Gauthier suspended (again)
I'm not sure if Denis Gauthier is learning anything from repeated disciplinary action. Here's his latest transgression:
Gauthier's been suspended for two games, without pay, and will forfeit just more than $22,000 as a result. This was Gauthier's fourth game back after being suspended five for an uglier hit on the Canadiens' Josh Gorges.
0 recs |
26 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Hockey is dangerous enough
these ‘grown men’ need to take more accountability for themselves. I love the physicality and intensity of hockey, but there is a line that players know not to cross.
A player like Gauther, who obviosuly knows what he is doing, needs to be pulled aside and given disciplinary actions that will either make a difference to the player or just given suspensions on an escalating scale. 3 consecutive 5-game suspensions obviously wont make a difference, so take him out of 10-15 games at a time until this nonsense stops. There are too many ways for guys to get seriously hurt without players looking to intentionally hurt each other.
Peninsula Is Mightier:Your SB Nation Miami Heat Blog Community Juggernaut
by DolPhanDave on Feb 21, 2009 1:33 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Agreed.
A repeat offender should face more games off rather than less even if the hit wasn’t as bad. 2 games? Coming off a 5 game suspension? I guess that means he would have gotten nothing if it was his first time.
by twoeightnine on Feb 21, 2009 2:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Next time he'll get 1 game, apparently
A repeat offender gets two games? Not that they are similar incidents, but I remember Chris Simon’s 25-game suspension having such length (the “stomp” received more than the prior cross-check to the face) specifically because they found him to be a repeat offender. This seemed to be a very major point for Campbell and Co.
Yet once again we’re left trying to interpret the disciplinary rules. An explanation or explicit policy would be nice. Beats Campbell’s infamous “we treat each incident as separate” (except when we don’t).
Lighthouse Hockey: SBN's New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
by Dominik on Feb 21, 2009 2:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bring on Round XXI of headshot debating...
It baffles me how the league and Campbell can have such a ridiculously poor grasp on the ramifications of their decisions.
I really wish I could live in Bettman’s make-believe-land.
by ConfidoBoyd on Feb 21, 2009 3:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure it was intentional. Good suspension.
by RyanV on Feb 21, 2009 4:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Clearly a potential injury situation with a repeat offender is 66 percent less harsh than an injury due to words on a first-time offender.
by Chad_ on Feb 21, 2009 4:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
NHL = Bush League
Words The Midget can’t explain to his daughter: Five games
Flying Elbow Smash to the Head of Star: Two games
by Dr Van Nostrum on Feb 21, 2009 5:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think Avery actually got six, FWIW.
by James Mirtle on Feb 21, 2009 7:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but he got one of them for crimes against fashion.
by J. Michael Neal on Feb 21, 2009 10:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think if the League is going to fail in its duty to come down hard on these repeat offenders, then NHL GMs are going to have to start making a blacklist. Treat these goons like radioactive waste; let them take their schtick to the beer leagues where this sort of stuff is appreciated.
I’d start with Gauthier, and add Ryan Hollweg for good measure. Any other candidates?
"Sweet Zarley Zalapski, Batman!"
by ZarleyZalapski on Feb 21, 2009 7:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think if you guys watched this play in the context of the game, you wouldn’t think it was a penalty, let alone a suspension. The suspension had nothing to do with it being a head shot (at least according to what they said on the Kings telecast today, they said Hextall said it was because it was on a potential icing play.)
by Nut on Feb 21, 2009 11:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re right in that it’s a suspension because it’s occurring on an icing play. That’s a call they’ve been instructed to make more often.
by James Mirtle on Feb 21, 2009 11:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve confirmed that the suspension is due to the fact the hit occurred on an icing play. The new rule is that players must play the puck when trying to beat out an icing, and Gauthier obviously didn’t do that here.
This happened in the off-season after that ugly injury to Kurtis Foster on an icing play last year:
A change to Rule 81.1 ("Icing") states that “Any contact between opposing players while pursuing the puck on an icing must be for the sole purpose of playing the puck and not for eliminating the opponent from playing the puck. Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player.”
by James Mirtle on Feb 21, 2009 11:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But to me, it looks like Gauthier was already beaten on the icing. There was no chance he was going to beat Marleau to the puck, so what is he supposed to do? I guess he could smartly pokecheck the puck away from Marleau, but then again, it’s Denis Gauthier.
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
by RudyKelly on Feb 22, 2009 12:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I believe Foster had beaten his checker to the puck as well. It’s to protect players in that situation.
The alternative would be a no-touch icing rule.
by James Mirtle on Feb 22, 2009 12:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Or not instituting rules because one player happened to get hurt.
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
by RudyKelly on Feb 22, 2009 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There have been zillions of players hurt on icing plays.
by James Mirtle on Feb 22, 2009 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What he could do is not hit Marleau. It isn’t that difficult a concept, though Gauthier may not understand it.
by J. Michael Neal on Feb 22, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I don’t see how this is a suspension. Gauthier apparently got suspended because he didn’t try to play the puck (he couldn’t because Marleau already had control of it, but such is life), but if you’re upset because it’s a hit to the head then I don’t know what to say. He didn’t charge him, he kept his elbow down, he didn’t jump… it was a good hit. Just because Marleau happened to duck into the hit doesn’t make Gauthier a dick.*
*On this play. He’s a dick because he gives me ulcers, but that’s another matter.
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
by RudyKelly on Feb 21, 2009 11:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
It looks to me
like Gauthier could have made it a race, and been at least 50/50 to beat Marleau to the puck. Instead he spent a full three second lining Marleau up, while Marleau was racing to get to the same spot just slightly ahead of time. There wasn’t a charge, there wasn’t an elbow, but I think it clearly violates the rule James cites above (81.1).
I would compare it directly to the hit that earned Scott Hartnell a two game suspension last season. He took advantage of a player in a vulnerable position to deliver an illegal and dangerous hit.
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Feb 22, 2009 3:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The one thing I’m not clear on this rule is how long after a player touches the puck you have to wait before you can hit him, because Marleau definitely was going to win the race. Also, the announcer who says “the elbow was down, his shoulder was down, but he was clearly aiming the hit at Marleau’s head” is an idiot.
by Nut on Feb 22, 2009 7:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t even define it by how long the player has touched the puck. A hit at the end of one of these races seems to me to fit easily within the definition of charging.
by J. Michael Neal on Feb 22, 2009 9:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Hartnell hit was worse
The Hartnell hit was far worse. He should have been suspended for a lot longer than two games.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIg8_Ls6oSU
by bearhunter on Feb 23, 2009 3:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s irrelevant here because there was no lag of time between Marleau touching the puck and being hit. And I’ll say it again: in my opinion there was a race. Gauthier deliberately lost so that he could line up his big hit – exactly what the rule was designed to prevent.
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Feb 22, 2009 9:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Do you really think Denis Gauthier is going to beat Patrick Marleau in a footrace?
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
by RudyKelly on Feb 23, 2009 8:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
1) The ‘suspension’ had to be due to the icing issue AND Gauthier’s recent past didn’t help either.
2) If that hit takes place in a non-icing circumstance it shouldn’ t even be a penalty ket alone a suspension. This is NHL hockey folks. The hit was clean otherwise. Marleau ducked down makin git impossible for the shoulder of Gauthier to miss his head.
3) Geez, a guy like Chara couldn’t hit anyone if they start making it a rule that shoulder checking is illegal. Just keep the elbows down, and stay on your feet, and it should be legal
by Fauxrumors on Feb 23, 2009 7:07 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 
















