How can anyone not be pulling for the Chicago Blackhawks to win the Stanley Cup? What a turnaround with this franchise. You really have to admire this fan base, I would put them up with anyone in the league; this includes Boston, Montreal, Washington, Detroit and Philadelphia - the Hawk fans (and the Hawks for that matter) are the real deal.
The Blackhawks have not won the Stanley Cup since 1961, they will be fixing that drought shortly. I remember going to the old Chicago Stadium in the late 80's to watch a regular season game between the St. Louis Blues and the Hawks. Both teams were having poor seasons and not going to make the playoffs, but that did not matter to the fans, they still went nuts and it was easily the loudest game I have ever attended.
Think about what the Hawks fan has been through. Under owner Bill Wirtz, he would not allow home games to be televised. He once commented the best season for him was when the Blackhawks went to the Stanley Cup finals and lost in seven (7) games - this way he maximized his gate receipts but did not have to pay his players a Stanley Cup bonus! True story. How could a franchise ever develop a winning tradition with an owner like this? It is no coincidence that once Bill Wirtz left the scene, to be replaced by his son Rocky, the demeanor of the Hawks changed immediately. The organization became fan friendly, they re-engaged former players, they drafted good players, eventually put them on long term contracts to keep them around and they allowed home games to be broadcast locally. Well deserved, well managed, Hawks in six (6) games.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
The Ship is On Its Way
I have just managed to pull my head out of the oven after last Friday's Bruins loss. What a mess and I don't know where to start, actually I do. Some of you students of history may recollect in 1630 the ship that carried John Winthrop to the Massachusetts Bay Colony also carried more than 10,000 gallons of wine and three times as much beer as water. Who was planning to drink all this? Not Bruins fans, they weren't around yet.
So what happened? A weak scoring team that loses its leading scorer, Marco Sturm, made it really difficult to overcome the momentum Philadelphia put together. The Bruins have good goal tending, good defense, but no scoring. One of only four teams to lose a best-of-seven series after taking a 3-0 lead. You have to be kidding me. I like the young defensemen Johnny Boychuk but I am scratching my head over his quote after the game “I wouldn’t say we choked. We had a chance to close it out . . . If you want to say we choked, I’m proud of the way we battled. I’m just in shock that we’re not playing anymore.’’ I'm shocked your not playing anymore Johnny and I'm shocked you choked! In fact we will memorialize this event by adding it to the "Crappy Feeling Index", I have placed it at Number 7 behind the 1978 - AL Playoff Red Sox loss to the Yankees. The list now is expanded to eleven events.
In the spirit of John Winthrop, I have commissioned a reenactment ship full of libations for Bruins fans, it's crossing the mid-Atlantic and working its way to Swift's Beach in Braintree, arrival is expected sometime this weekend. Help is on its way Bruins fans!
So what happened? A weak scoring team that loses its leading scorer, Marco Sturm, made it really difficult to overcome the momentum Philadelphia put together. The Bruins have good goal tending, good defense, but no scoring. One of only four teams to lose a best-of-seven series after taking a 3-0 lead. You have to be kidding me. I like the young defensemen Johnny Boychuk but I am scratching my head over his quote after the game “I wouldn’t say we choked. We had a chance to close it out . . . If you want to say we choked, I’m proud of the way we battled. I’m just in shock that we’re not playing anymore.’’ I'm shocked your not playing anymore Johnny and I'm shocked you choked! In fact we will memorialize this event by adding it to the "Crappy Feeling Index", I have placed it at Number 7 behind the 1978 - AL Playoff Red Sox loss to the Yankees. The list now is expanded to eleven events.
In the spirit of John Winthrop, I have commissioned a reenactment ship full of libations for Bruins fans, it's crossing the mid-Atlantic and working its way to Swift's Beach in Braintree, arrival is expected sometime this weekend. Help is on its way Bruins fans!
Saturday, May 1, 2010
The Caps, The Red Sox and The "Crappy Feeling Index"
Okay, here we go. Inhale, exhale, inhale, exhale. Alright, we are now ready to discuss the Washington Capitals first round elimination by the storied Montreal Canadiens - one of the biggest upsets in the history of the National Hockey League.
Prior to diagnosis of the Caps, it is somewhat therapeutic to put this upset in context. By context I mean how this loss compares to other sports upsets I have witnessed over the years. To do this, I gauge how crappy I feel after the loss and how long the crappy feeling lingers with me. Below I have compiled my "Crappy Feeling Index". It's really straightforward, a 10 is really crappy, a 5 is somewhat crappy and a 1 is not crappy at all, perhaps diffident. So here we go:
Now that we are done rationalizing, what happened to the Caps? I hear all this blather that the power play was terrible and they could not penetrate the perimeter, perhaps true, but you should still win games when you have 53 and 41 shots respectively. The Caps problem is not offense. The Canadiens had a hot goalie who stood on his head for two games. Frankly, Team Canada would not have done any better job scoring against the Canadiens than the Caps did. Team Canada would have won, however, because they would have allowed fewer goals; therein lies the issue with the Caps - defensive talent.
They got beat by a mediocre Canadiens team that will not get by the Pittsburgh Penguins in the next round of the playoffs. The Caps need no overhaul though, instead they need a couple of defensemen. Here's the good news, they have John Carlson who will get even better next year and Karl Alzner who will be more than ready for the NHL. To complement them, they need to go out and get one really imposing defensive defenseman, someone like a Zdeno Chara, Chris Pronger (in his prime), Hal Gill or Tyler Myers type. More good news, to get this defensive stalwart they have some good players to offer in a trade: Mike Green, Shaone Morrisonn, John Erskine, Jose Theodore, Milan Jurcina and Brendan Morrison. It will be tricky from a salary cap perspective to bring in this big D-man because Nick Backstrom's contract is up and I expect him to sign for between $7 and $7.5m per year.
Don't mess with this Caps team, get some defensemen, not too much else needs to be done here.
Prior to diagnosis of the Caps, it is somewhat therapeutic to put this upset in context. By context I mean how this loss compares to other sports upsets I have witnessed over the years. To do this, I gauge how crappy I feel after the loss and how long the crappy feeling lingers with me. Below I have compiled my "Crappy Feeling Index". It's really straightforward, a 10 is really crappy, a 5 is somewhat crappy and a 1 is not crappy at all, perhaps diffident. So here we go:
- 1987 - Marvin Hagler split-decision loss to Sugar Ray Leonard (9.5)
- 1971 - Bruins playoff elimination to Canadiens, Ken Dryden in goal (9.0)
- 1974 - Bruins Stanley Cup Final loss to Flyers (8.5)
- 1986 - World Series Red Sox loss to Mets, Game 6 (8.5)
- 1986 - World Series Red Sox loss to Mets, Game 7 (8.5)
- 1978 - AL Playoff Red Sox loss to Yankees, Buck F&&%#ing Dent (8.0)
- 1975 - World Series Red Sox loss to Reds, Game 7 (8.0)
- 2010 - Capitals playoff elimination to Canadiens (7.5)
- 2008 - Super Bowl XLIV Patriots loss to Giants (7.0)
- 1976 - Mass State HS Hockey Championship Braintree loss to Winthrop (6.5)
Now that we are done rationalizing, what happened to the Caps? I hear all this blather that the power play was terrible and they could not penetrate the perimeter, perhaps true, but you should still win games when you have 53 and 41 shots respectively. The Caps problem is not offense. The Canadiens had a hot goalie who stood on his head for two games. Frankly, Team Canada would not have done any better job scoring against the Canadiens than the Caps did. Team Canada would have won, however, because they would have allowed fewer goals; therein lies the issue with the Caps - defensive talent.
They got beat by a mediocre Canadiens team that will not get by the Pittsburgh Penguins in the next round of the playoffs. The Caps need no overhaul though, instead they need a couple of defensemen. Here's the good news, they have John Carlson who will get even better next year and Karl Alzner who will be more than ready for the NHL. To complement them, they need to go out and get one really imposing defensive defenseman, someone like a Zdeno Chara, Chris Pronger (in his prime), Hal Gill or Tyler Myers type. More good news, to get this defensive stalwart they have some good players to offer in a trade: Mike Green, Shaone Morrisonn, John Erskine, Jose Theodore, Milan Jurcina and Brendan Morrison. It will be tricky from a salary cap perspective to bring in this big D-man because Nick Backstrom's contract is up and I expect him to sign for between $7 and $7.5m per year.
Don't mess with this Caps team, get some defensemen, not too much else needs to be done here.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Eastern Conference Playoffs
I believe the winner of the Eastern Conference should win the Stanley Cup. Not taking anything away from the Western Conference teams, I feel strongly the East team, rising above the others, will have to be playing really, really good hockey. In fact hockey so good it should propel them to a Stanley Cup Championship. So, lets take a look at the teams I like.
First, lets start with Washington. Pre-playoff favorite as evidenced by its #1 seed and President's Trophy. Make no mistake these guys have their hands full with Montreal. For game 6 on Monday, I believe the Caps will start Valarmov. Despite Bruce Boudreau's threats in today's Washington Post to mix up line combinations on Monday, I don't think you will see too many changes to start. As an aside, I wish Alex Ovechkin considered a lesser curve on his stick. Look closely, it looks like a banana - really difficult for him to control the puck (small surface area) on his backhand. These guys need to finish this series Monday night in 6 games.
Pittsburgh. As much as I dislike admitting it, the road to the Stanley Cup Finals goes through Pittsburgh. The Penguins disposed of a surging Ottawa team, Fluery looks solid, and they won the deciding game in a comeback fashion - all good signs for the Pittsburgh faithful. They now get a bit of rest in preparation for the next series.
Philadelphia. A very efficient 5 game playoff series win over New Jersey. Well needed considering the emotional rollcoaster they have been on just to get into the playoffs (last day of season in shootout with the Rangers). Flyers are a formidable playoff team. They are starting to get decent goaltending, have solid defensemen and their forwards are starting to score - even that goon Dan Carcillo. Given rest and preparation for their next opponent (winner of Washington Montreal series) they will be a worthy opponent.
Buffalo. Great goal tending and enough scoring to get by the Bruins. Yeah, I know the Bruins have a 3-2 lead in the series, a great goalie and a solid defensive corps but this will not be enough to win one of the next two games with the Sabres. NOT ENOUGH OFFENSE, only 1 player with over 22 goals! Bruins have as much chance winning this series as Gary Doak has at running a stick handling clinic this summer.
Miscellaneous
Did you see in today's Parade section the Vancouver Canucks of the late 80's are being given credit for first use of the word 'Couger'? They can't win Stanley Cups but they can help broaden our vocabulary.
First, lets start with Washington. Pre-playoff favorite as evidenced by its #1 seed and President's Trophy. Make no mistake these guys have their hands full with Montreal. For game 6 on Monday, I believe the Caps will start Valarmov. Despite Bruce Boudreau's threats in today's Washington Post to mix up line combinations on Monday, I don't think you will see too many changes to start. As an aside, I wish Alex Ovechkin considered a lesser curve on his stick. Look closely, it looks like a banana - really difficult for him to control the puck (small surface area) on his backhand. These guys need to finish this series Monday night in 6 games.
Pittsburgh. As much as I dislike admitting it, the road to the Stanley Cup Finals goes through Pittsburgh. The Penguins disposed of a surging Ottawa team, Fluery looks solid, and they won the deciding game in a comeback fashion - all good signs for the Pittsburgh faithful. They now get a bit of rest in preparation for the next series.
Philadelphia. A very efficient 5 game playoff series win over New Jersey. Well needed considering the emotional rollcoaster they have been on just to get into the playoffs (last day of season in shootout with the Rangers). Flyers are a formidable playoff team. They are starting to get decent goaltending, have solid defensemen and their forwards are starting to score - even that goon Dan Carcillo. Given rest and preparation for their next opponent (winner of Washington Montreal series) they will be a worthy opponent.
Buffalo. Great goal tending and enough scoring to get by the Bruins. Yeah, I know the Bruins have a 3-2 lead in the series, a great goalie and a solid defensive corps but this will not be enough to win one of the next two games with the Sabres. NOT ENOUGH OFFENSE, only 1 player with over 22 goals! Bruins have as much chance winning this series as Gary Doak has at running a stick handling clinic this summer.
Miscellaneous
Did you see in today's Parade section the Vancouver Canucks of the late 80's are being given credit for first use of the word 'Couger'? They can't win Stanley Cups but they can help broaden our vocabulary.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
High School Hockey
Two great high school hockey stories this month.
The first is Hingham (Massachusetts) High School's recent Super 8 Championship, a 1-0 thriller over Catholic Memorial before a huge crowd at the Boston Garden. Always great to see a public high school beat a Catholic Conference team in the final. Only the second time a public high school has won this championship. A great memorial and tribute to Garrett Reagan, the former Hingham coach for 26 years who built this fine program and passed away suddenly in 2008. Kudo's to the coaches and players at Hingham High!
The second high school hockey story is about a game that was never played. In 1989 two New Jersey teams were slated to play in the State Final Hockey Championship - The Delbarton School versus St. Joseph Regional High School. Ranked 1 and 2 respectively, anticipation was high as the teams had not faced each other during the course of the season. Both teams had lots of talent, many went on and had great college careers, in fact one player, Ken Blum, was drafted by the Minnesota North Stars. During the course of the 1989 season both squads frequently played in front of capacity crowds. Unfortunately, the excitement came to a screeching halt when an outbreak of measles at Delbarton forced the administration to cancel the game. It was never played.
For years this decision weighed heavily on players who have since wondered whether they could have been champions. But here's the good news. On April 3, 34 of the original 42 players and both coaches have agreed to play the game. After 20 years, players are coming from Massachusetts, Maine, California, Texas, Pennsylvania and Minnesota to play the game. In fact, these guys ranging in age from 38-40, have been practicing at 5 AM with their old coaches then going to work. The NHL has donated jersey for both teams and partial proceeds from the game go to Hockey Fights Cancer.
For additional details check out the following article at:
http://www.maxpreps.com/news/7uxKQDLcEd-UswAcxJTdpg/greatest-hockey-game-never-played-frozen-in-new-jersey.htm
The first is Hingham (Massachusetts) High School's recent Super 8 Championship, a 1-0 thriller over Catholic Memorial before a huge crowd at the Boston Garden. Always great to see a public high school beat a Catholic Conference team in the final. Only the second time a public high school has won this championship. A great memorial and tribute to Garrett Reagan, the former Hingham coach for 26 years who built this fine program and passed away suddenly in 2008. Kudo's to the coaches and players at Hingham High!
The second high school hockey story is about a game that was never played. In 1989 two New Jersey teams were slated to play in the State Final Hockey Championship - The Delbarton School versus St. Joseph Regional High School. Ranked 1 and 2 respectively, anticipation was high as the teams had not faced each other during the course of the season. Both teams had lots of talent, many went on and had great college careers, in fact one player, Ken Blum, was drafted by the Minnesota North Stars. During the course of the 1989 season both squads frequently played in front of capacity crowds. Unfortunately, the excitement came to a screeching halt when an outbreak of measles at Delbarton forced the administration to cancel the game. It was never played.
For years this decision weighed heavily on players who have since wondered whether they could have been champions. But here's the good news. On April 3, 34 of the original 42 players and both coaches have agreed to play the game. After 20 years, players are coming from Massachusetts, Maine, California, Texas, Pennsylvania and Minnesota to play the game. In fact, these guys ranging in age from 38-40, have been practicing at 5 AM with their old coaches then going to work. The NHL has donated jersey for both teams and partial proceeds from the game go to Hockey Fights Cancer.
For additional details check out the following article at:
http://www.maxpreps.com/news/7uxKQDLcEd-UswAcxJTdpg/greatest-hockey-game-never-played-frozen-in-new-jersey.htm
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Time For No-Touch Icing Has Arrived
When will the NHL implement no-touch icing? Earlier this week we had yet another instance of injury related to the current icing rule. Check out the video below where Darcy Tucker of the Colorado Avalanche is pursuing the puck against Matt Greene of the LA Kings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv43KuZ-IqY
Fortunately Greene was able to continue playing but he was really lucky.
Icing occurs when a player shoots the puck across at least two red lines, the opposing team's goal line being the last. When icing is called, the officials stop play. Play is resumed with a face-off in the defending zone of the team that committed the infraction. In international competitions, the East Coast Hockey League (ECHL), and the Central Hockey League (CHL), play is stopped for icing once the puck crosses the goal line. This is called automatic or no-touch icing. In the NHL and AHL, however, a player on the opposing team other than the goalie must touch the puck to cause a stoppage in play.
The NHL, in its infinite wisdom, will sit on this until a really serious injury occurs. For once I ask the NHL to be proactive and preemptive. General Managers also have some ownership on this one - make a move for no-touch icing to be implemented next season.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv43KuZ-IqY
Fortunately Greene was able to continue playing but he was really lucky.
Icing occurs when a player shoots the puck across at least two red lines, the opposing team's goal line being the last. When icing is called, the officials stop play. Play is resumed with a face-off in the defending zone of the team that committed the infraction. In international competitions, the East Coast Hockey League (ECHL), and the Central Hockey League (CHL), play is stopped for icing once the puck crosses the goal line. This is called automatic or no-touch icing. In the NHL and AHL, however, a player on the opposing team other than the goalie must touch the puck to cause a stoppage in play.
There are two solid reasons I believe no-touch icing should be implemented.
First, serious injury will be prevented. Look at some of the major injuries over that past few years due to an icing-related chase for the puck. Minnesota's Kurt Foster broke his leg, Calgary's Al MacInnis dislocated his hip, Dallas' Mark Tinordi broke his femur, Edmonton's Marty Reasoner damaged his knee and foot, the former San Jose Shark (and current Bruin) Marco Sturm dislocated his ankle and broke his leg and Florida's Mike Wilson dislocated his shoulder and broke his arm. You may also remember former first rounder Pat Peake of the Washington Capitals. Peake's career ended in a sprint for the puck with Pittsburgh's J.J. Daigneault. His heel shattered in 12 places - he was done at age 24.
Second, the tempo of the game will be quicker. The average duration of a game will decrease and will appeal to hockey's fan base.
Second, the tempo of the game will be quicker. The average duration of a game will decrease and will appeal to hockey's fan base.
The NHL, in its infinite wisdom, will sit on this until a really serious injury occurs. For once I ask the NHL to be proactive and preemptive. General Managers also have some ownership on this one - make a move for no-touch icing to be implemented next season.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Colin Campbell and Player Safety
Most of us are still pondering the rationale of Colin Campbell's decision not to suspend Matt Cooke for his blind-sided shoulder to the head of Boston's Marc Savard. I view Campbell's behavior as blatant incompetence.
Campbell's explanation for not suspending Cooke was because the check was identical to the hit Mike Richards dealt to David Booth. In Campbell's view, Richards' hit did not draw a suspension therefore, to be consistent, neither should Cooke's.
Really Mr. Campbell? Have you had one too many Boone Island Ales? I vehemently disagree with your decision-making. Before looking at the video, here's a refresher on Rule 21.1 from this year's NHL Rulebook, "A match penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who deliberately attempts to injure an opponent in any manner. A match penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who deliberately injures an opponent in any manner."
What is unclear about this rule? Now take a close look again at the hit on David Booth and see if you can apply the rule.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOsp_Spcdwg
Richards clearly brings his shoulder to the head. You will notice upon impact Richards actually thrusts upward to make full impact on the head. Clearly, this was an intent to injure. Any one of the four referees on the ice should have called this penalty. They opted not to and the decision came to your office for review and possible supplemental action. You too decided this was not an attempt to injure and recommended no suspension.
Last week you reviewed the hit delivered by Matt Cooke. Remember Rule 21.1, now again take a closer look at the Cooke hit on Savard below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_F7LEZ78_o
Clearly a head-shot and unquestionably an intent to injure. Because of the similarities and precedence set with the Richards incident you opted for no suspension.
Mr. Campbell, your decision-making on Matt Cooke demonstrates incredibly poor judgment and really questionable competence. I make this statement for several reasons:
1) You ignored Matt Cooke's track record - he is a repeat offender. He was suspended earlier this season for his head shots on both Artem Animisimov in November 2009 and for his check on Scott Walker in January 2009. He was recently accused of biting Asham. Two years ago when he played for the Washington Capitals I saw him come across the neutral zone and clobber Vincent Lecavalier. He destroyed Lecavalier's shoulder which ended his season. I was at the game, Cooke blind-sided Lecavalier - clearly an attempt to injure. In fact, all the above cited incidences are intent to injure infractions. Do you see the trend starting to develop Mr. Campbell?
2) You are confused between incidental and intentional contact. I hear all the time hockey is such a fast game and there are numerous instances where incidental contact takes place. Because you did not suspend Cooke perhaps you made the decision his contact was incidental. Just look closer at the videos. Cooke knows Savard is vulnerable and is applying a blind-sided hit to the head, with the intent of applying maximum impact with intent to injure.
3) Two wrongs do not make it right. You got the Richards incident wrong and you got the Cooke incident wrong as well. You elected to save face and not admit a mistake. Your saving face was a higher priority than the integrity and safety of the game.
4) Rare player outrage. Credible players across the league such as Vincent Lecavalier, Martin St. Louis and Mark Recchi are surprised at your decision. Even one of Cooke's teammates, Bill Guerin, said there should have been disciplinary action taken.
5) You are inconsistent in your rulings. Cooke suspensions were meted out when he checked Animisimov and Walker. In the case of Animisimov, the elbow was flagrant; less so with Savard, but the intent to injure was still there. In both Richard's and Cooke's cases you should have applied the intent to injure rule. You would then have come to the conclusion to suspend both of them.
6) You are incapable of interpreting the rules. Rule 21.1, mentioned above is applicable here. Either you do not understand it or, in the interest of self-preservation, you elected not to apply it.
Your poor decisions imperil player safety. You ought to tune into the Bruins versus Penguins game on March 18. With Matt Cooke still playing, you have the makings of another Todd Bertuzzi-Steve Moore scenario.
Campbell's explanation for not suspending Cooke was because the check was identical to the hit Mike Richards dealt to David Booth. In Campbell's view, Richards' hit did not draw a suspension therefore, to be consistent, neither should Cooke's.
Really Mr. Campbell? Have you had one too many Boone Island Ales? I vehemently disagree with your decision-making. Before looking at the video, here's a refresher on Rule 21.1 from this year's NHL Rulebook, "A match penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who deliberately attempts to injure an opponent in any manner. A match penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who deliberately injures an opponent in any manner."
What is unclear about this rule? Now take a close look again at the hit on David Booth and see if you can apply the rule.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOsp_Spcdwg
Richards clearly brings his shoulder to the head. You will notice upon impact Richards actually thrusts upward to make full impact on the head. Clearly, this was an intent to injure. Any one of the four referees on the ice should have called this penalty. They opted not to and the decision came to your office for review and possible supplemental action. You too decided this was not an attempt to injure and recommended no suspension.
Last week you reviewed the hit delivered by Matt Cooke. Remember Rule 21.1, now again take a closer look at the Cooke hit on Savard below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_F7LEZ78_o
Clearly a head-shot and unquestionably an intent to injure. Because of the similarities and precedence set with the Richards incident you opted for no suspension.
Mr. Campbell, your decision-making on Matt Cooke demonstrates incredibly poor judgment and really questionable competence. I make this statement for several reasons:
1) You ignored Matt Cooke's track record - he is a repeat offender. He was suspended earlier this season for his head shots on both Artem Animisimov in November 2009 and for his check on Scott Walker in January 2009. He was recently accused of biting Asham. Two years ago when he played for the Washington Capitals I saw him come across the neutral zone and clobber Vincent Lecavalier. He destroyed Lecavalier's shoulder which ended his season. I was at the game, Cooke blind-sided Lecavalier - clearly an attempt to injure. In fact, all the above cited incidences are intent to injure infractions. Do you see the trend starting to develop Mr. Campbell?
2) You are confused between incidental and intentional contact. I hear all the time hockey is such a fast game and there are numerous instances where incidental contact takes place. Because you did not suspend Cooke perhaps you made the decision his contact was incidental. Just look closer at the videos. Cooke knows Savard is vulnerable and is applying a blind-sided hit to the head, with the intent of applying maximum impact with intent to injure.
3) Two wrongs do not make it right. You got the Richards incident wrong and you got the Cooke incident wrong as well. You elected to save face and not admit a mistake. Your saving face was a higher priority than the integrity and safety of the game.
4) Rare player outrage. Credible players across the league such as Vincent Lecavalier, Martin St. Louis and Mark Recchi are surprised at your decision. Even one of Cooke's teammates, Bill Guerin, said there should have been disciplinary action taken.
5) You are inconsistent in your rulings. Cooke suspensions were meted out when he checked Animisimov and Walker. In the case of Animisimov, the elbow was flagrant; less so with Savard, but the intent to injure was still there. In both Richard's and Cooke's cases you should have applied the intent to injure rule. You would then have come to the conclusion to suspend both of them.
6) You are incapable of interpreting the rules. Rule 21.1, mentioned above is applicable here. Either you do not understand it or, in the interest of self-preservation, you elected not to apply it.
Your poor decisions imperil player safety. You ought to tune into the Bruins versus Penguins game on March 18. With Matt Cooke still playing, you have the makings of another Todd Bertuzzi-Steve Moore scenario.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)