Rink Side Radio, Tonight at 9pm
So did ya hear? Alex Ovechkin has been suspended for his hit on Brian Campbell. Wanna talk about it? Well you can obviously do it here, but if you wanna hear (literally) what other people are saying, you can tune in to Rink Side Radio tonight at 9pm.
5 months ago
FrankD
36 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Honestly didn’t think that this would actually happen. But i guess if you gave Lapierre 4 games for a very similar hit then you had to give Ocho something aswell. Hey at least the NHL is somewhat consistant on that part…
I think two games is good. Judging by ocho’s comments after the game, he didn’t understand the gravity of his hit…either that or he was just trying to talk his way out of it. Two games should make him realize that those types of reckless plays aren’t ok. Of course, that’s what I said after he got suspended for the Gleason kneeing incident and he still didn’t learn so hopefully this time he does. You know I was, and still am, a believer that OV isn’t dirty, and that he’s just really reckless, but all the shit that’s happened with him in the past year is making me re-think that. If I was Ted Leonis (sp? ah…I don’t care) I would be pretty pissed; not at the suspension, but at OV. He’s got to be thinking, “I pay this guy to play not to have 3 game misconducts and 2 suspensions (amounting to 4 games) in a year.” I really hope the Caps organization sits down and tells OV that this extreme recklessness has to stop…not his aggressiveness – his recklessness.
But, of course, the Caps fans and Bruce Boudreau (and, I’m assuming, the Caps organization) all thought it was a two minute boarding minor.
871
He gets away with alot because of who he is. Last time we played them he had Letang (I think) on the ice choking him – WTF is THAT all about. Of course nothing happened to him. He doesn’t understand it because he gets away with so much all the time.
You are correct....
It looked something like this
.
by PensAreYourDaddy on Mar 16, 2010 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I have (actually) been working today and have been out of the hockey loop.
Did the NHL say that they suspended him specifically for the hit, or more for him having 3 different game misconducts this year?
I was definitely surprised to see a 2-game suspension, that’s for sure. I am also sick of it being compared to Matt Cooke’s situation. I understand Cooke should’ve been suspended, but they are completely unrelated.
Me too. I thought Cooke should’ve been suspended, but if the hit isn’t against the rules and you didn’t suspend another guy for a similar and more vicious hit, then what can you do? It makes me so happy that it looks like that type of hit will be against the rules next year.
In Ocho’s situation, there is a rule against boarding and the league followed it. He has a history of boarding calls and now suspensions, so another one seemed imminent to me. The league basically called the hit “reckless” and said that he was a repeat offender.
Now, people have point about suspension and non-suspensions when the victim is/isn’t injured. How many games would Downie have gotten if Sid would’ve been seriously hurt? In my opinion, the NHL shouldn’t give out suspensions based on the players name or whether or not the victim was hurt.
871
The Downie thing is my biggest problem. AO’s hit wasn’t even the worst hit of yesterday. I’m in the crowd that thought it was just a boarding PIM and that 5 and a Game was more than sufficient. But your comment above is way too broad. There are definitely Caps fans that think the suspension is fine. I don’t think AO meant to hurt Campbell, while Downie was clearly trying to hurt Crosby. That’s the end of the story for me. AO got punished in game, in a big way. Supplemental stuff is for people that are malicious, IMO. I didn’t see malice. I saw a reckless hit with an unfortunate toe pick by Campbell. It sucks, but it was nowhere near the same level of dirty as Downie.
Killer_Carlson and Steckel Me Elmo are like brothers to me. And when I say brothers I don't mean like actual brothers. I mean it like how black people use it, which is more meaningful, I think.
by Fehr and Balanced on Mar 15, 2010 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions
It wasn’t malicious, but, most of all, it was reckless and against the rules. You just can’t hit/shove a player that far away from the boards like that…you just can’t. In my opinion, both OV and Downie (and Cooke, but what he did wasn’t against the rules) should be sitting right now but that’s the problem with the NHL’s suspension policy; they weigh the status of the victim too much when deciding whether or not to suspend a player. OV should’ve be suspended whether or not Campbell got hurt and Downie should be suspended on the basis that he was trying to snap Sid’s leg in half.
Sorry if I generalized the Caps fans too much…it got on my nerves when people said the Pens fans didn’t want Cooke suspended.
871
I disagree that Cooke didn’t break the rules, but that’s been beaten to death. NHL rules are very vague and can easily penalize the Cooke hit. Either under roughing or the intent to injure provision, Cooke could have been punished. But they botched the Richards hit so they wanted to be consistent, for whatever that’s worth.
No worries, it wasn’t a gross mischaracterization. I was just pointing out that it’s a grey area and there is a lot of disagreement no matter where you go.
Killer_Carlson and Steckel Me Elmo are like brothers to me. And when I say brothers I don't mean like actual brothers. I mean it like how black people use it, which is more meaningful, I think.
by Fehr and Balanced on Mar 15, 2010 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem is that they go by the rules like a robot. And I reeeaaalllyyy hate to say this, but it’s in Colin Campbell’s defense. He’s using the rules as the roots for his suspensions. Looking at the Cooke’s hit and Ovechkin’s hit side by side. Who’s is more malicious? Cooke’s, of course. Ovechkin’s was reckless, not malicious. However, there is NO rule that Cooke broke. Ovechkin broke a rule. And therefore, that is where the problem en lies. They have to finalize this ban on blindside hits to the head. If there was such a rule, Cooke would have gotten 3-4 games, maybe 5.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 15, 2010 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Why are people claiming AO's hit was not malicious?
Or for that matter, Cooke’s hit was malicious? We cannot measure intent, this is pointless. What AO’s hit was dirty and against the rules. You cannot shove someone head first into the boards. Cooke’s hit was dirty but not against the rules, hence no suspension. There is absolutely no reason to claim AO’s hit was any more or less malicious than Cooke’s – only the play itself.
Cooke has enough body of work that he’s been in too many places in too many times to see it as coincidence. I don’t know what was going through his head, but I think it’s clear he had bad intentions in mind.
Ovechkin’s building a rap sheet of questionable hits too, but for this specific incident the awkwardness of Campbell’s fall worsened his impact and injury. If Campbell wasn’t hurt, AO probably goes free. I’m not trying to excuse him, a player can’t hit/shove another to the back near the boards.
Wayne Gretzky had it wrong: 100% of the shots Gary Roberts doesn't take DO go in.
by Hooks Orpik on Mar 15, 2010 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Well there is the rub
Cooke is a grinder who’s job is to play on edge. So people are more willing to claim he’s a dirty player. Therefore, his rap sheet is simply more proof. Whereas Ovechkin is a superstar – so despite a large rap sheet everyone of his hits are deemed reckless, not dirty. He is a dirty player. Both Cooke and him are dirty players.
No, AO’s rap sheet isn’t even close to Cooke’s. Cooke has thrown three of these blindside head shots in the last year. Savard, Anisimov, Walker. That’s not a coincidence. You think AO is bad with the knees? Go watch Don Cherry’s segment on Cooke. There’s no comparison. You can, and will, hate on AO all you want but if you can’t see the difference between the way he plays and the way Cooke plays then you are just a blind homer.
Killer_Carlson and Steckel Me Elmo are like brothers to me. And when I say brothers I don't mean like actual brothers. I mean it like how black people use it, which is more meaningful, I think.
by Fehr and Balanced on Mar 16, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
You can’t measure it completely. But you can interpret it with enough evidence. For example, Cooke nailed Savard in the head when he was perfectly capable of laying a solid shoulder-to-shoulder hit on him.
AO’s hit was dirty, but I don’t think it was malicious. He could have pushed him a lot harder, like Lapierre did to Nichols.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 15, 2010 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions
And AO
Clearly could have laid off Campbell. Instead he shoved him in the back. At least Cooke’s hit was a check and the result of Savard not keeping his head up. Campbell was in a completely indefensively position due no fault of his own. Ovechkin didn’t even use a proper check. The guy is dirty. You can think he is not malicious – doesn’t change the fact that he has a dirty hit highlight reel.
I know he could have laid off Campbell. Which is why I think it was a reckless, dirty hit that warranted a suspension. And yes, Ovechkin’s track record (arguably the worst being his Tie Domi attempt on Dustin Brown which I saw today for the first time) proves he is a reckless player.
As for the Cooke hit, Savard’s head was up. It was looking in the direction he shot the puck. The hit was completely legal, however, the malicious intent comes from the fact that rather putting what could have been a huge open ice shoulder to shoulder hit, he chose to crush the man’s skull instead.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions
and AÓ
Shoved campbell from the back head first into the boards. I guess I don’t see a differnce between reckless and malicous except for superstar and grinder.
by zeke5123 on Mar 16, 2010 10:46 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
The difference between reckless and malicious is idiot and a-hole. The former is a stupid, careless play, the latter is injurious intent.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
My point
Is that both, hitting a guy in the head and shoving a guy head first into the boards seem like injurious intent. The only difference is you are giving the benefit of the doubt to Ovechkin. I don’t believe he deserves it.
I do give the benefit of the doubt to Ovechkin because you can simply tell by his hits that he’s out of control, not trying to hurt someone. Cooke wasn’t charging at full speed when he hit Savard. He let up his stride, cocked back, and laid into Savard’s head. Ovechkin just goes charging in without any hesitation. Which is exactly what people love to see. Hell, I did it when I played as much as I could. It’s clean intimidation. Ovechkin’s problem, however, is that he doesn’t use his head in those situations. He doesn’t analzye his target and say to himself “Is this gonna be a clean hit I throw and is this player not in any position to be hurt.” Look at all his knee-on-knees. He’s so intent on throwing any kind of hit that he’ll lean and sometimes even jump to make it. He’s not intending to, but it’s something that he needs to learn to control.
Now I’m not saying that he hasn’t thrown a cheap shot. As I said earlier, that Dustin Brown flying elbow was as cheap as they come. And the puck he fired at Scuds last year was dirty too. But for his entire rap sheet, 3/4s of it are reckless, not malicious.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
There is a rule against intent to injure. You can argue whether you think Cooke intended to injure (I think he did) but to just say “well it’s not against the rules” is a cop out, IMO.
Killer_Carlson and Steckel Me Elmo are like brothers to me. And when I say brothers I don't mean like actual brothers. I mean it like how black people use it, which is more meaningful, I think.
by Fehr and Balanced on Mar 16, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Who’s been saying that Pens fans didn’t think Cooke should have been suspended? I suppose there have been a few with that opinion, but as soon as I saw the hit I assumed he’d get 5 at least and figured he deserved it.
Non-Pens fans said that we said that. I guess they just assumed that we all thought the Cooke hit was clean. From what I’ve seen, about 9 out 10 Pens fans (including me) thought he should’ve been suspended.
871
by PensFan8725 on Mar 16, 2010 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. I thought he was getting a two-gamer at the LEAST. Five looked like the obvious ruling.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com and twitter.
Supplemental stuff is for people that are malicious, IMO. I didn’t see malice
Malice is a big part, but I think the result is important too. Ovechkin made a dangerous hit and it took out an important player, that needs to be addressed, especially since he’s been suspended already this season for another dangerous hit that took out an important player (himself). Ovechkin needs to learn to control his play, if only in situations like that when the result could be a nasty hit into the boards or near them.
I understand the outrage about Downie, I’m a little surprised he didn’t merit suspension consideration. If only since the NHL should keep a tighter leash on the clowns like Avery, Ott, Carcillo, etc that are all too willing to go over the line when the chance presents itself.
Wayne Gretzky had it wrong: 100% of the shots Gary Roberts doesn't take DO go in.
by Hooks Orpik on Mar 15, 2010 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Now, the Downie incident is a very interesting case standing right in the middle of the Cooke hit and the Ovechkin hit. As I said above, one was malicious without breaking any rules, while the other was not malicious (dirty, but not malicious) but breaking a rule. However, in the middle we have Downie, which was obviously malicious, but how borderline was that to a slewfoot? I know he didn’t actually use a kicking motion and it was more of a tangling up with his knee, but that is about as borderline as you can get.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 2:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I thought it was blatant. It wasn’t textbook form but given that there was literally no reason to initiate contact at that point (it was way after Sid moved the puck) I can’t give him the benefit of the doubt. You don’t get your knee into the back of another player’s knee on accident. It just doesn’t happen.
Killer_Carlson and Steckel Me Elmo are like brothers to me. And when I say brothers I don't mean like actual brothers. I mean it like how black people use it, which is more meaningful, I think.
by Fehr and Balanced on Mar 16, 2010 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
True. It was pretty late. Could have been a trip as easily as it could have been a slewfoot.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Question
If Sid had been knocked out for several games and unable to go back on the ice, do you think they would have suspended Downie?
Yes, I think Downie would have gotten the boot for a while. The league did fine Downie an undisclosed amount for his actions, so it’s not like he got off scott free, but yeah it’s basically a little slap on the wrist for something very dirty and very dangerous.
Wayne Gretzky had it wrong: 100% of the shots Gary Roberts doesn't take DO go in.
by Hooks Orpik on Mar 16, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Too bad. I was just reading a Puck Daddy article the other day on him, and about all the other malicious things he’s tried.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
He’s a clown.
Which is a shame, because like that Puck Daddy piece said, when he was just focused on actually playing hockey he can be a solid player. It’s not like he’s a bender or anything.
Wayne Gretzky had it wrong: 100% of the shots Gary Roberts doesn't take DO go in.
by Hooks Orpik on Mar 16, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Same as Avery, Carcillo, and even Ott sometimes. The problem is those guys have their wires crossed or something; I don’t see any of them ever pulling their heads out of their asses.
Killer_Carlson and Steckel Me Elmo are like brothers to me. And when I say brothers I don't mean like actual brothers. I mean it like how black people use it, which is more meaningful, I think.
by Fehr and Balanced on Mar 16, 2010 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Hartnell and Ruutu are another two that come to mind. I just don’t get it. Do they realize that if someone really wanted to, they could end their careers? And there wouldn’t be one damn person out there who wouldn’t stand up and applaud anyone who did it.
by lostprophetRJX on Mar 16, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Fantasy Hockey Philosophy: How Darryl Dobbs builds his teams
- Puck Headlines: Return of Nordiques news; ‘Goon' movie casting
- Fight Video: Jonah Coonishish-Coon says hello with his fists
- NHL 2010-11 Season Preview: Wrestling with Carolina Hurricanes
- An Internet-owned hockey team, for the price of a few beers?
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.
