72 replies to this topic

[The Secret]

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

His illegal hit from behind ended Campbell's season! Players must be held accountable for their actions and Ovechkin has had many dirty hits. Would everyone's opinion be different if he did the same thing to Kronwall or Stuart or would it remain the same because its Ovechkin?

[Marty Barry]

Ovie just got a 2 game suspension from the league. Per the Washington Post.

[Barrie]

Ovie just got a 2 game suspension from the league. Per the Washington Post.

Just heard that too. And Cooke got nothin'!

[toby91_ca]

Just heard that too. And Cooke got nothin'!

Not sure I understand the point. The incidents are completely different. Cooke's hit was not against the rules and for which there was a precendent of no suspension on similar incidents (this will change in the future).

Ovechkin's hit was against the rules and a precedent was set last week whereby Lapierre was suspended for 4 games...so getting only 2 games is lucky if you ask me.

[esteef]

Not sure I understand the point. The incidents are completely different. Cooke's hit was not against the rules and for which there was a precendent of no suspension on similar incidents (this will change in the future).

Ovechkin's hit was against the rules and a precedent was set last week whereby Lapierre was suspended for 4 games...so getting only 2 games is lucky if you ask me.

Cooke's hit is easily intent to injure, which is probably where most of the outrage comes from. I guess it depends on which "rule" you wanna cite?

While I don't think this "hit" was as bad from the outset, it certainly, by rule is not allowed and Ovie should get what he gets (especially since Cambell really was hurt and Ovie is a repeat offender.)

esteef

Edited by esteef, 15 March 2010 - 04:18 PM.

[hooon]

Not really sure anything the NHL makes any sense. I wouldn't mind the suspension if it actually meant some consistency in the rules, however, I know this wont be the case. Certain players/teams will still be allowed to do whatever they want with no repercussions.

I don't see this hit as suspension worthy, but I understand that he has a shaky history of hits, and they are trying to prevent him from doing it again.

I just think there needs to be consistency.

Edited by hooon, 15 March 2010 - 04:22 PM.

[toby91_ca]

Cooke's hit is easily intent to injure, which is probably where most of the outrage comes from. I guess it depends on which "rule" you wanna cite?

While I don't think this "hit" was as bad from the outset, it certainly, by rule is not allowed and Ovie should get what he gets (especially since Cambell really was hurt and Ovie is a repeat offender.)

esteef

I agree on Cooke's hit, it was dirty and I think it should be suspendable, but I guess I agree that it's not against the rules and they didn't suspend Richards, so...

On the Ovechkin hit, they just suspended a guy for the same thing for 4 games, so I don't see how they wouldn't suspend him. When I first saw the Lapierre hit, I wondered why he would get 4 games for it, but the more you look at it, it is a very dangerous play that could result in very, very serious injuries.

[mjlegend]

Because Maxim Lapierre is French-Canadian. Or at least, that's how La Presse will spin it.

Two games isn't quite as much as I wanted, but is still a hit to the Caps - who came back against Chicago and won without him anyway.

BTW, if anyone hasn't figured out from the Malkin instigator in last year's final that there's a different system of justice to the star players than to the Lapierres of the league, it may be too late to save them.

[kylee]

That was a reckless play from a reckless player.

what was he thinking?

[toby91_ca]

Interesting comment from Boudreau:

While McPhee would not comment, Capitals head coach Bruce Boudreau was furious with the decision.

"If this was Sidney Crosby doing this, everybody outside of Pittsburgh would have cried foul: 'Suspend him for the year,"' Boudreau told the Capitals team website, Caps365 on Monday. "I don't think it does the game any good to have Alex suspended."

What is he actually trying to say here? Is he saying people outside of Pittsburgh would want Crosby out to give their team a better chance of winning and it's the same for Ovechkin? I'm really confused.

What I did get from the comment though is that he almost thinks Ovechkin should get a free pass because he's a star and it's not good for the game to suspend him.

[Drake_Marcus]

Interesting comment from Boudreau:



What is he actually trying to say here? Is he saying people outside of Pittsburgh would want Crosby out to give their team a better chance of winning and it's the same for Ovechkin? I'm really confused.

What I did get from the comment though is that he almost thinks Ovechkin should get a free pass because he's a star and it's not good for the game to suspend him.

Yeah, I have no idea what Boudreau is talking about. Bringing Crosby's name into the discussion makes no sense. Did Crosby get a free pass on a boarding based suspension? No. So where's the comparable? You have to play a physical game to get in trouble for hitting.

[Carman]

Cooke's hit is easily intent to injure, which is probably where most of the outrage comes from. I guess it depends on which "rule" you wanna cite?

While I don't think this "hit" was as bad from the outset, it certainly, by rule is not allowed and Ovie should get what he gets (especially since Cambell really was hurt and Ovie is a repeat offender.)

esteef

"Intent to injure" cannot be used in the Cooke case considering there is no rule against headshots/blindside hits yet. "Intent to Injure" can only be used on illegal hits to add discipline, not to be used for legal hits that are too hard.

Let's just hope the board of governors gets their stuff together and that rule can get in place asap.

Edited by Carman, 15 March 2010 - 09:30 PM.

[edicius]

Yeah, but that player wasn't the best player in the league. Ovi is. And if there's one thing we know about the NHL is that they have a two-tiered system.



Did you read the article? It lists the rule that states Ovi can't have the auto-suspension applied to him because the infraction occurred more than 41 games apart.

Yup, I did, thus the "intriguing technicality" comment. The second comment was just commenting on how selective the league is with "automatic" suspensions anyway.

Also, am I the only guy who remembers how many extremely dangerous and highly irresponsible hits Messier did? The NHL named a frigging leadership award after him based solely on his famous NY Cup promise and have completely ignored how dirty he was.

Oh yep. Him and Scott Stevens both. The league has a weird memory when it comes to things like that.