Ovie ejected

[Jaymister 71]

Nasty hit, he saw nothing but numbers the whole way and he hammered him anyway. I love Ovie, but i'm getting really tired of all the dirty hits he dishs out. It doesn't help that the NHL refuses to suspend him no matter what he does.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=35&id=62762

[wmubronco420 25]

uh the NHL suspended him ealier this year

[P. Marlowe 748]

This has already been discussed here: http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=63623

[cjm502 165]

Dont antagonize the Ovechkin fans. Somehow most of them do not understand how this is a dirty hit.

[Jaymister 71]

Dont antagonize the Ovechkin fans. Somehow most of them do not understand how this is a dirty hit.

Ovie is my favorite player in the league right now, but you can't look at these things with rose coloured glasses.

[hockeygods 2]

i do think it was a hit deserving of a penalty but not a game misconduct or a suspension there has been far worse hits lately with no such action. I disagree with the refs today

[hooon 1,089]

Nasty hit, he saw nothing but numbers the whole way and he hammered him anyway. I love Ovie, but i'm getting really tired of all the dirty hits he dishs out. It doesn't help that the NHL refuses to suspend him no matter what he does.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=35&id=62762

Actually he has already been suspended once this year and received a game misconduct today. Dunno where this 'NHL refusal' is that you speak of.

[cjm502 165]

Ovie is my favorite player in the league right now, but you can't look at these things with rose coloured glasses.

There is no question Ovechkin is probably the best player in the league right now, but he does some pretty stupid stuff. I guess every player has their flaws.

[Jaymister 71]

Actually he has already been suspended once this year and received a game misconduct today. Dunno where this 'NHL refusal' is that you speak of.

I somehow missed or have forgotten about that suspension. I just think he gets away with a lot more than most because he's one of the leagues poster boys. Crybaby also gets away with a lot as well.

[Marty Barry 230]

It's a conspiracy! Ovie WILL receive a suspension just so that Buttman can give Cindy the Ross and Richard trophies. And, probably the Hart.

[Fifey 3]

Even if this wasn't a dirty hit, it's EXACTLY the play that Micky talks about when he says players need to let up and know that they don't have to make the play. Like the Mike Greer almost-hit on Rafalski last night. Ovechkin is a HORRIBLE judge of when he needs to let up and NOT make a hit out of common courtesy to his fellow players.

[Theophany 110]

It's a dirty hit, but should have only gotten a double minor or just a major. Game misconduct was a bit overboard.

[Gordie Howe hat trick 110]

If they suspend Ovie and Cooke gets nothing I will be pissed.

[Theophany 110]

If they suspend Ovie and Cooke gets nothing I will be pissed.

To be fair, Cooke's hit was open-ice and didn't involve his elbow, so there's no rule against it.

Ovi was given a major for boarding—which he definitely did—and a game misconduct. There's a huge difference between the two plays when it comes to the rules of the game.

[Jaymister 71]

If they suspend Ovie and Cooke gets nothing I will be pissed.

Totally agree with you there.

[Fifey 3]

If they suspend Ovie and Cooke gets nothing I will be pissed.

I'm so sick of hearing this faulty logic. Just because the league f***ed up and didn't suspend Cooke (and their logic there was faulty too) doesn't mean that something like this should be let go without a suspension since it wasn't "as bad".

Every fan of hockey should be pissed about the Cooke non-suspension, but that's no reason to say that bad plays later should get the same outcome out of some sense of fairness.

The league said no suspension for Cooke because there was no suspension on the Richards hit earlier this season, which is faulty logic since the non-suspension on Richards was a bad call to begin with.

Admit that the prior call was bulls*** and start making the right call moving forward.

[Theophany 110]

I'm so sick of hearing this faulty logic. Just because the league f***ed up and didn't suspend Cooke (and their logic there was faulty too) doesn't mean that something like this should be let go without a suspension since it wasn't "as bad".

Every fan of hockey should be pissed about the Cooke non-suspension, but that's no reason to say that bad plays later should get the same outcome out of some sense of fairness.

The league said no suspension for Cooke because there was no suspension on the Richards hit earlier this season, which is faulty logic since the non-suspension on Richards was a bad call to begin with.

Admit that the prior call was bulls*** and start making the right call moving forward.

There was no suspension on the Cooke hit because there was no penalty on the ice (correctly so). The hit was dirty, but what are they going to suspend him for?

You're putting words in the mouth of the NHL, and as much as I don't like Bettman and his cronies, it's unfair of you.

[cjm502 165]

There was no suspension on the Cooke hit because there was no penalty on the ice (correctly so). The hit was dirty, but what are they going to suspend him for?

You're putting words in the mouth of the NHL, and as much as I don't like Bettman and his cronies, it's unfair of you.

Im pretty sure the explanation for not suspending Cooke was it is to similar to the Richards hit. Sure the hit was legal, but they can still suspend him if they want. Cookes hit is a big reason the new rule was set in, so the refs can punish the players on the spot.

[Marty Barry 230]

The "experts" are starting to weigh in on the hit and ejection.

Burnside

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

It's a dirty hit, but should have only gotten a double minor or just a major. Game misconduct was a bit overboard.

A major for boarding means an automatic game misconduct.

[Guest Shoreline]

I'd say it's likely he will be suspended but probably a game or two.

Reason is, Cooke's penalty was dirty, but not a penalty, as much as I'd like to have seen his ass fry. This was a clear boarding call that was highly dangerous and, more pertinently, against the rules. It got a major for boarding and Ovechkin was booted from the game. There's really nothing to defend here. The only saving grace from suspension could be that Campbell did get up on his own and Ovechkin missed a huge chunk of the game when he was ejected.

And cjm502, given there's a collective bargaining agreement and legal technicalities are involved, the NHL would never win with executing a rule in ex post facto like that. So no, they can't suspend Cooke still if they want.

Edited March 14, 2010 by Shoreline

[jollymania 162]

[Marty Barry 230]

OK. Here's why he won't get a suspension.

another "expert"

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Wow, I'm all for phyiscal play but yet another example unfortuantely of needing to learn when to let up.

[Drake_Marcus 890]

To be fair, Cooke's hit was open-ice and didn't involve his elbow, so there's no rule against it.

Ovi was given a major for boarding—which he definitely did—and a game misconduct. There's a huge difference between the two plays when it comes to the rules of the game.

The biggest problem I had with the bulls*** Cooke non-suspension is that he's known around the league for his dirty head-shots and is always taking liberties with other players. On top of that the hit itself was incredibly dirty-- whether there's a rule for it or not doesn't make the hit any more reasonable. And yes, you can suspend someone for something they didn't get penalized for on the ice!

Given that this is Ovi's second boarding suspension I think he deserves a game suspension even though the Cooke non-suspension is complete horses***.

Edit

According to Puck Daddy the repeat offender thing isn't a concern:

When a player or goalkeeper has played in 41 consecutive regular League games without being assessed a boarding and/or a checking from behind major and a game misconduct according to Rules 42 and 44, he will have the previous game misconduct penalties removed from his current record. They will remain part of his historical record.

Edited March 15, 2010 by Drake_Marcus