucks in the end... but it was a giant mess of refereeing.. bad calls both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that was some shitty reffing.

Kronwall jumps, hits Kesler... Kesler comes up angry and gives him a shot.... no penalty to Kronwall, 2 minutes to Kesler.

Canucks come down shorthanded... Hansen runs over the goalie, Edler puts it in to the open net while Howard has been wiped out. Good Goal.

It benefitted the Canucks in the end... but it was a giant mess of refereeing.. bad calls both ways.

Yeah, I saw that goal.. but Cole.. he interfered.. LOL.. the reffing in this league can be very entertaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I saw that goal.. but Cole.. he interfered.. LOL.. the reffing in this league can be very entertaining.

Like that high stick in the Toronto NYI game haha

The puck was just shot in the guys face and the ref thought there was a high sticking haha :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well, I am surprised, but the League was getting embarrassed by the Bruins. They got away with a ton of stuff and just kept going back to the well. Still, Marchant is an easy mark.

Wake me when they suspend Chara. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanny's video on this one was awesome.

The amazing thing about the Bruins is that they still feel like the victims. Julien gave a presser whining about the concussions to Bergeron and Savard - lamentable, I agree, but how those incidents justify Chara's attempted murder, or the can-opener on Raymond that nearly paralyzed him, or the assault on Miller, or the job on Salo, or any of the other outrages committed by a Bruins team that considers itself above the rules, I don't know. And Chiarelli had the nerve to come out and attack Shanahan for his verdict. Unfortunately that delusional sense of victimhood helps to fuel their success. It's gonna take a team like the Canucks to KILL them on the power-play to put a stop to their bulls*t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I hadn't seen the part where Marchand went into the corner and did the body check with Salo a mere 16 seconds earlier and came out of that hit frustrated and nailing Salo in the back of the head, I would have called bull on the decision to suspend Marchand.

Call me old school in this case, or not sufficiently a Habs fan if that's where you want to go, but taken in isolation, in my humble opinion, the hit looked like a hip check only slightly below the waist - and I think Habs fans would have been rioting had Robinson, for instance, been suspended every time he did that. Again, I agree with the call because of what happened before the hit, but I feel the hit itself looked more like a hip check than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not a hip check, because in a hip check you hit a guy with your hip.

Marchand hits him with his shoulder and flips Salo over the top. With a hip check he doesn't have the same leverage as he got here which was going low with his shoulder.

Marchand also went lower.

Sure both involve bending at the waist... but there is a difference between what you can do, when you flip a player over your hip and ass, and when you lead with your shoulder into his knees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

25 is good. But Keith should have gotten about that number for his vicious attack on Sedin.

The whole 'repeat offender' thing carries too much weight IMHO. Yes, it should carry some weight. But right now it seems the only way to get a suspension that actually fits the deed is to be a repeat offender.

The Torres hit was vicious, but not remotely as ridiculous as either the Weber assault on Zetterberg or the Keith 'hit' on Sedin. The explosion of hostile commentary that followed the Torres hit had more to do with Torres than with the hit itself; everyone had identified Torres as a problem case and were ready to destroy him when he did something.

This approach leads to a grotesque leniency regarding players like Chara, Keith, and Weber, all of whom got the benefit of the doubt for egregiously obvious deliberate attempts to destroy their opponents. 'Oh, Chara didn't mean to do that...' 'Well, let's give Keith five games 'cause, you know, he's a good guy...' 'Weber, well, he didn't actually cause an injury despite a deliberate attempt to inflict a concussion...'

It's basically the logic of the old boys network. You crucify the guys that are hated, but when it comes to first-time offenders, the guys that are well-liked, you show more concern for the perpetrator than the victim. The real message is: you get to commit one gruesome act of savage brutality every few years with minimal consequence. So pick your spot. Just like Chara did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think the Torres hit was that bad. I think he jumped mostly out of reflexes when he noticed he were going to colide with Hossa, sure a suspension but 25 games feels a bit much for THAT hit. (Bet the spelling of that sentence is some of the worst Ive ever done)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 is good. But Keith should have gotten about that number for his vicious attack on Sedin.

The whole 'repeat offender' thing carries too much weight IMHO. Yes, it should carry some weight. But right now it seems the only way to get a suspension that actually fits the deed is to be a repeat offender.

The Torres hit was vicious, but not remotely as ridiculous as either the Weber assault on Zetterberg or the Keith 'hit' on Sedin. The explosion of hostile commentary that followed the Torres hit had more to do with Torres than with the hit itself; everyone had identified Torres as a problem case and were ready to destroy him when he did something.

This approach leads to a grotesque leniency regarding players like Chara, Keith, and Weber, all of whom got the benefit of the doubt for egregiously obvious deliberate attempts to destroy their opponents. 'Oh, Chara didn't mean to do that...' 'Well, let's give Keith five games 'cause, you know, he's a good guy...' 'Weber, well, he didn't actually cause an injury despite a deliberate attempt to inflict a concussion...'

It's basically the logic of the old boys network. You crucify the guys that are hated, but when it comes to first-time offenders, the guys that are well-liked, you show more concern for the perpetrator than the victim. The real message is: you get to commit one gruesome act of savage brutality every few years with minimal consequence. So pick your spot. Just like Chara did.

I agree with all this.

I like the 25 games for Torres, but it doesn't mean much because I know it won't change anything for everybody else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with all this.

I like the 25 games for Torres, but it doesn't mean much because I know it won't change anything for everybody else.

Interesting comments from Alain Vigneault on this. He basically nails it when he says the Torres hit was more of a 'hockey play' than the Keith assault on Sedin, and that the ruling merely adds to the confusion. http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/stanleycup2012/2012/04/torres-suspension-adds-to-confusion-on-headshot-rulings-vigneault.html

This league is total B.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vigneault is correct. Keith's hit was far worse.

But Keith has the mitigating factor of never being suspended before.

Where Torres has 6 incidents in 3 years.... 3 in this season alone (4 in the last 13 months)... plus the Seabrook hit which he didn't get suspended or fined for (and should have).

Its clear that Torres is a player who like Matt Cooke (before his long suspension) ... isn't learning, isn't changing his game according to the rules. When that becomes the case. When its the same guy every damn time, you really have to drop the hammer and drop it hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vigneault is correct. Keith's hit was far worse.

But Keith has the mitigating factor of never being suspended before.

Where Torres has 6 incidents in 3 years.... 3 in this season alone (4 in the last 13 months)... plus the Seabrook hit which he didn't get suspended or fined for (and should have).

Its clear that Torres is a player who like Matt Cooke (before his long suspension) ... isn't learning, isn't changing his game according to the rules. When that becomes the case. When its the same guy every damn time, you really have to drop the hammer and drop it hard.

I agree that if you're a repeat offender, that should be taken into consideration. But like I said before, the ratio is totally out of whack.

Torres's hit in and of itself is not worth 25 games. But when you factor in his history, it sure is, because this guy is a menace to the safety of everyone else out there.

Keith's hit in and of itself is worth 20-25 games. If he were a repeat offender it'd be worth even more.

It's the second part of the equation the NHL has totally flubbed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering how many times Torres has been suspended it makes sense to me. Keith should have got 10 imo as a first time offender and then if he did anything like that again throw him into the Torres range of missing 30-40% of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...