|
|
Post by ex-BluesGM on Jun 2, 2009 9:03:12 GMT -5
I know this will go over like a fart in church cause of all the pen fans here, but what a bunch of BS with the league rescinding the "mandatory" one game suspension on Malkin. Trying to claim that it wasn't a premediated thing done to make up for an earlier incident. That's not the scope nor the intention of the rule, nor is it how the rule has been handed out in the past. The league either needs to follow its rules or forget about it. Just cause its Malkin and the Pens are already down 2-0... makes me sick.
If it were Avery I guarantee the suspension would've stuck. Hell if it were anyone but Crosby, & Malkin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elite Sim News (ESN) on Jun 2, 2009 9:55:44 GMT -5
I hear what you are saying Gav, but this isn't the first time the NHL has rescinded an instigator in these playoffs. Scott Walker got hit with an instigator in Game 5 of the Boston-Carolina series when he dropped Aaron Ward, and the NHL saw fit to drop the "mandatory" suspension as well.
I will keep saying this until the league actually does it...they need to get rid of the instigator penalty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carolina GM on Jun 2, 2009 12:23:03 GMT -5
Personally I would rather have the guy that stuck Osgood in the chest getting suspended as that play served no purpose other than to start stuff! Malkin was more heat of the moment and frustration so I don't have as big of a problem with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by CapitalsGM on Jun 2, 2009 15:24:29 GMT -5
I agree, Ron. I don't think there was anything wrong with Malkin's actions, and I agree with the suspension being rescinded. If anyone should be suspended, it should be Talbot.
I also think that Osgood embellished the contact and it is all part of the game. This is the Stanley Cup Finals and everyone is leaving it out on the line this series.
|
|
|
|
Post by ex-BluesGM on Jun 2, 2009 15:36:52 GMT -5
I agree with the sentiment that Rog has put out there. The instigator penalty is stupid, particularly the mandatory suspension part of it. I'm fine with them taking that out of the game, but a rule is a rule and it should be adhered to if its in place. The ward/walker play was a different scenario, one where there is a precident of league reversels and one where it is written into the rules that it may happen that way. I think players (malkin or otherwise) should certainly stick up for their teammates w/o fear of suspension, unless they cross the line. But again, if its a rule, its a rule....IMO
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyersGM on Jun 2, 2009 21:47:54 GMT -5
I disagree with everybody, nobody should be suspended. This is hockey and we need to stop turning the game into a ballerina show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elite Sim News (ESN) on Jun 2, 2009 22:41:16 GMT -5
Jack, just so we're clear...I COMPLETELY agree with you.  |
|
|
|
Post by torontogm on Jun 2, 2009 23:12:59 GMT -5
Quote: "but a rule is a rule and it should be adhered to if its in place."
Gavin, you wouldn't by any chance be a lawyer for Mr. Bettman down in Phoenix would you? Gotta stick to league rules, just like moving teams - just ask Winnipeg... oh, wait, never mind...
The one thing that is clear is that the league sticks to the rules when it suits it (Just ask any Sabre fan about Hull's goal). I was personally pleasantly shocked when they rescinded Walker's suspension because he can be a s*** disturber, but the fact that Malkin gets off pretty much boils down to the fact that he's a superstar... having said that, I also COMPLETELY agree with Jack that the rule is stupid AND the only ballerinas in hockey should be waiting somewhere naked for after the game... think about it... okay Ron, stop thinking about Baryshnikov...
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyersGM on Jun 4, 2009 7:41:07 GMT -5
Guys, just so you know.....
Rule 47.22 states: "A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc..."
Following that review, Campbell said: "None of the criteria in this rule applied in this situation. Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded."
|
|
