Re: Cooke suspension
posted at 3/22/2011 3:08 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Cooke suspension
First: Why does anyone read what the Habs fan writes?
Posted by bigvig
Because some of us are wicked smaht?
I agree with your point about having a black and white policy so that the NHL can't have the mysterious wheel of justice that hands out suspensions seemingly at random. While they got the last 2 big calls right (no games for Chara and a long suspension for Cooke), too often they're missing the boat and allowing the inmates to run the asylum. That has to stop, and one of the ways to make it stop is to put in a more concrete policy. I doubt it happens because I think the league brass like having unfettered power.
The second way to clean things up is to get rid of the instigator rule. Cooke doesn't fear any retribution, and why should he? I know Tony Twist and guys like him were oftimes useless except to fight, but the instances of these kind of cheap shots is reduced if players feared having to run for their lives against an enforcer.
I do disagree that the league has to make up for the Savard hit, since the hit on Savard wasn't illegal at the time. It should have been, but it wasn't; thankfully it is now. But since that's the case, I don't think they're looking to make up something that really wasn't wrong. I don't think the league cares about PR, either, at least when it comes to suspensions. If they did, I bet they would have given Chara a couple of games just to keep up appearances. That probably would have saved them any kind of outcry, and instead they (correctly) said they heck with outcry, we're giving him 0 because that's what we think he deserves.
I think if anything they're just sick of Matt Cooke being Matt Cooke, and for that I can't blame them. The only reason we're all sick of Matt Cooke is because of the antics of the man himself. The guy gets what he deserves (almost; he shouldn't play again this year. Here's hoping the Pens lose in Round 1 so he doesn't).