MacK_Attack 108 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Zdeno Chara took an instigator penalty in the last five minutes of tonight's Sabres/Bruins game, which is an automatic one-game suspension. However, NHL has ruled that Chara was goaded into the fight by Paul Gaustad via a slash and he won't be suspended. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lovin Jiri Fischer 147 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 The whole instigator thing is kind of stupid, but it is a rule and if it's in the book it needs to be enforced. Imagine if the NHL would stop making up rules they don't plan on enforcing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Z and D for the C 712 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 So it's a regular season only rule. Okay, that's fine. But call a spade a spade, NHL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pjgj13 30 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 They already have rules they don't enforce! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 I've covered this with Malkin. It's not to stop fights that happen out of the spirit of the game. It's to stop sending out enforcers at the end of the game to send messages. Stop crying about the NHL on this issue, they are very clear on it. 4 kmfdm, Dano33, haroldsnepsts and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Travis 576 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 What's the point of having it, then? If it's a nobody he's gone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blueliner 69 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Apparently, the best players in this league get a pass on this rule. Same thing happened with Malkin last year in the Finals. 1 Hossa4Life reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 What's the point of having it, then? If it's a nobody he's gone. The point in having it is so in this case Boston doesn't send out Scott Thornton to start slashing everyone trying to get the other team to fight to send a message. 5 Dano33, Uncle Danny, haroldsnepsts and 2 others reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cjm502 165 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 I've covered this with Malkin. It's not to stop fights that happen out of the spirit of the game. It's to stop sending out enforcers at the end of the game to send messages. Stop crying about the NHL on this issue, they are very clear on it. So you want to fix one double standard with another? 1 YMHC reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 So you want to fix one double standard with another? Life's not fair, stop trying to make things perfect. 2 kmfdm and lookalive07 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Agreeing with Carman isn't a.. usual.. thing for me, but he's absolutely right here. The spirit of this rule is to stop message sending, and in cases where the fight has clearly been the result of intensity and not gooning it up, the NHL has consistently overturned the suspension. 1 titanium2 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MotorCityMadness 388 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 either have the rule or don't...if you want it in the book, ENFORCE it regardless of who is involved. If they actually enforced it I pretty much think you would not see it needing to be handed out, but with the "relaxed" enforcement guys do it figuring they wont get suspended. 2 Lovin Jiri Fischer and SiLkK19 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casey 145 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Agreeing with Carman isn't a.. usual.. thing for me, but he's absolutely right here. The spirit of this rule is to stop message sending, and in cases where the fight has clearly been the result of intensity and not gooning it up, the NHL has consistently overturned the suspension. If that's the spirit, write it and make it law. In the absence of that, enforce as written. 2 Lovin Jiri Fischer and 55fan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
newfy 695 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Yeah it doesn't matter if the point of the rule was to stop Boogard from pounding someones head in or to stop datsyuk from pounding someones head in. It should either be enforced for everyone or not be a rule. Enforcers should be allowed to do the same stuff at the end of games as the stars. Why does it matter if its Malkin or Colton Orr sending the message? 3 titanium2, SiLkK19 and Lovin Jiri Fischer reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 If that's the spirit, write it and make it law. In the absence of that, enforce as written. They did. 47.22 Fines and Suspensions – Instigator in Final Five Minutes of Regulation Time (or Anytime in Overtime) - A player or goalkeeper who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five (5) minutes of regulation time or at anytime in overtime, shall automatically be suspended for one game. 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 limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc. The length of suspension will double for each subsequent offense. This suspension shall be served in addition to any other automatic suspensions a player may incur for an accumulation of three or more instigator penalties. When the one-game suspension is imposed, the Coach shall be fined $10,000 – a fine that will double for each subsequent incident. No team appeals will be permitted either verbally or in writing regarding the assessment of this automatic suspension. Pretty clear that their intention isn't to stop all fighting, just to stop enforcers from instigating. 4 Uncle Danny, Dano33, kmfdm and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redwingfan19 293 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 yes, but if it was Begin it would have been a suspension Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 (edited) yes, but if it was Begin it would have been a suspension Wouldn't be so sure, Begin doesn't have much of a past history for "enforcing". But he might be considering he isn't a top player and could be used in a "message sending" role. Edited April 24, 2010 by Carman 1 kmfdm reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xitium 272 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 /obligatory. 4 55fan, Hossa4Life, BuckeyeWingsfan80 and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redwingfan19 293 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Wouldn't be so sure, Begin doesn't have much of a past history for "enforcing". But he might be considering he isn't a top player and could be used in a "message sending" role. maybe not the greatest example, how is thorton? he's all for enforcing. It goes with the name, the same thing happened with malkin. Chara is a star player, if it was any other scrub it probably would have been a suspension Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MonkeyGoalie 14 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 The rule is not clear that only enforcers should be the only ones involved in the rule. As you have posted the rule it states that "A player or goalkeeper who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five (5) minutes of regulation time or at anytime in overtime, shall automatically be suspended for one game." Cause last time I knew there are more then just enforcers playing hockey. IMO, they only put the whole thing with the Director of Hockey Operations is so they can chose who they think should be dealt the repercussion, (which to me is a cop out). This is just one of many gray area rules that the NHL rules book has in it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hiei 192 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Sorry Carman. Double standards go against the spirit of good competition. Telling me that this rule was made for the Boogaards and Proberts of the world, but Malkin and Chara get away scot-free, is WRONG. Just like the Ally bank commercial, you don't have to be a kid to know that this is WRONG. What about PRONGER?!?! He's both a goon and a star, and we all know the double standard that has worked AGAINST us in the past. What about the Niederdick brothers? 3 Lovin Jiri Fischer, YMHC and Casey reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Well they obviously can't classify "enforcer" in the rule book. But the criteria on past incidents etc. make it pretty easy to see the type of game someone plays. For an example, if Datsyuk decides to stick up for himself at the end of the game would this forum still be asking the league to enforce this? And if you don't like this rule would you like seeing Tootoo or Cooke out at the end of the game taking runs at Lidstrom etc. 3 haroldsnepsts, Dano33 and kmfdm reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 Sorry Carman. Double standards go against the spirit of good competition. Telling me that this rule was made for the Boogaards and Proberts of the world, but Malkin and Chara get away scot-free, is WRONG. Just like the Ally bank commercial, you don't have to be a kid to know that this is WRONG. What about PRONGER?!?! He's both a goon and a star, and we all know the double standard that has worked AGAINST us in the past. What about the Niederdick brothers? No, it clearly says in the rules stars are exempt! .... no? But that's what they meant! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casey 145 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 47.22 Fines and Suspensions – Instigator in Final Five Minutes of Regulation Time (or Anytime in Overtime) - A player or goalkeeper who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five (5) minutes of regulation time or at anytime in overtime, shall automatically be suspended for one game. Nothing there about intent, sorry. Saying "but we can change our minds" is the kind of bulls*** that makes fans leave the sport. Either enforce it as written, rewrite it, or drop it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted April 24, 2010 (edited) Nothing there about intent, sorry. Saying "but we can change our minds" is the kind of bulls*** that makes fans leave the sport. Either enforce it as written, rewrite it, or drop it. Might want to read and quote the whole rule. How else are you going to write a rule to stop coaches from sending messages towards the end of the game? Edited April 24, 2010 by Carman 3 kmfdm, haroldsnepsts and Uncle Danny reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites