I always blindly hated Bettman because everyone seems to. But as I get older, I love the way he handles things. his no BS way of getting involved.
The NHL as never been richer than under his watch.
For example - Teams like Ottawa that have terrible owners have been reassured by Bettman that if the team is sold, it's 100% staying in Ottawa.
and he doesn't seem to cave in when he easily could have reduced this to one game
I always blindly hated Bettman because everyone seems to. But as I get older, I love the way he handles things. his no BS way of getting involved.
The NHL as never been richer than under his watch.
For example - Teams like Ottawa that have terrible owners have been reassured by Bettman that if the team is sold, it's 100% staying in Ottawa.
and he doesn't seem to cave in when he easily could have reduced this to one game - Maverick1818
You mean like making decisions and/or rulings based on facts and not guesses that Boychuk was going to run him from behind?
Location: The East Coast Dump, NJ Joined: 10.12.2015
Mar 13 @ 2:31 PM ET
You mean like making decisions and/or rulings based on facts and not guesses that Boychuk was going to run him from behind?
- eichiefs9
If the play runs it's course without Jake stopping Boychuk is ramming him into the boards with a hit right between the numbers. Boychuk's momentum makes it happen. There's no guess involved.
Location: "China was as proactive as possible" - Rinosaur, SC Joined: 02.01.2012
Mar 13 @ 2:42 PM ET
If the play runs it's course without Jake stopping Boychuk is ramming him into the boards with a hit right between the numbers. Boychuk's momentum makes it happen. There's no guess involved. - dragonoffrost
That didn't happen so its speculation. Take off the homer glasses.
If the play runs it's course without Jake stopping Boychuk is ramming him into the boards with a hit right between the numbers. Boychuk's momentum makes it happen. There's no guess involved. - dragonoffrost
Except for the fact that, you know.....it didn't happen
Location: Faceoffs, Plus/Minus, and PIMs...the Holy Trinity, TX Joined: 03.10.2013
Mar 13 @ 2:52 PM ET
Fine with a one game suspension but don't think it deserved two. Just more consistency please in how suspensions are given out would be nice but we will never get that
Location: The East Coast Dump, NJ Joined: 10.12.2015
Mar 13 @ 3:14 PM ET
Fine with a one game suspension but don't think it deserved two. Just more consistency please in how suspensions are given out would be nice but we will never get that - bulet13
Exactly this should have been a 1 game. The second game is bogus seeing everything else recently.
Hathaway
Malkin
Mantha
The Devils Minor League goon.
Location: The East Coast Dump, NJ Joined: 10.12.2015
Mar 13 @ 3:15 PM ET
Except for the fact that, you know.....it didn't happen - eichiefs9
It didn't happen because Jake made sure it didn't and if you haven't seen that kind of play before you are lying.
If I'm seeing a guy coming to lay a hit that will concuss me you would be damn sure I'd hit them first. I'll take the in game penalty and walk away rather than be concussed. I've had enough to know it's not something I want again.
It didn't happen because Jake made sure it didn't and if you haven't seen that kind of play before you are lying. - dragonoffrost
Sure, and he made no effort to play the puck and injured a guy in the process. Hence the two game suspension. I'm not really understanding why so many people can't grasp the notion that facts are the only things relevant in these hearings.
Opinions and speculation about things that didn't happen are irrelevant. Have whatever opinion you want, but if you're surprised that the league didn't change their ruling because Boychuk, who has exactly zero suspensions ever, may have boarded him from behind then I can't help you.
If players are allowed to cause injury to guys they perceive might hurt them then I'm sure you won't complain if someone preemptively tomahawks a cro magnon knuckle-dragger like Gudas directly in the face because that's a guy with a long history of dangerous, stupid plays.
Location: The East Coast Dump, NJ Joined: 10.12.2015
Mar 13 @ 3:24 PM ET
Sure, and he made no effort to play the puck and injured a guy in the process. Hence the two game suspension. I'm not really understanding why so many people can't grasp the notion that facts are the only things relevant in these hearings.
Opinions and speculation about things that didn't happen are irrelevant. Have whatever opinion you want, but if you're surprised that the league didn't change their ruling because Boychuk, who has exactly zero suspensions ever, may have boarded him from behind then I can't help you.
If players are allowed to cause injury to guys they perceive might hurt them then I'm sure you won't complain if someone preemptively tomahawks a cro magnon knuckle-dragger like Gudas directly in the face because that's a guy with a long history of dangerous, stupid plays. - eichiefs9
See my other post before the one you replied to 1 game is what it should have been based on the others I listed. 2 games was excessive. Hell even Eichel's hit was worse and he got 2.
See my other post before the one you replied to 1 game is what it should have been based on the others I listed. 2 games was excessive. Hell even Eichel's hit was worse and he got 2. - dragonoffrost
I'm not arguing that the league is always consistent in their discipline, but I don't really think that this one is way off-base. In this particular case, it's pretty consistent with the way they've doled out supplemental discipline in the past.
Had he been ejected from the game I think he only would've been suspended for one game. But he wasn't, so that accounts for one game's worth of the suspension.
The 2nd game comes from the fact that the play caused an injury. Boychuk still hasn't skated since the hit.
That's how they handle most of these things these days. The in-game discipline was insufficient, so he serves a game for that and he serves a game for an illegal hit that caused an injury.
Location: The East Coast Dump, NJ Joined: 10.12.2015
Mar 13 @ 3:37 PM ET
What about Giroux hitting Mantha in the back of the head? - Feds91Stammer
Giroux hits Mantha lower than the head and then Mantha doubles over which send G over him. Then Mantha blatantly cross checks him into the boards. Hockey play that then becomes a dirty retaliatory play.
Location: "China was as proactive as possible" - Rinosaur, SC Joined: 02.01.2012
Mar 13 @ 3:38 PM ET
Giroux hits Mantha lower than the head and then Mantha doubles over which send G over him. Then Mantha blatantly cross checks him into the boards. Hockey play that then becomes a dirty retaliatory play.
- dragonoffrost
Girouxs forearm definitely hit the back of Manthas head. Hence the retaliation.
Location: The East Coast Dump, NJ Joined: 10.12.2015
Mar 13 @ 3:46 PM ET
Girouxs forearm definitely hit the back of Manthas head. Hence the retaliation. - Feds91Stammer
Contact before that was lower ... the follow through goes to the back of the head as Mantha goes down. If Mantha didn't like it square up with him, don't cross check him into the boards.
