Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

OFFSIDEsports

Latest Straightjab (Nhl Discipline - D. Sedin)

56 posts in this topic

Fantastic art work!

I reiterate my proposal;  one for one. for every game that a player misses as a result of blatant intent to injure the offending player misses an equal amount of games and his salary is donated to a charity of the injured players choice. If the league is serious about taking serious injury (including Raymonds broken back) out of the game, a paltry 5 game suspension for Keith at this juncture of the season doesn't cut it. This is simply a good rest for him before the playoffs begin. If Shanny was serious, he would have suspended  him the first 5 games of the playoffs.

And yes, this would be directed at Bertuzzi and at Matt Cooke. The message needs to be clear. This is entertainment, not at the cost of life changing injuries.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sir are AWESOME. I love your work. Well done.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is absolutely phenomenal. Love 'em

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith's suspension was appropriate given his lack of history with suspensions. Any number of games he would receive would not help the Canucks either way. The referees failed to toss Keith out of the game for a clear hit to the head. Their inconsistency is pathetic.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how about roster spot suspensions? lets say in this case, Keith is suspended for 5 games, the blackhawks cannot dress a guy for five games to replace keith. I think teams would suffer alot more being a man down. (21 non goalie skaters, games would still be 5 on 5, but you have one less skater to juggle your lines with) and i bet coaches and GM's would outlaw hits to head/intent to injure on their players. and teammates would be pretty pissed that their guy put the whole team down a skater for 'x' amount of games. especially in tight playoff races. also, in the case of goons and AHL callups, the parent team now becomes responsible for their actions and must suffer the consequences

off course all this would not be necessary in this case, if keith didn't blatantly try to remove daniel's head with his elbow. im only talking about suspension where intent to injure has been ruled by the NHL

ive been thinking about this for a while, what is the point of suspending a player, when the team that owns them can just replace them for the next 5 games. there is no liability on the teams, it's not all the time a good player is suspended

i am sure i am not thinking of other aspects of this, but i think it's a good idea. you intend to injure someone, you and your team suffer

and heck why not, you really want to get this out of the game, after 3 suspensions in a year, if you make the playoffs, you lose home ice advantage. if you dont, you move down 5 spots in the draft order.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHA!! this and the one with the stick threw the Sedins head are great! keep it up :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, These should be featured on the main site. Great job.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic art work!

I reiterate my proposal; one for one. for every game that a player misses as a result of blatant intent to injure the offending player misses an equal amount of games and his salary is donated to a charity of the injured players choice. If the league is serious about taking serious injury (including Raymonds broken back) out of the game, a paltry 5 game suspension for Keith at this juncture of the season doesn't cut it. This is simply a good rest for him before the playoffs begin. If Shanny was serious, he would have suspended him the first 5 games of the playoffs.

And yes, this would be directed at Bertuzzi and at Matt Cooke. The message needs to be clear. This is entertainment, not at the cost of life changing injuries.\

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a-lovin' it, as usual! Well done and it states what a lot of people are thinking!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how about roster spot suspensions? lets say in this case, Keith is suspended for 5 games, the blackhawks cannot dress a guy for five games to replace keith. I think teams would suffer alot more being a man down. (21 non goalie skaters, games would still be 5 on 5, but you have one less skater to juggle your lines with) and i bet coaches and GM's would outlaw hits to head/intent to injure on their players. and teammates would be pretty pissed that their guy put the whole team down a skater for 'x' amount of games. especially in tight playoff races. also, in the case of goons and AHL callups, the parent team now becomes responsible for their actions and must suffer the consequences

off course all this would not be necessary in this case, if keith didn't blatantly try to remove daniel's head with his elbow. im only talking about suspension where intent to injure has been ruled by the NHL

ive been thinking about this for a while, what is the point of suspending a player, when the team that owns them can just replace them for the next 5 games. there is no liability on the teams, it's not all the time a good player is suspended

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL nice, NFL headshot rules are getting out of hand, but they are at least protecting star and vulnerable players, Qb's recievers ect.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL nice, NFL headshot rules are getting out of hand, but they are at least protecting star and vulnerable players, Qb's recievers ect.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't get the Daniel thing. What's-his-face got five games... Since when is a five game suspension something to scoff at? He didn't board him, he didn't sucker punch him, he didn't swing his stick at his head, he just gave him an elbow to the head. Frankly, five games is the perfect amount of times for that.

I don't think it's wise to set the precedent that injuries demand suspensions. If you hit a guy clean and take him out of the season then you shouldn't be suspended. If you elbow a guy like Daniel and he bounces back up you should get five games. The fact that the player is injured is irrelevant. The goal should be to punish bad behavior, not bad results.

The only thing that I can think of to explain this, is that everyone is butthurt at the fact that Romer got four in the finals. I agree that that was waaay to excessive, but two wrongs don't make a right and we shouldn't compound the problem.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't get the Daniel thing. What's-his-face got five games... Since when is a five game suspension something to scoff at? He didn't board him, he didn't sucker punch him, he didn't swing his stick at his head, he just gave him an elbow to the head. Frankly, five games is the perfect amount of times for that.

I don't think it's wise to set the precedent that injuries demand suspensions. If you hit a guy clean and take him out of the season then you shouldn't be suspended. If you elbow a guy like Daniel and he bounces back up you should get five games. The fact that the player is injured is irrelevant. The goal should be to punish bad behavior, not bad results.

The only thing that I can think of to explain this, is that everyone is butthurt at the fact that Romer got four in the finals. I agree that that was waaay to excessive, but two wrongs don't make a right and we shouldn't compound the problem.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many proposed solutions for adequate penalty/suspensions to offending players and/or teams.

Also many people saying these proposed solutions are too outrageous and the league will never go for them.

In my mind it is simple. If the league wants a solution, make the penalty outrageous. In fact, the more outrageous the better the results.

I like to speed. I really don't care if I get a $200 ticket. If the penalty was a $5000 I would stop speeding. If the penalty was 10 years in jail then I would never go 1 km/h over the speed limit ever again in my life.

You get the point.

Do you think Keith would have made that hit if he had to forfeit half of his salary? Or the rest of his season including play-offs? I'm not saying those should be the penalties, but an outrageous penalty will deter offenders.

Regards,

T

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again everyone... I think we can all agree on one thing, the NHL could and should have done better by Daniel, the fans and the league itself.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't get the Daniel thing. What's-his-face got five games... Since when is a five game suspension something to scoff at? He didn't board him, he didn't sucker punch him, he didn't swing his stick at his head, he just gave him an elbow to the head. Frankly, five games is the perfect amount of times for that.

I don't think it's wise to set the precedent that injuries demand suspensions. If you hit a guy clean and take him out of the season then you shouldn't be suspended. If you elbow a guy like Daniel and he bounces back up you should get five games. The fact that the player is injured is irrelevant. The goal should be to punish bad behavior, not bad results.

The only thing that I can think of to explain this, is that everyone is butthurt at the fact that Romer got four in the finals. I agree that that was waaay to excessive, but two wrongs don't make a right and we shouldn't compound the problem.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.