NHL '11 - '12 Thread

[357]

Originally Posted by mithrilG60

Nope, just $2500 fine and a stern "We'll take this into account if you're a naughty boy again in these playoffs". Yet Bitz has a hearing with Shannahan over his hit on Clifford which likely means at least a game. I fail to see how the NHL can possibly say the Bitz hit is suspendable if the Weber WWE head-to-the-turnbuckle move isn't. BOTH actions should result in suspensions. More inconsistency from the league, how the hell are they supposed to change any behaviour when they constantly send the players mixed messages on what is and what isn't acceptable behaviour?

What's rediculous to me is that they factor the net result into the punishment. Apparently intent is not important as net result. So if I take my skate off and try to slit someone's throat but fail, I'll just get a fine. However, if I'm biting my fingernail and it flies off, hits someone in the eye resulting in vision loss I'll be banned from the league for life. Granted I know these are extreme and over-the-top examples, but it seems to be what would happen if you follow the league's logic (or lack thereof).

Wouldn't they be better off severly punishing all players who intend to injur rather than just those who succeed?