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

[Report] Evander Kane suspended 3 games

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Majored in economics, wrote his thesis on the westcoast longshoreman’s labour dispute, was on the all academic team 3 years in a row. No “mail In degree” or Arts degree... 

I was just shaking my head when he wrote it. People just make careless statements without checking over the stuff they are spewing.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DeNiro said:

The league needed to be called out and I’m sure other players appreciate it.

 

However that was for sure a suspension, no defending it. Three games may be a bit extreme but isn’t he a repeat offender?

Marchand is also a repeat offender. And so is Kassian.

To put it into perspective, Hansen got suspended for one game (~7 years ago) and the play was just him trying to catch the puck in the air, and he had no record previously. 3 games is most definitely "light" for a repeat offender.

Edited by Dazzle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

So, here's my take on this;

 

#1. Kane's hit was absolutely worthy of a suspension. He clearly brought his forearm up and made the head the principle point of contact. He's lucky to only get 3 games considering his past history.

 

#2. His statement about the consistency of the DPS, is not wrong. Its incredibly inconsistent and the NHL gives passes to many players. The cross check to the head by Chara should have been at least a game, and it would have been for any other team in the league. There are so many times where we see incidents, regardless of team, where it should be a suspension, and it doesn't even get a second look.

 

He is absolutely correct that the system needs an overhaul and maybe an outside, independent board setting the fines and suspensions, wouldn't be a bad thing to try.

 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Majored in economics, wrote his thesis on the westcoast longshoreman’s labour dispute, was on the all academic team 3 years in a row. No “mail In degree” or Arts degree... 

Economics is hardly a tough degree. One of the easiest actually

 

you seem to be forgetting that “higher education” came before he had his face rearranged in the nhl and his head met the ice several times 

 

guy was a nobody hockey player and a joke of a head of the DOPS. There have never been so much anger and confusion over the DOPS during his tenure 

 

you think thats just a coincidence? 

  • Haha 1
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, canuck2288 said:

Economics is hardly a tough degree. One of the easiest actually

 

you seem to be forgetting that “higher education” came before he had his face rearranged in the nhl and his head met the ice several times 

 

guy was a nobody hockey player and a joke of a head of the DOPS. There have never been so much anger and confusion over the DOPS during his tenure 

 

you think thats just a coincidence? 

Actually there was just as much confusion under Shanahan and Campbell... And again it's not a one man operation so blaming Parros only is pointless. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to disagree with the majority here who are cheering Kane's response.

 

It's one thing to call out inconsistencies, but it's quite another to accuse Parros of "bias". Kane clearly crossed a line there and if I were in charge, Kane would get 5 more games.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Actually there was just as much confusion under Shanahan and Campbell... And again it's not a one man operation so blaming Parros only is pointless. 

I know the other 2 were also awful but Parros is not helping himself or the effectiveness of the role 

 

 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

DoPS is more than just George Parros so to solely blame him is silly. 

Completely agree.  He was supposed to make things better, and that hasn't happened. Also isn't he supposed to be in charge?  So, he gets a good amount of the blame.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I'm going to disagree with the majority here who are cheering Kane's response.

 

It's one thing to call out inconsistencies, but it's quite another to accuse Parros of "bias". Kane clearly crossed a line there and if I were in charge, Kane would get 5 more games.

Kinda both.  Its cool he spoke out, but i agree he clearly deserves more as a result.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I'm going to disagree with the majority here who are cheering Kane's response.

 

It's one thing to call out inconsistencies, but it's quite another to accuse Parros of "bias". Kane clearly crossed a line there and if I were in charge, Kane would get 5 more games.

Bias is generous.  The NHL has crossed many lines and entirely deserves the criticism they are receiving.  If they don't like it, they are more than welcome to clean up the corruption.  Start by forcing referees to call an honest game and work from there.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Bias is generous.  The NHL has crossed many lines and entirely deserves the criticism they are receiving.  If they don't like it, they are more than welcome to clean up the corruption.  Start by forcing referees to call an honest game and work from there.

Completely disagree. You can make a case for inconsistency, but bias is another thing altogether. It would suggest that Parros unfairly targets the Sharks, or Kane himself.

 

I know it's the cool thing to do to dump on the DoPS, but you're off base saying that GP is "biased", as is Evander Kane.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I'm going to disagree with the majority here who are cheering Kane's response.

 

It's one thing to call out inconsistencies, but it's quite another to accuse Parros of "bias". Kane clearly crossed a line there and if I were in charge, Kane would get 5 more games.

So you would abuse power and position because someone hurt your feelings?    
Cool bro.  
Glad you aren’t in charge. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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