Lapierre gets 5 games

[MissTeeks]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/con...&cmpid=nhl-twt

[Stupid]

Is he now considered a repeat-offender?

They said he wasn't before, but is he now?

[kingkahuna]

Seems pretty light to me considering its Lapierre on Boyle

[killer_carlson]

I think he is pretty thankful of that "repeat offender" limitation in the CBA.

should have been 10.

[Flash Walken]

Sounds like they wanted to give him more games but couldn't invoke the repeat offender label necessary to give him those games.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Stupid

Is he now considered a repeat-offender?

They said he wasn't before, but is he now?

Yes, for the next 18 months, if he has another incident requiring supplemental discipline, he will be considered a repeat offender.

From the CBA:

18.15(d) status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall be re-determined every eighteen (18) months on a rolling basis. For example, where a Player is suspended for the first time, he becomes a repeat offender if he is suspended again within eighteen (18) months of the first incident. If he does not have another suspension within eighteen (18) months of the first incident, his next suspension will be treated as a "first" offense.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Take the names off the back of the jersey's and this seems right to me for number of games.

[Meers]

Seems about right. If you hit a guy in the numbers near the boards you risk a suspension if his head makes contact.

Max was actually involved in a more dangerous check the week before, in my estimation.

[bzoo02]

The hit was brutal and suspension is on par. The thing that pissed me off the most about this play was Lapierre's refusal to answer for the hit, he ran and hid behind the refs so he wouldnt have to drop the mitts.

He's a frickin weasel and players like this don't belong in the game. IMO they need to drop the instigator rule so that fear of retaliation can bring respect back to the game.

[19Yzerman19]

Man, I just don't know anymore.

If you want to protect players from reckless, injurious plays, I would've thought this one would be a great time to throw the book at a guy. 10+ was absolutely justifiable here. Now take a look back at the Edler suspension for basically nothing and we're saying that this play is in the same ballpark?

Now what does Cody McLeod get for the Kronwall hit? The same? Less because Kronwall stopped up? These are the truly dangerous plays and the fact that they're not getting penalized as such while others are resulting in significant missed time...

I just don't get it.

[GirlySports]

So if you, say, ended someone's career 18 months and one day ago, you're clear. Very NHL.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

I've never heard of that 18 month window for repeat offenders before. That's one of the more idiotic things I've heard the NHL come up with.

If you're a repeat offender you should be considered as such for the rest of your career. Obviously if you haven't done anything for 10 years there should be some leniency, but as Girly points out, 18 months and one day later and you're a 'first' time offender again. Ridiculous.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I've never heard of that 18 month window for repeat offenders before. That's one of the more idiotic things I've heard the NHL come up with.

If you're a repeat offender you should be considered as such for the rest of your career. Obviously if you haven't done anything for 10 years there should be some leniency, but as Girly points out, 18 months and one day later and you're a 'first' time offender again. Ridiculous.

It's a concession to the PA.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's a concession to the PA.

Gotta love the PA standing up for player rights despite the fact that NHL only enforces the suspensions in hopes of keeping the game safer for the players.

[strombad]

Lapierre is scum. He's a sorry excuse for a hockey player and quite frankly I don't think guys like him have a place in the NHL.

That said, I think the suspension is spot on.

[opendoor]

The CBA's 18 month repeat offender status has more to do with how they calculate salary losses from the suspension than it does the severity of future suspensions. A non repeat offender loses a day's pay for every game he's suspended (about 1/185th) while a repeat offender loses 1/82nd of his salary for every game he's suspended. That's mostly what the 18.15(d) clause is used to determine.

A player's history beyond 18 months ago is certainly considered in determining the length of the suspension, though more recent violations are naturally given more weight than ones from years ago.

[Mr.Coffee]

But if a player is suspended are they getting paid? I didnt think so and ergo there's the PA angle. Safety? Meh. Money?? Absolutely!!!

[Flame On]

Idiotic rules like that PA one make me have less sympathy for any grievously injured player. With contempt for common sense like that it makes it hard to respect them.
In addition it's going to be harder for the players to ever come back at the League; like the NFL players did, because of their own choosing they repeatedly remove there own safe guards. Like here and with things like visors etc.

[foshizzle11]

why does the "repeat offender" get erased after a few years?

I don't get that. If you do something like that once and then again in the future, why does it matter how long it has been since you last did it.

Does it work like that in criminal law too?

I robbed a bank when I was 18 and now it is 20 years later, do I get a less or more severe sentence because I am a repeat offender?

[Hockey]

Personally I don't think the hit was that bad, just the result. Those types of hits happen all the time and unfortunately Boyle got hurt that one time. Of course it being Lapierre makes it seem worse then it is. Yes I agree with the suspension, but to say he should be banned from the league is just insane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free