Chara non-suspension talk

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=358396

Marchand ended up getting a two game suspension for the hit on Umburger.

Though he did have this to say:

"I did get him in the head," he said. "That wasn't my intention. I was just trying to make contact. That stuff happens in hockey. It's a rough sport.

If he says it wasn't his intention, then OBVIOUSLY he shouldn't be suspended. Poor Marchand. What an injustice.

Edited March 17, 2011 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

[l.moustakas]

If he says it wasn't his intention, then OBVIOUSLY he shouldn't be suspended. Poor Marchand. What an injustice.

Let's see. I will put my arm and elbow up about 'yay' high. Wonder what will happen? Maybe we should hand out suspensions for sheer stupidity. Like, don't they teach how to hit when you are like 3 and 1/2 years old? But you are in the NHL and can't figure it out. Great.

As my dad is fond of saying, I was born at night, it just wasn't last night.

Edited March 17, 2011 by l.moustakas

[l.moustakas]

In the vein of my continued gripping about the league's recent take on discipline, I absolutely love how, at the GM meetings, they took a long hard look at spin-o-ramas and video review for highsticking. Really? This is what we are worried about?

Also, other this new cockamamie video review, the referees were apparently told to watch out more for charging and boarding. Yes, let's shovel all the blame and responsibility towards the referees, who are constantly given varying and near contradictory directives. We all know, at one point during the playoffs, Darren Dreger will come out and say the refs have been warned about goalie interference. Or hooking. Or late hits. Take your pick. If the refereeing leaves us scratching our collective head at times, I certainly do not blame the referees, who for the most part are quite good. Rather, I blame the league and their seeming inability to properly apply the rules as stated.

In the end, I suppose it's no wonder Stephen Walkolm left his post as Director of Officiating after only a year. He must have had his fill.

[brobin]

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/nhl/article/956784--perkins-nhl-s-lack-of-action-on-hits-speaks-louder-than-words?bn=1

I think this article nails it. Lots they can do, but all they do is talk. Watch Matt cooke get two games for throwing an elbow into a guys face.

[Clawskulls]

Call me jaded, but as soon as I heard about the Cooke incident, my second thought (after hoping RMcD was ok) was that this was just what the NHL was hoping for....

An incident with a repeat offender which would allow the NHL to 'throw the book' at somebody to 'prove' to the hockey world that they do indeed take headshots seriously. As an added benefit, it also helps people forget about the non-action with respects to the Chara/Patches incident...something new to talk about.

The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if Cooke and Gary are pals....

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The NHL is being widely praised for the Cooke suspension, and I agree they got it right. But on the other hand, it's just more of a smokescreen to disguise the pathologies of their disciplinary regime. The whole thing is predicated on presuming to have psychic insight into a player's 'intent.' What this means in practice is that if a player is a good old boy, respected around the league as a basically decent fellow (Chara) then he gets a free pass. If a player is actively disliked, why then he gets nailed.

I can't wait until PK Subban inflicts a controversial hit on someone. Judging from the essential arbitrary nature of such a system, where 'justice' is based on personal likes and dislikes, I would expect him to get a fairly stiff punishment, supported by the same pious media frauds who assured us that Chara is a saint and therefore obviously undeserving of even a token suspension for nearly killing someone with a reckless hit. Subban is a jerk, so he deserves it, see?

The entire system works like Don Cherry's mind: axiomatic biases and personal likes and dislikes, dispensed as some sort of Code and Moral Truth.

[l.moustakas]

The NHL is being widely praised for the Cooke suspension, and I agree they got it right. But on the other hand, it's just more of a smokescreen to disguise the pathologies of their disciplinary regime. The whole thing is predicated on presuming to have psychic insight into a player's 'intent.' What this means in practice is that if a player is a good old boy, respected around the league as a basically decent fellow (Chara) then he gets a free pass. If a player is actively disliked, why then he gets nailed.

I can't wait until PK Subban inflicts a controversial hit on someone. Judging from the essential arbitrary nature of such a system, where 'justice' is based on personal likes and dislikes, I would expect him to get a fairly stiff punishment, supported by the same pious media frauds who assured us that Chara is a saint and therefore obviously undeserving of even a token suspension for nearly killing someone with a reckless hit. Subban is a jerk, so he deserves it, see?

The entire system works like Don Cherry's mind: axiomatic biases and personal likes and dislikes, dispensed as some sort of Code and Moral Truth.

It will continue to be so until the league defines clear punishment guidelines for certain infractions. I mean, how does Marchand get two games for an elbow behind the head and Cooke gets 14-17 ? The fact that he is a repeat offender cannot fully explain away the 700% longer suspension.

In short, until such guidelines are put in place, it will continue feel like suspension lengths are picked with about the same randomness as lottery balls. And, unlike the lotto balls, there is no charming young lady on TV picking the numbers.

[lazy26]

It will continue to be so until the league defines clear punishment guidelines for certain infractions. I mean, how does Marchand get two games for an elbow behind the head and Cooke gets 14-17 ? The fact that he is a repeat offender cannot fully explain away the 700% longer suspension.

In short, until such guidelines are put in place, it will continue feel like suspension lengths are picked with about the same randomness as lottery balls. And, unlike the lotto balls, there is no charming young lady on TV picking the numbers.

I believe it's referred to as "The Wheel of Justice". Once it's spun, no one knows for certain where it will land.

I dream of an NHL with a predictable degree of consistency.

[BrenDittero]

It's ridiculous that there are clear rules and resulting penalties for

boarding, charging, cross checking, hand pass, high sticking, holding, hooking, icing, interference, slashing,tripping, delay of game, too many men on the ice, etc etc etc

But something as common sense as not hitting an opponent in the head still has this level of indecision and randomness in the punishment handed out.

Why they simply don't make it a 5 minute major plus automatic 5 game suspension ( upgradable upon review ) is as crazy as Don Cherry's suit collection.

The only deterrent will be consequences that players know will cost them money and time on the ice.

Whether some one is a repeat offender or not shouldn't even factor into the conversation.

[brobin]

Now Recchi is claiming that the Habs were embellishing the injury to get chara suspended. "yeah, he has a broken neck, but he was at the movies 4 days later, so what concussion"...

Wow.. what class... now I am watching TSN interview all the Bruins players about how unfair it is that chara is being made to look bad by the Habs and the Media in Monteal, when it was clearly just an accident and Chara is a saint...

[l.moustakas]

Now Recchi is claiming that the Habs were embellishing the injury to get chara suspended. "yeah, he has a broken neck, but he was at the movies 4 days later, so what concussion"...

Wow.. what class... now I am watching TSN interview all the Bruins players about how unfair it is that chara is being made to look bad by the Habs and the Media in Monteal, when it was clearly just an accident and Chara is a saint...

Source?

[dlbalr]

Source?

From the Twitterbug:

(Link to audio interview)

[BCHabnut]

Wow. This is getting insane. I mean I see several reporters saying that Patch's head was driven into the Glass by Chara. I really don't get this. The man was unconcious for 5 minutes. Chara broke a rule, by running an extremely agressive interference play. One which resulted in injury. Regardless of intent or past history, if that broken law results in an injury, the person should be suspended. Between, Recchi saying he faked it, and Thomas saying it's Government run amuck, I am shocked and surprised at the way these guys are brushing this off. I don't support a criminal investigatation, and I find it a little embarassing as a fan, but the response of the Bruins players is disgusting.

[l.moustakas]

Wow. How do you embellish unconsciousness and a damaged vertebrae? And I am sure Dr. Mulder and company were embellishing when they intervened, as they were obviously solely caring about having Chara suspended. Give me a break.

Beyond that, whatever happened to not stirring the pot. Why would Recchi intentionally light a fire under his opposition? Why give Montreal any extra motivation? Personally, if I am Claude Julien, I am none to pleased with these comments from one of my supposed veteran leaders. I would tell him in the future to, well, shut (use your imagination here) up.

[BrenDittero]

Wow. How do you embellish unconsciousness and a damaged vertebrae? And I am sure Dr. Mulder and company were embellishing when they intervened, as they were obviously solely caring about having Chara suspended. Give me a break.

Beyond that, whatever happened to not stirring the pot. Why would Recchi intentionally light a fire under his opposition? Why give Montreal any extra motivation? Personally, if I am Claude Julien, I am none to pleased with these comments from one of my supposed veteran leaders. I would tell him in the future to, well, shut (use your imagination here) up.

I think one answer could be that Recchi, Marchand and any of the other loud mouths are flapping their lips cause they like the sound it makes.

It's such an utterly ridiculous thing to say that there can't be any rational thought behind it.

[kenadian]

Is a possible fine on the way? When players/coaches criticize the refs they get fined, Avery was fined for his sloppy-seconds comment.......guess Gary's too busy trying to keep the "Yotes" deal alive.

[l.moustakas]

I think one answer could be that Recchi, Marchand and any of the other loud mouths are flapping their lips cause they like the sound it makes.

It's such an utterly ridiculous thing to say that there can't be any rational thought behind it.

Beyond that, I think they are a tad emboldened by the Boston media who, for the most part, seem to believe the Bruins can do no wrong. They simply will not call out Recchi for making such an egregious statement. And, with no players available to the media today, no one will have the opportunity to do so.

Believe me, If a Canadiens player had said something so utterly dumb, they would have been lambasted by the press. Mind you, we had a collective cow when Pacioretty said he'd rather play in Hamilton then be a bottom-six forward in Montreal.

Edited March 24, 2011 by l.moustakas

[SOOPAVILLIN]

I can't even imagine what would happen if that disrespectful? PK said something as stupid and classless as this. Wow I always thought that Recchi and Seguin were the slight shred of class the bruins had, but apparently it's Seguin.

[brobin]

If PK said something like that, the media would be all over him. Recchi accuses the Hospital of conspiracy to get chara suspended, when the ruling came down long before most of the medical statements were made. What happens? Doug McLean and Kyperos have come out in agreement with Recchi, that Pacs wasn't that badly hurt but Montreal lied about it in an attempt to get Chara suspended.

Again, this is what is wrong with this game. We have players accusing Pacs of being responsible for daring to skate near that turnbuckle, "he made himself vulnerable" and now accusing him of "faking injuries" in a conspiracy with the Montreal hospital and the Team management. We have old dogs in the media supporting these views. We have old dogs in the media rushing to the defense of Chara, to the point where they are now saying he is the victim of harassment! Poor Chara.

The league came out and said this is all good, but under pressure, jumped all over Cooke as evidence that they are doing something. I wonder how much they paid Cooke for that PR opportunity. This just days after handing out 2 game suspensions for Marchand and Heatley.. I will believe the NHL when a star player gets a 5 to 10 game suspension for a head shot. I might not live that long.

And the NHL wonders why some sponsors are questioning their involvement with these clowns? Don't forget, McDonald's already bailed on them before this latest mess. I suspect many sponsors will drop the NHL when the renewals come up. (except for beer companies, of course).

This whole mess is really turning me off the whole game. I can't stand watching TSN, etc. and see this BS be spouted. My kids are in hockey and they are confused. Even if it was an accident, their impression is the league couldn't care less that Pacs was hurt. They don't want to watch the game tonight as they are afraid a player is going to get killed. Thanks Bettman. You are losing another future fan who is sickened by the leagues response to these incidents (and to be clear, this started last year when they heard that Cooke's hit on Savard was clean!

[BrenDittero]

Beyond that, I think they are a tad emboldened by the Boston media who, for the most part, seem to believe the Bruins can do no wrong. They simply will not call out Recchi for making such an egregious statement. And, with no players available to the media today, no one will have the opportunity to do so.

Believe me, If a Canadiens player had said something so utterly dumb, they would have been lambasted by the press. Mind you, we had a collective cow when Pacioretty said he'd rather play in Hamilton then be a bottom-six forward in Montreal.

Regular season and playoff hockey are two great stories that play out every year. Like any truly exceptional story you need heroes and villains, underdogs and champions.

Stupid Recchi and Marchand comments, wildly illegal - yet uncalled hockey plays, the guilty " reaching out " to the victim, injuries that would cripple most organizations, one of the most talked about goalie trades in Habs history...

The story of this season has been outstanding..the closest thing I've seen to " The Godfather " in pro sports.

Let'em keep talking, it'll make it all the sweeter when they eventually fall.

Edited March 24, 2011 by BrenDittero

[brobin]

You know what is even sadder. Go read the comments on TSN about Recchi (from fans). Most jumped right in and agree with Recchi, Pacs is fine, just the habs faking it to get an advantage. It is amazing the amount of hate for the habs in this country, but I guess that explains the PK situation as well. Given most TSN readers are probably Leaf fans, I guess it makes sense.

Still, it makes me embarrassed to say I am a hockey fan when I read ignorant comments from other fans. Pretty hard to defend the stereotype that hockey fans are just as dumb and ignorant as most of the players.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Look. The whole pro-Chara analysis has to do with three things:

1. Intent.

2. Whether you like Chara or at least think he is a good guy, not an SOB like Cooke.

3. Whether you hate the individual Chara destroyed, or the team that individual plays for.

Practically ALL of the supporters of Chara in the media and among fans accept at least one of these principles as determinant of whether discipline was warranted. On (1), Chara's 'intent' is of course unclear, but since, at least from some camera angles it looks like the sort of play we see happening fairly routinely in other parts of the arena, he gets the benefit of the doubt. (It also helps if you subscribe to (2) or (3). But you don't have to take those extra steps). Now, I suspect that everybody can intuitively sense the problem with relying on 'intent' - it assumes psychic knowledge of what was in a player's mind. And this is why we've seen all sorts of other 'issues' added to further bolster the argument: it's the building's fault, MaxPac 'put himself' in that position, he 'jumped,' etc., etc. These are all just special pleading designed to distract us from the radical weakness of relying on 'intent' as the basis for a verdict.

(2) is even more circular. If you 'know' that Chara 'would never' do that (he's such a swell joe) then you 'know' that the intent wasn't there. This is the Don Cherry school of reasoning, where those deemed to be good guys are always in the right no matter what they do. (3) works the same way. It also works in reverse: some fans would indeed be calling for Chara's head whether or not it was warranted. Recchi is right about that much.

The real issues, which are whether this was an illegal play (it was) and a reckless play due to its specific location (it very definitely was) - and whether reckless, dangerous, illegal plays should be punishable - are therefore neatly avoided altogether.