goon attack wrote:
Screw all this time Shanny is taking to explain the suspensions on video. Also, it seems awfully complicated. I'd simplify it. Does it look like someone was attempting to injure? Okay:
first offense: 1 game
second offense: 3 games
third offense: 10 games
fourth offense: 20 games
(Frank) all the debate about all the intricacies of each issue etc... just hand out the freaking suspendings(durbano video
) as dictated by the formula.
Is this a players' union deal issue, or can Shanny do whatever the hell he wants?
The reason it seems complicated, is because it IS complicated.
Every hit has different scenarios & factors that play into it, and every hit is different...so making it a black and white issue isn't really feasible if you want to be fair about the suspensions.
I like the idea of detailed video explanations. Before Shanny, suspensions were handed down or not handed down without any explanation at all, which was frustrating for fans and players....we had no idea how the league came to their conclusion. That sucked.I see the problem at this point being a few things:1) Preferential treatment.
Even with the detailed explanations, it's still obvious to everyone that star players are treated differently and are given far more slack. Franzen jumps out to me as one of those players. He has taken numerous, dirty, cheap shots after the whistle without even so much as a review. You have to start suspending star players who commit suspendable hits at the same rate as everyone else. Until that happens, this system will continue to be a joke.2) The playoff factor.
Suspensions in the playoffs will be less severe than a regular season suspsension because of the shear importance of each playoff game...which I agree with. HOWEVER,, the problem is if a player is injured because of a dirty play, why is it that those games he misses don't seem to factor in? Those are important games missed because of a cheap shot. Why should someone have to miss an entire series due to injury because of a cheap shot when the offending player only misses one or two games because it is the playoffs? That is frustrating for everyone.3) Over-analyzing.
When you slow the video down and have so many rules & different scenarios that can factor into if a player gets suspended or not, quite often you can make the video say anything you want. By breaking it down in such a detailed way, taking into account every single head angle & body position, you can explain your way out of suspending anyone, or explain your way into suspending someone. And that leads back to point #1 with consistency issues.4) What gets reviewed?
I think this annoyance frustrates fans more than anything. Some seriously questionable plays for some reason are being ignored.
There isn't a single reason, not one, that the Burns elbow on Nichol shouldn't have been reviewed.
There isn't a single reason, not one, that the Galiardi hit on McDonald shouldn't have been reviewed.
Neither were reviewed.
Maybe, just maybe you could explain why Galiardi doesn't deserve a suspension...but the Burns eblow on Nichol was intentional, obvious, clearly seen on video and pretty viscous. Burns should have received at least a 1 game suspension based on the rules in place for suspensions and factoring in that it is the playoffs, but it wasn't even reviewed.
Breaking the plays down in detail is fine, I think everyone wants that to work. But you have to retain the common sense factor, which seems to be lost in this whole thing.
Here's my solution...
- Keep all of the detailed scenarios and rules for what warrants a suspension/fine.
- Review every questionable play, not just ones that received a penalty. Review every play that a team requests you to review.
- Be consistent and do not base the suspension or fine on who the player is.
- Don't forget to use common sense.
2014-2015 Sponsor -- Blues Asst. Coach Kirk Muller