Quote:
Originally Posted by Red
So it's ok to suspend a repeat offender for non suspend-able offenses? He punched a guy, dirty play for sure, but suspension would be a stretch. A lengthy one would be a joke.
If he elbows a guy in to next week then sure, get him out for 20-40 games. But this?
What were the most dangerous incidents this season? How does this compare? This hoopla from the NYR over this was so over the top, just idiotic.
The fans here are acting like it was a Bertuzzi incident all over again.
BTW, isnt that following the same script? Star gets hit/punched (is he though?). Team gets upset. The organization goes bonkers. Next game, settling down scores. Besides some normal fights we have a guy that feeds another one a stick to the head.
Now just imagine if he landed it differently and hurt Mantha.
But that's ok, cause he is Russian and probably a skill guy. Never mind the guy is huge and a fighter.
A Tom Wilson in the making maybe? Big power forward?
|
Imagine if Panarin landed differently and Tom Wilson broke his neck. Imagine if he hit head even worse and Wilson ended his career thanks to ensuing concussion issues. If you want to use your imagination, use it.
Whether or not you agree with what a suspendable offence is, what Wilson did IS a suspendable offence, because players have been suspended for less before.
You think anyone would disagree with Buch getting a suspension if it didn't come right after Wilson completely deserving one and not getting a fine? Of course not, it's a suspendable offence, so he should be suspended. But now the NHL and especially the DOPS looks like a joke whether they suspend him or not, because they either don't suspend a guy who deserves it AGAIN, or they do suspend a guy after letting a repeat offender get a pass.
A lot of this would be solved if you just watched the video, or, I guess, understood what a suspendable offence is and the implications repeat offender has on suspensions.
The precedent has been set. Looking at the situation, previous situations like it, and Wilson's history, he objectively warranted a suspension. That's fact. It's great you don't think so, Parros didn't think so too, it's great you want to debate it like there's some "other side" to it, but it doesn't matter. And that's why the NHL looks bush-league.