2013 Shanaban thread

[Johnnydollaz89]

Aamzing that Brouwer doesn't even get a hearing, unintentional my ass.

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

Just my , but it should be a two stage process:

1. First, examine the offending player's action and determine length of suspension (if any) based on that action alone.

2. Secondly, tack on additional game(s) to any suspension length from step 1 above based on severity of injury. Granted, this can be difficult when the injury is a concussion, but hey, people have to make tough decisions every single day.

I'd also like to see a multiplier step for repeat offenders. Details could be worked out, but something like:

Step 1: Incident is examined on its own merits. Suspension of X games is determined appropriate.
Step 2: Suspension is multiplied based on player history. 1.5X for 2nd offense, 2X for 3rd offense, 4X for 4th offense.
Step 3: Additional games are added on, as necessary, based on player injury.

 

[HockeyDoug]

Aamzing that Brouwer doesn't even get a hearing, unintentional my ass.

He's not bright enough on the ice for that to have been intentional. If you watch him skate, he might have done more damage if he tried to get out of the way.

 

[BOSSMANPC]

Sadly this is still relevant, and spot on, today.

Down Goes Brown: The NHL's top secret flow chart for handing out suspensions

I like that Kenny. The Superstar part is spot on!

 

[KennyBanyeah]

Patrick Kaleta has appealed his 10-game suspension and the Sabres are waiting to hear when his appeal process will be heard. Tonight's game against Vancouver will already be his fourth one out of the lineup. Fellow Sabres agitator Steve Ott said the issue he's had with Brendan Shanahan's ruling is that Columbus defenseman Jack Johnson was not hurt on the play and went on to get 23 minutes of ice time in the Oct. 10 game against the Sabres.

"It's hard because there's no injury on the play," Ott told The News today after the Sabres' pregame skate. "I have a hard time with it for that simple fact. Is it suspendable? Absolutely, as in the guy could have really been hurt. But could have is not good enough for me.

"No one wants to see anybody injured by any means but that has to play in the equation if you're going to throw a book at somebody. He didn't even fall. Could it have been bad? Sure. For me, the injury has to play into the situation."

Just my , but it should be a two stage process:

1. First, examine the offending player's action and determine length of suspension (if any) based on that action alone.

2. Secondly, tack on additional game(s) to any suspension length from step 1 above based on severity of injury. Granted, this can be difficult when the injury is a concussion, but hey, people have to make tough decisions every single day.

I agree with this. I also disagree 100% with Steve Ott.

Intent is ultimately all that matters.

As an aside the appeal process should go both ways. When I was a TA I used to tell students who complained about their grades: Absolutely I make mistakes. Not often when I'm at work but mistakes DO occur. In light of this I'd be happy to-remark your paper/test. Buuuuuut.... my mistakes work both ways. It's possible that I gave you too HIGH a mark. It's entirely possible that I'll be lowering your mark after I re-evaluate.
It's amazing how many complaints would turn into mumbling, trailing off and awkwardly backing out of my office.

The appeals process should work the same. Yes you ARE entitled to find an independent arbitrator. The case will be presented anew. Perhaps the arbitrator will feel that we've been too lenient with you Mr. Kaleta. 20 games it is.

 

[BOSSMANPC]

I agree with this. I also disagree 100% with Steve Ott.

Intent is ultimately all that matters.

As an aside the appeal process should go both ways. When I was a TA I used to tell students who complained about their grades: Absolutely I make mistakes. Not often when I'm at work but mistakes DO occur. In light of this I'd be happy to-remark your paper/test. Buuuuuut.... my mistakes work both ways. It's possible that I gave you too HIGH a mark. It's entirely possible that I'll be lowering your mark after I re-evaluate.
It's amazing how many complaints would turn into mumbling, trailing off and awkwardly backing out of my office.

The appeals process should work the same. Yes you ARE entitled to find an independent arbitrator. The case will be presented anew. Perhaps the arbitrator will feel that we've been too lenient with you Mr. Kaleta. 20 games it is.

I disagree with Ott as well and honestly 99% of the fans I've talked to say INTENT is what should matter NOT result. It drives me bonkers when Shanny mentions if the player was injured or not. That should have nothing to do with it! If a player swings his stick like a baseball bat at someones head and they happen to be fast enough to get the fuck out of the way it should be treated no different than had he connected. I don't get it and again I will say it's as dumb as the high sticking 2 or 4 minutes if the player bleeds. Some people bleed easier than others, you can crack a guy in the face and break his jaw and he may not bleed.

 

[mattola]

has shanny or the NHL explained why they take injury into consideration instead of just the act alone? I just dont get that logic at all

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

I'd be curious on how the other players feel about the injury aspect of suspensions. Is Ott representative of the players in general or is he talking out his ass because it's his teammate?

 

[KennyBanyeah]

I'd be curious on how the other players feel about the injury aspect of suspensions. Is Ott representative of the players in general or is he talking out his ass because it's his teammate and he himself has tried (successfully and unsuccessfully) to injure players before and will continue to do so?

FTFY

 

[BOSSMANPC]

I'd be curious on how the other players feel about the injury aspect of suspensions. Is Ott representative of the players in general or is he talking out his ass because it's his teammate?

Probably that.

 

[jstewismybastardson]

BobMac on the radio thinks lapierre suspension will be between 3 and 5 games

and calls this hit "dangerous as hell ... dangerous as hell" (yes he repeated it)





and it was a fine for Chimera

 

[Johnnydollaz89]

He's not bright enough on the ice for that to have been intentional. If you watch him skate, he might have done more damage if he tried to get out of the way.

He saw Stepan, you can see him brace himself for the hit and get ready for it. But after the game he said he didn't see him at all, if you watch it, he clearly sees the contact and Stepan coming and moves his hand in motion up high to hit Step. It was intentional and he got away with it. Why brace yourself for something you said you didn't see coming?

 

[esls79]

I'm just throwing this out there, but I think Chris Pronger could do a better job than Shanahan has done so far.

Pronger for Sheriff

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

[/B]

Probably that.

I'm wondering more if the players really see it that way though. We had a lively debate here about removing fighting, but surveys say that the players are overwhelming in favor of it.

It's not much of a stretch in my mind then to say that even though we are not in favor of suspensions being based on injury, perhaps the players are.

 

[rares]

BobMac on the radio thinks lapierre suspension will be between 3 and 5 games

and calls this hit "dangerous as hell ... dangerous as hell" (yes he repeated it)

Is that even possible? With an in-person hearing?

I thought in-person kind of, sort of implied* 5+ games?

*= but doesn't HAVE TO, I guess? /shrug

 

[rares]

Meanwhile, in the KHL:

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

Lappy hearing scheduled for today.

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Is that even possible? With an in-person hearing?

I thought in-person kind of, sort of implied* 5+ games?

*= but doesn't HAVE TO, I guess? /shrug

the way BobMac framed it was that they may be having the in person hearing to dress Lapierre down (lecture him) and tell him they dont want to see him there again

the cba doesnt mention any of this lol ... it says as you bring up... phone means 0 to 5 ... in person means 6plus ... but then again the determination of hearing type is based on preliminary review/evidence ... they could "manufacture" something and say the suspension was reduced to under 6 games thanks to new evidence (that would be so NHL)

 

[dash]

they could "manufacture" something and say the suspension was reduced to under 6 games thanks to new evidence (that would be so NHL)

the CFL wants a word, they've copyrighted that practice...

 

[rares]

Wow...