avelanch Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I think it's too much. I'm not a buff fan nor a jets fan. We've seen the league let guys get away with more. Keith got 5 for a flying elbow to an unsuspecting D Sedin (a star in the league) which caused serious injury. He only got 5 games while Daniel missed the remainder of the season and pretty much the playoffs. The league has factored injuries playoff race, etc when determining suspension in the past. Fraser thought Taffoli avoided suspension as the playoff race was a factor. This is a big screw job by the league on Winnipeg to get LA in. I'm ok if 4 games is the norm for this kind of play but when they show inconsistency depending on which team and players are involved, it's complete bush league just because others have gotten away with less it doen't mean that was right, or that should be the benchmark going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I don't always follow conspiracy theories. But when I do I don't pay attention to bs This makes for a convenient argument for the league helping LA, but that doesn't change the fact that Buff took a cheap shot that could have seriously injured someone. He put himself in the position to be dealt punishment. For a play that didn't need to occur, and didn't help his team whatsoever. This easily could have been more than 4 games. Edit: Never attribute to conspiracy, the likes of which can be explained by incompetence. I understand why it's a 4 game suspension. What I don't understand is how the "correct" ruling applies to some teams while other rulings or non suspensions occur for things that are equally dangerous like cross checking a player head first into the boards when peeling off for a line change. I guess you are saying the wide range of rulings is ineptitude more than conspiracy but at the same time, I do think they do factor things like public backlash, revenue/overall future of the league (expansion in the US) When making rulings. Has there ever been an analysis done on suspension length by team in correlation to league revenue contribution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 just because others have gotten away with less it doen't mean that was right, or that should be the benchmark going forward. I think the benchmark is history and if history tells me Taffoli is in the clear for a dangerous cross check sending a player head first into the boards causing a concussion, then based on that history and benchmark, the ruling on Buff is too much. If anything, everyone that is saying that this is the right call or still not enough are the ones deviating from the benchmark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster6 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I understand why it's a 4 game suspension. What I don't understand is how the "correct" ruling applies to some teams while other rulings or non suspensions occur for things that are equally dangerous like cross checking a player head first into the boards when peeling off for a line change. I guess you are saying the wide range of rulings is ineptitude more than conspiracy but at the same time, I do think they do factor things like public backlash, revenue/overall future of the league (expansion in the US) When making rulings(1). Has there ever been an analysis done on suspension length by team in correlation to league revenue contribution? (1) I agree the commissioner and his constituents would like to mold the standings into something that would benefit their financial motives. However they do not have the power to manipulate things as much as people would like to believe. Bettman and Co. didn't make Big Buff crosscheck someone in the neck. (2) Maybe ask Snowden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltt Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Remember when this clown was whining about Kane wearing a tracksuit and professionalism. Then he goes and does something stupid like this. Someone should throw his clothes in the shower. Yep. Brutal hit, could have been much worse for the victim there. Would have liked to have seen 8 or 9 games but the league doesn't like its big tough stars out at the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 If Rome's late hit gets the length of suspension he had, then Buff should be suspend for the rest of the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 (1) I agree the commissioner and his constituents would like to mold the standings into something that would benefit their financial motives. However they do not have the power to manipulate things as much as people would like to believe. Bettman and Co. didn't make Big Buff crosscheck someone in the neck. (2) Maybe ask Snowden? Oh for sure there is responsibility of the player and teams to play a clean game. Hockey however has many grey areas. What I am saying is that during these grey areas, the league will make rulings that aren't impartial. They can suspend a guy in Winnipeg or Vancouver and say, Hey that's a dangerous play and a fair call in which everyone else agrees that the play was dangerous and worthy of the suspension. On the other hand, if it's a large market US team, they can overlook it or give a reduced penalty where the victimized teams will say hey, that's not enough! But by then, it's too late and the league and teams move on focusing on the next game. So in a sense I do agree that it's not completely WWE in that the matches are fixed. What I am saying is that they can tilt the ice in favour (even if ever slightly) for an extra advantage. A truly good team might be able to fight through the garbage and the tilted ice but my question is, why do they have to play on a tilted ice? It's sports. The players should determine the outcome without any outside influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Lord Baltimore Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I think it's too much. I'm not a buff fan nor a jets fan. I am a fan of both but I still think it's not enough. Whether or not the player was injured should have no bearing on it. If a man attempts murder but fails should he get away scott free? I mean, he didn't actually kill anybody... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 History perhaps suggesting such an incident was upcoming; is that terribly different than Bertuzzi whacking Moore? And the scale of injury of course! Anyway, I'm exaggerating to make a point. Someone can obviously get hurt and the penalty should be more severe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 The NHL DOPS proves that they care more about profit from the playoffs than they do for ths safety of players. Butfuglien had zero reason to attack Miller like that. The guy is built like a linebacker and he attacked a guy from behind who was essentially sitting on the ice. He should be banned indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Like a poster above says, if Rome got banished for a millisecond late hit, then Buf should be gone for a year for doing that. He's a huge man, well maybe, he isn't that huge afterall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I find it funny that elliotte friedman called this exact amount of games two days ago. His reasoning behind it was, WPG has 5 games left, the very last game is in direct competition with a team they are currently competing for a playoff spot against. There for it would be unfair to the Jets owners to keep a key guy out of the line up for a game that could be the most important game of the Jets season. If jets had more games and a few in between against some bottom feeder teams he would have gotten a bigger suspension. It’s really sad but the schedule of a team should not have an impact on how long a player is suspending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Remember when this clown was whining about Kane wearing a tracksuit and professionalism. Then he goes and does something stupid like this. Someone should throw his clothes in the shower. This. Buff is a certified clown. Sharp got him too on the weekend when he mocked his celebration on the tying 3 3 goal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 How many games Winnipeg has remaining, or the fact that MIller was fortunate enough not to have a concussion or a fractured neck really should have no bearing on the decision. The act, obvious intent, and extent of the risk taken with the other player's health should have far more bearing. Not a significant enough suspension imo. DoPeS is still far too toothless and continues to effect virtually no deterrence. 4 games is soft. I mean Edler got 3 games for not conceding his path to the puck to Hertl. One game more than that suspension for this vicious cross check from behind to the neck is a joke as far as I'm concerned. Starting dishing out 9 or 10 for incidents like this and players may actually start to think twice about respecting each other's safety/health. There are enough injuries in the NHL without all the intentional stuff. Apparently they're not taking this stuff very seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 WPG misses the PO POS FTFY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster6 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Oh for sure there is responsibility of the player and teams to play a clean game. Hockey however has many grey areas. What I am saying is that during these grey areas, the league will make rulings that aren't impartial. They can suspend a guy in Winnipeg or Vancouver and say, Hey that's a dangerous play and a fair call in which everyone else agrees that the play was dangerous and worthy of the suspension. On the other hand, if it's a large market US team, they can overlook it or give a reduced penalty where the victimized teams will say hey, that's not enough! But by then, it's too late and the league and teams move on focusing on the next game. So in a sense I do agree that it's not completely WWE in that the matches are fixed. What I am saying is that they can tilt the ice in favour (even if ever slightly) for an extra advantage. A truly good team might be able to fight through the garbage and the tilted ice but my question is, why do they have to play on a tilted ice? It's sports. The players should determine the outcome without any outside influence. I can agree to this. Business is business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo.Horvat53 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 So WPG misses the post season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I'd say the length of the suspension was about right. Honestly, with the way the DoPS works, anything from 2 to 5 wouldn't have surprised me. I kind of thought that he might get five since that is the max and it would have kept him out for the remainder of the regular season, but he's not a repeat offender, so 4 is probably about right. Either way, he's made things a lot tougher for his teammates... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobble Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Yet Toffoli gets off with nothing, never mind the guy who cross checked Myers in the throat. I'd be fine with the suspension if the NHL were at all consistent. Where is our "fighting for the playoffs" edge that LA gets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I find it funny that elliotte friedman called this exact amount of games two days ago. His reasoning behind it was, WPG has 5 games left, the very last game is in direct competition with a team they are currently competing for a playoff spot against. There for it would be unfair to the Jets owners to keep a key guy out of the line up for a game that could be the most important game of the Jets season. If jets had more games and a few in between against some bottom feeder teams he would have gotten a bigger suspension. It’s really sad but the schedule of a team should not have an impact on how long a player is suspending.This..league is playing favouritism to the Jets instead of looking after player safety. Fugly should have got the maximum 5 games for a phone hearing. Remember when Torres got suspended for a hit on Eberly that carried over into the first round of the playoffs or Romes hit that was nowhere near as brutal as Buffs near decapitation. It's obvious the League office cut the Jets a break and dictated to DOPS on the length of the suspention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.