Mirtle mentioned in a tweet that there have been 27 different suspensions for what I guess you can call “unnecessary roughness” this year, so yes, I think it can be said that the current supplemental discipline process is not effective, and needs to change. However, you cant “move the goalposts” in the middle of a season!

The mid (or rather late) season escalation in the severity of the supplemental penalties is problematic to me. OV’s a multiple offender, yet his first incident cost him 1 game, and the second netted him 2. Wisniewski’s first was 2 games, and his second was 8. Where’s the consistency? Is there a bias in the quality of players/teams that comes in to play with suspensions? I think so.

Whats also of concern to me, and probably should be an issue for the players, is that due to their union being in total disarray, there’s been no input from the players association regarding this issue all year. In MLB/NBA/NHL, an obscene suspension like the one handed to Wiz would have been immediately appealed.

Should Wiz have been suspended, definitely. 8 games? That’s ridiculous based on past precedent.

I think they need to get more proactive about throwing guys out of games for bad hits. People won’t be so outraged if there is immediate repercussions for cheap shots.

You weren’t half as infuriated on the Glencross suspension as we were. Three games for what was, at worst, an interference minor was obscene. Especially given that hit was no different than Richards or Cooke, and not half as violent as either. That suspension was entirely based on the logo on Drury’s chest.

John is dead on on this one – the disciplinary decisions are not based on action anywhere, but on the player’s rep and the teams they play for.

but of the three hits (the Downie slew foot, the Cooke hit, and the Wisniewski hit) I thought that Wisniewski deserved the least amount of punishment.

Joe, I’m curious why you rank them that way. Because of the potential danger involved, or…?

To me Wisniewski’s hit was easily as bad because it involved multiple forms of illegal: He charged, he left his feet, he hit with his arms up (and his stick dangerously up, a persistent flaw that seems to be overlooked in the fundamentals of bodychecking), and he hit someone who wasn’t playing the puck.

Regardless, they need standards beyond the relativist “was the recipient injured?” Since they never delineate their standards and since Colin Campbell is a trainwreck at communication, the signals coming from the league are constantly mixed. (Oh wait, Bettman describes Campbell’s approach as “having a consistency and a sound jurisprudential way.” So never mind.)

We can complain all we want about the lack of consistency, but it will never change so long as there are not clear, negotiated guidelines for the NHL/NHLPA to be aware of and apply in a more black and white fashion.

First, no suspension should be for less than 3 games. There needs to be some fear that I might do something that actually has an impact on me, and more importantly, my team.

Second, if you’ve been suspended once before, and you get suspended again, the length has to be at least as long as the first time. If you are a “repeat offender”, you have to pay a price for not learning your lesson.

Finally, the financial penalties for being suspended have to be greatly increased. Losing pay for games missed is one thing. Maybe you do that for the first offense. The second offense, third offense, etc. the fine needs to be greatly enhanced.

An elbow or forearm to the head is a suspension if the other guy is hurt.

Unless your name is Matt Cooke, which is what was truly baffling about that situation.

I think the NHL should follow the example of the NBA. Back in the 70s there were issues with fighting and the catalyst was probably the infamous Kermit Washington cheap shot. He was suspended for 26 games! That sure sent a message. If they did that in hockey players might learn that kind of behavior isn’t tolerated.