Malkin's penalty rescinded (merged)

[esteef 2,679]

NHL only uses rules that are convenient

esteef

[TheCaptain19 49]

Someone is actually bashing the refs in OUR favor? WOW. This guy has it right, in my book.

Malkin should get one game

[Opie 308]

Edited June 1, 2009 by Opie

[esteef 2,679]

Someone is actually bashing the refs in OUR favor? WOW. This guy has it right, in my book.

Malkin should get one game

Quit copying me!

esteef

[gentex 0]

There is absolutely no reason for Malkin to get a game suspension for what happened at the end of the game. The instigator call was silly and Malkin wasn't out there looking to fight, or send a message. It was just a fight (kind of a sissy slap fight) between two guys working their asses off. This is the finals. People get their dander up. It happens . . . nothing to see here . . . move along.

I was more concerned about the stick to the chest that Osgood took. That was more of a cheap shot than what Malkin did. But, afterward, Osgood brushed it off, so no big deal.

[hooon 1,089]

lol... malkin wasnt out there looking to fight? Did you even see what happened? I suppose you think he fought by accident?

[Chris L 0]

I have to agree with gentex. I expected Hank and Geno to get matching majors, but the game misconduct and instigator was totally unexpected to me. My jaw hit the floor when I was looking at the game's boxscore on yahoo.com.

Having said that, Campbell should hang his head in shame for his enforcement this year. All the non suspensions for egregious stuff is outragious, but at least he stuck with his refs. In this case, Campbell actually reversed his refs decisions by not following through with the rules. The league stuck with the zebras when they stripped Hossa's goal against the Ducks, and now this turnaround.

Hey Campbell, do you even know what consistency is? Call the s*** or don't call the s***, you can't do both!

[Opie 308]

Yet some one copy and paste the rule that got Avery suspended?

[esteef 2,679]

There is absolutely no reason for Malkin to get a game suspension for what happened at the end of the game. The instigator call was silly and Malkin wasn't out there looking to fight, or send a message. It was just a fight (kind of a sissy slap fight) between two guys working their asses off. This is the finals. People get their dander up. It happens . . . nothing to see here . . . move along.

I was more concerned about the stick to the chest that Osgood took. That was more of a cheap shot than what Malkin did. But, afterward, Osgood brushed it off, so no big deal.

Just because the fight was weak doesn't mean Malkin didn't purposely go after Zetterberg WELL after the whistle. His instigator was warranted and he should sit a game.

The rule is stupid the way it's being interpreted though, basically "message sending" means any player who's known for fighting being on the ice late and starting s***. So this allows players like Malkin, who don't have a fighting history, to get away with s*** like last night, which was clearly what the rule was put in place to stop (teams stirring it up, especially after the whistle, when the game is decided).

Malkin got the star treatment period.

esteef

[Chris L 0]

Yet some one copy and paste the rule that got Avery suspended?

Looking back on that, I'm still scratching my head about Avery's suspension. Campbell, after that, has let so much go now that Avery's suspension is a wacky outlier.

[Chris L 0]

Malkin got the star treatment period.

Here's a question: were the roles reversed, and Hank lost his cool on Malkin and went after him like that, then picked up the penalties, do you think would Hank sit?

[Red4wings4life 0]

Here's a question: were the roles reversed, and Hank lost his cool on Malkin and went after him like that, then picked up the penalties, do you think would Hank sit?

Yes 100% Yes.

That being said, I have no issue with Malkin not getting the call. I would much rather beat Pen at full strength then to listen to the Pen Fans cry about missing Malkin.

s*** they should be already crying for missing Crosby. He has been a no show for the Cup finals so far.

[Albeh 1]

Yes 100% Yes.

That being said, I have no issue with Malkin not getting the call. I would much rather beat Pen at full strength then to listen to the Pen Fans cry about missing Malkin.

s*** they should be already crying for missing Crosby. He has been a no show for the Cup finals so far.

Ditto. If the wings go on to win (even sweep?) it'd be far more satisfying to do it with us shorthanded (no Datsyuk) and them at full power. Makes quite a bit more impressive statement.

[TCbrizz 2]

Ah, but here's the thing.

Back in 1996 and 1997, that wasn't a rule, it is now...

Also back in 1996 and 1997, you couldn't be a hair in the crease and you would have had your goal waived off (unless you're Buffalo and Dallas in 1999), but that rule has now been changed.

You're not calling a game in the 2009 playoffs according to the rules of 1996 and 1997.

yep..it was added in 2006...not sure if there was a particular incident that led to it being added though.

In the end I don't really care. we've been them twice without our own Malkin....hopefully Dats comes back and we really pour it on. the only thing that bothered me was how he was swing his stick around like a maniac at the start of it. he was truly out of control...which is a good thing - we're in their heads so bad their two stars are losing it at the end of games

[esteef 2,679]

Here's a question: were the roles reversed, and Hank lost his cool on Malkin and went after him like that, then picked up the penalties, do you think would Hank sit?

Would or should? He SHOULD sit absolutely if the roles were reversed. Bettman and Campbell would be lickin' their chops at a chance to give advantage to the Pens.

I also don't buy this, "it'll be better when we win because they had all their players, etc, etc" mentality. First it assumes we are going to win, what if we don't? What if Malkin has a huge Game 3? It's possible isn't it? What if him playing in Game 3 is the turnaround for their series when he should've been sitting?

Enforce the rules is all I'm saying. Don't look at the name on the back of the sweater, just enforce the rules.

esteef

[Opie 308]

Would or should? He SHOULD sit absolutely if the roles were reversed. Bettman and Campbell would be lickin' their chops at a chance to give advantage to the Pens.

I also don't buy this, "it'll be better when we win because they had all their players, etc, etc" mentality. First it assumes we are going to win, what if we don't? What if Malkin has a huge Game 3? It's possible isn't it? What if him playing in Game 3 is the turnaround for their series when he should've been sitting?

Enforce the rules is all I'm saying. Don't look at the name on the back of the sweater, just enforce the rules.

esteef

And if you are not going to enforce the rule get rid of it!

I am waiting for the day when a ref has to stop and look at the name on the jersey before putting his arm up!

[DesertWing 11]

The NHL needs to come out and eliminate this so-called rule. If you're not going to enforce it, it becomes a joke.

[Nightfall 871]

And if you are not going to enforce the rule get rid of it!

I am waiting for the day when a ref has to stop and look at the name on the jersey before putting his arm up!

You do realize that we have superstars as well that are bypassed for penalties during games don't you?

Otherwise, I agree. The rule is dumb, and if Campbell is going to evaluate every one of these, then it shouldn't be in black and white in the rulebook.

[87to71 0]

Not condoning anything Malkin did in terms of starting the fight with Zetterberg but Osgood's acting after Talbot barely poked him with the stick after the play was over was a little bit over the top. I mean Talbot barely touched him that hard and Osgood fell down like he just got shot or something...

[Nightfall 871]

The NHL needs to come out and eliminate this so-called rule. If you're not going to enforce it, it becomes a joke.

They inforced it a lot this season. There were also instances where it wasn't enforced. Just like the rule says, there can be circumstances when they won't enforce a suspension.

http://www.freep.com/article/20090531/COL22/90531047/?imw=Y

Glad someone from Detroit agrees with me that there shouldn't be a suspension.

Edited June 1, 2009 by Nightfall

[esteef 2,679]

And if you are not going to enforce the rule get rid of it!

I am waiting for the day when a ref has to stop and look at the name on the jersey before putting his arm up!

No s***. Carcillo's probably pissed as hell! I mean he did his s*** between the whistles and got tossed. Malkin's fighting guys after the play's over and blown dead for Christ sakes and his instigator is rescinded before the first commercial break?!!

Boooools*** yet again in favor of the Pens and their stars.

esteef

[RockyMountainWingGal 108]

Fedetenko had the goal in game one, IIRC.

Yeah my bad I meant a point on each of the goals....point is he's been on the board for each of their 2 goals so as far as scapegoats I'd look to some of the other Pens...

[Chris L 0]

Would or should? He SHOULD sit absolutely if the roles were reversed. Bettman and Campbell would be lickin' their chops at a chance to give advantage to the Pens.

Would or should doesn't enter into this if Campbell is just going choose to apply the rules or not. Malkin should sit and so should any player that goes bonkers like that for no damn reason. Hank didn't do anything in that scrum to warrant the reaction Malkin gave him. If anything Malkin should have come in, pushed a bit, shoved a bit there, said something about Hank's mother in Russian and been done with it.

I also don't buy this, "it'll be better when we win because they had all their players, etc, etc" mentality. First it assumes we are going to win, what if we don't? What if Malkin has a huge Game 3? It's possible isn't it? What if him playing in Game 3 is the turnaround for their series when he should've been sitting?

I'm with you, this is just asking for trouble. The Wings (and us, the fans) should take the breaks they get but not cry over what didn't break our way. Malkin not being suspended comes to no surprise. I was shocked that he even got an instigator in the first place. I see the reason why, but I didn't expect he would get one.

Enforce the rules is all I'm saying. Don't look at the name on the back of the sweater, just enforce the rules.

+2 for esteef on this.

[Opie 308]

You do realize that we have superstars as well that are bypassed for penalties during games don't you?

Otherwise, I agree. The rule is dumb, and if Campbell is going to evaluate every one of these, then it shouldn't be in black and white in the rulebook.

100% I understand the Wings (the we you referred to) have superstar players, and you know what if Dats is two strides early of the bench for a line change and gets a penalty, I don't blame the refs. If Lids is holding with the free hand, I want it called, and then I will ***** at lids (through the TV) for doing it.

Rules are rules, my team, your team, his team, our team, their team.

Call the rules, that is all I ask, call them, otherwise get rid of them.

My feelings on last night,

Z and Malkin gone for game 3 (strap tie down rule) and Malkin gone for game 4 instigation in the last 5 (47.22).

Sorry those are the rules, I don't run around holding up banks and expect the local police to let me off because some one knows my Aunt's hairdresser whose husband used to be a cop.

If I break a rule (speeding for example) I know what the risk reward is in that situation, reward I get where I am going quicker, risk $$$$$$ in speeding tickets.

If I get a ticket going 75 in a 65 and the Troopers son doesn't, I will be pissed, just like if Abdelkader or Big E go after a Pen player in the final 5 and get the suspension I will be pissed.

[esteef 2,679]

Would or should doesn't enter into this if Campbell is just going choose to apply the rules or not. Malkin should sit and so should any player that goes bonkers like that for no damn reason. Hank didn't do anything in that scrum to warrant the reaction Malkin gave him. If anything Malkin should have come in, pushed a bit, shoved a bit there, said something about Hank's mother in Russian and been done with it.

I'm with you, this is just asking for trouble. The Wings (and us, the fans) should take the breaks they get but not cry over what didn't break our way. Malkin not being suspended comes to no surprise. I was shocked that he even got an instigator in the first place. I see the reason why, but I didn't expect he would get one.

+2 for esteef on this.

I'm rackin' up the points today!

esteef