[News] Kessel suspended rest of preseason. Will not miss any regular season games

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Let me make sure I understand. If someone two hands one of our boys across the legs this season, breaks their leg, you will feel it's a joke if said player gets suspended?

Kessels' slashes had next to 0% chance of injuring him, let alone breaking his leg, you're trying to simplify it too much. If this is Byfuglien chopping Cammaleri/Sven's leg for no apparent reason, then absolutely he deserves a suspension. But if it's Duchene taking a whack at Kanzig (Simply using him as a comparable size wise to Scott) after Kanzig says "I'm going to jump you" and he races towards Duchene, then no, a suspension should not be handed out.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by valo403

Yeah, hardly watch at all

I haven't seen it either, which is what made Scott's actions so pathetic.

Thank you for picking up the point of my post. As you mentioned, with all the hockey you watched, you've never seen it happen.

You know what else, even with Scott's actions, you still haven't seen it happen. So once again, you are making a complete assumption about what Scott would have done if Kessel stood still and Scott wasn't jumped. By your own admission, odds aren't in the favour of Scott teeing off on Kessel if he had the chance. So why are we justifying Kessel's actions due to something that never happened?

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I highly doubt that Scott would have ever even punched Kessel...in fact Rob Ray was on the fan this AM and said as much....that Scott said to Kessel "Phil i have to grab you, i wont urt you but i have to do something with you"...or something similar. To which Kessel said "OK then"...which is where the nonsense came from in regards to the report that Kessel agreed to fight him, that was definately not the case.

Again though, Kessell had other option than turning into Tommy Tomahawk with his stick. Start skating away the second Scott tells him...line up 3- steps back for the puck drop...skate like hell right to the bench....all of which would be preferable to endangering everyone around the melee with wildly swinging a piece of lumber at temple level in an attempt to injure someone.

The precedent is set now though.....if you are an NHL player and are afraid of a guy trying to engage you, start swinging like a chandelier on the titanic. The most you will receive punishment wise is missing 3 meaningless games, 2 of which you were not slated to play anyhow.

Brilliant....and probably leads to all kinds of issues this season so the morons in the justice system are forced to get the whole thing right.

And you'd take him at his word? If a giant known for fighting said to me, I have to grab you, don't worry I won't hit you though.. I'd say get the F away from me.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by $ven27

Kessels' slashes had next to 0% chance of injuring him, let alone breaking his leg, you're trying to simplify it too much. If this is Byfuglien chopping Cammaleri/Sven's leg for no apparent reason, then absolutely he deserves a suspension. But if it's Duchene taking a whack at Kanzig (Simply using him as a comparable size wise to Scott) after Kanzig says "I'm going to jump you" and he races towards Duchene, then no, a suspension should not be handed out.

Ok, so smaller NHL players aren't capable of swinging their sticks hard enough to hurt bigger NHL players.

Good to know.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Thank you for picking up the point of my post. As you mentioned, with all the hockey you watched, you've never seen it happen.

You know what else, even with Scott's actions, you still haven't seen it happen. So once again, you are making a complete assumption about what Scott would have done if Kessel stood still and he wasn't jumped. By your own admission, odds aren't in the favour of Scott teeing off on Kessel if he had the chance. So why are we justifying Kessel's actions due to something that never happened?

Because Scott going after Kessel to start with was stupid, regardless of what he planned on doing to him once he grabbed him.

If a big goon wants to take a run at a smaller star, skilled, player he deserves to have his ankles chopped.

The first was justified, second was a little iffy, and the poke in the leg was nothing.

I would rather a star player show a little push back, rather then just sitting there and getting punched in the face like the Sedins did.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by valo403

I can't stand this. Basically you are asking guys who are actually capable of playing hockey to not play hockey due to the presence of some neanderthal threatening them, and that's somehow okay?

I am saying if someone tells me they are gonna grab me and i know i dont stand a chance with them, i am gonna do everything in my power to get out of their way.

I don't by Ray's version of events for a second. Scott's not looking to cuddle.

And temple level? Did the temple get relocated to the shin?

Buy it, dont buy it...he has no reason to lie and it certainly doesnt seem at all far fetched, as if Scott would have grabbed Kessell and punched him, he would today be the guy being suspended..and no one else.

And yes temple level...watch the whole video ...when he takes that stick back to its tomahawk position, anyone that would have been behind him would have been clobbered....thats where the danger aspect of this is, not where contact was made...i thought that was obvious.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Thank you for picking up the point of my post. As you mentioned, with all the hockey you watched, you've never seen it happen.

You know what else, even with Scott's actions, you still haven't seen it happen. So once again, you are making a complete assumption about what Scott would have done if Kessel stood still and Scott wasn't jumped. By your own admission, odds aren't in the favour of Scott teeing off on Kessel if he had the chance. So why are we justifying Kessel's actions due to something that never happened?

Odds aren't in favor? Why? This isn't statistical analysis. Scott's actions don't support your conclusion. Everything about what he did showed a desire to go after Kessel, or at least makes that a reasonable conclusion of his intent. You can assume he wouldn't have thrown a punch if you want, but that's really irrelevant. What's relevant is what Kessel saw coming for him and his response. He saw Scott coming looking to throw punches, and reacted to defend himself. If you're expecting Kessel to read Scott's mind and determine that he actually wanted to hold him in his arms like a baby koala I think you may need to lay off grandpa's old cough medicine.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Because Scott going after Kessel to start with was stupid, regardless of what he planned on doing to him once he grabbed him.

If a big goon wants to take a run at a smaller star, skilled, player he deserves to have his ankles chopped.

The first was justified, second was a little iffy, and the poke in the leg was nothing.

I would rather a star player show a little push back, rather then just sitting there and getting punched in the face like the Sedins did.

I agree, but you are getting it wrong.

If what you want is to eliminate the action of what Scott did (which I'm fine with), then what you actually want to see is Scott get a suspension, not Kessel get away with a light suspension.

The two actions aren't entirely tied.

I would like to see players stop using their sticks as weapons, like Kessel did, so......

A meaningful suspension for Scott for trying to attack a star player - totally in favour.

A meaningful suspension for Kessel taking axe like swings with stick after he cleared himself some space - totally in favour.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I am saying if someone tells me they are gonna grab me and i know i dont stand a chance with them, i am gonna do everything in my power to get out of their way.
.

So again, hockey player should not play hockey, and instead line up out of position or leave the ice, because neanderthal on skates says "me punch you now". What a great result.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Ok, so smaller NHL players aren't capable of swinging their sticks hard enough to hurt bigger NHL players.

Good to know.

When did I say that? Never, you're missing the point. If someone whacks another player for no reason viciously, then yes that's suspend-able. But If a heavy weight fighter starts charging at a player who doesn't fight, and that player gives him a whack to try to get him away, then he shouldn't be suspended for the enforcers idiocy. That's the point you're missing.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by valo403

Odds aren't in favor? Why? This isn't statistical analysis. Scott's actions don't support your conclusion. Everything about what he did showed a desire to go after Kessel, or at least makes that a reasonable conclusion of his intent. You can assume he wouldn't have thrown a punch if you want, but that's really irrelevant. What's relevant is what Kessel saw coming for him and his response. He saw Scott coming looking to throw punches, and reacted to defend himself. If you're expecting Kessel to read Scott's mind and determine that he actually wanted to hold him in his arms like a baby koala I think you may need to lay off grandpa's old cough medicine.

It actually is a statistical analysis in the post mortem, but I agree, you can't expect Kessel to think that through when Scott comes towards him. Kessel's first swing was a reaction, one of self defense that I can live with.

The subsequent reactions and slashes, when the danger was no longer there, are acts of aggression and intent to injure.

We absolutely can't leave acts of aggression and intent to injure, from a league perspective, in the hands of the players to decide when and where are ok. The NHL needs to eliminate any form of using the stick as an aggressive weapon from the game, there can be 0 scenarios where this is ok. Kessel was using his stick in aggression not self defense after the initial swipe, and the league failed to communicate that it's not ok.

You are attempting to justify him using his stick as though Scott had him and was delivering a beating. That never happened, and once Kessel was aware that wasn't going to happen, there is 0 justification for stick swinging.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by $ven27

When did I say that? Never, you're missing the point. If someone whacks another player for no reason viciously, then yes that's suspend-able. But If a heavy weight fighter starts charging at a player who doesn't fight, and that player gives him a whack to try to get him away, then he shouldn't be suspended for the enforcers idiocy. That's the point you're missing.

What's that old saying...........

Kessel had gottent away, and went back for more, that's the issue. It's clear as day on the highlights.

As I mentioned, I have no issue with Scott getting a suspension for "enforcer idocy", but "enforce idocy" doesn't mean Kessel can run around the ice attacking people with his stick.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

It actually is a statistical analysis in the post mortem, but I agree, you can't expect Kessel to think that threw when Scott comes towards him. Kessel's first swing was a reaction, one of self defense that I can live with.

The subsequent reactions and slashes, when the danger was no longer there, are acts of aggression and intent to injure.

We absolutely can't leave acts of aggression and intent to injure, from a league perspective, in the hands of the players to decide when and where are ok. The NHL needs to eliminate any form of using the stick as an aggressive weapon from the game, there can be 0 scenarios where this is ok. Kessel was using his stick in aggression not self defense after the initial swipe, and the league failed to communicate that it's not ok.

You are attempting to justify him using his stick as though Scott had him and was delivering a beating. That never happened, and once Kessel was aware that wasn't going to happen, there is 0 justification for stick swinging.

I have at no point attempted to justify the follow up slashes. In fact, I think he should have faced a fine in addition to the suspension in order to add some actual immediate impact, not just the elevation to 'offender' status going forward.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I agree, but you are getting it wrong.

If what you want is to eliminate the action of what Scott did (which I'm fine with), then what you actually want to see is Scott get a suspension, not Kessel get away with a light suspension.

The two actions aren't entirely tied.

I would like to see players stop using their sticks as weapons, like Kessel did, so......

A meaningful suspension for Scott for trying to attack a star player - totally in favour.

A meaningful suspension for Kessel taking axe like swings with stick after he cleared himself some space - totally in favour.

I just don't really care about the suspensions.

Let the players police themselves a little bit. Scott gets a broken ankle from chasing a star player and he probably doesn't do it again.

Had Scott grabbed Kessel and successfully punched his face in you could suspend him. But I'm not sure you can suspend him for dropping his gloves since fighting is technically legal.

Kessel did what he needed to do to protect himself at that time. The only thing that was maybe suspension worthy was the second slash, the first one was completely necessary.

It's like high school. What works better to stop a bully? Running to tell the teacher or finally taking enough and punching him right back in the face.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

What's that old saying...........

Kessel had gottent away, and went back for more, that's the issue. It's clear as day on the highlights.

As I mentioned, I have no issue with Scott getting a suspension for "enforcer idocy", but "enforce idocy" doesn't mean Kessel can run around the ice attacking people with his stick.

Kessel was clearly POed at Scott, this wasn't an emotionless attack on Scott. It isn't Ted Lindsay hacking down people left and right, this is the first time he's really done anything dirty to another player, and he didn't touch another player, he wasn't running around hitting other people at all.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I just don't really care about the suspensions.

Let the players police themselves a little bit. Scott gets a broken ankle from chasing a star player and he probably doesn't do it again.

Had Scott grabbed Kessel and successfully punched his face in you could suspend him. But I'm not sure you can suspend him for dropping his gloves since fighting is technically legal.

Kessel did what he needed to do to protect himself at that time.

It's like high school. What works better to stop a bully? Running to tell the teacher or finally taking enough and punching him right back in the face.

To be honest, I have no idea which works better in high school, been too long.

I'm with you with self policing of the game a little more, if there is respect in the game. If stick swinging becomes a part of self policing, someone else needs to take that out of their hands. Self policing needs to be done with fists or body checks.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by $ven27

Kessel was clearly POed at Scott, this wasn't an emotionless attack on Scott. It isn't Ted Lindsay hacking down people left and right, this is the first time he's really done anything dirty to another player, and he didn't touch another player, he wasn't running around hitting other people at all.

I never said it was emotionless.............I said it was an act of aggression not self defense after swing #1.

Controling ones emotions is part of it.....otherwise one could justify a lot of bad things that happen on the ice due to emmotion.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I never said it was emotionless.............I said it was an act of aggression not self defense after swing #1.

Controling ones emotions is part of it.....otherwise one could justify a lot of bad things that happen on the ice due to emmotion.

You implied it though, aggressive and anger go hand and hand. Kessel was angry and took it out on the guy that tried to beat him face in, there's nothing wrong with that. Maybe if he was a foot taller and 80 pounds heavier they could have done it the "right" way.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by valo403

Odds aren't in favor? Why? This isn't statistical analysis. Scott's actions don't support your conclusion. Everything about what he did showed a desire to go after Kessel, or at least makes that a reasonable conclusion of his intent. You can assume he wouldn't have thrown a punch if you want, but that's really irrelevant. What's relevant is what Kessel saw coming for him and his response. He saw Scott coming looking to throw punches, and reacted to defend himself. If you're expecting Kessel to read Scott's mind and determine that he actually wanted to hold him in his arms like a baby koala I think you may need to lay off grandpa's old cough medicine.

The bolded part is only irrelevant to you, he didn't punch Kessel how hard is that to understand? If you watch the video he changes directions and goes after a different guy because he probably didn't really want to go after Kessel. He said himself he just lined up with who was out there.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by valo403

So again, hockey player should not play hockey, and instead line up out of position or leave the ice, because neanderthal on skates says "me punch you now". What a great result.

Yup...and anyone else on the ice that you know can knock your block off....which in Kessels case appears to be many many guys. I mean would it have been better if it was Tyler Myers who spoke to him? He is a monster as well...or is swinging his stick OK in that instance too?

And again, Scott explicitly told him he wasnt going to hurt him according to Ray who would have the ability to fond out if thats true or not.