Jump to content

Chara non-suspension talk


dlbalr
 Share

  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. How many games, if any, will Chara get?

    • 0
      5
    • 1
      1
    • 2
      4
    • 3
      1
    • 4
      0
    • 5+
      7


Recommended Posts

Unfortunately, in the nhl, if a Bruin gets a hang nail in the next game, the book will be thrown at the Habs. In fact, I am sure they have been warned by the league not to take justice into their own hands... well.. not to expect justice at all I guess.

On the other hand... the habs playoff hopes continue to fade with this key injury. If things are not looking good, maybe they should insure the Bruins enter the playoffs short handed too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Further to the hypocrisy of suspending Kostopolous because of the severity of the injury of Van Ryn here is Campbell about Kostopolous this season.

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/The-problematic-suspension-of-Tom-Kostopoulos?urn=nhl-305539

NHL VP Colin Campbell's statement on the matter:

"A number of factors were considered in reaching this decision," said NHL Senior Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell. "Kostopoulos delivered a blow to the head of an unsuspecting and vulnerable player. As well, he targeted the head of his opponent and, while the hit was not from the blindside, the head was the principle point of contact. The fact that Brad Stuart was not in possession of the puck when the blow was delivered and the serious nature of the player's injury were also considered in my decision."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing I hear is most NHL players down playing this, including the habs. You don't think that has anything to do with the fact that you are more likely to be fined for speaking out then for breaking someone's neck?

Price and Cammy were being subtle, but the message was clear... chara knew where he was and he knew what he was doing. Unfortunately, the NHL brass were looking for an excuse for chara, and they found it.

Anyway, this whole topic has me just sick of hockey right now.

Wow..

Further to the hypocrisy of suspending Kostopolous because of the severity of the injury of Van Ryn here is Campbell about Kostopolous this season.

http://ca.sports.yah...?urn=nhl-305539

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The build up to this game, the quotes from the bruins dressing room, they practically called this shot. Even the bruins announcer said one day he'd get his head taken off. I can't believe it, Chara did it. He got his revenge for that "love-tap" after the OT winner. And we can't and won't do anything. I'm at a loss for words. I'm beyond worried that Max will never be the same, assuming he can even resume his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One angle that came up on Vancouver radio today was the possibility that the league is worried about another Steve Moore-type legal situation. If they suspend Chara, then they open Chara up to a lawsuit by Patches in the event that Pacioretty is permanently damaged or his career compromised. If they declare it an 'unfortunate' hockey play, it makes the legal waters much murkier.

It's an interesting thought.

Anyway, we've been around and around this particular wagon wheel. The bottom line is that as long as INTENT is the key consideration, players will continue to practice dangerous plays, until someone is crippled for life or killed. Then they will get serious. Unless and until the NHL decides to focus on players' responsibility for their actions and the effects of those actions - a responsibility that all normal people bear in everyday life, and players bear in other areas of play, such as shooting the puck over the boards - it's guilty of criminal negligence in my book.

As for revenge - I have to laugh. WHO on the Habs is going to succeed in injuring Chara even if they wanted to? It's like trying to injure a gorilla. The only revenge we will be able to enjoy is beating the Bruins on the scoreboard. (I confess, though, that IF a habs were to somehow drill a puck at 100mph into Chara's face, I would rather enjoy hearing them argue that 'it was a hockey play' and an 'unfortunate incident.' Oh well).

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The build up to this game, the quotes from the bruins dressing room, they practically called this shot. Even the bruins announcer said one day he'd get his head taken off. I can't believe it, Chara did it. He got his revenge for that "love-tap" after the OT winner. And we can't and won't do anything. I'm at a loss for words. I'm beyond worried that Max will never be the same, assuming he can even resume his career.

Let's not forget the two handed slash mr Chara gave Paccioretty(to the back of his leg) in the 8-6 loss on Feb 9th. Max was not able to finish that game. I find it funny that the NHL conveniently forgot about this incident!?!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One angle that came up on Vancouver radio today was the possibility that the league is worried about another Steve Moore-type legal situation. If they suspend Chara, then they open Chara up to a lawsuit by Patches in the event that Pacioretty is permanently damaged or his career compromised. If they declare it an 'unfortunate' hockey play, it makes the legal waters much murkier.

It's an interesting thought.

Anyway, we've been around and around this particular wagon wheel. The bottom line is that as long as INTENT is the key consideration, players will continue to practice dangerous plays, until someone is crippled for life or killed. Then they will get serious. Unless and until the NHL decides to focus on players' responsibility for their actions and the effects of those actions - a responsibility that all normal people bear in everyday life, and players bear in other areas of play, such as shooting the puck over the boards - it's guilty of criminal negligence in my book.

As for revenge - I have to laugh. WHO on the Habs is going to succeed in injuring Chara even if they wanted to? It's like trying to injure a gorilla. The only revenge we will be able to enjoy is beating the Bruins on the scoreboard. (I confess, though, that IF a habs were to somehow drill a puck at 100mph into Chara's face, I would rather enjoy hearing them argue that 'it was a hockey play' and an 'unfortunate incident.' Oh well).

It isn't even intent though. Campbell twice ignored intent in suspending Kostopolous. One his main argument was the "severity of injury" and the second didn't fit into the blind side definition so he changed it to fit a suspension by bringing in "puck away from play" and "severity of injury".

It is pretty obvious that there is no actual binding rules for why they suspend players and it is essentially at the whim of Campbell and Murphy to unilaterally decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the NHL is still run by an old boys club of pontificating suits.

They have as much consideration for 'player welfare' as Charlie Sheen has for a no-smoking sign.

This shows that the league really could care less about the players. They are meat. A commodity.

So a few players get hurt or even suffer career ending injuries? No big deal. Thats the cost of doing business.

There will always be a steady stream of fresh talent who is more than happy to jump into the fray and live their dream in the NHL.

Colin Campbell and the rest of his cronies are unscrupulous swine and clearly motivated by nothing more than greed and fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like we've been violated.

NHL on Chara: "We took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career."

Awesome.

Can I use this too?

"But officer, during my 13-years driving, i've never once received a fine for speeding. Clearly i'm exonerated!"

Idiots. Somebody has to die before the NHL wakes up. Eff you, Bettman. Eff you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the NHL is still run by an old boys club of pontificating suits.

They have as much consideration for 'player welfare' as Charlie Sheen has for a no-smoking sign.

This shows that the league really could care less about the players. They are meat. A commodity.

So a few players get hurt or even suffer career ending injuries? No big deal. Thats the cost of doing business.

There will always be a steady stream of fresh talent who is more than happy to jump into the fray and live their dream in the NHL.

Colin Campbell and the rest of his cronies are unscrupulous swine and clearly motivated by nothing more than greed and fear.

Well-stated, sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing some surfing/reading, like I'm sure many of us are. In many instances, players and coaches seem to be defending Chara. I guess we've got it all wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the NHL is still run by an old boys club of pontificating suits.

They have as much consideration for 'player welfare' as Charlie Sheen has for a no-smoking sign.

This shows that the league really could care less about the players. They are meat. A commodity.

So a few players get hurt or even suffer career ending injuries? No big deal. Thats the cost of doing business.

There will always be a steady stream of fresh talent who is more than happy to jump into the fray and live their dream in the NHL.

Colin Campbell and the rest of his cronies are unscrupulous swine and clearly motivated by nothing more than greed and fear.

Just like Sheen, Chara is bi-winning. He wins by ending the season of a player he had a beef with. He also wins by dodging any repercussions.

Ladies and gentlemen give it up for Chara Sheen.

You are absolutely right in saying that players are meat.

Most big business consists of a powerful but incompetent upper tier of management.

These guys will tell themselves that it's their amazing knack for business that has gotten the company ( the NHL ) where it is today.

That top tier only exists because of the huge contributions, long hours and sacrifices put in by the lowly employees ( the players )

Employees are not allowed to question management because at the end of the day they are lucky to have jobs and need to appreciate the cushy life that upper management has provided.

They always know that there are thousands of people who would love to have your job, and they'll never let you forget that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing some surfing/reading, like I'm sure many of us are. In many instances, players and coaches seem to be defending Chara. I guess we've got it all wrong.

It IS a little surprising that Chara's absence of intent has been taken as gospel just because he has no track record. I mean, consider the circumstances:

-a prior personal beef with the injured player, including previous unsatisfied attempts to go after him

-a grudge match against a rival team that has your number in a humiliating way

-the injured player publicly stating that he felt himself a target prior the game

-the score conventiently out of reach, such that taking a penalty won't hurt the team

These are all classic signs of intent to injure. At least three of these apply to the Bertuzzi atrocity, for instance.

In any case, set all that aside. Chara's defenders are all consistent about one thing. They all assume that if you didn't intend to injure a guy, you shouldn't be suspended. I think they are well-meaning and sincere in this belief; they believe it to be an appropriate standard and, despite Wamsley's convincing counter-example, they believe it to be the established NHL standard.

If this truly is your standard, then you can reasonably give Chara the benefit of the doubt given the uncertainty of proving intent for a player who is not known as a headhunter.

It's the standard itself that's f*cked up. What astounds me is just how many of these 'experts' simply can't see that - and that's a direct contributor to the culture of disrespect that is guaranteed to kills someone one day.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It IS a little surprising that Chara's absence of intent has been taken as gospel just because he has no track record. I mean, consider the circumstances:

-a prior personal beef with the injured player, including previous unsatisfied attempts to go after him

-a grudge match against a rival team that has your number in a humiliating way

-the injured player publicly stating that he felt himself a target prior the game

-the score conventiently out of reach, such that taking a penalty won't hurt the team

These are all classic signs of intent to injure. At least three of these apply to the Bertuzzi atrocity, for instance.

In any case, set all that aside. Chara's defenders are all consistent about one thing. They all assume that if you didn't intend to injure a guy, you shouldn't be suspended. I think they are well-meaning and sincere in this belief; they believe it to be an appropriate standard and, despite Wamsley's convincing counter-example, they believe it to be the established NHL standard.

If this truly is your standard, then you can reasonably give Chara the benefit of the doubt given the uncertainty of proving intent for a player who is not known as a headhunter.

It's the standard itself that's f*cked up. What astounds me is just how many of these 'experts' simply can't see that - and that's a direct contributor to the culture of disrespect that is guaranteed to kills someone one day.

At which point we will get in to discussions about "why we didn't see this coming" even though we all do and nobody wants to deal with it.

Loot at Brittanie Cecil. 50 years of no netting behind the goal, an innocent girl dies and it now seems absurd that we used to watch games without netting.

The NHL is not interested in leading the way in anything but creating internet revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now Patches speaks and says he feels his head was directed into the turnbuckle. Why didn't the league wait to talk to the victom and give enough time to establish the extent of his injuries before passing judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now Patches speaks and says he feels his head was directed into the turnbuckle. Why didn't the league wait to talk to the victom and give enough time to establish the extent of his injuries before passing judgement.

Because the League never had any intention of Suspending one of its stars. Chara is a Norris winning d-man, and Pacioretty is a nobody! The NHL is not a demcoracy...the players are not equals. Some are more important than others!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the League never had any intention of Suspending one of its stars. Chara is a Norris winning d-man, and Pacioretty is a nobody! The NHL is not a demcoracy...the players are not equals. Some are more important than others!

This league was quite happy to see its single greatest marquee player (Crosby) be gravely damaged on an-only-slightly-less-irresponsible play, without suspension. So honestly, I think the issue is more an 'innocent until proven guilty' philosophy. Remember, what you need to be found guilty of is not reckless behaviour or irresponsibly causing grave bodily harm, but rather the deliberate intent to inflict that harm. Pacioretty no more knows what was in Chara's head than we do so I'm not sure why his testimony would make a difference.

I keep saying it: it's the philosophy of what constitutes guilt that is completely screwed up. All the other insanity flows from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 day later after reflecting on the game besides the chara hit the part that is most shocking and disgusts me almost as much as the no suspension is how the bruins just played the 3rd period as business as usual with their numerous cheap shots, goalie running, and fight starting BS. And the officials just let it go, they should of constantly had a bruin in the penalty box to just kinda let the game ride out. I mean you could clearly see that the Habs players where in shock and not in the game anymore, which i don't blame them for, I didn't even wanna watch the rest of the game and we were winning, probably the most unenjoyable win in history.

It really makes me question this sport that I grew up playing and watching, and after yesterday if seems like that innocence and sportsmanship of sports is gone.

I know someone else said this and I agree that it feels like way got raped and their is absolutely nothing we can do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 day later after reflecting on the game besides the chara hit the part that is most shocking and disgusts me almost as much as the no suspension is how the bruins just played the 3rd period as business as usual with their numerous cheap shots, goalie running, and fight starting BS. And the officials just let it go, they should of constantly had a bruin in the penalty box to just kinda let the game ride out. I mean you could clearly see that the Habs players where in shock and not in the game anymore, which i don't blame them for, I didn't even wanna watch the rest of the game and we were winning, probably the most unenjoyable win in history.

It really makes me question this sport that I grew up playing and watching, and after yesterday if seems like that innocence and sportsmanship of sports is gone.

I know someone else said this and I agree that it feels like way got raped and their is absolutely nothing we can do about it.

You're absolutely right, including questioning your support for the NHL. More than once over the last two days, I've found myself asking, for the first time in my life, why I watch a sport knowing that, thanks to the sheer negligence of the NHL and the idiot commentators who have bought into the 'intentionality' argument, it is almost 100% guaranteed that I will, sooner or later, see a young man permanently crippled or else die a needless and preventable death on the ice. Why would I want to watch (let alone support) that?

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Unless the NHL takes immediate action with serious suspension to the players in question to curtail these life-threatening injuries, Air Canada will withdraw its sponsorship of hockey."

Air Canada threatens NHL over headshots

Colour me impressed. This is exactly what needed to happen... threaten dollars and maybe the NHL listens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming it's more than just a token statement, I am also very impressed with Air Canada on this. Gotta dig up an e-mail address so I can voice my support to them.

Unfortunately, the only way fans could make a similar statement is by banding together (petition?) and hitting the NHL in the pocket book as well...avoid games, merchandise, channels showing hockey, etc. Given how a large chunk of the fanbase believes this horrific incident was "a hockey play gone wrong", I'm not sure there'd be enough traction to get this off the ground.

I can say this though....even as a huge hockey fan myself, seeing this example of non-action at the highest level of hockey has definitely raised questions in my mind about whether I'll ever consider putting my own kids into hockey. Intent or not, the NHL has ruled that reckless play by one player resulting in a severe injury of another player is not the offending player's responsibility. I get that this is a sport, but there has to be some sort of accountability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Unless the NHL takes immediate action with serious suspension to the players in question to curtail these life-threatening injuries, Air Canada will withdraw its sponsorship of hockey."

Air Canada threatens NHL over headshots

Colour me impressed. This is exactly what needed to happen... threaten dollars and maybe the NHL listens.

I am so proud of our national airline right now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to take back the NHL

The people of Canada need to buy back the NHL brand.

use lottery revenues or something

Add Winnipeg, Quebec and Hamilton as teams.

Extend right of first refusal for any US based original six team.

Commisioners of this new NHL will be ex players like Gainey or Gretzky or Yzerman not smug little pompous sleezeballs like Bettman

Hockey is our game

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.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...