Chalky Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 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. Perhaps not the DOPS, but I bet the NHL brass would prefer the profit from LA over WPG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etsen3 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Lucky Miller didn't break his neck, his suspension should extend well into next season/the playoffs. 10-15 games minimum, but if he got 20+ games I would not consider that excessive. I mean Boulerice got 25 games for crosschecking Kesler in the face, maybe it was too long ago to set precedent, but I believe when you have an obvious intent to seriously injure someone you can never be too excessive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Thought Buff should have got 6 to 8 games. IMO, DoPS needs some serious reform. Gotta take it out of the hands of the NHL...too many considerations outside of the incident when deciding on the ruling for them to be entirely objective. I would suggest the following: Form an independent committee of seven made up of 1 ex-enforcer (say a guy like Marty McSorley or Donald Brashear)...1 ex-player who has had his career cut short because of injury (say a guy like Andrew Alberts or Marc Savard, or even Chris Pronger)...1 ex-player elected by current NHLPA...1 hockey exec elected by NHL...1 person with sports medicine background...1 person with a legal background specializing in injury liability...1 ex-hockey official. Have this group of seven review all plays and participate in hearings... Have a defined suspension menu...2 games for incidental contact to the head...4 games for intentional contact to the head...5 games for hit from behind when unsuspecting player is 4 to 5' from the boards...2-4 games for intentional knee-on-knee, etc. Let the players know what the penalties/suspensions are ahead of time so that MAY act as a deterrent before the crime is done. For incidents such as Buf-falo's cross-check on Miller, Bertuzzi's sucker punch on Moore, Thornton's sucker punch on Orpik, Domi's elbow on Neidermayer, McSorley's slash on Brashear, Boulerice cross check on Kesler, Pronger stomp on Kesler, Simon's stomp on Hollwegg, etc. designate these as an extraordinary infraction which leaves length of suspension open to seven-person committee's discretion. Put it into SPCs that the player's agree to these terms so that there is no cause for legal action against the DoPS by those committing the crime receiving what they may perceive as unfair disciplinary action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Perhaps not the DOPS, but I bet the NHL brass would prefer the profit from LA over WPG?Surely. That's initially what I meant, but you said it much more succinctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewismyname Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 It wasnt as bad as it looked. Iv seen other players do the same thing. Buff missed the typical back shot and his stick slid up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 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. But then 6+ game suspensions open the door for appeals and the NHL could be proven wrong. How easy does it become to argue that he didn't meant to hit him in the neck, thought he was protecting his goalie, and/or there was danger of a scoring chance somehow. In my opinion, that's holding the NHL back from making more meaningful suspensions without significant injury and/or repeat offender status. It wasnt as bad as it looked. Iv seen other players do the same thing. Buff missed the typical back shot and his stick slid up. Except the player usually isn't already on the ice with the puck already going the other way and the cross check isn't typically that violent. It was bad, and Buff is lucky there wasn't a significant injury or he would have sitting for a while even as a first suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 It is interesting however to see 2 very different reactions to the suspension. I have to say, I agree with most of you who say that severity of injury or the schedule or playoff race should have no bearing on the length of suspension. The main issue with the above statement is that that is the ideal and what ought to happen and not what actually happens in the NHL when looking at past rulings. Its really too bad that they can't / wont create an external panel that is impartial from the NHL. Its like the need a room full of jurors who are locked in their hotel rooms for the entire hockey season without being able to watch games on TV and then someone needs to edit or blur out the face and jersey and team colors so that people only make decisions based on the play itself and remove the rest of the context like team, importance of upcoming schedule, size of hockey market, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewismyname Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 But then 6+ game suspensions open the door for appeals and the NHL could be proven wrong. How easy does it become to argue that he didn't meant to hit him in the neck, thought he was protecting his goalie, and/or there was danger of a scoring chance somehow. In my opinion, that's holding the NHL back from making more meaningful suspensions without significant injury and/or repeat offender status. Except the player usually isn't already on the ice with the puck already going the other way and the cross check isn't typically that violent. It was bad, and Buff is lucky there wasn't a significant injury or he would have sitting for a while even as a first suspension. There wasn't a significant injury because it was a dive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 There wasn't a significant injury because it was a dive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Not enough in my opinion, if there as ever an intent to injure this was it. It's what I expected given the phone hearing, but I still don't completely agree with the number. If the number of games the Jets have left in the season played into it at all, the DOPS has sincerely lost it's way. Yeah he's very lucky it wasn't in-person, but they gave him the max they can with a phone hearing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Thought Buff should have got 6 to 8 games. We knew that was out the window when a phone hearing was announced. Only an in-person hearing can amount to more than 5 games. I wouldn't have been surprised if he had gotten the maximum 5 games, but with the Jets playing the Flames in the season finale, it makes sense that the league might want big Buff back in the lineup. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I certainly understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 One other point that Paul Maurice made that I thought was germane, was the fact that Antoine Roussel only got two games for a crosscheck to the face of Adam McQuaid. I realize that a lot of the people on CDC consider cheap shots against a Bruin to be less egregious than to any other team, but Maurice's question of whether Buff's was twice as bad (an argument could be made for three or four times as bad, considering the point of the season) is reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 For incidents such as Buf-falo's cross-check on Miller, Bertuzzi's sucker punch on Moore, Thornton's sucker punch on Orpik, Domi's elbow on Neidermayer, McSorley's slash on Brashear, Boulerice cross check on Kesler, Pronger stomp on Kesler, Simon's stomp on Hollwegg, etc. designate these as an extraordinary infraction which leaves length of suspension open to seven-person committee's discretion. These sort of actions should result in an automatic full calendar-year suspension. There needs to some consistency, and the NHL has proven itself incapable of exercising professional judgement. Take as much subjectivity out of it and have clearly defined suspension, with extreme escalations of criminal assault such as Keith's elbow on Daniel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 These sort of actions should result in an automatic full calendar-year suspension. There needs to some consistency, and the NHL has proven itself incapable of exercising professional judgement. Take as much subjectivity out of it and have clearly defined suspension, with extreme escalations of criminal assault such as Keith's elbow on Daniel. I failed to state that such infractions should come with a minimum 20 game suspension and any additional time to be served would be at the discretion of the seven man committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster6 Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 It wasnt as bad as it looked. Iv seen other players do the same thing. Buff missed the typical back shot and his stick slid up. Most players do not have the size or strength of Buff. That wasn't just a crosscheck, he dropped all his upper body mass onto the guys neck with all the of that weight focused through the stick. That had the potential to be career ending. Thankfully he wasn't hurt too severely, but that easily could have turned into a freak accident that broke his neck. If say Buff lost his balanced and collapsed on top of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 There wasn't a significant injury because it was a dive. Yeah he's very lucky it wasn't in-person, but they gave him the max they can with a phone hearing It's 5 games max possible from a phone hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toni Zamboni Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 The fact that the league aligns number and importance of remaining games into their decisions just shows that they're so far off base. Doesn't matter. That has MORE of an impact...if a guy has to sit when he's really needed in critical games. You don't let him off the hook so he can be there or loses emphasis. We certainly lost players when it really mattered and the league didn't provide any leniency in that. This was a deliberate attack and not part of gameplay. It wasn't two guys going for a puck or a check, it was vicious and targeted...the head. The DOPS is all over the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don's Cherries Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 hey guys, When you look at this type of physicality with what Byfuglien did, It brings me back to the good old days when the "Broad Street Bullies" were around. This was Rock em', Sock em' type of hockey and thats the stuff that I like to see! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.