Moderator: LGB Mods



Portland Blues wrote:The fight at the end was right up there with an NBA fight.


Hullie wrote:Portland Blues wrote:The fight at the end was right up there with an NBA fight.
lol...
Malkin attacks Z Russian style with his stick.

Hullie wrote:Automatic suspension for Malkin??
he got an instigator penalty in the last 5min of the game. that is the rule isn't it?




philco_3 wrote:You can't have the face of the NHL's butt buddy suspended. Rules are rules and he should be suspended. But wait this is the NHL too, after all they allowed Brett Hull to win to a Stanley Cup with his foot in the crease.




ProngerBlues44 wrote:I am trying to post the quote, but for some reason the site or my computer is not letting me. So here's the link: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=424480
Everything of that play screams sending a message and suspension for Malkin IMO. That's horse s*** yet again by Campbell and its just another time when the NHL covets its stars.

nhl.com wrote:Rule 47.22 states: "A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc..."
Following that review, Campbell said: "None of the criteria in this rule applied in this situation. Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded."

theohall wrote:nhl.com wrote:Rule 47.22 states: "A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc..."
Following that review, Campbell said: "None of the criteria in this rule applied in this situation. Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded."
The bolded, underlined part is what's important. The suspension is only in place until a review is held and determination is made as to whether or not a suspension is warranted. IMO, Campbell did the right thing and explained it very clearly.


WaukeeBlues wrote:![]()
Honestly man- shut the f*ck up. The Wings are gonna probably win the cup regardless and I'll likely break something when it happens.
If both teams have to do it, it's fair. And don't give me this age differential crap. Tired is tired and last I checked, your team has young legs too. The TV announcers sounded about ready to jump on the ice to suck the cocks of the "young and powerful and studly Wings 4th line that is just super awesome." I threw up in my mouth about 5 times towards the end of that game cause they just would not shut the f*ck up about the Wings' young talent.
God I hate the Red Wings.![]()


WaukeeBlues wrote:philco_3 wrote:You can't have the face of the NHL's butt buddy suspended. Rules are rules and he should be suspended. But wait this is the NHL too, after all they allowed Brett Hull to win to a Stanley Cup with his foot in the crease.
I don't think its egregious to take the Stanley Cup Finals as a special case for rules interpretation when the league deems it necessary.
I for one didn't think that the "fight" amounted to much more than frustrated fist throwing. More importantly, I get the feeling the NHL just wants to "let 'em play" per se and not try to get involved in adversely affecting one team's ability to compete. If it were Zetterberg (or "Z") instigating, I would make the same argument; unless its very serious enough to warrant a suspension, the Cup Finals isn't the time to do it. My $.02


WaukeeBlues wrote:First off- what Malkin and Zetterberg did BARELY qualifies as a fight IMO. Secondly, the fight was the result of a scrum in front of the net and much less Malkin pointing out Zetterberg and like chasing him down or anything. They were going at it in front of the net and the gloves came off. It happens.
Last- if the NHL suspended Malkin, they might as well just hand Detroit the Stanley Cup right now. It's akin to calling a 2 minute penalty against you on a questionable call late in a game when your team in down by a goal. Do you still technically have a chance to win? Yes. Likely? No. Same thing here. So in a sense, you ARE right when you say Malkin got special treatment- I just feel its for different reasons than what you and others are alluding to.


WestCoastWingsFan wrote:First off- what Malkin and Zetterberg did BARELY qualifies as a fight IMO. Secondly, the fight was the result of a scrum in front of the net and much less Malkin pointing out Zetterberg and like chasing him down or anything. They were going at it in front of the net and the gloves came off. It happens.
Last- if the NHL suspended Malkin, they might as well just hand Detroit the Stanley Cup right now. It's akin to calling a 2 minute penalty against you on a questionable call late in a game when your team in down by a goal. Do you still technically have a chance to win? Yes. Likely? No. Same thing here. So in a sense, you ARE right when you say Malkin got special treatment- I just feel its for different reasons than what you and others are alluding to.


WestCoastWingsFan wrote:WaukeeBlues wrote:philco_3 wrote:You can't have the face of the NHL's butt buddy suspended. Rules are rules and he should be suspended. But wait this is the NHL too, after all they allowed Brett Hull to win to a Stanley Cup with his foot in the crease.
I don't think its egregious to take the Stanley Cup Finals as a special case for rules interpretation when the league deems it necessary.
I for one didn't think that the "fight" amounted to much more than frustrated fist throwing. More importantly, I get the feeling the NHL just wants to "let 'em play" per se and not try to get involved in adversely affecting one team's ability to compete. If it were Zetterberg (or "Z") instigating, I would make the same argument; unless its very serious enough to warrant a suspension, the Cup Finals isn't the time to do it. My $.02
![]()
Honestly man- shut the f*ck up.
Rules are rules. If you do the crime, you do the time. Why should Malkin (and the Pens, by proxy) get special treatment?
nhl.com wrote:Rule 47.22 states: "A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc..."
Following that review, Campbell said: "None of the criteria in this rule applied in this situation. Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded."



Return to St. Louis Blues Discussion
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], kodos, WaukeeBlues and 9 guests