Malkin's penalty rescinded (merged)

[Statts 4]

Rules need to be black or white, with no grey areas. This is not the only rule where this applies in the NHL unfortunately.

Edited June 1, 2009 by Statts

[MonkeyGoalie 14]

Actually, it does follow the rule as written, although the rule isn't black and white (as earlier quoted by Statts):

Rule 47.22

Yeah I noticed that a bit later in some other forum or discussion, but thanks for the heads up.

Even in that I think they should add more criteria to the actual Rule 47.22 just so that it doesn't seem like they can just decide on any old thing to rescind the suspension. Or I might be off base in this, but who knows?

Edited June 1, 2009 by MonkeyGoalie

[weGotTheCup89 41]

meh, I'd rather beat the Penguins with Malkin in the lineup, though it seems it's always hardest to win Game 3 on the road.. oh well, I do wish that they would've waited until tomorrow to announce so it would seem that Campbell deliberated over it more..

[Doc Holiday 0]

They can rescind the suspension based on the context of the rule.

I'm very surprised it only took maybe twenty minutes to do it, though.

[Zeowingsfan 16]

Good, now pens fans can't use Malkin not playing as a reason if they lose game 3, and it's the finals.

[drfnr14 0]

-----------------------and it begins!!!

[FUUFNF 1]

Whatever... No excuses now when they lose on Tuesday.

[mjlegend 155]

My fiancee is a pens fan and told me that the pens site has the fans of course complaining about EVERYTHING on earth and also saying they should play goodard so he can break knees. Stay Classy Pittsburgh

Meh. We have someone on this board suggesting we should dress Downey.

[KronwallCRUNCH 5]

Who needs "rules" anyway?

[under_par_00 45]

"A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc..."

What comes after the etc....??? Or is this the grey area that says this rule does not apply to Malkin and Crosby?

2 goals down with 19 seconds to go. The game is over. So Malkin got off by not having any previous incidents? So by that logic, everyone gets 1 free pass.

I'm too lazy to look it up, but who has this rule been enforced on? Who has had to sit out 1 game for receiving an instigator in the final 5 minutes? Were they awarded 1 free pass??

This is BS.

But ya, its ok for Dats and Lids to miss one game for not going to the All Star Game injured.

[LivoniaGrinder 37]

I wouldn't expect anything less than shameless corruption from the "new nhl". When buttman gets his way it'll be about as genuine as wwf.

[under_par_00 45]

Double post.

Edited June 1, 2009 by under_par_00

[Systemfel 33]

-----------------------and it begins!!!

Yup. Bet your ass they will be doing everything to keep this series alive.

[KronwallCRUNCH 5]

Meh. We have someone on this board suggesting we should dress Downey.

We should, and send him after Malkin in the last 5 minutes.

[Mike 0]

Did they even review the play? I bet the suspension was rescinded before the final horn sounded.

[Rocket Queen 30 1]

BUUUUSH LEEEEEAAGUE

[Nero 20]

They can rescind the suspension based on the context of the rule.

I'm very surprised it only took maybe twenty minutes to do it, though.

TSN was reporting that Malkin wouldn't be suspended under 10 minutes after the game ended.

[RedWingsFan4Life 0]

Nah if Downy had a freaking hat trick and we were up or down 5 goals they would still suspend him for going after someone. The league just proves they don't care about the rules. Since the lockout the NHL officials/headquarters have been inconsistant at best.

[RockyMountainWingGal 108]

Of all the Pens I actually like Malkin the most. He has the team's only 2G in the first two games. What does his dynamic duo buddy have? zilch. And it is Crosby who is getting shut down again by Z. Yet he is too much of a wimp to challenge anyone face to face - a little head slashing after the whistle, or slashing Maltby's foot (wtf like Maltby has anything to do with his inability to score - if he can get under your skin you are in trouble).

Anyhow back to the point, Malkin was doing Sid's dirty work. The rest of that crew is intent on dirty stuff behind the play. A bit unclassy and uncalled for to go after Z yes - but at least one guy on that team has balls. Their coach doesn't even have any - that guy's press conference is dryer than a Martini.....

[Third Man In 2,091]

Yeah I noticed that a bit later in some other forum or discussion, but thanks for the heads up.

Even in that I think they should add more criteria to the actual Rule 47.22 just so that it doesn't seem like they can just decide on any old thing to rescind the suspension. Or I might be off base in this, but who knows?

Yeah, that clause I quoted is a grey area that gives the league an out in situations like this; the rule isn't nearly as black and white as some here (and also Bylsma) suppose.

I guess my problem isn't so much with Malkin as with Colin Campbell's explanation:

Following that review, Campbell said: "None of the criteria in this rule applied in this situation. Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded."

It did seem like a clear attempt to send a message. The criteria for review include prior incidents--i.e., reputation--and this was probably what it came down to. No one would argue that Malkin has a history of this sort of thing if that was Campbell's explanation for rescinding the suspension. But it would be refreshing for the league to give an honest answer for once. I know, I know--not bloody likely...

[Lovin Jiri Fischer 147]

I'm not worried since we already beat them twice with Malkin. And we might get Dats back??? But I am angry that it's different rules for different players. This crap is making the NHL so pathetic. First it's the All Star Game fiasco. Then let's set a date for the finals to be June 5th so everyone can buy tickets and then change our mind and decide to rush through. Then it's this crap. I agree the rule is dumb but it is there to protect certain players. Yeah it was Malkin coming after Z this time, no big threat. But it could be Pronger next time. And if Pronger does go after anyone's star player at the end of the game he wouldn't get suspended either because Malkin didn't. I don't care what Malkin's intentions were. The rule is black and white, and by not suspending him, the NHL is giving future offenders a free pass. If it was the other way around and Z going after Malkin like that (not that he ever would because he has an ounce of class in him) they wouldn't even be reviewing his suspension.

[Doc Holiday 0]

TSN was reporting that Malkin wouldn't be suspended under 10 minutes after the game ended.

Yeah, that is awful.

At least make it look like you reviewed the play with some objectivity.

[Guest CaliWingsNut]

We should, and send him after Malkin in the last 5 minutes.

Doubt that's gonna happen after how he capped the end of his ahl season.

[teebo 22]

I'm not worried since we already beat them twice with Malkin. And we might get Dats back??? But I am angry that it's different rules for different players. This crap is making the NHL so pathetic. First it's the All Star Game fiasco. Then let's set a date for the finals to be June 5th so everyone can buy tickets and then change our mind and decide to rush through. Then it's this crap. I agree the rule is dumb but it is there to protect certain players. Yeah it was Malkin coming after Z this time, no big threat. But it could be Pronger next time. And if Pronger does go after anyone's star player at the end of the game he wouldn't get suspended either because Malkin didn't. I don't care what Malkin's intentions were. The rule is black and white, and by not suspending him, the NHL is giving future offenders a free pass. If it was the other way around and Z going after Malkin like that (not that he ever would because he has an ounce of class in him) they wouldn't even be reviewing his suspension.

the nhl already gave a pass to a non star that did worse then malkin. i guess they just treat playoffs and regular season differently

[stevie for president 42]

correct me if im wrong but didnt colin campbell review this play? and doesnt he absolutely love the wings? and pronger would be suspended based on reputation. malkin was frustrated and his emotions got the best of him. he wasnt out there trying to injure zetterberg, i dont even know if he was sending a message. i just think he was pissed off and let out some rage. dont get me wrong, as a wings fan, i was hoping malkin was out, but as a hockey fan, without malkin game 3 could be a very lopsided and boring stanley cup finals game, so it might be better anyways. plus hopefully he gets frustrated easily and takes more dumb penalties