The system is broken. When common sense and rules have so noticeably diverged, then something is wrong. If nothing else, that is what we can take from the Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard.
As reported by Bob McKenzie of TSN today, league disciplinarian Colin Campbell will not fine or suspend Matt Cooke for his shot to the head of Boston Bruins’ forward Marc Savard. Despite the hit being noticeably dirty, uncalled for, and Savard leaving the rink on a stretcher, the NHL stated that nothing he did was against the rules and no punishment is necessary. Campbell went on to explain that they were following the precedent that they had set when they chose not to suspend Mike Richards for his hit on David Booth earlier this season.
Legally speaking, Colin Campbell made the right decision in choosing not to punish Matt Cooke for his blindside shoulder to the head of Marc Savard. First of all, there’s currently no penalty for that kind of hit. It’s a shoulder check (i.e. not an elbow) that was delivered high. Secondly, Campbell followed the precedent that he set by not suspending Mike Richards earlier in the season. In the legal world, precedents and the way laws are interpreted are just as important as the rules themselves.
But as we’ve stated before, just because something is legal doesn’t necessarily mean you should do it. Common sense says that hitting someone in the head is wrong and shouldn’t be allowed. Apparently next season, they’ll have that documented as well.
Taking a step back, the absence of punishment isn’t really a surprise at all. The precedent had been set to let head shots go unpunished. Because of prior history, many fans thought that a 3-5 game suspension would be coming from the league office. Like the head shot, there has been a precedent sent to punish repeat offenders more harshly than first-time offenders. And then there was a segment of fans that thought that the league should make an example of him and suspend him for at least 10 games. I’m not defending any of these options over the other, but I wouldn’t have been surprised at all to see any of them handed down.
When confronted with a cheap shot that injured an opponent by a player with a history of cheap shots, Colin Campbell chose to look the other way and let the boys “play on.” In his explanation, he said that Mike Richards’ hit which was in the flow of the game was equivalent to Matt Cooke’s cold shoulder that was NOT in the flow of the game. He hid behind the company line, “We’re following the precedent that has been set,” disregarding whether the prior precedent was correct in the first place.
Thankfully this will be a penalty next season. But until then, remember that any shot to the head for the rest of the season will be neither a penalty, nor a suspension. After all, the almighty precedent has been set.
This is a messy situation and there is no right or wrong answer. What do you think? Did they get it right or wrong?
Matt Reitz is the Editor-In-Chief here at ViewFromMySeats.com and former NHL Writer for ProHockeyTalk on NBCSports. When he’s not shoving a mic in the face of NHLers or explaining why home teams should wear white, he’s usually trying to figure out what song to play next on his iPod. It’s a never-ending job.
