General Leafs Talk v2.0

[sneakyray]

kind of weirdly worded rule...so anyone who leaves the bench to start an altercation should be automatically suspended for 10 games.  So anyone who is on the ice presumably left the bench...so if there is a staged fight, the 2 players came on to the ice to start an altercation did they not?

bam...10 game suspension for all players who take part in a staged fight.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

http://www.downgoesbrown.com/2013/09/phil-kessel-suspension.html

Hilarious.

 

[louisstamos]

kind of weirdly worded rule...so anyone who leaves the bench to start an altercation should be automatically suspended for 10 games.  So anyone who is on the ice presumably left the bench...so if there is a staged fight, the 2 players came on to the ice to start an altercation did they not?

bam...10 game suspension for all players who take part in a staged fight.

You'll notice with every staged fight, though, they wait until the puck is dropped before they drop the gloves.  That way, play has "technically" resumed.

 

[Kin]

kind of weirdly worded rule...so anyone who leaves the bench to start an altercation should be automatically suspended for 10 games.  So anyone who is on the ice presumably left the bench...so if there is a staged fight, the 2 players came on to the ice to start an altercation did they not?

bam...10 game suspension for all players who take part in a staged fight.

But that assumes that the league differentiates between a staged fight and an unstaged one, which they don't. If two straight up goons come onto the ice and fight .5 seconds after the whistle blows there's nothing in the rule book that says that's different from any other fight. The difference is that right up until the fight starts those players are simply engaged in the regular act of playing hockey. Clarkson, though, can't make that claim when he jumps over the boards with the whistle blown and 6 Leafs on the ice.

 

[sneakyray]

kind of weirdly worded rule...so anyone who leaves the bench to start an altercation should be automatically suspended for 10 games.  So anyone who is on the ice presumably left the bench...so if there is a staged fight, the 2 players came on to the ice to start an altercation did they not?

bam...10 game suspension for all players who take part in a staged fight.

But that assumes that the league differentiates between a staged fight and an unstaged one, which they don't. If two straight up goons come onto the ice and fight .5 seconds after the whistle blows there's nothing in the rule book that says that's different from any other fight. The difference is that right up until the fight starts those players are simply engaged in the regular act of playing hockey. Clarkson, though, can't make that claim when he jumps over the boards with the whistle blown and 6 Leafs on the ice.

the rule doesn't specify when the altercation needs to happen in order for a suspension.  It simply states that if a player comes off of the bench in order to start an altercation he will be suspended for 10 games.

so if 2 big oafs come off the bench, line up next to each other, agree to go, wait till the puck drops, then drop em and fight.  I think its pretty clear that their intentions were to start an altercation.

anyways...I think I mostly agree with mr Cox.  if they started suspending coaches for putting goons on the ice (like if rolston got suspended for having scott out there)  that would end this kind of nonsense pretty quickly.

 

[Kin]

the rule doesn't specify when the altercation needs to happen in order for a suspension.  It simply states that if a player comes off of the bench in order to start an altercation he will be suspended for 10 games.

so if 2 big oafs come off the bench, line up next to each other, agree to go, wait till the puck drops, then drop em and fight.  I think its pretty clear that their intentions were to start an altercation.

Right, it's clear to you and me but the whole farce of the concept of John Scott as a "hockey player" is predicated on the idea that when he hops over the boards to line up for a face-off it's to play hockey and that if a fight breaks out during his time on ice it's an occurrence no different than the Clark-McSorley fight or any other naturally occurring fight. The rulebook actually pretty clearly separates what you're talking about from what Clarkson did. Not in 70.10 but rather in 70.2, the section on line changes:

A player or players who have entered the game on a legal line change during a stoppage of play, who line up in preparation for the ensuing face-off, and who participate in an altercation shall be penalized under the appropriate rule and will be subject to discipline in accordance with Rule 28 ? Supplementary Discipline (a game misconduct is not automatic in this situation unless provided for as a result of his actions in the altercation).

So the rulebook absolutely differentiates between players who come onto the ice and fight after a legal line change and those who don't.

 

[sneakyray]

the rule doesn't specify when the altercation needs to happen in order for a suspension.  It simply states that if a player comes off of the bench in order to start an altercation he will be suspended for 10 games.

so if 2 big oafs come off the bench, line up next to each other, agree to go, wait till the puck drops, then drop em and fight.  I think its pretty clear that their intentions were to start an altercation.

Right, it's clear to you and me but the whole farce of the concept of John Scott as a "hockey player" is predicated on the idea that when he hops over the boards to line up for a face-off it's to play hockey and that if a fight breaks out during his time on ice it's an occurrence no different than the Clark-McSorley fight or any other naturally occurring fight. The rulebook actually pretty clearly separates what you're talking about from what Clarkson did. Not in 70.10 but rather in 70.2, the section on line changes:

A player or players who have entered the game on a legal line change during a stoppage of play, who line up in preparation for the ensuing face-off, and who participate in an altercation shall be penalized under the appropriate rule and will be subject to discipline in accordance with Rule 28 ? Supplementary Discipline (a game misconduct is not automatic in this situation unless provided for as a result of his actions in the altercation).

So the rulebook absolutely differentiates between players who come onto the ice and fight after a legal line change and those who don't.

ah yes... the old addendum.  I'll be interested to see where clarkson goes with it if he indeed decides to appeal.

 

[ZBBM]

Point 1 is irrelevant.  As I stated above, pulling from Potvin's quote of the rule, he came off the bench during the altercation.  The rule then reads "or" -- not "and" -- to start an altercation.  If you do one or the other, you're suspended.  He did the first.

But, and I realize you're not defending the rule exactly, doesn't this rule essentially make it so the best thing for Carlyle to do in this situation be responding to Rolston by engaging Scott with whoever he has can fight? Doesn't that just escalate things? If the league looks at what Clarkson did as being worse than what Scott did then aren't they essentially saying that if one team sends out a goon they other team is obligated to either A) send out a matching goon or B) stand by and watch as a goon picks a fight or throws a punch at whoever he can find?

I'm fine with the idea that coming off the bench to fight should be strongly discouraged but someone coming off the bench to get an idiot like Scott in a headlock does not seem to be worth of a month of their season and, if anything, escalates the problem going forward.

I agree 100% with everything you say.  110%, in fact.  Your comments point to the need for an equivalent rule that would penalize players for doing what Scott did, which is simply mug an unwilling victim.  He should have gotten 10 games too -- at least.

Your analysis, Nik, is an indictment of the NHL and its putrid, two-faced stance on fighting.  On the one hand, they want to tut-tut-tut about it with suspensions like Clarkson's -- which are justified, you can't have people leaping off the bench to get into fights.  But OTOH they refuse to condemn goonery because some segment of -- dare I call them retrograde? -- fanbase thinks it's entertaining.  So their quest for the almighty dollar blinds them to the absurd inconsistencies in their so-called disciplinary "system."

 

[oakl0008]

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenlze 4m
Phil Kessel has been suspended 8 games. #Leafs




Edit: God I'm an idiot this profile is fake...lol sorry my bad.

 

[Palmateer29]

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenlze 4m
Phil Kessel has been suspended 8 games. #Leafs

I'm assuming 3 preseason games, the same as Cassian. I guess a broken jaw is the same as a hack to the ankle

 

[bustaheims]

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenlze 4m
Phil Kessel has been suspended 8 games. #Leafs




Edit: God I'm an idiot this profile is fake...lol sorry my bad.

Yeah, you got suckered pretty good there. For one, the hearing just started a couple minutes ago - it was pushed back to 4:45 - and, secondly, with a phone hearing, Kessel can't get more than 5 games.

 

[oakl0008]

Hence why I corrected myself pretty quickly but kept the post cause I thought it was funny. Kind of like those who mistake the Brozak account for the Bozak account. False Bobo did get me good.  ;D


Edit: Not sure if this is the thread for it but I heard that Coach Rolston was fined for "player selection and team conduct".

 

[Deebo]

The sabres coach was fined an undisclosed amount for "player selection and team conduct"

 

[lamajama]

Does anybody else find it ironic that for years during the Burke era we were fed the line that the Leafs were going to take advantage of teams that were in trouble with the Cap...and now WE"RE the team that others will now take advantage of?

Good move Leafs.

 

[bustaheims]

The sabres coach was fined an undisclosed amount for "player selection and team conduct"

Which is sort of the league saying "we don't like what you did, but there really aren't any specific rules against it, so, we're gonna make something up and give you a slap on the wrist."

 

[Bender]

Does anybody else find it ironic that for years during the Burke era we were fed the line that the Leafs were going to take advantage of teams that were in trouble with the Cap...and now WE"RE the team that others will now take advantage of?

Good move Leafs.

Huh?

 

[Kin]

Does anybody else find it ironic that for years during the Burke era we were fed the line that the Leafs were going to take advantage of teams that were in trouble with the Cap...and now WE"RE the team that others will now take advantage of?

Not particularly. The reason people said that during the Burke years was because the team stunk and could easily be below the cap. Then the team got better and they're closer to the cap. That's typically how things progress in a cap system.

 

[Frank E]

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenlze 4m
Phil Kessel has been suspended 8 games. #Leafs




Edit: God I'm an idiot this profile is fake...lol sorry my bad.

Yeah, you got suckered pretty good there. For one, the hearing just started a couple minutes ago - it was pushed back to 4:45 - and, secondly, with a phone hearing, Kessel can't get more than 5 games.

Unless the poster misspelled the name, wouldn't that also be a pretty good sign?

 

[drummond]

Anything more than 1 game would surprise me

 

[Redleaf]

Does Kessel skate away 'Scott' free once again?

Sorry. I couldn't resist.