20 games for Downie

[Kutcher 0]

You guys are making it sound like I'm condoning Downie's hit. I'm in noway stated that. All I'm saying is that 20 games is way too much, especially when suspensions don't really teach a guy a lesson. ( Just ask Simon) Guys like Downie, Tootoo , Neil, Avery etc need to be beat down before they will comprehend that what they are doing is ignorant. i don't like watching guys get hurt, but I do enjoy hard body checks.

And I do have a close relation to a few guys who play in the NHL and I wouldn't want them to get hurt like Dean, and I know they don't think Downie deserved 20 games+ like most of the other idiots like Jason Blake are saying.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

You guys are making it sound like I'm condoning Downie's hit. I'm in noway stated that. All I'm saying is that 20 games is way too much, especially when suspensions don't really teach a guy a lesson. ( Just ask Simon) Guys like Downie, Tootoo , Neil, Avery etc need to be beat down before they will comprehend that what they are doing is ignorant. i don't like watching guys get hurt, but I do enjoy hard body checks.

And I do have a close relation to a few guys who play in the NHL and I wouldn't want them to get hurt like Dean, and I know they don't think Downie deserved 20 games+ like most of the other idiots like Jason Blake are saying.

Tootoo has been challenged by so many people and for the most part the little bastard has held his own. I haven't seen anyone teach him lesson. Ryan Clowe did dial him up a bit but let's not get carried away. If toots is a byng candidate this year then you can say you told me so.

Simon, probably one of the greatest heavyweights of all time. People may disagree, but if you look at his tenure, the guy's he's fought, his longevity and ability to win fights, not too mention that whalloping punch of his that was so great when he was an Ave. Yeah, i'd like to see somebody teach him a lesson on the ice.

Neil, arguably the most talented heavyweight in the league. Who is going to teach him a lesson?

Avery, the guy simply outsmarted everyone the past 2 years. He's a legit hockey player. Who is gonna feed him his lunch? Ian Laperierre tried and Avery is still kicking.

I don't understand this notion that people have that players are going to just up and be taught a lesson and change their game. It's fiction.

Players today don't have the respect for each other they need to. The only way to get through to guys these days is to hit them with suspensions. You take away their livelihood and most importantly these days, their money, and they'll get the message.

Who learns from a 5 game suspension? Nobody. Who learns from a 20+ game suspension? Would those guys learn if they knew their next suspension would be 40 games? Losing 1/2 a year's salary might be more effective than the spectre of having Derek Boogaard "teach you a lesson".

Edited October 2, 2007 by GordieSid&Ted

[BringHomeTheCup! 0]

Not really. Generally, right now, they are cracking down on jumping into a hit, they need to deal with that agressively first and that's is part of what this suspension is about.

The next step is to think about how to reduce the other head shots that occur in a normal/legal body check (mostly when guys are crouching with their head down. This one is probably going to have to be dealt with using a lot of judgement, which isn't ideal, but I don't see any other way to deal with it without eliminating hitting all together.

If you think about it, how does a guy like Chara throw a shoulder into someone without catching their head? He would have to get himself in an awkward croached position to do so.

This isn't AA we are talking about here, there aren't steps to making this right. This is a simple question of being in or out. You can't say all head shots are out without drastically effecting the game, in my opinion, in a very bad way. Why? Because you would drastically change the way players can hit, and not in a good way.

There have been hits that were much worse than this one. The simple fact of the matter is that Downie is an easy target for Campbell and Co. to make a point with. This hit was no worse than several previous mentioned hits. 20 games for this hit is far too harsh.

If the NHL really wants to get ride of head shots, it's as simple as making any head shot an automatic suspension. There is no pussyfooting around it. Who cares if it's Chara hitting Rex. The danger factor for a concussion does not drop simply because a player didn't mean to. If eliminating head shots is the goal, it would have been done by now.

That being said, I think it's nearly impossible to outlaw head shots. There will always be the odd match up of your Chara's and Rex's. But what makes it so difficult to restrict head shots is the nature of hockey.

Anyone who has enough talent to play in the NHL should know better than to watch the pass he just made. There is no arguing the fact that if McAmmond hadn't decided to watch the play he tried to setup, he wouldn't have gotten smoked like he did.

[joshy207 156]

I think the suspension would have been similar no matter who hit who. The league said they were going to crack down on head checks. This is a good start. It was a cheap hit, dirty and late. You don't explode that far up when you hit someone--the point of checking is to separate the player from the puck. You can't do that and keep yourself in the play if you're 5" off the ice when your shoulder makes contact with the guy's head.

20 games, just like I called for in the original thread about the hit...

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

This isn't AA we are talking about here, there aren't steps to making this right. This is a simple question of being in or out. You can't say all head shots are out without drastically effecting the game, in my opinion, in a very bad way. Why? Because you would drastically change the way players can hit, and not in a good way.

There have been hits that were much worse than this one. The simple fact of the matter is that Downie is an easy target for Campbell and Co. to make a point with. This hit was no worse than several previous mentioned hits. 20 games for this hit is far too harsh.

If the NHL really wants to get ride of head shots, it's as simple as making any head shot an automatic suspension. There is no pussyfooting around it. Who cares if it's Chara hitting Rex. The danger factor for a concussion does not drop simply because a player didn't mean to. If eliminating head shots is the goal, it would have been done by now.

That being said, I think it's nearly impossible to outlaw head shots. There will always be the odd match up of your Chara's and Rex's. But what makes it so difficult to restrict head shots is the nature of hockey.

Anyone who has enough talent to play in the NHL should know better than to watch the pass he just made. There is no arguing the fact that if McAmmond hadn't decided to watch the play he tried to setup, he wouldn't have gotten smoked like he did.

Dude, you are so lost in your desire to win, win, win this argument that its become ridiculous. The poster you responded too is spot on. There's a world of freaking difference between jumping into a person's head to deliver a hit, like Downie did, and the hit Brian Campbell laid on RJ Umberger last year or the one Chris Tamer laid on Keith Primeau years ago.

There is a fine line. And the league can most definitely see a distinction. Jumping to nail a guy in the head = easy decision to suspend.

Catching a guy with a clean hit, not involving any elbows, superman-like leaps into the air or other offense, is still a grey area.

You can allow players do deliver clean hits like the ones scott stevens used to throw and remind players that they need to keep their heads up. Players don't skate standing up like flag poles. There's gonna be hits to the head. I don't see how the league can avoid that without letting offensive players go buck wild without fear of being drilled. However, this has nothing to do with the league taking a strong stance against leaping, malicious headshots like Downie's. These are 2 different beasts even if you don't want to see it as such.

[Turkey 0]

GST is right from what I see. There is a distinction between incidental contact with the head (bad but not always avoidable without removing hitting) and deliberate head strikes with the intent to injure. To be clear, there is no way a player would do what Downie did, i.e. leap into another players head and smash it, unless they were planning to hurt them. The NHL doesn't want to see hits to the head that stem from a clear intent to hurt.

As someone else said, the reason checking is in the game is to separate a player from the puck. It isn't in the game because hitting people is just neato. There's a purpose. Once players start hitting for any reason outside that purpose the act is punishable, either by suspension, penalty, or whatever. The difference is clear enough to me.

[clutchngrab 12]

All right, I know I'm showing my age here, but I can say this after watching hockey on and off for a while: Never, ever, ever did guys run at guys in the manner that Downie did in the pre-Bettman days. And I'm talking about some of the nastiest hockey you can imagine with the the "Broad Street Bullies" and "Big Bad Bruins". Hockey had this marvelous purging quality about it. If some punk, no matter how talented, did stuff like this, then he was expected to back it up, and if he didn't he was out of the league pretty quick. Hockey used to mean that cheap-shot guys got their due - much to the satisafaction of the paying fans and all was kept in order - more or less. It was a little like watching a great western movie: No good guys shot other guys in the back and young gunslingers had to prove themselves directly.

Anyhow, Downie deserves a royal ass-kicking everytime he steps on the ice, but since that is no longer an acceptable way to police the game (thanks to Gary), then a significant suspension will have to suffice.

[Opie 308]

You guys are making it sound like I'm condoning Downie's hit. I'm in noway stated that. All I'm saying is that 20 games is way too much, especially when suspensions don't really teach a guy a lesson. ( Just ask Simon) Guys like Downie, Tootoo , Neil, Avery etc need to be beat down before they will comprehend that what they are doing is ignorant. i don't like watching guys get hurt, but I do enjoy hard body checks.

And I do have a close relation to a few guys who play in the NHL and I wouldn't want them to get hurt like Dean, and I know they don't think Downie deserved 20 games+ like most of the other idiots like Jason Blake are saying.

We would be making it sound like you are condoning his hit because on your first post on this forum you wrote the following:

All I can say was Nice F-ing hit. Way to finish your chech Steve. Sorry that Dean got hurt but sh*t happens.

A suspension definately is not needed. He only left his feet AFTER he made contact with Dean. Therefore not a charge. His shoulder did hit Deans head , only cause Deans head was down. Lesson here KEEP YOUR HEAD UP!

So that would be why some of us may think you are condoning his hit.

But that is just my opinion we welcome yours!

[vangvace 12]

Who learns from a 5 game suspension? Nobody. Who learns from a 20+ game suspension? Would those guys learn if they knew their next suspension would be 40 games? Losing 1/2 a year's salary might be more effective than the spectre of having Derek Boogaard "teach you a lesson".

Honestly I don't think that suspensions or a beating will teach dirty players a lesson. You made a very valid point about beatdowns ealier in the thread. As for suspensions, players are getting suspended often and heavily without changing across all of the major sports in America. Once they suspension is over, they come back and do something and are suspended again.

Truely dirty players should have been blackballed from the league before they even made it to the show.

[Turkey 0]

The problem, with stars anyway, is that they make so much stinking money that they don't really feel the economic impact of a suspension. For a player like Downie that's less true. He probably won't get it because he just a big doofus. Three strikes and you're out I say. You commit a truly heinous act, like this hit, three times and you don't play again. End of story.

[BringHomeTheCup! 0]

Dude, you are so lost in your desire to win, win, win this argument that its become ridiculous. The poster you responded too is spot on. There's a world of freaking difference between jumping into a person's head to deliver a hit, like Downie did, and the hit Brian Campbell laid on RJ Umberger last year or the one Chris Tamer laid on Keith Primeau years ago.

There is a fine line. And the league can most definitely see a distinction. Jumping to nail a guy in the head = easy decision to suspend.

Catching a guy with a clean hit, not involving any elbows, superman-like leaps into the air or other offense, is still a grey area.

You can allow players do deliver clean hits like the ones scott stevens used to throw and remind players that they need to keep their heads up. Players don't skate standing up like flag poles. There's gonna be hits to the head. I don't see how the league can avoid that without letting offensive players go buck wild without fear of being drilled. However, this has nothing to do with the league taking a strong stance against leaping, malicious headshots like Downie's. These are 2 different beasts even if you don't want to see it as such.

First of all, what you view as arguing, I view as a discussion. I've never won or lost a discussion. You are looking at this all wrong.

Second, if they were mentioned, I don't recall teh Umberger or Primeau hits being discussed. The hits I was referring to were ones like the Markov on Stoll.

I'm not sure if you read the post I responded to. However, I still stand pat with my responce. There is no difference in head shots. If you are going to rule some out, you have to rule them all out. Do you think Umberger felt any better on the ice knowing it was a clean hit? No. The result was the same. That is why either head shots are in or out. There isn't any room for gray area here.

I am not defending Downie. By no means do I think he should walk away from this unpunished. However, 20 games is quite ridiculous. As I said before, no suspension in NHL history was this harsh. The punishment does not fit the crime. By giving Downie 20 games, Campbell and Co. said that the hit he threw was far worse than the hit Lemieux threw on Draper. Remember, Draper doesn't have a real face anymore. Head shots won't be eliminated. It just isn't feasible.

There is no way this suspension is justifiable. It should be appealed, and it should be reduced. I think something like 10 games would be sufficient. Again, the NHL never said "Hey, head shots like the ones on this DVD will get you X amount of games", and that is a big problem for me. Especially since we all know that the next time Pronger lays a hit like that he most likely won't get suspended.

Finally, if the NHL really wanted to eliminate head shots, the first step would be to eliminate the instigator rule. I know this won't instantly clean things up, but it will go a long way to making guys think twice about what they are doing. Allowing fighting to be a bigger part of the game would reduce the chances of something like this happening. I mean, how many times did you see someone take a run at a Duck last year? Not too often. Why? The Ducks were intimidating, and backed it up. Guys knew the consequences. Guys like Tootoo, and Downie will always push the envelope of the rules further than others. But if the others aren't pressing it as hard, it won't leave as much breathing room for those guys to do the same.

[Viperar 16]

Downie banned from the AHL

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=ap-f...p&type=lgns

[Turkey 0]

Confirmed at TSN, one month out.

tsn.ca

[auxlepli 17]

GREAT!

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

First of all, what you view as arguing, I view as a discussion. I've never won or lost a discussion. You are looking at this all wrong.

Second, if they were mentioned, I don't recall teh Umberger or Primeau hits being discussed. The hits I was referring to were ones like the Markov on Stoll.

I'm not sure if you read the post I responded to. However, I still stand pat with my responce. There is no difference in head shots. If you are going to rule some out, you have to rule them all out. Do you think Umberger felt any better on the ice knowing it was a clean hit? No. The result was the same. That is why either head shots are in or out. There isn't any room for gray area here.

I am not defending Downie. By no means do I think he should walk away from this unpunished. However, 20 games is quite ridiculous. As I said before, no suspension in NHL history was this harsh. The punishment does not fit the crime. By giving Downie 20 games, Campbell and Co. said that the hit he threw was far worse than the hit Lemieux threw on Draper. Remember, Draper doesn't have a real face anymore. Head shots won't be eliminated. It just isn't feasible.

There is no way this suspension is justifiable. It should be appealed, and it should be reduced. I think something like 10 games would be sufficient. Again, the NHL never said "Hey, head shots like the ones on this DVD will get you X amount of games", and that is a big problem for me. Especially since we all know that the next time Pronger lays a hit like that he most likely won't get suspended.

Finally, if the NHL really wanted to eliminate head shots, the first step would be to eliminate the instigator rule. I know this won't instantly clean things up, but it will go a long way to making guys think twice about what they are doing. Allowing fighting to be a bigger part of the game would reduce the chances of something like this happening. I mean, how many times did you see someone take a run at a Duck last year? Not too often. Why? The Ducks were intimidating, and backed it up. Guys knew the consequences. Guys like Tootoo, and Downie will always push the envelope of the rules further than others. But if the others aren't pressing it as hard, it won't leave as much breathing room for those guys to do the same.

You just don't get it.

If you don't know what clips i'm talking about, then you don't really have any reference now do you. Leaving your feet to drill a guy in the head is going to be punished severely. Catching a guy on a wraparound chance, trying to jam one home on your goal, where his posture has his head way out over his feet, you're going to end up hitting that guy in the face/head. That's hockey. Always has been always will be. What's the defender supposed to do, not hit the guy and pray that a poke check works?

The fact that you don't grasp that not all headshots are created equal says alot about you. I don't think I can carry on anymore when somebody is this far behind. Sorry.

Do yourself a favor, look up the clips. You mean to tell me you see no difference between Scott Stevens laying out Paul Kariya and Downie laying out McAmmond? That's like saying going 5 miles over the speed limit is the same as going 55 miles over the speed limit. Its not the same, hence why the punishment is different. WHAT DO YOU NOT GET? Der?

[BringHomeTheCup! 0]

You just don't get it.

If you don't know what clips i'm talking about, then you don't really have any reference now do you. Leaving your feet to drill a guy in the head is going to be punished severely. Catching a guy on a wraparound chance, trying to jam one home on your goal, where his posture has his head way out over his feet, you're going to end up hitting that guy in the face/head. That's hockey. Always has been always will be. What's the defender supposed to do, not hit the guy and pray that a poke check works?

The fact that you don't grasp that not all headshots are created equal says alot about you. I don't think I can carry on anymore when somebody is this far behind. Sorry.

Do yourself a favor, look up the clips. You mean to tell me you see no difference between Scott Stevens laying out Paul Kariya and Downie laying out McAmmond? That's like saying going 5 miles over the speed limit is the same as going 55 miles over the speed limit. Its not the same, hence why the punishment is different. WHAT DO YOU NOT GET? Der?

I think it's you who doesn't quite grasp what I'm trying to say here.

Your own example is flawed. Is it ok to go 5 mph over the limit? No. Is going 55 mph more wrong than going 5 mph over? No. There is a steeper fine. That is the only difference. There is no way you can say one head shot is ok, but one isn't. If one is wrong, so it the other. It's black and white. Maybe it's you who needs to catch up? When you go 55 mph you know there are more serious penalties to pay than if it were only 5 mph, we all know this. Downie, and for that matter the rest of the NHL, had no idea the fine would be this steep. It's unprecedented, unnecessary, and unfair to lay that kinda of discipline down without proper warning. I'm not trying to say that ignorance is an excuse, rather that there is no past record or warning that the punishment would be this harsh. Let me ask you this. If you were caught going 55 mph over, and you were fined more than anyone else in the past was fined, how would you feel? Especially if there were no real warning about how drastic this fine would increase. Wouldn't you appeal?

As for what a defender is supposed to do when an opposing player attempts to stuff the puck in on a wraparound. That is for the powers at be to decide. However, if youv'e ever played you know that any player worth a hill of beans knows better than to do what both Downie and Kariya (I'll get to him shortly) did, and that's watch the play he just tried to set up. People like you will always try to find any small detail that could happen, and try to exploit it. I'll humor you just this once. In that senario, a wraparound, a head shot isn't necessary. If a defender has the time to hit the opposing player before the wraparound attempt is made, then he also has time to simply step in front of the opposing player and block his path. If the defender doesn't have the time, or ability to do that, then it would be a late hit anyhow. There are always going to be head shot. I don't disagree with penalizing them. But it has to be all or none even if it's something as simple as an automatic minor penalty. There is no way you can logistically put it into the referee's hands to make a judgment call like that. It has to be black and white.

I'm not really sure what you mean about these clips you are speaking of. As far as I can tell, you haven't posted any to view, so before you tell me I don't have anything to reference to, at least put some clips out there for me to comment on.

Again, it doesn't matter how the head shot was laid out. It's still a shot to the head. A concussion is a concussion. If you really want to make a comparison between Downie and Stevens, I'll do it. The hit Stevens laid on Kariya(that's a link to the clip, just so we are clear on the hit) was brutal. He didn't have to destroy PK like he did. It was dirty. It was late, PK took two strides after passing the puck. Stevens blindsided him. He should have been suspended. It's the perfect example of what an arbitrator could use as evidence that the suspension handed to Downie was far too excessive.

At any rate, I'm done responding to you on this issue. All you want to do is argue. A wise man one said "Never argue with an idiot, they will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". So, I'm cutting this off before you get the chance to drag me down, how ever far that is.

[Kutcher 0]

We would be making it sound like you are condoning his hit because on your first post on this forum you wrote the following:

So that would be why some of us may think you are condoning his hit.

But that is just my opinion we welcome yours!

That was also before the slo-mo clip was brought to my attention. From any of the other clips it was impossible to see Downie's feet leaving the ice before he made contact with Mcammond.

If you read my later posts you will see that I have changed the fact that it was a clean hit. I still don't think its worth 20 games. There's not much that I would say " ya that deserves 20 games" Simon and McSorely are the only 2 events that I feel deserved 20 games.

Edited October 3, 2007 by Kutcher

[toby91_ca 620]

I think it's you who doesn't quite grasp what I'm trying to say here.

Your own example is flawed. Is it ok to go 5 mph over the limit? No. Is going 55 mph more wrong than going 5 mph over? No. There is a steeper fine. That is the only difference. There is no way you can say one head shot is ok, but one isn't. If one is wrong, so it the other. It's black and white. Maybe it's you who needs to catch up? When you go 55 mph you know there are more serious penalties to pay than if it were only 5 mph, we all know this. Downie, and for that matter the rest of the NHL, had no idea the fine would be this steep. It's unprecedented, unnecessary, and unfair to lay that kinda of discipline down without proper warning. I'm not trying to say that ignorance is an excuse, rather that there is no past record or warning that the punishment would be this harsh. Let me ask you this. If you were caught going 55 mph over, and you were fined more than anyone else in the past was fined, how would you feel? Especially if there were no real warning about how drastic this fine would increase. Wouldn't you appeal?

I have to disagree with you and lean towards you not getting the actual point here. The speed limit thing maybe wasnt' the greatest example from a techincal point of view because they are both wrong, but in terms of head shots, hitting something with their head down with a good clean check is within the rules, while jumping into someone is quite different.

In terms of not being in line with past punishments......people need to really, really get over this. Past punishments need to be ignored, the NHL needs to start setting new precedents here and maybe that's what they are starting (i.e. will not accept these types of hits anymore), hopefully they keep up with the firm punishment.

In terms of not providing proper warning, I think this is where you may be lacking the full story. All teams and every player in the league were debriefed at the start of preseason and were warned about these types of hits and that the NHL was going to come down hard on those that may deliver such a hit. They were shown many videos, etc. explaining the type of hits they were talking about. So, to me, there was quite a clear warning provided.

Edited October 3, 2007 by toby91_ca

[BringHomeTheCup! 0]

I have to disagree with you and lean towards you not getting the actual point here. The speed limit thing maybe wasnt' the greatest example from a techincal point of view because they are both wrong, but in terms of head shots, hitting something with their head down with a good clean check is within the rules, while jumping into someone is quite different.

In terms of not being in line with past punishments......people need to really, really get over this. Past punishments need to be ignored, the NHL needs to start setting new precedents here and maybe that's what they are starting (i.e. will not accept these types of hits anymore), hopefully they keep up with the firm punishment.

In terms of not providing proper warning, I think this is where you may be lacking the full story. All teams and every player in the league were debriefed at the start of preseason and were warned about these types of hits and that the NHL was going to come down hard on those that may deliver such a hit. They were shown many videos, etc. explaining the type of hits they were talking about. So, to me, there was quite a clear warning provided.

My point about the head shots is simply this, it doesn't matter if it is a clean hit or not. A head shot is a head shot and can do the same amount of damage. So, if the NHL wants to get rid of head shots because they are so dangerous, then all head shots should result in punishment of some sort, as I said, even if it is only a two minute minor.

As far as past susensions holding precidence or not, it's my opinon that they do have to hold some weight. I mean, how else is anyone supposed to determine what is 'coming down hard'? You have to look at what was done in the past. If they want to come down hard on head shots, fine, I'm all for that. But you must take into account what suspensions were handed out in the past to help set the bar for future suspensions.

About the warning, I'm not lacking the full story. As I said before, the problem I have with this suspension is that no one said the penalty will be at least x amount of games, and will increase from there based on severity. All that was said was,"Here is a DVD of head shots, hits like these will bring down severe punishment." IMO you can't justify the suspension given to Downie based on that. Especially when no one has ever been suspended for nearly as long for VERY SIMILAR hits (Stevens on PK, ect.). Again, if you don't look at past suspensions and draw from them, how are you supposed to determine exactly if the NHL came down hard or not? The longest suspension in NHL history was the 25 games given to Chris Simon for the slash to face he gave Hollweg. What Dowie did is nowhere near that bad. Not even in the same ball park.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

BringHome

Your entire argument is based upon this notion that the league can't hand out any suspension they want. Nowhere does it say the league has to follow any precedent or cannot set a new precedent. Unprecedented? Sure. Unnecessary and Unfair? It's only unnecessary if you feel that a lighter punishment would have the desired effect? It sure seems like to me the league is sending a clear message here. Considering the state of affairs surrounding the concussion issue something NECESSARY needed to be done. Unfair? That depends upon which side of the fence you are sitting on. Has there ever been a suspension where somebody didn't feel it was unfairly light or unfairly stiff?

Furthermore the league did, for the 1st time I believe, issue a tape to all teams regarding this. Seems like they were setting a new precedent already, no?

As for how you play defense. I played defense for nearly 25 years. I wasn't a winger or a center or a goalie. I played wing for about 10 minutes of my lifetime. I know a thing or two about playing defense. The way I was taught was not the Nick Lidstrom school of defending the side of the net. I was taught the physical way to separate the man from the puck and not allow the scoring chance. If i'm bearing down on a guy going for the wraparound I can either hit him, which likely means i'm going to make contact with his head, especially if he's nearly around the net, or I can try to poke the puck away. What I do depends on how much time I have and if I can get there first. If all head shots were banned, I have no option but to poke at the puck or stand to the side of the net like a pylon. That doesn't seem feasible to me.

In the end I see a very strong difference between leaping into the air to strike a guy in the head and hitting a guy who has his head down. Downie could've hit McAmmond without leaping and this wouldn't be the issue that it is.

Its your right to see everything in black and white. Colin Campbell and the league don't and neither do I. I guess that makes me, Colin Campbell and everyone else an idiot. So please, don't let me waste any more of your precious time. I wouldn't want you to get dragged down by me. by the way, that really cut me to the bone what you said. i'm so frail and pathetic that you thinking poorly of me truly stings. And this isn't arguing. This is me trying to help somebody who is so obviously lost find their way. This is me trying to teach you something. I'm using my superior intellect to help raise you up to the next level. Do yourself a favor and don't take it for granted. I'm not always going to be here to help you, you know. Think about that. I'll be waiting for your humble apology.

My point about the head shots is simply this, it doesn't matter if it is a clean hit or not. A head shot is a head shot and can do the same amount of damage. So, if the NHL wants to get rid of head shots because they are so dangerous, then all head shots should result in punishment of some sort, as I said, even if it is only a two minute minor.

As far as past susensions holding precidence or not, it's my opinon that they do have to hold some weight. I mean, how else is anyone supposed to determine what is 'coming down hard'? You have to look at what was done in the past. If they want to come down hard on head shots, fine, I'm all for that. But you must take into account what suspensions were handed out in the past to help set the bar for future suspensions.

About the warning, I'm not lacking the full story. As I said before, the problem I have with this suspension is that no one said the penalty will be at least x amount of games, and will increase from there based on severity. All that was said was,"Here is a DVD of head shots, hits like these will bring down severe punishment." IMO you can't justify the suspension given to Downie based on that. Especially when no one has ever been suspended for nearly as long for VERY SIMILAR hits (Stevens on PK, ect.). Again, if you don't look at past suspensions and draw from them, how are you supposed to determine exactly if the NHL came down hard or not? The longest suspension in NHL history was the 25 games given to Chris Simon for the slash to face he gave Hollweg. What Dowie did is nowhere near that bad. Not even in the same ball park.

"So, if the NHL wants to get rid of head shots because they are so dangerous, then all head shots should result in punishment of some sort, as I said, even if it is only a two minute minor."

I dunno if I like this or not yet but this makes more sense to me than alot of the other stuff you've said.

I have to disagree with you and lean towards you not getting the actual point here. The speed limit thing maybe wasnt' the greatest example from a techincal point of view because they are both wrong, but in terms of head shots, hitting something with their head down with a good clean check is within the rules, while jumping into someone is quite different.

In terms of not being in line with past punishments......people need to really, really get over this. Past punishments need to be ignored, the NHL needs to start setting new precedents here and maybe that's what they are starting (i.e. will not accept these types of hits anymore), hopefully they keep up with the firm punishment.

In terms of not providing proper warning, I think this is where you may be lacking the full story. All teams and every player in the league were debriefed at the start of preseason and were warned about these types of hits and that the NHL was going to come down hard on those that may deliver such a hit. They were shown many videos, etc. explaining the type of hits they were talking about. So, to me, there was quite a clear warning provided.

Toby, thanks for getting the point. And crap, you're right, speeding is not allowed no matter how fast but clean hits to the head are currently not illegal so you are correct in pointing out that my analogy blows donkey nuts.

Edited October 3, 2007 by GordieSid&Ted

[vangvace 12]

Update-

Downie is eligible and expected to be back in the lineup for Philadelphia Weds night vs. Carolina.

[2probert4 8]

Tootoo has been challenged by so many people and for the most part the little bastard has held his own. I haven't seen anyone teach him lesson. Ryan Clowe did dial him up a bit but let's not get carried away. If toots is a byng candidate this year then you can say you told me so.

Simon, probably one of the greatest heavyweights of all time. People may disagree, but if you look at his tenure, the guy's he's fought, his longevity and ability to win fights, not too mention that whalloping punch of his that was so great when he was an Ave. Yeah, i'd like to see somebody teach him a lesson on the ice.

Neil, arguably the most talented heavyweight in the league. Who is going to teach him a lesson?

Avery, the guy simply outsmarted everyone the past 2 years. He's a legit hockey player. Who is gonna feed him his lunch? Ian Laperierre tried and Avery is still kicking.

I don't understand this notion that people have that players are going to just up and be taught a lesson and change their game. It's fiction.

Players today don't have the respect for each other they need to. The only way to get through to guys these days is to hit them with suspensions. You take away their livelihood and most importantly these days, their money, and they'll get the message.

Who learns from a 5 game suspension? Nobody. Who learns from a 20+ game suspension? Would those guys learn if they knew their next suspension would be 40 games? Losing 1/2 a year's salary might be more effective than the spectre of having Derek Boogaard "teach you a lesson".

Reed Low beat the snot out of FooFoo last season in Nashville, something like 20 shots to his pelicanhead. Didn't work, he's still being his usual self.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

The first game he plays against Ottawa is going to be the game of the year. Biron may get stuck having to fight Emery again! Poor guy...

[vangvace 12]

The first game he plays against Ottawa is going to be the game of the year. Biron may get stuck having to fight Emery again! Poor guy...

January 20th in Philly... gonna try to be at that one

[WhiteLightning91 105]

UPDATE:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=3141472

Downie was recalled the Flyers today