Comments on: Video: Mike Green Gives and Receives

By: phillyphan

phillyphan — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:14:43 +0000

All Richards hit did was teach Booth what he should have learned in midgets. DON'T SKATE THROUGH THE CENTER OF THE ICE WITH YOUR HEAD DOWN” Thats the first thing they teach you. It was a clean hit.

By: vulcansmuse

vulcansmuse — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:52:33 +0000

I'm totally fine with the league making a step up on the headshots. They need to, especially after Booth has been out and the Cormier hit. But, there has to be consistency. The problem is… if it was John Erskine, it wouldn't have been a suspension.

Gonchar did the exact same thing, probably MUCH worse to Clutterbuck a few weeks ago and only got an in-game 5 minutes. Koci boarded Green a month or so ago, and only got an in-game. Both were pre-meditated, one an elbow, the other a severe boarding… both resulted in players leaving the games with head/face injuries. And yet, the NHL didn't see any need for suspensions. Gonchar's hit was terrible… Koci is a fighter and a repeat offender. Yet, Andy Sutton cleanly boarded Dupuis (who bled like crazy) and he's suspended… and he's not considered a “repeat offender” like Koci is. Seriously, if you're a newbie to the sport, or even a longtime fan, you're still confused because this makes NO SENSE.

I know that they are looking at headshots and at elbows, especially with the Cormier incident. I'm not defending Green's incident. This may be the only call they've gotten right all year. And I'm not crying because it's my team… but seriously, the league's “policy” (or lack thereof) is laughable… and it's starting to look like they target certain teams, and guard other teams (see: Philly, Pittsburgh, NYR).

By: Matt Reitz

Matt Reitz — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:06:05 +0000

Really? (I'm not being condescending, I'm honestly asking)

From my perspective, I thought the only part of the Richards' hit was the final result. BOTH were headshots-- and if the league wants to make a statement about headshots, they both should have been suspensions. But I still look back at Richards hit and it looked like a shoulder to the head.

I wonder if people's opinions are changing because Booth has been out for 3 months.

By: Matt Reitz

Matt Reitz — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:58:29 +0000

I think that's the biggest problem that most people have with the suspensions lately. They could make the suspensions steeper (or even make them more lenient), as long as their consistent.

Honestly, if you break down Green's hit on Frolik, I'm surprised that it wasn't more. It was premeditated (he was pissed all shift), it was an elbow AND it was a headshot. Those are all things that they look for when they determine a suspension.

If it was someone like John Erskine instead... would the suspension be the same?

By: vulcansmuse

vulcansmuse — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:02:10 +0000

In all seriousness, Colin Campbell's office HAS to start becoming more consistent, star status or not. With Richards's hit on Booth, he received no suspension and Booth is still out, yet Green got 3 games, and Frolik jumps back up right after the elbow. No, Green shouldn't have elbowed, but c'mon, this is ridiculous. Campbell's office is becoming a joke… there are real injuries happening and suspensions aren't being assessed where they should, and his pet teams are receiving unfair treatment while those “targeted” teams are watched for the smallest things.

If you ask me, whether you're the smallest man on the totem pole or Ovi/Crosby, the discipline should be the same… this “star treatment” that they've done to prove a lesson to others isn't making a difference, but just proving to fans that the NHL has no control on the discipline and safety of the league, but even more, they don't really care.