people were acting like suspensions just disappear with time earlier to justify it...now that that was proven wrong its back to me being a crazy homer
If you think the Department of Safety looked at the Rasmus Andersson hit and looked at the Charlie McAvoy hit and decided what they should because Anderson plays for Calgary and McAvoy doesn't then yes you are a crazy homer. It is an insane suggestion based on zero evidence or logic.
If you say as an NHL fan it sucks that the department of safety is so bad at their job that we have no idea what the suspension will be and it seems they often fail to follow their own guidelines, fair enough.
But their is nothing here to indicate any bias against the Flames like you are trying to create.
If you think the Department of Safety looked at the Rasmus Andersson hit and looked at the Charlie McAvoy hit and decided what they should because Anderson plays for Calgary and McAvoy doesn't then yes you are a crazy homer. It is an insane suggestion based on zero evidence or logic.
If you say as an NHL fan it sucks that the department of safety is so bad at their job that we have no idea what the suspension will be and it seems they often fail to follow their own guidelines, fair enough.
But their is nothing here to indicate any bias against the Flames like you are trying to create.
Yes or no do you think McAvoy should have gotten a stiffer penalty due to the fact he has a prior suspension for a head hit
people were acting like suspensions just disappear with time earlier to justify it...now that that was proven wrong its back to me being a crazy homer
BOTTOM LINE: These two players should not have the same punishment based on suspension history
there is no reasonable argument otherwise so you can resort to personal attacks
Sure. 4 games is fine if he doesn't do it with 10 seconds left in the game.
Hey i'm like the 2nd crazy homer on this site. Not close to catching you though. I think the Flames will make the playoffs every year in our piss poor division. but even I've given that up this year. We suck.
__________________ Peter12 "I'm no Trump fan but he is smarter than most if not everyone in this thread. ”
Yes or no do you think McAvoy should have gotten a stiffer penalty due to the fact he has a prior suspension for a head hit
yes or no
I think both should have got a stiffer penalty because I want head shots gone.
I don't think the hits were the same based on the circumstances of the game and time they occurred so I think that makes up the difference of the prior history.
If Mcavoy threw the same hit with less than 10 seconds left in a game he was losing yes he should get more games based on his past suspension.
Leaves Monday's game
October 30, 2023
Ekman-Larsson (undisclosed) will be evaluated Tuesday after suffering an injury Monday against Boston, David Dwork of Local 10 Miami reports.
Ekman-Larsson took a high check from Charlie McAvoy in the third period and exited the game. Prior to the injury, Ekman-Larsson logged 20:22 of ice time and put four shots on goal. Florida's next game is Thursday against Detroit.
So, to summarize:
- Andersson: Charging (not illegal check to the head), + injury + no prior relevant history: 4 games.
- McAvoy: Illegal check to the head + injury + prior relevant history (including one earlier in the same game): 4 games.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
It's annoying because included in Rasmus' 4 games was the outdoor game which I would argue is worth a little more, but them's the breaks.
Technically McAvoy got an extra game since he got a match penalty on the play.
At least comparable hits are being punished similarly. If they can't get the repeat offender vs. not a repeat offender thing straight, it's also annoying but at least it has less of a wheel of justice feel to it.
Both are a hit to the head, but they are completely different hits, the hit to the head is all they have in common. 4 games for both while maybe not ideal, seems reasonable. Any Flames tax seems like reaching, fine with both.
__________________
I have Strong opinions about things I know very little about.
This isn't a penalty, not from behind, unfortunately he hit his head on the glass.
we only care because it happened right after the Anderson suspension and we are looking for anything as a comparable.
__________________
I have Strong opinions about things I know very little about.
This isn't a penalty, not from behind, unfortunately he hit his head on the glass.
we only care because it happened right after the Anderson suspension and we are looking for anything as a comparable.
That's a charging call in any other rink in the league. He came in at a steady speed all the way from the middle of the zone. Was it perfectly square in the numbers? No, but it was still from behind against a guy with his back turned (not someone who just turned their back) and who was completely unaware the hit was coming.
Ruzicka's body position did not change at all from the start of the hit (the hit started from the middle of the zone) to the completion of the hit against the boards.
people were acting like suspensions just disappear with time earlier to justify it...now that that was proven wrong its back to me being a crazy homer
BOTTOM LINE: These two players should not have the same punishment based on suspension history
there is no reasonable argument otherwise so you can resort to personal attacks
There absolutely is.
Andersson made his hit happened with 1 second left. The game is over, and Raz's hit would have no ability to impact the outcome of the game. So, intent is there/in question.
McAvoy's hit happened with 10 minutes left in the 3rd.
That's a charging call in any other rink in the league. He came in at a steady speed all the way from the middle of the zone. Was it perfectly square in the numbers? No, but it was still from behind against a guy with his back turned (not someone who just turned their back) and who was completely unaware the hit was coming.
Ruzicka's body position did not change at all from the start of the hit (the hit started from the middle of the zone) to the completion of the hit against the boards.
An absolute joke.
Speaking of absolute jokes...
1) puck was going in anyway (and was already on the goal line)
2) defenseman was taking him down, and he was on one leg
3) he was in the motion of stopping (in order to not drill himself into the cross bar)
4) though he moved his skate towards the goal at the last moment, it never left the ice
Might be the worst disallowed goal (for kicking motion) in league history
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
McAvoy's hit was nowhere near the play so how is time relevant? He wasn't trying to change the outcome of the game he was being a dick
Andersson was at least trying to stop a guy from scoring a goal
I will argue, but I have made all my points so this is it
I think doing something AGAIN after being punished for it should have a substantially higher penalty. I think every civilized justice system on earth agrees. Its telling that "good enough" is good enough with the league and its wheel of justice.
People are happy he got something, I get it but its still ridiculous IMO
1) puck was going in anyway (and was already on the goal line)
2) defenseman was taking him down, and he was on one leg
3) he was in the motion of stopping (in order to not drill himself into the cross bar)
4) though he moved his skate towards the goal at the last moment, it never left the ice
Might be the worst disallowed goal (for kicking motion) in league history
They wanted Mack vs. McD
promos were ready to roll...pikachu face for the Oilers in the next round when the Avs started getting all the calls like that offside.
I haven't spent a cent on the league since that incident