Possible solution to suspensions

D

DionPhaneufAuthentic

Registered Trader
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
817
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary, AB
I think a player should be suspended for as long as the injured player is out, but without pay. I think this would greatly decrease cheap shots and such due to the unknown of how long you could possibly be suspended.

Just a thought, what do you think?
 
Far too easy to be manipulated. What's to stop a team from saying a 4th line plug is still injured if they are knocked out by another teams star player, even if they aren't? How would the league prove otherwise?

Derek
 
what they should do is follow suit with the NFL. hit the perp where it really counts. in the wallet.
 
There's a reason no league has instituted this rule. Derek is right. It opens a major can of worms. All the NHL needs to do is be harsher on the suspensions. That Duncan Keith elbow was disgusting. To me, that's a 10-gamer, easy
 
Agreed that it's a nice concept but I can totally see an organization having marginal players suddenly suffering from prolonged symptoms if the offending player is more important to that team.

Maybe having a two tiered disciplinary system would help. Shanahan reviews and rules on all issues without considering the historical reputation and violations by the player. He just rules on the given situation with no regard to how each player generally conducts themselves. On each subsequent incident by a player the league auto adds a benchmark # of games, i.e., 3 games added for 2nd incident, 5 games for 3rd, 10 games for 4th, 25 games for 5th, etc.
 
frankiefives said:
There's a reason no league has instituted this rule. Derek is right. It opens a major can of worms. All the NHL needs to do is be harsher on the suspensions. That Duncan Keith elbow was disgusting. To me, that's a 10-gamer, easy
Click to expand...

Any shots to the head = automatic penalty shot plus a 5 minute major and automatic indefinite suspension with a minimum of 10 games.

Problem solved.
 
solt0131 said:
Any shots to the head = automatic penalty shot plus a 5 minute major and automatic indefinite suspension with a minimum of 10 games.

Problem solved.
Click to expand...

May be the only way to get the players to stop this.

And I really hate hearing how the GM's did not like the length of the suspensions that the league was handing out when they first started this, and that is why the suspenions have not been longer. Would they rather have one of their players injured and out for 10, 20 or 30 games and the punishment to the player for doing it only be 5 games?

I think everyone agrees that something has to change as thecurrentsystem is notworking well enough to protect the players.
 
I think that the suspensions after a hit that causes an injury should be bigger. Give Duncan Keith 15 matches and a huge fine and you will see that he will not make the same mistake again.

The eye for an eye rule would be also an option, but I see same problems as the guys above, that some fourth line player would pretend a longer injury than it actually is. Yes, you could bring some neutral doctors and specialists, but I think that its normal that after an head shot the players are just not feeling right and dont know if there is a mechanism which would proove that they are not speaking the truth.
 
Stop punishing the player and punish the team, actually, do both. Guess what Keith, not only are you getting a 10 game suspension, the 'Hawks are going to lose a draft pick. See how long organizations keep dirty players in their systems.
 
IF they really wanted to crack down, I suggest the perp be locked in a room with Torts.
That MIGHT fix the issue lol
 
NHLPA would never go for that. I have been saying the same thing for years but it is not a realistic solution. I agree it would certainly make players think twice before taking a cheap shot at someone. I think they need bigger suspensions and maybe somehow punish the coach. If some like Duncan Keith was suspended 20 games it would send a LOUD message.
 
It's been mentioned before and is a great idea but the NHLPA would veto this so quickly... Duncan Keith is out for 5, the Hawks can only dress 17 players for those 5 games. His spot in the lineup is vacant and can't be replaced.

I do like Jon's thoughts as well about hitting them in the wallet - 5 game suspension, 10 game lost of income. Just double the fine. Keith is making 72 million this contract, $150K isn't going to bother him much (nor will 300K really).

Right now much of the system is being used as a CBA negotiation tool rather than an actually tool to help the players and the game.
 
kmitchel said:
It's been mentioned before and is a great idea but the NHLPA would veto this so quickly... Duncan Keith is out for 5, the Hawks can only dress 17 players for those 5 games. His spot in the lineup is vacant and can't be replaced.

I do like Jon's thoughts as well about hitting them in the wallet - 5 game suspension, 10 game lost of income. Just double the fine. Keith is making 72 million this contract, $150K isn't going to bother him much (nor will 300K really).

Right now much of the system is being used as a CBA negotiation tool rather than an actually tool to help the players and the game.
Click to expand...

could make a fine a fixed amount plus a percentage of their contract
 
It's been said here that the GM's don't want long suspensions (true). That the PA would fight any attempt at long suspensions (true). With that in mind I am going to attempt to let the status quo be. It is obvious that those involved with the game only pay lip service to saying they care about player safety. So if they don't seem to be interested in doing anything to curb these injuries why should someone like me who has no vested interest in it care?
 
cassijon said:
what they should do is follow suit with the NFL. hit the perp where it really counts. in the wallet.
Click to expand...

This x10


I laugh when players fined 2,500, 5,000, or even 10,000. They make more than that while they sit on the bench between shifts.....

I always liked the 'percentage' idea, for example a player is fined 2% of his contract for offense one, 6% for offense 2, 10% for offense 3....

Meanwhile, if you get to the third offense, perhaps the organization is fined as well for not enforcing or 'changing' the behavior of the player (ala Cooke this year).



Long suspensions hurt the team more than the player, big fines hurt the player much more.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
389,540
Messages
2,233,458
Members
4,151
Latest member
barchamb13
Back
Top