Injury should not determine suspension length, but it always will

by DarrenM on Jan 19, 2010 7:30 AM EST Comment 16 comments

You've likely seen the Patrice Cormier flying elbow already, and if not you can find it at the bottom of this post. After the hit made the waves on Twitter, a common debate ensued: whether Tam's injury should determine the length of Cormier's suspension.

Common sense quickly dictates that it shouldn't. After all, whether Tam is out for two games or twenty does not change Cormier's actions -- Cormier went for a dirty hit, and it's that hit he should be punished for. What happens to Tam is not only based on Cormier's hit, but his own susceptibility to injury: there's a difference between Tim Connolly getting injured and the same happening to Doug Jarvis.

However, injury will always be a determining factor in the length of a suspension, and there are several reasons for it. The first is that if there's no injury -- the victim doesn't even miss a shift -- then there tends to be complete disinterest on the part of the opposing team and fans for punishment. Think about it: for every hit from behind that results in concussion or worse, there's about ten or so that don't result in any injury. Those ones that don't result in injury rarely create an outcry the next day. A second reason can be found by looking to similar external sources. Seeing as the suspension policy is based on the same foundation as criminal law -- deterrence, punishment, etc. -- what happens for attempts in the criminal law? An attempted murder, which requires all of the forethought and intention of actual murder (but merely features an unsuccessful perpetrator), does not result in nearly the penalty as murder, and that does not seem to really bother the community at large. And while a hockey injury is a far cry from murder, there is an undeniable connection in these scenarios between what common sense says should happen and what the community at large needs to be satisfied.

And the community is, in fact, the largest reason that injuries dictate suspension length. Fans base their own perceptions of the player's intentions based on the aftermath of a hit rather than the intentions, and there's no denying it: when was the last time you cried out for a suspension of a player that attempted a knee-on-knee or elbow but missed his target? You probably never have, and likely never will. Whether your favourite player gets up after a hit or continues to lie on the ice undoubtedly shapes your view of the incident and what the consequences should be. So even if common sense dictates that the injury shouldn't factor into the suspension conversation it always will, because that's what you want -- even if you don't realize it.

0 recs | Comment 16 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Great post

www.silversevensens.com

by PeterR on Jan 19, 2010 11:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

A friend of mine who played hockey for a long time was discussing the inherent flaw we’ve built into our hockey system. We’ve taken hitting out of the game at younger ages. So kids are learning later and later the contact aspect of the game. Teaching body contact young shows you how to give a hit and how to take a hit. Now it just seems like many of these younger players are coming out of junior and being entirely reckless with the lives and livelihoods of other players.

Everyone wants to put bubblewrap their children to keep them safe, but really it’s to their detriment to keep them from hitting. Hitting is a part of hockey and always will be. How well would people do if you took math out a school curriculum and didn’t teach it until you’re 11? They are just impairing the development of players instead of actually teaching them and making them smarter about it.

by modsuperstar on Jan 19, 2010 12:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

debilitating hits have been occurring for ages, not just since they moved the age of contact. However, what you have in essence said does have great merit, I just do not think we can look at it as a solution to a long standing problem.

I am AWESOME! Are you?

by Manthong on Jan 19, 2010 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Flawed Logic

The problem with your logic in this is you are describing this assault like it’s another normal hit in hockey. It wasn’t a “body-check” or “hit” in any way, shape or form. Cormier intentionally tried to injure Tam with a vicious elbow to the head. This has nothing to do with “hitting” or taking the physical aspect out of hockey. It has everything to do with holding Cormier accountable for going beyond the rules and normal physical play by head-hunting another player.

by LTC Pain on Jan 19, 2010 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, Cormier’s elbow was 100% dirty, but what I’m talking about is just the general lack of respect guys have coming up through the system these days. I look at a guy like Steve Downie who is now a multiple time offender in the NHL. It just seems like incidents like this are happening more and more. My point is that by trying to protect kids at a younger age we’re just creating a generation of players who aren’t being taught fundamentals early and have practically become accidents waiting to happen. It needs to be ingrained into players that stuff like Cormier’s hit is totally unacceptable.

by modsuperstar on Jan 19, 2010 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was going to compare this to the Downie incident, as well

There is a problem with the players’ understanding of the repercussions of their actions, that’s true, but I have another point: The expectations which are put on players.

Look at Cormier: He was the captain of Team Canada, a country which prides itself on the physicality of its players. He had expectations put on him to be the leader—especially the physical leader—of that team, and as a very young man, got overexcited and overly intense in his execution, and you could see that as he walked (sometimes crossed) the line in the tournament. Then he was acquired by Rouyn-Noranda as a huge part of the stock-up for a Memorial Cup run, and had expectations going with that: Again, to make a physical statement every shift he played.

Look at Downie: When he hit Dean McAmmond, he was a young kid looking to make an impression on the Broad Street Bullies—led by good extraordinaire Bobby Clarke—and had a very predetermined role: Instigator and heavy hitter. Just as he always had in his junior career, Downie walked the line, and also crossed it. He paid a big price for it, but McAmmond probably paid a bigger price for Downie’s indiscretions.

Both were instances where a very young man had huge expectations put on him to finish every check with intensity. They both wanted to make sure that they fulfilled these expectations, and—as young people—failed to keep their emotions from overpowering their self-control. Does that make it acceptable? Not at all, but the fact of the matter is that we put huge expectations on players, especially young players, to play with an outrageously unforgiving physicality, but when they take these expectations seriously, we berate them for it.

www.silversevensens.com

by PeterR on Jan 19, 2010 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Very well said Peter

Alot of the time these questionable hits are just a result of the intense nature of the game. Especially in junior, these guys are trying to distinguish themselves to coaches, teammates, scouts, etc.

I think the Zack Kassian hit is a perfect example. Yes he should have let up on the guy, but I think once players start to do that its possible they open themselves up to criticism. If he lets up there, does he start to let up on other hits? Does he get a rep as a ‘lazy’ or ‘soft’ player who wont finish checks?

I think David Branch embodies the hypocrisy Darren addresses in his article. I’m not trying to be glib here, but I really feel there is a trend in the OHL where suspension length is directly affected by the optics of the situation; i.e. how many times was it replayed on TSN; was he carried off on a stretcher or did he skate off, etc.

At the same time it’s easy to sit here and demand consistency in legislating dirty hits, but each case really is unique. Its a tough job no doubt, but I think league execs need to make a better public case for their actions.

Making these decisions with little or no significant explanation to the public is condescending to hockey fans, it damages the leagues credibility in non-hockey markets and its bad for the game period.

Cannot play with 'em, cannot win with 'em, cannot coach with 'em. Cant do it.

by Andrew J on Jan 19, 2010 6:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Quite an interesting point, Darren

But if injury isn’t the determining factor in suspension length, what is?

Since some things, such as intent, can never truly be determined, that doesn’t leave a lot of metrics for punishment left. The only logical solution left to me is strict application of a predetermined number of games for certain hits, regardless of intent or injury. I think you know the length I have in mind…

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jan 19, 2010 12:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The length of suspensions

Not only does it bother me that the length of suspensions are determined, for the most part, by the seriousness of the injury but the quality of player that’s involved in the altercation; case in point, Ovechkin earlier this season.

It seems to me that Colin Campbell’s “Wheel of Justice” has more than a few flaws in it. Why does someone like Ovechkin get a free pass when delivering a deliberate knee-on-knee hit? What did he get 3 games? Another reason why his punishment was minimal was because the victim was Tim Gleason, not a household name. I realize star players get star treatment but when it comes to deliberate attempts to injure it should be thrown out the window.

As for Cormier, he should have been suspended for the entire tournament after his elbow to the head of an unsuspecting Swedish player in an exhibition game (no less). Then – maybe – he would’ve learned his lesson but unfortunately nothing came about and thus has led us to this dispicable act. There is no defending this and the Q has no choice but to suspend him for the rest of the season. Hopefully this is the end this kind of behaviour from Cormier who has all the potential in the world to have a quality professional career.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Jan 19, 2010 12:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

marking has a lot to do with why Ovechkin and similar players do not receive more severe punishment, but I do not disagree with you.

Also, I do agree with you on the Cormier/WJC hit. First off, he was the wrong guy to name captain, that was mind-boggling given his rep.

I am AWESOME! Are you?

by Manthong on Jan 19, 2010 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

*marketing

I am AWESOME! Are you?

by Manthong on Jan 19, 2010 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The NHL is just generally too weak to be able to take the balls to suspend one of their marquee players. There is definitely a double standard.

by modsuperstar on Jan 19, 2010 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's the problem with self-policing, isn't it?

It’s like the fox guarding the henhouse. (Did I use that phrase properly?)

www.silversevensens.com

by PeterR on Jan 19, 2010 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t think the league really cares. If a player causes an injury and the offending player is found “guilty” enough to be suspended he should not be allowed to play until the hurt player can play. I promise you that would stop it… but my point is the league doesn’t really want to stop it.

by wismack on Jan 19, 2010 4:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

"Cormier intentionally tried to injure Tam with a vicious elbow to the head."

Ban for life. There is no place in our game for deliberate acts of vicious stupidity. I’m all for big hits and fighting but he went in leading with the elbow with intent to injure (knock the guys fucking head off). And what makes this worse, this isn’t the first time he has done it? He has already embarrassed himself at international level, as well as embarrassing our country and game. There is simply no place for this bullshit.

by sens_24 on Jan 19, 2010 6:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs