Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

If You Are In Shanahan Shoes, What Would You Do?


Recommended Posts

Seems like suspension alone will not get these players act responsibly and to make things worse, Shanahan & co are so inconsistent with the rule. What would you do if you are in Shanahan shoes? I would propose that suspension to be kept within reasonable amount (1 to 3 games) but that suspended player have to be in the penalty box the whole suspension time and to be counted against the max number of players in a game for that team. This will make the team to seriously manage and remind their players to play responsibly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest AriGold

Marchand gets 182 game suspension for being a douche

Kane gets 78 game suspension for not keeping his mouth guard in his mouth

Bolland gets 124 game suspension for hacking the Sedins legs every shift

Keith gets 678 game suspension for ... You know what..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop making "informative" videos on each suspension and learn how to be consistent. "hmm keith is pretty important to the hawks and he DID injure a Canuck.. I'll give him 5 games to not seems biased but I'll buy him something at Toys R us afterwards , maybe a new beyblade" (Raffi Torres hit) " OH WTF ?!?! 25 games that is just completely dirty ohhhhemmmgeee!"

He sucks. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the problem does not start with Shanahan. It involves the NHL culture. We always say hockey is unique. Well, it is. Compare with other major sports, there are no games that involve in a scum or fight after the whistle. Look at MLS, NBA, MLB, every player is equal. Not in NHL, when elite players are treated differently. It's different within the reaction of the players. It's different even from the penalty hand out by the referees. It's not equal from the start. It will never change if referees treat every players differently.

A referee does not only dictate the style of play players play, it also dictates the outcome of the game. If a referee allows pushing and face washing, the team which do not usually engage in this suffer, both physically and mentally. It prevent a team to play its normal style and has to adjust according to the call of the referees. it takes the team out of its comfort zone, not by the other team but by the calls of the referees.

A referee should call consistently throughout the season and after the playoff. If there are changes, it should be done the next season. Coaches coach according to the rule book and the players they have in the team, and players play according to the coaches`instruction. If everyone knows rules are to be followed strictly, then we don`t have to talk about inconsistency.

We might not like high sticking or clearing the puck over the glass at times, but players don`t argue with the referees because it is clear cut and it`s a two minutes penalty.

Worst case scenario would be when one or more referee bets, and it`s not uncommon worldwide. This will ultimately change the outcome of the games because referees can call an action differently. One can award a cross checking penalty 5 times or not given even once.

If I were Shanahan, I will work with the referees and ensure that calls are made according to rule book and not at the discretion of the referees. Then I would specify that all players are treated the same throughout the game and penalties will be the same, regardless of who you are. For example, a headshot with an elbow is a 5 game suspension and an extra two will be given if one`s skate leave the ice. If high sticking is 2 minute and a cut is 4 minute, I don`t see why Shanahan can`t set certain guideline for the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanahan needs to set up a table of automatic penalties that are consistent for every player.

(1) Each infraction should be examined as it is now to determine if the infraction is in fact founded and suspendable by the league.

(2) Automatic suspensions be put in place eg. First Offence - 5 games; Second Offence - 10 games; Third Offense - 25 games; etc. There should no be deviance in the length of suspension as it is right there written in black and white for everyone to be aware of.

(3) Everyone would be treated fairly and the same. Repeat offenders would get hammered and the onus of deciding how many games a player should receive would be taken out of the hands of Shanahan. It would also prevent owners and GM's from influencing suspension outcomes.

It certainly is not rocket science - well maybe to Bettman??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the problem does not start with Shanahan. It involves the NHL culture. We always say hockey is unique. Well, it is. Compare with other major sports, there are no games that involve in a scum or fight after the whistle. Look at MLS, NBA, MLB, every player is equal. Not in NHL, when elite players are treated differently. It's different within the reaction of the players. It's different even from the penalty hand out by the referees. It's not equal from the start. It will never change if referees treat every players differently.

A referee does not only dictate the style of play players play, it also dictates the outcome of the game. If a referee allows pushing and face washing, the team which do not usually engage in this suffer, both physically and mentally. It prevent a team to play its normal style and has to adjust according to the call of the referees. it takes the team out of its comfort zone, not by the other team but by the calls of the referees.

A referee should call consistently throughout the season and after the playoff. If there are changes, it should be done the next season. Coaches coach according to the rule book and the players they have in the team, and players play according to the coaches`instruction. If everyone knows rules are to be followed strictly, then we don`t have to talk about inconsistency.

We might not like high sticking or clearing the puck over the glass at times, but players don`t argue with the referees because it is clear cut and it`s a two minutes penalty.

Worst case scenario would be when one or more referee bets, and it`s not uncommon worldwide. This will ultimately change the outcome of the games because referees can call an action differently. One can award a cross checking penalty 5 times or not given even once.

If I were Shanahan, I will work with the referees and ensure that calls are made according to rule book and not at the discretion of the referees. Then I would specify that all players are treated the same throughout the game and penalties will be the same, regardless of who you are. For example, a headshot with an elbow is a 5 game suspension and an extra two will be given if one`s skate leave the ice. If high sticking is 2 minute and a cut is 4 minute, I don`t see why Shanahan can`t set certain guideline for the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanahan needs to set up a table of automatic penalties that are consistent for every player.

(1) Each infraction should be examined as it is now to determine if the infraction is in fact founded and suspendable by the league.

(2) Automatic suspensions be put in place eg. First Offence - 5 games; Second Offence - 10 games; Third Offense - 25 games; etc. There should no be deviance in the length of suspension as it is right there written in black and white for everyone to be aware of.

(3) Everyone would be treated fairly and the same. Repeat offenders would get hammered and the onus of deciding how many games a player should receive would be taken out of the hands of Shanahan. It would also prevent owners and GM's from influencing suspension outcomes.

It certainly is not rocket science - well maybe to Bettman??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this - but I would also say that Shanahan should suspend based on intent alone and not injury.

Player X gets hit in the head but continues playing.

Player Y gets hit in the head (exact same way) but has to leave the game.

IMO, both hits should warrant the same suspension. Is it Player X's fault that he may be more resilient than Y and is able to keep playing? Not at all. Therefore the player that hit X should get the same length of suspension as the player that hit Y.

Suspensions should be based on intent and not influenced by injury. Rather, they should be influenced by the circumstances that led up to the hit. If Player Z accidentally collides with an opponent and it's quite obvious there was no intent to injure but rather a hockey play gone bad, then the punishment should be just the automatic and nothing more. But if Player Z purposely ignores the puck and strikes an opponent with an elbow (that is quite obiously retaliatory in nature), then he should get more than the automatic.

But of course, what you have suggested and what I have suggested probably makes too much sense for the NHL to implement <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...