• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Bring Back The Bruise Bros

The Official NHL Suspension Thread

Rate this topic

330 posts in this topic

So boyes only gets 2 preseason games for his hit which is very similar to smiths and smith could get 5 games??? doesn't seem right to me.

so judging by Shanny's explanation, smith should get 2 games just like Boyes, if any at all cause i think babcock is right and ben smith put himself in that position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so judging by Shanny's explanation, smith should get 2 games just like Boyes

Actually, based on Shanny explaination there, Smith should only get 1 game if any, because Ben Smith DID make a sudden movement immediately before the hit, which caused the head hit to happen. And Shanny seems to be emphasizing in these videos the point of whether or not the player that got hit made any sudden movements prior to the hit, which caused the hit to the head to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Smith clearly put himself in that position. There was definitely contact to the head, but players have to be responsible for protecting themselves. I don't think it warrants a suspension, but the way it is getting called, its inevitable. I'd be upset to see any more than 2 games. Sounding like it will be more. It wasn't malicious. He didn't skate a path from the other end of the ice to drill him. Ben Smith zigged when he should of zagged and got hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Smith clearly put himself in that position. There was definitely contact to the head, but players have to be responsible for protecting themselves. I don't think it warrants a suspension, but the way it is getting called, its inevitable. I'd be upset to see any more than 2 games. Sounding like it will be more. It wasn't malicious. He didn't skate a path from the other end of the ice to drill him. Ben Smith zigged when he should of zagged and got hit.

This is what I'm hoping for sure but i could see him getting a tad bit more just to prove a point. 3-4 games. But going by the Boyes hit he should only get 3 games at the most. Seeing that we only have i think 2 more preseason games...both of those and reg season game at the most. But i just get a weird feeling on this one like he's going to get like 4-5 reg season games. :scared:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so judging by Shanny's explanation, smith should get 2 games just like Boyes, if any at all cause i think babcock is right and ben smith put himself in that position.

Wait wait wait, Boyes only got 2 games for that? If that's the case, then I see no more than 1 for Smith. It's not brendan's fault that Ben likes the taste of shoulder pads.

But in all actuality, his suspension won't matter, since he'll be starting in the AHL and those suspended games will be happening while playing in GRap. This is of course if I am missing something where Smith needs to be a part of the active roster to count towards his games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait wait wait, Boyes only got 2 games for that? If that's the case, then I see no more than 1 for Smith. It's not brendan's fault that Ben likes the taste of shoulder pads.

But in all actuality, his suspension won't matter, since he'll be starting in the AHL and those suspended games will be happening while playing in GRap. This is of course if I am missing something where Smith needs to be a part of the active roster to count towards his games.

Yea i think i read somewhere that it's up to the ahl if they want to carry the suspension over. not sure if that's right or not but i think i seen that somewhere here or on another site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in all actuality, his suspension won't matter, since he'll be starting in the AHL and those suspended games will be happening while playing in GRap.

You are missing the bigger picture though. Brendan Smith hasn't even made the NHL yet, and will now be considered a "repeat offender" which means for the rest of his (hopefully long) career, if he messes up, he'll get the book thrown at him.

Edited by sleepwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also don't believe that there should be a suspension based upon the fact that there is a 5 minute penalty that cost us that game. Honestly how much can you punish someone for the other person being at fault?

It reminds me of hitting someone with your car. You always lose if you are the driver, but there are people who dive in front of cars in order to sue...

Just wait until one of the divers figures out if they lead with their head, then fall down hard they can get a five minute penalty and a suspension in a playoff series...

Note that they would most likely have to spend 10 minutes in the quiet room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are missing the bigger picture though. Brendan Smith hasn't even made the NHL yet, and will now be considered a "repeat offender" which means for the rest of his (hopefully long) career, if he messes up, he'll get the book thrown at him.

Meh, he'll have 18 months to shake off the repeat offender status. He'll be fine since he'll spend this season in the AHL.

Status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall bere-determined every eighteen months. For example, where a playeris suspended for the first time, he is a repeat offender if he issuspended again within eighteen months of the first incident. Ifhe is not suspended a second time within this eighteen monthperiod, he is no longer a repeat offender for disciplinarypurposes.
Edited by Konnan511

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, he'll have 18 months to shake off the repeat offender status. He'll be fine since he'll spend this season in the AHL.

[/color]

Maybe in theory.

In Wisniewski's recent suspension, Shanahan referenced suspensions going back to March 2008.

Edited by Zetts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't usually watch a lot of pre-season hockey so maybe it's always this way, but my question is, borderline plays aside, are there always this many stupid plays in the pre-season?

suspension or not, this seems like a hell of a lot of clear hits from behind for preseason hockey. On any given two week period of the regular season it would be more than usual.

maybe because it's not the regular lineup more of this kind of stuff goes on??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't usually watch a lot of pre-season hockey so maybe it's always this way, but my question is, borderline plays aside, are there always this many stupid plays in the pre-season?

suspension or not, this seems like a hell of a lot of clear hits from behind for preseason hockey. On any given two week period of the regular season it would be more than usual.

maybe because it's not the regular lineup more of this kind of stuff goes on??

There's usually more nasty hits in the preseason because of guys getting a little over-excited, trying to make the team.

What's surprising about this year is the amount of established NHLers that are involved in some of these altercations.

I just have to say that Shanny is doing an excellent job so far. He stepped into a very thankless task, and is doing the best job possible. He makes his decisions rationally and carefully, and doesn't operate under the cloak of secrecy that the old regime did. The videos are great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't usually watch a lot of pre-season hockey so maybe it's always this way, but my question is, borderline plays aside, are there always this many stupid plays in the pre-season?

suspension or not, this seems like a hell of a lot of clear hits from behind for preseason hockey. On any given two week period of the regular season it would be more than usual.

maybe because it's not the regular lineup more of this kind of stuff goes on??

I think it's probably about the same but the "SHANHAMMER" is coming down now unlike the last leadership.

Shanahan is putting his pimp hand down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, he'll have 18 months to shake off the repeat offender status. He'll be fine since he'll spend this season in the AHL.

Status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall be re-determined every eighteen months. For example, where a player is suspended for the first time, he is a repeat offender if he is suspended again within eighteen months of the first incident. If he is not suspended a second time within this eighteen month period, he is no longer a repeat offender for disciplinary purposes.

The bolded part is what should be noted. Sure, Smith could get out from under the 18 month window for "repeat offender" but in no way does this case get ruled out of future decisions.

As per Shanny:

With the suspension, Wisniewski, who had recently signed a six-year, $33 million contract, is forfeiting more than $535,000 in salary. Scott Howson, the Columbus general manager, said Wisniewski was “distraught” over the decision.

“A player’s history over his career, repeated behavior, certainly plays a very big role,” Shanahan said, referring to Wisniewski. “The guys who just do this over and over again have to be dealt with.”

Wisniewski may not have been under that 18 month window, but that hit still cost him a half a million dollars and 8 regular season games. It may seem insignificant at this point, but from now on, every incident involving Smith is going to be watched. And for a kid so young in his career who is touted as being a physical player, it's going to be a tough road.

Also, I'm not 100% sure that the NHL would count time played in the AHL towards their own 18 month window. As I posted earlier, it's up to a review by the AHL president if he wants to uphold any discipline handed to players while at the NHL level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may seem insignificant at this point, but from now on, every incident involving Smith is going to be watched. And for a kid so young in his career who is touted as being a physical player, it's going to be a tough road.

Exactly. Thats what makes this whole thing so unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bolded part is what should be noted. Sure, Smith could get out from under the 18 month window for "repeat offender" but in no way does this case get ruled out of future decisions.

As per Shanny:

Wisniewski may not have been under that 18 month window, but that hit still cost him a half a million dollars and 8 regular season games. It may seem insignificant at this point, but from now on, every incident involving Smith is going to be watched. And for a kid so young in his career who is touted as being a physical player, it's going to be a tough road.

Also, I'm not 100% sure that the NHL would count time played in the AHL towards their own 18 month window. As I posted earlier, it's up to a review by the AHL president if he wants to uphold any discipline handed to players while at the NHL level.

On top of his general history of suspensions, I'm pretty sure Wiz was still under the 18 month window for his suspension on the Seabrook hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. You don't have to go back to 2008 to find his last suspension, Shanny referenced that he's had 3 or 4 suspensions since that date (basically illustrates repeated behaviour in a short period of time).

If Smith doesn't do anything again for the next 5 years and then something happens, I don't think this incident will factor too much into any ruling. If he does something again in a few months, it will factor in and it should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On top of his general history of suspensions, I'm pretty sure Wiz was still under the 18 month window for his suspension on the Seabrook hit.

The Seabrook hit happened March 18th, 2010 which would put his 18 month term ending around September 18th, 2011 (?). That would clear him of that, no? Do non-physical suspensions (ie. his "gesture" to Avery on Oct 11th, 2010) open that window once again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Seabrook hit happened March 18th, 2010 which would put his 18 month term ending around September 18th, 2011 (?). That would clear him of that, no? Do non-physical suspensions (ie. his "gesture" to Avery on Oct 11th, 2010) open that window once again?

Ah. I knew it would be close but I didn't totally work out the math. I guess he was technically clear by a couple weeks.

Still, the Seabrook hit, Wiz came up elbows high on a guy without the puck. So when he elbows Clutterbuck (who didn't have the puck either), it definitely makes him look like a repeat offender. Then throw on top of that all his other suspensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspensions have been pretty harsh, but I'm glad they're getting guys before they get to the ridiculous Matt Cooke stage. Had Cooke (repeat offender_ done what Wisniewski (repeat offender) did, people would be calling for a half-season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On top of his general history of suspensions, I'm pretty sure Wiz was still under the 18 month window for his suspension on the Seabrook hit.

Exactly. Wiz is a repeat offender. Shanny may have referenced a 2008 incident, but Wiz is still within that 18 month window. If Smith is clean on hits and actions for the next 18 months, he'll be fine.

The Seabrook hit happened March 18th, 2010 which would put his 18 month term ending around September 18th, 2011 (?). That would clear him of that, no? Do non-physical suspensions (ie. his "gesture" to Avery on Oct 11th, 2010) open that window once again?

It's not an incident to incident window. It starts from when his suspension ended to when his next incident happens. His repeat offender status would have ended on October 3rd and not September 18th.

Edited by Konnan511

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm loving the idea of Shanahan as the head of safety. I'm loving the full video reviews of hits. I think the majority of the eightish suspensions before are pretty legit. HOWEVER, I think that there's a good chance of too many players getting suspensions with this new crack down. There's nothing wrong with wanting a more safe game and if it is clearly a bad hit or dirty then sure a suspension is in order. But I don't know if I like this "It wasn't intentional... It was careless" Asking a player to watch his elbows on an open ice hit 1 on 1 is asking alot. Especially if the opposing player tries to duck or deke around the hit. I think if it's clearly unintentional it shouldn't be a suspension. This goes for hits from behind when the player with the puck turns away from the check. It's stupid of him to put himself in danger by presenting his back to the player hitting him, and the player throwing the check may not be able to stop his check in time. I know that if it's shown the player with the puck did turn away it's not a penalty, but still. I think we'll just need to wait and see, but I really don't want NHL to turn into crybaby soccer. Violence is a part of the game, enforcers are just a reality the NHL needs to not try to change. Hockey isn't for sissies. As long as the video explanations keep coming and there's no "Come on now" moments (Which there will be) it'll be okay. I just don't wanna see players end up afraid to use some muscle.

wings1110 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm loving the idea of Shanahan as the head of safety. I'm loving the full video reviews of hits. I think the majority of the eightish suspensions before are pretty legit. HOWEVER, I think that there's a good chance of too many players getting suspensions with this new crack down. There's nothing wrong with wanting a more safe game and if it is clearly a bad hit or dirty then sure a suspension is in order. But I don't know if I like this "It wasn't intentional... It was careless" Asking a player to watch his elbows on an open ice hit 1 on 1 is asking alot. Especially if the opposing player tries to duck or deke around the hit. I think if it's clearly unintentional it shouldn't be a suspension. This goes for hits from behind when the player with the puck turns away from the check. It's stupid of him to put himself in danger by presenting his back to the player hitting him, and the player throwing the check may not be able to stop his check in time. I know that if it's shown the player with the puck did turn away it's not a penalty, but still. I think we'll just need to wait and see, but I really don't want NHL to turn into crybaby soccer. Violence is a part of the game, enforcers are just a reality the NHL needs to not try to change. Hockey isn't for sissies. As long as the video explanations keep coming and there's no "Come on now" moments (Which there will be) it'll be okay. I just don't wanna see players end up afraid to use some muscle.

hockey is gradually turning in to soccer. ruining the game.

Majsheppard likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hockey is gradually turning in to soccer. ruining the game.

I know, it makes me sad. I don't think Shanahan is gonna try and completely clean up hockey though (Fingers crossed). All the suspensions so far have been pretty legit, I just don't want the line to be too strict. I think he's making a statement and will back off. Just like how they tried to clean up the game after the lockout. It's GOOD players are finally being shown they need to not be dirty scumbags. It'll be BAD if this becomes such a common occurance players don't want to hit. Head contact is watched closely in every game and I don't really mind that. But if a player throws a check and the other person's head is unintentionally hit due to reasons outside the checking players control (ie. the player with the puck being a idiot and lowering his head) the player shouldn't get fined. It's been grey area on that so far, but we'll see what happens.

wings1110 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now