Matt Cooke suspended two games for hit on Artem Anisimov
by FrankD on Nov 29, 2009 7:23 PM EST
in News
34 comments
Well, we all saw this one coming. I don't think a single person doubted that Matt Cooke would receive some sort of suspension and/or fine for his hit on Artem Anisimov. Well, he's been hit with both. For once you almost wish Cooke would've taken a page out of Sean Avery's book and missed completely on his "alleged" cheap shot attempt on Crosby that sent him tumbling to the ice as Sid ducked out of the way.
Cooke will miss Monday night's game against the Rangers at Madison Square Garden as well as one Thursday against Colorado at Mellon Arena.
He will be eligible to return for the Penguins' home game against Chicago Saturday.
As part of his punishment, Cooke will forfeit $29,268.30 in salary, with that money going to the Players' Emergency Assistance Fund.
0 recs |
34 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I can’t believe Penguin fans think he should have been suspended for a shoulder check.
So now it’s Cooke’s fault for him having his head down, unreal
The shoulder was clearly aimed towards the head, and Cooke left his feet…
by Hatt the Moople on Nov 29, 2009 7:45 PM EST up reply actions
The other day you were saying how you’re not just another Penguins fan who can back Fleury or anyone else when they are doing poorly, yet Pens fans doing the same thing – as in, putting away the black and gold glasses to pass judgment on this call – is unbelievable to you?
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
This has nothing to do with black & white glasses, this has to do with people being angry for OV & Richards, but not angry for the Cooke suspension. Doesn’t make sense to me, but what do I know, I usually get questioned for my opinion for some reason
by GhostWalker40 on Nov 29, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
Nothing I just said was done in a malicious way, yet you spin it around as if I’m going for the jugular here. I was asking a genuine question that relates to something you said previously.
I think a good amount of Pens fans were mad about the OV and Richards hits and subsequent lack of a suspension. But in the grand scheme of things, or at least in the overall eyes of this blog, it’s not really something we’ll make a front page post about. Now if it was on a Pens player (which Ovie’s knee-to-knee in the playoffs last season WAS) then yeah, we’ll post up about it. But really if anything those kinds of things will get mentioned as part of a post or maybe a fanpost.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
I see Avery wasn’t suspended for his attempted butt-rape of Fedotenko.
Matt Cooke wouldn’t have been suspended if he wasn’t Matt Cooke.
Hey, an out is an out - unless you're Mario, in which case it's probably two outs. -UtesFan89
Idd if this is a two game suspension (which I’m fine with btw, i don’t like those rising shoulderpad to head hits, they almost invariably end up with aconcussion.) then “Leadership” should still be in the box for his hit on Booth.
There is a knack to flying: it's learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
by Sid the captain on Nov 29, 2009 7:49 PM EST up reply actions
If you’re a team captain or a league superstar you don’t get suspended on this hit..
I’d really like to hear the league explain why Richards escaped suspension on a similiar, even more vicious hit.
The NHL’s wheel of justice strikes again
You come at the king, you best not miss.
by Hooks Orpik on Nov 29, 2009 8:55 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
What I don’t get is how people complain about OV & Dicks not getting suspended, but yet agree with this suspension.
If those 2 didn’t get suspended, then Cooke shouldn’t have been either
by GhostWalker40 on Nov 29, 2009 9:03 PM EST up reply actions
Not analogous hits because AO didn’t blindside Kaleta or hit him in the head so don’t use it as an excuse to hate on AO. Briere has star power, no? He got suspended. I’m with you on Richards.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 29, 2009 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
Briere hasn’t had star power since Buffalo. And even then that was more of a “I guess we’ll give it to him since we don’t have much else” sort of power.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
I can buy that he’s not a superstar, but he’s not Patrick Kaleta either. I’m pretty sure he’s been in an all star game and Gary Bettman knows who he is so he’s not just a goon getting a suspension.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 30, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
You’re an OV homer, so what you say doesn’t count around here. Go back to the craps blog
by GhostWalker40 on Nov 30, 2009 12:01 AM EST up reply actions
Dude, chill. Fehr and Balanced contributes some pretty good input around here. And frankly has provided even some non-biased commentary when it comes to the Caps and OV.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
Thanks Frank, just trying to provide some outside perspective and get in on some good hockey talk. I know you don’t all agree with me all the time but I try to bring a rational point of view and engage in civil discussion. You all know you’re welcome to do the same at Japers’ Rink at any time.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 30, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
It’s good to get öutside views imo, we as Pens Fans tend to look at all matters Pens with a rose colered look, a fan from another team forces us to make our arguments more precise and accurate, this ofc is the same for any fanbase of any team.
There is a knack to flying: it's learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
by Sid the captain on Nov 30, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
Definitely, and I’ve had lots of great conversations on this site (and other rival SBN sites), even with people I don’t agree with. We also love it when Hooks and Frank come by our place and bring their perspective (even when Hooks tries to catch me with my head down in the neutral zone). Any of you that are starved for hockey talk can feel free to come by, just keep it civil and rational.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 30, 2009 6:36 PM EST up reply actions
Because Richards’ hit was the one that caused all the commotion. The rest are suspensions in response to that hit. It’s like coaches always say, be the aggressor, not the retaliator.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 29, 2009 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
I agree completely. I stated my opinion when the commotion about the Richard’s hit was happening. The way the rule book is written, Richard’s hit was not illegal. It was savage, but not illegal. Bettman used the commotion to “create” rules that are now affecting those who come after Richards, and headhunt. Cooke got what Bettman thought he deserved.
BTW, OV is a dirty cherry picker! :)
I do think the rules are broad enough to consider the Richards hit illegal, but the way they’ve been enforced wouldn’t call it illegal. Charging is so broad that any big hit could be a PIM so the Richards hit could have been, but it would be a departure from the standards they had set up.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 30, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
I’m still pissed about the non-suspension on Richards because it really set the precedent early in the season as to how the league is going to handle these situations. Like you said, put a superstar in Cooke’s shoes and this isn’t a suspension. It might be a fine but instead of “reckless” it would be dubbed “careless,” or something similar.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
I see two sides to this one. On the one hand, Cooke left his feet and hit him in the head. I don’t think he meant to make a dirty hit, he was just playing hard, but it was a reckless play with a significant chance to result in serious injury. To me the suspension seems appropriate judged on its own merit. In a perfect world, a two game suspension would be perfectly appropriate. However, within the context of the NHL’s standards (and I use that term very loosely) for what constitutes a suspension-worthy offense, this is complete bullshit. There is no was anyone is going to tell me that that was a worse or more dangerous hit than the one Richards put on Booth. Why does Cooke get a suspension when Richards didn’t. Bullshit. Did Cooke deserve two games for that one? Probably. Is the NHL hypocritical for giving it to him? Absolutely.
The NHL absolutely must formulate a consistent policy for this sort of thing and stick by it regardless of who hits who. The present state of affaris is shameful, pathetic, grossly unfair, and dangerous to the sport of hockey and the men that play it.
by OlenWhitaker on Nov 29, 2009 8:20 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
I’m nodding like a bobblehead here. My instinct would be to suspend him a couple games, but my instinct would have been to suspend a few other players who have already been named for similar actions. I would love to see some damned consistency in the policy. I would also love to hit all six winning lottery numbers, have a pet panda, and see lasting peace in the Middle East.
"Darling, you say Brooks Orpik 'checked' that guy. He did not 'get under him and put him into the wall'."--Beloved to me, Winter 2007
"Don't beat yourself!"--Darrell Waltrip
by GreenEyedLilo on Nov 29, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions
haha… good one there, Lilo… I think this calls for a poll:
Which one of these you believe is more likely:
a) you hit the lottery numbers
b) Lilo gets a pet panda
c) peace is achieved in the Middle East
d) the NHL develops a consistent suspension policy
;)
You have to see it for yourself...
Some Thoughts on Odds...
a) 1 in 400 million, roughly
b) 1 in NEVER. Cute, but have you seen “When Animals Attack?”
c) 1 in NEVER. They have been fighting each other for 5,000 years.
d) 1 in NEVER, or when Bettman “retires,” whichever comes first.
LILO, YOU ARE GOING TO HIT THE LOTTERY IF YOU PLAY 400 MILLION TIMES!!! Too bad you will only win… 1 MIIILLLLLIOONN dollars!
As a replacement for the panda as pet: near Chengdu, Sichuan, China there is a reasearch center where for a donation (about 130 dollars if i have the rates right) you can hold a young giant panda (mine was about 10 months old) on your lap for a while. If you really like panda’s and are in the neighbourhood (not very likely i have to admit), go there!
There is a knack to flying: it's learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
by Sid the captain on Nov 30, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Right on. Rec’d. That’s the annoying part about this. I too believe Cooke deserves a suspension for this – two, maybe three games MAX. But yet a guy gets carried off on a stretcher (Booth), has STILL yet to make any effort to get back on the ice for his team AND may have missed his only opportunity within the next four years to play for his national team in the Olympics, the aggressor in that situation gets only 5 penalty minutes?
You’re right. Total BS. And unfortunately this is the correlation that all fans, regardless of team affiliation, will be making throughout the season because the NHL let that one get by early in the season. Until next year, when the front office screws up some sort of suspension or punishment again and we can all resort to the lack of proper suspension in a brand NEW debacle (now with 100% less common sense!) where someone gets seriously injured and the other guys skates away with nothing.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
I generally agree with most of you guys… no point in repeating what you’ve already said. I voted “questionable” though, cause with the current system … no… practice by the League every suspension could be dubbed “questionable”, it just depends on what do you compare it with…
I’ve said it at least a couple of times on this blog already, but… the Richards hit on Booth was a nasty one, I still get chills when I remember it… and he doesn’t even get a fine?!? I’m really starting to lose any hope that there will be at least some degree of fairness when handling out a suspension…
You have to see it for yourself...
Great post. I’d also add that it’s probably going to get much worse again come playoff time.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 30, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, the intent to injure doesn’t warrant any sort of suspension or fine consideration. It’s only the aftermath of the actions, unfortunately.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on PensBurgh
Related FanShots on PensBurgh
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
