| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest4278 |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 20:36:24
Alright everyone is up in arms with the Zdeno Chara hit. Here is the new idea. Way back when there was talk about how to penalize players and teams for a dirty hit presented a few options but my favorite was about suspending the player for the duration that the injured player was out for. A lot of people were against this being unfair since it full extent of the injury may not be the result of this one hit. For example, a player was mildly concussed previously recovered and got nailed again and is then out for the season. Would the player that hit him illegally the second time have caused the concussion for the same duration if he was first to give the concussion?
Fair enough. Here is my new idea. How about the player gets suspended for whatever length deemed appropriate by the NHL. However in addition, on a graded scale the team of the player suspended is then penalized also. The penalty is to lose of cap space with a multiplier (dependent on the severity of suspension). So, if a team is at say $50M out of a total $60. The hurt player's cap space is $3M and assuming only a 1 multiplier (relatively minor duration say 2 games), then the team's new cap is limited to $45M.
The only time it can go up is when:
a) the injured player returns
b) the long injury that carries over to a new year and the max cap has increased. Using the example above, the cap is now $62M, then the team's cap can go to $47M
The multiplier can be greater or less than 1 depending on the suspension length. So no additional suspension, maybe a multiplier or 0.25.. And this can increase to something like 5 times the salary if the hit is truly heinous like the Bertuzzi incident
Discuss.
|
| 19 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| n/a |
Posted - 04/13/2011 : 11:23:11
quote:
Originally posted by tbar
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Yep, great idea. Let's solve the issue of injured players by punching someone in the throat???
Firstly, this money cap consequence is not the answer nor is anything that uses the negative impact of a player as a measure of punishment. That will tell players it's ok to play reckless as long as no one gets hurt. Well, please will get hurt and it will be bad.
FER has some valid points when it comes to allowing the refs to do their job but I am going to take it one further. There needs to be a panel of 9 people with an even representation from all sides as well as neutral postions. The NHL would hire and pay for 3 reps, the NHLPA would hire and pay for 3 reps, and there are 3 reps who are paid evenly from both parties but they are not responsible to either side. That group of people are responsible for not only the officiating of the game but also discipline.
Impartial decision making is the first step on making this issue go away. This would mean it's not about the league/owners and it's not about the players. It would be about the game. And the decisions would not be placed in the hands of one or two people. It would kind of be like the Supreme Court of Hockey.
I would gladly sit on that bench. What the heck, Slozo you can come too!
Oh God I could only imagine what the NHL would become if Slozo anfd yourself had anything to do with it, hell i might have to watch girls hockey to see a good hit!!
Yeah . . . it would be horrible to see more skilled hockey players playing - like Crosby, Savard - sure, sure.
Keep at that false argument about us not wanting any hitting . . . you know, repeating it a hundred times doesn't change the fact that it is false, incorrect, utter baloney - all one hundred times you have repeated it. Every single time.
I like solid bodychecks. Hockey hits, not hits to injure or take out a star player.
A bodycheck is legal, and someone gets hurt, I have no problem with it, as long as it is a hockey play.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 04/13/2011 : 08:31:15
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2158
See but Elvis, you're wrong too. Because there are legitimate open ice hits, on players admiring their passes, where those players are injured.
I'm sorry, I'm not going to put all the blame on the injured player, and sometimes that player is entirely innocent, but skaters have a responsibility to take due care as well.
When you're driving a car, you need to be aware of what's going on around you,and watch for potential hazards. 90% of the time, when a car hits a pedestrian, it's the car's fault, they were not being cautious enough.
But every so often, a pedestrian just runs into traffic, with their eyes on the bus the mean to catch, or a pretty girl, and they get hit.
We put stop signs on the back's of jerseys, but we also teach players not to turn their backs.
And I would totally agree if the majority of these examples reflected that, but they do not. The hitter has the time to take the hit, it's not the hitee, 'running out in to traffic', it's the hitter making a big hit, which I have no problem with, if it's clean, and taking the headshot, which has never been legal, only now, is it being enforced.
If you're driving the car and you see a chance you may hit someone, but don't use your brakes and instead hope they will see you first, is it still the pedestrian's fault?
As well, the stop sign hasn't stopped the hitting from behind, though, is that the partial fault of the jerseymaker as well? |
| tbar |
Posted - 04/13/2011 : 07:36:03
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Yep, great idea. Let's solve the issue of injured players by punching someone in the throat???
Firstly, this money cap consequence is not the answer nor is anything that uses the negative impact of a player as a measure of punishment. That will tell players it's ok to play reckless as long as no one gets hurt. Well, please will get hurt and it will be bad.
FER has some valid points when it comes to allowing the refs to do their job but I am going to take it one further. There needs to be a panel of 9 people with an even representation from all sides as well as neutral postions. The NHL would hire and pay for 3 reps, the NHLPA would hire and pay for 3 reps, and there are 3 reps who are paid evenly from both parties but they are not responsible to either side. That group of people are responsible for not only the officiating of the game but also discipline.
Impartial decision making is the first step on making this issue go away. This would mean it's not about the league/owners and it's not about the players. It would be about the game. And the decisions would not be placed in the hands of one or two people. It would kind of be like the Supreme Court of Hockey.
I would gladly sit on that bench. What the heck, Slozo you can come too!
Oh God I could only imagine what the NHL would become if Slozo anfd yourself had anything to do with it, hell i might have to watch girls hockey to see a good hit!! |
| Guest2158 |
Posted - 04/13/2011 : 07:08:31
See but Elvis, you're wrong too. Because there are legitimate open ice hits, on players admiring their passes, where those players are injured.
I'm sorry, I'm not going to put all the blame on the injured player, and sometimes that player is entirely innocent, but skaters have a responsibility to take due care as well.
When you're driving a car, you need to be aware of what's going on around you,and watch for potential hazards. 90% of the time, when a car hits a pedestrian, it's the car's fault, they were not being cautious enough.
But every so often, a pedestrian just runs into traffic, with their eyes on the bus the mean to catch, or a pretty girl, and they get hit.
We put stop signs on the back's of jerseys, but we also teach players not to turn their backs. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 04/12/2011 : 22:26:21
Ben Coughlan,
I appreciate you giving your opinion and putting a name to it.
That being said. You say you are a Junior player, that would imply to me anyways, that you are an older teenager minimum.
Please, if you want your opinion to begin to be taken seriously, make your post intelligible. Horrible spelling and grammar but that is more constructive criticism to help you get your point across, than me picking at you, please take it as such.
I did decipher what I think you were trying to say and, correct me if I am wrong, but it sounds like you are stating that the major cause of the injuries, headshots, dirty hits, etc. are the fault of the player being hit?, because they are admiring their passes? and the have their heads down?
That is wrong, period.
You are regurgitating the same nonsense that is going to keep the game as dangerous as it currently is, and frankly, it's exactly that mentality that is the underlying contributor to the problems with the hits today.
When did it become vogue to hit to injure? When did it become acceptable to say that is a hockey play? A hit to the head, has never been 'fair play', even if a player had his head down. It has never been considered 'part of the game', and it most certainly has never been the fault of the hitee!
Your nearly imcomprehensible post aside, if that is truly your view, then I am afraid that perhaps your post is indicative of your thought processes, in which case, you may be more of the problem, than the solution, to what is wrong with the bad hit discussions.
Please show me I am wrong.
|
| Guest5474 |
Posted - 04/12/2011 : 21:54:06
Okay....
So the topic of supending player for hits to the head or so called dirty hits in the NHL, is a huge topic in which many people have different opinions.
So here it is look at players for earlier in the game from he eighties there wasnt players getting laying a dirty hit left right and center or players being hurt because frankly these hits aren't dirty yes some are like the flying elbows and hit from behinds but open ice hits are apart of the game is players keep their head up and dont admire there pass this one happen i was tought in my first year of pewee hockey stay out of the danger zone along the boreds keep your head up and do not admire your pass those are the three number one thing contributing to concusions and season ending injuries or any injury today.
The players et paid an insane amount of mone so they should know what to do and how not to get hurt yes accidents happen like on the Chara hit where yes he did hit the player but again a freak accident where the pillars should be placed at a 45 segree anle instead of a 90 degree agngle no more injuries like that.
sincerely:
junior player
Ben Coughlan |
| 99pickles |
Posted - 04/12/2011 : 21:18:24
Agreed, Beans - a dirty hit is a dirty hit even if the victim isn't injured.
Also, there is way too much room for shenanigans when attempting to apply the idea of suspending an aggressor for the same amount of time that a victim is injured.
Then there's the overlap: a fast-healing victim would allow an aggressor to return sooner than another aggressor on an identical hit on a slower healer.
Sheesh!
Perhaps the panel is the most equitable solution.... |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/13/2011 : 19:58:39
But Duke, what happens if a player does something that could have or should have led to a serious injury but by fluke the player was ok?? Then what's is the punishment.
For example, Drew Doughty got into into the Stanchion almost exactly the same was at Max P but he didn't get seriously hurt and there was not penalty or anything.
Your theory only works when a players is hurt. What happens if a player doesn't get hurt?? Is it ok to play recklessly as long as no one gets hurt??
And Mario, the 9 people don't have to agree. It would be majority rules. It takes the personal opinion out of the mix and makes it more reasonable and consistant. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/13/2011 : 19:01:23
If you have a sit time equals injury lost time suspension....wouldn`t you just let the better player ( if he is the agressor ) sit out at your conveinience.
Just say your in a playoff series....If your injured player is a non - significant player and your opponent ( who gets suspended ) is very good....then you just let your guy sit, even if he is healthy...why not ?
A panel would be a good idea but i think 9 is too many and would cause too much debate and time consumption. Maybe 5 would work or even 3 members |
| Mario 66 |
Posted - 03/12/2011 : 09:05:48
FER i like the refs idea & Beans i like and think the panel may work but 9 people agreeing on a decision could become a mess.
Honestly, there is a lack of respect amongst the players as well as towards the officials. Colin Campbell has set a poor example. I was watching Glen Scheiller's piece on the score the other day on hits Cambell gave suspensions to and others he deemed as ok. THEY WHERE THE SAME F***** HITS, yet resulted in different outcomes.
I really believe the NHL should hand the power over to the in game officials to make the final call. First, it would force the players to respect the refs as there fate is in their hands and second the outcome is based upon the decision of 4 gentleman (2 refs / 2 lineman) who are involved in the game; aware of the tempo & emotion involved in the game as well as cheap shots that may have occured earlier that a 5 minute view of the play in question may not accurately depict..
EX The Chara hit is only a 2 min interference call yet the ref deemed their to be intent there, thus the game misconduct. Campbell followed this up by dropping the ball & deeming nothing was inappropiate with the play.
You can claim refs may have a bias or human error is a possible outcome. However, i will take 8 eyes involved in the game over 2 eyes watching a video in his lazy boy who is notorious for inconsistency.
In youth we learn; in age we understand |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 18:00:40
Yep, great idea. Let's solve the issue of injured players by punching someone in the throat???
Firstly, this money cap consequence is not the answer nor is anything that uses the negative impact of a player as a measure of punishment. That will tell players it's ok to play reckless as long as no one gets hurt. Well, please will get hurt and it will be bad.
FER has some valid points when it comes to allowing the refs to do their job but I am going to take it one further. There needs to be a panel of 9 people with an even representation from all sides as well as neutral postions. The NHL would hire and pay for 3 reps, the NHLPA would hire and pay for 3 reps, and there are 3 reps who are paid evenly from both parties but they are not responsible to either side. That group of people are responsible for not only the officiating of the game but also discipline.
Impartial decision making is the first step on making this issue go away. This would mean it's not about the league/owners and it's not about the players. It would be about the game. And the decisions would not be placed in the hands of one or two people. It would kind of be like the Supreme Court of Hockey.
I would gladly sit on that bench. What the heck, Slozo you can come too! |
| doublechamp7 |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 17:43:12
How about this for cleaning up the game, the next person to see Colin Campbell punches him in the throat hard enough to crush his windpipe.
That isn't going to happen, but I kind of like the idea of injury time determines the suspension length, but it should give a vague idea of length, depending on the aggresion and intent. I also like that idea of a jury type thing.
Bring back the Jets! |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 09:30:14
I've said it before and I still say it, the rules are already there, it's time to give/let/train/mandate the referees to use the power to enforce them in a discretionary fashion, with the direction of the league and player's association jointly dictating what level of discretion.
You want to make the game safer for the players? Give full support to the referees to use their discretion on a situation by situation basis with the safety of play being the side to err on. Have the review board overturn any calls that may above the intent, but at the least the message will be sent as to what is acceptable in the heat of the moment.
On plays that cause injuries, make use of video replay, and allow the ref to leave their call in abeyance until said review.
Use the Chara hit as the example. The play stops as Pacioretty is obviously in distress. Use the video replay to determine the extent of the infraction that caused the injury. Then, make the call. Knowing you have the support of the governing bodies behind the scenes, as the referee, you make the call appropriate to the situation.
In this case perhaps a Game Misconduct or Match penalty for 'intent to injure' with the subsequent review determining whether the intent was deliberate or not.
I think the referees are being much too timid in their enforcement of rules that already exist and it needs to be determined where this trend comes from, and changed at that level.
The game doesn't need any drastic overhaul, it just needs to be reigned back in a bit, and respect for safety recognized, supported and mandated. |
| n/a |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 04:54:18
Hmm. Interesting, confusing idea.
OR . . .
. . . we could get a new NHL head of discipline that gives out fair, rational suspensions and fines based on the illegality and severity of the hit/infraction, and the history of the player taken into account.
Just that would solve a lot.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4271 |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 22:23:53
I have an idea, take all the hitting and gear off, and don't pay the players or pay to get in and watch a game............oh ya, we already do this, its called shinny hockey, leave things alone, body armour wouldn't even protect some of these guys. The players don't care about anyone, just themselves, its been like this for a while, instigator fighting rule took care of this, not allowed to police themselves |
| FutureKesler |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 22:12:06
I like the suspension=games out idea, but I don't get the cap multiplier |
| Guest7742 |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 21:40:16
how about the NHL drops the disciplinary committee and replace then with a jury duty system where an odd # of rational people get placed in a room where they watch the play under review they have some choices laid out before them regarding the situation (no suspension, 1 game, 2, 3, 5 etc) and whichever has majority is the punishment |
| Guest4278 |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 21:08:43
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4278
So, if a team is at say $50M out of a total $60. The hurt player's cap space is $3M and assuming only a 1 multiplier (relatively minor duration say 2 games), then the team's new cap is limited to $45M.
Sorry I can't do math. The above should read:
So, if a team is at say $50M with a max league wide cap of $60M. The hurt player's cap space is $3M and assuming only a 1 multiplier (relatively minor duration say 2 games), then the team's new cap is limited to $47M (50-3). This would mean the team needs to move players to fit within their new cap limit. |
| Awesome One |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 20:50:23
Uhhh.....
?????????
Don't quite know how to respond to that one, it's a little confusing!
There was once a license plate in Toronto that abbreviated "Go Leafs" it read "Golfs". |
|
|
