After this weekend, the heat intensified over how Brendan Shanahan decides suspensions and disciplinary action. But for us women, there’s no secret. After the Campbell empire of nepotism and favoritism crumbled there was hope for a clean start. But after almost a year in the position it looks like The Plastics are back with 2.0 edition.
Here is Shanahan and Bettman at a press conference discussing the recent Torres suspension:
http://www.nbc.com/assets/video/widget/widget.html?vid=1384659
This is what it must be like behind closed doors when they are deciding on disciplinary action. “Well Brendan, you have the physique of a 20 year old Zack Parise shooting down the cold freshly zambonied ice on a winter classic day with a crazed Shea Weber chasing you trying to smash you head into the boards.”
shanahan simply calls it in
ask henrik if this was worth $2,500 bowl full of crazy
My point is, discipline should be like justice, blind, fair and across the board. A hit should be judged on its own. Not if someone is hurt, not if someone is a popular or famous player, but as a stand alone on its own merits – as it were. This is simply not happening. I realize people are human but come on.
And don’t use Matt Cooke is the poster boy for this system – it was the Penguins who sat him down and said it’s your job or you’re out. That was the reason he change, NOT Shanahan or the new system.
Tags: Brendan Shanahan, henrik Zetterberg, Matt Cooke, raffi torres, shea weber, zack parise
Points very well taken, and bonus blingee for reminding everybody that Cooke was extensively debriefed/desensitized/overhauled by the Pens. There are a lot of reasons why certain players seem to be more prone to being dumbasses out there. Much of it has to do with how they were coached when they were young, and the degree to which their local hockey culture tolerated/promoted this type of stupidity. A lot of guys from Western Canada or who played junior out there think this is just men being men and you deserve special dispensation to be reckless because you’re playing “playoff hockey” (whatever that means). If you’re extra excited and the Cup’s on the line, reckless endangerment is a-okay.
The League needs to step up with the PA and demonstrate/stand firm that it doesn’t matter if you’re popular, who your agent is, who your GM is, where you played junior or college and whether or not you’ve been nominated for an NHL Award: If you behave like an animal on the ice you’ll be disciplined. But as I have said before, I think disciplining individual players has proven futile. It’s gotten to the point whereby unless entire teams are disciplined – thus, held accountable – for loose cannon blunders, nothing’s going to change anytime soon. This is why I think points should be taken from teams whose players have instigated/engaged in fights and have inflicted illegal hits. If both teams are equally responsible (as was the case recently with PHI-PIT), both teams should lose 2 points. During the playoffs, this system would be modified such that games would taken from teams instead of points.
If you play like a loser, you lose. You lose points. You lose games. Why? Because you’re a loser. Plain and simple. If players can’t keep their problem teammates under control, they can confront coaches and implore that these players not be inserted into lineups. If that doesn’t work, then they can go to their GMs and politely ask why liability players like this were scouted/drafted/acquired in the first place? Franchises will finally make it a priority to rehabilitate or demote problem players – better yet, don’t even look at them in the first place. And the PA won’t be able to say that certain players are always being picked on, fined, suspended, etc. If the whole team (organization, coaching staff, players) is collectively held accountable, they can’t scream that players are being picked on. It’s everybody’s responsibility to play responsibly. Right?
Ultimately, the only message players really understand and care about is winning and losing. If you take away their wins and prevent them from advancing in their quest for the Cup, you can be sure they’ll get the message. Loud and clear.
Well thought out. I think a woman should be on this panel and it should consist of three people. 🙂