No supplemental discipline

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    No supplemental discipline

    For Cooke. We most likely all figured this would be the case. 

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

     

    Still a chance supplemental discipline will be provided by ST.  Maybe.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruinfaninnewjersey. Show Bruinfaninnewjersey's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    Is it because McQuaid wasn't hurt (as far as anyone knows) or because Marchand only got 2 minutes for his hit on Neal?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rufus604. Show Rufus604's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    Marchands hit wasnt even close to being as bad as Cookes.  That being said I don't think either deserves a suspension and think the only reason Cooke got 5 is because of his name and the fact McQuaid appeared injured.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    I think it's because five minutes and the gate were enough.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    Also remember that according to the new CBA Cooke is NOT a repeat offender as he has not been suspended in the last 365 days.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to red75's comment:

    Also remember that according to the new CBA Cooke is NOT a repeat offender as he has not been suspended in the last 365 days.



    18 months

     e.   Status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall be
    re-determined every eighteen months.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    In response to red75's comment:

     

    Also remember that according to the new CBA Cooke is NOT a repeat offender as he has not been suspended in the last 365 days.

     



    18 months

     

     e.   Status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall be
    re-determined every eighteen months.




    sorry, thought it was 12 -my bad

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rufus604. Show Rufus604's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    In response to red75's comment:

     

    Also remember that according to the new CBA Cooke is NOT a repeat offender as he has not been suspended in the last 365 days.

     



    18 months

     

     e.   Status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall be
    re-determined every eighteen months.




    Also the "repeat offender" doesn't even come into play until a discipline hearing has been decided upon.  They can't say since he is a repeat offender we are going to have a discipline hearing.  That is in theory, I'm sure Torres feels that this is not the case.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrrandPapiRGods. Show OrrandPapiRGods's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    This may be the only time I've thought, "Cooke got what he deserved". Let's hope the Bs can make some legal crunching blows on a hole

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    other than to brace yourself when he tries to make his illegal hits, i'd let him make a fool of himself. When the B's are well ahead in the series, take him out then. 

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

    Cooke should be getting at least 1 game. His take on what happened is a joke, too.  There was PLENTY of time to see McQuaid had his back turned. Cooke took 4 or 5 strides before finishing McQuaid off with a delivery through with his head hitting the glass first. It wasn't even remotely near a clean hit.

    As suggested, Shanahan is a gutless puuke himself for his arbitrary way of ruling on these kinds of hits.  Cooke has to have photos on Shanahan. Has to.  He's seriously the worst repeat violator I've seen in the NHL.

    Torres gets two games for a semi blindside hit but at least it wasn't well after the puck was gone or anything.

    Every hockey player knows if you see both numbers don't finish a check like that.




    Torres is the worst repeater in my book.

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:




    Not worse than Cooke. No way.  Torres has had a more recent of issues, but he's just been really reckless with how gets pinched. Cooke is  sneaky dirty type which is way worse, IMO.



    In English, please.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

     

    In response to red75's comment:

     

     

    That's just a ridiculous premise.  There is a limit for 1 calendar year as opposed over the player's career?  What ridiculous idea. 

     

    So, if you commit a felony, get released from jail, commit another, you aren't a repeat offender because some time went by?

    Bettman is such a joke.

     






    Bettman didn't set this standard. It was negotiated in the last CBA by the NHLPA and NHL . And it's 18 months .......not a year.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    Chowda, don't confuse Rusty with facts and truth.  If he says it's outrageous, it's outrageous.  You might as well take that to the bank!

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    I don't know why, but I think I would pay hundreds of dollars to know what cliff/bass/whatever looks like. Right now I picture an older version of the comic book guy from the simpsons

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from perrysound. Show perrysound's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

     

    That's just a ridiculous premise.  There is a limit for 1 calendar year as opposed over the player's career?  What ridiculous idea. 

     

    So, if you commit a felony, get released from jail, commit another, you aren't a repeat offender because some time went by?

    Bettman is such a joke.

     






    Bettman didn't set this standard. It was negotiated in the last CBA by the NHLPA and NHL . And it's 18 months .......not a year.

     I was going by Red's post saying it was a year. Who cares how many days it is? Why do you goobers in here focus on nonsensical details when the principle or concept of the topic is really the focus?

     

    Please read a book or do something. It's so annoying. Bettman didn't sign off on the CBA? Really? How do you figure that?

    [/QUOTE]

    Much to Bettmen's displeasure, he does not always get what he wants in a CBA. It is a Collectively Bargined Agreement. Therefore the Union gets certain stipulations in there to 'protect' the players. It seems funny because it is there to protect the players from the NHL, but not from each other. 

    If the current CBA says 18 months, as per Chowder, then that is the rule. Far from a perfect process, but it is the one they live with, so we as fans must accept the absurd.  

     

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: No supplemental discipline

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

     

    Cooke should be getting at least 1 game. His take on what happened is a joke, too.  There was PLENTY of time to see McQuaid had his back turned. Cooke took 4 or 5 strides before finishing McQuaid off with a delivery through with his head hitting the glass first. It wasn't even remotely near a clean hit.

    As suggested, Shanahan is a gutless puuke himself for his arbitrary way of ruling on these kinds of hits.  Cooke has to have photos on Shanahan. Has to.  He's seriously the worst repeat violator I've seen in the NHL.

    Torres gets two games for a semi blindside hit but at least it wasn't well after the puck was gone or anything.

    Every hockey player knows if you see both numbers don't finish a check like that.

     




    Torres is the worst repeater in my book.

     

     

     

    Oh how many careers has he ended? I know for a fact that Cooke has one notch on his career ending gun. Also I think Shanny got caught diddling a little boy in a rest room (Sidney Crosby) and that's the real reason why there was no additional penalty. I'm pretty sure there were pictures involved. 


     

     

Share