Clutterbuck fined for Embellishment

[Nynja*]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=750727&navid=nhl:topheads

I thought there was a thread dedicated to these, but I couldnt find it.

Click to read more...

 

[The Big Giant Head]

Whats this, #2 this season as far player fines for embellishment? Amount of the fine is a drop in the bucket for these guys but hopefully it comes with a little bit of humiliation.

 

[PBandJ]

Whats this, #2 this season as far player fines for embellishment? Amount of the fine is a drop in the bucket for these guys but hopefully it comes with a little bit of humiliation.

I think that's the point. They can't hit their wallet hard, but they can sure as hell hit their reputation by publicly announcing these fines.

 

[dechire]

Whats this, #2 this season as far player fines for embellishment? Amount of the fine is a drop in the bucket for these guys but hopefully it comes with a little bit of humiliation.

He's 4th I believe. The others were Neal, Nyquist and Trocheck

 

[luki here]

I think that's the point. They can't hit their wallet hard, but they can sure as hell hit their reputation by publicly announcing these fines.

you get this kind of embellishment 20x a day on high sticking penalties. Hope they stay consistent and hand out this fine each time.

Does this fine affect the duration of a possible future suspension for clutterbuck? What i meant to say: will he have to sit longer due to this fine if he lays a suspendable hit on someone during the remainder of the season?

 

[janecky]

I understand fines for blatant dives where the other player's stick is not even touching the player, but when they start punishing incidents like this it's a slippery slope to an inherently biased process where they are looking for ways to punish agitators. It takes the gamesmanship out of the game, and gamesmanship should always be a part of it.

To me, this incident shouldn't have resulted in a fine, and wouldn't have if it weren't Cal Clutterbuck. And there's the problem. Clutterbuck gets fined for an incident that gets a pass if it's a top-six player. Clutterbuck did have a good shooting position and Voracek did turn and put the stick under Clutterbuck's arm. That's a penalty. All Clutterbuck did was lift his arm and go on one knee. Sure, he embellished, but if he doesn't, the refs overlook the hook.

 

[Analyzer*]

He is one of about 100 terrible divers in this league.

If they had actual balls, the league would generate so much money from fining people for diving.

 

[YEM]

All Clutterbuck did was lift his arm and go on one knee.

yr legs should keep working if you get a love tap of a hook near yr shoulder

but if he doesn't, the refs overlook the hook.

and you know this how?

 

[flyershockey]

Good. I'll admit that I didn't think this play was all that bad on Clutterbuck, but I've seen enough of his flopping to know that he's earned some public embarrassment.

 

[Nynja*]

Sure, he embellished, but if he doesn't, the refs overlook the hook.

You wrote a nice two paragraph post defending him, and at the end, you drop that gem negating whatever you wrote.

 

[startainfection*]

So putting his hand up is what made it an embellishment?

 

[Nynja*]

Probably trying to sell a hook as a baseball swing slash, then stopping the sell when he realizes a penalty was called.

 

[janecky]

and you know this how?

Because I watch a lot of games and see refs do it all the time. They usually only give a penalty when they can't ignore it. But that also means they give penalties when players stumble on the blue line instead of being fouled... Oh, look, he fell down, must've been a hook or a trip, let's call it.

You wrote a nice two paragraph post defending him, and at the end, you drop that gem negating whatever you wrote.

Nope. This kind of embellishment happens all the time. You feel the stick and you make sure the refs see it. My point was that it's one thing to dive when there is no foul at all than it is to embellish when there is a foul. When they start fining players for doing the latter, it's a biased process because they will not fine all players for doing the exact same thing. They just pick and choose who they want to fine.

 

[chupanibre]

I love the name and shame system they have with the diving offenders.

That being said, I didn't think Clutterbucks was that bad, if they start naming and shaming ALL the embellishments that are the equivalent to this one, they'll be fining several players every game. Is the NHL low on money or something?


Del Zotto had a full on dive vs the Pens that resulted in the Downie vs Schenn fight that went unpunished, some consistency would be nice.

(skip to 1:30 for the dive, unless you want to watch Downie get beat down, which is always great!)

 

[CodeE]

Because I watch a lot of games and see refs do it all the time. They usually only give a penalty when they can't ignore it. But that also means they give penalties when players stumble on the blue line instead of being fouled... Oh, look, he fell down, must've been a hook or a trip, let's call it.

Nope. This kind of embellishment happens all the time. You feel the stick and you make sure the refs see it. My point was that it's one thing to dive when there is no foul at all than it is to embellish when there is a foul. When they start fining players for doing the latter, it's a biased process because they will not fine all players for doing the exact same thing. They just pick and choose who they want to fine.

You're absolutely correct, I see little things like this happen all the time. Not going to defend Clutts or say he didn't embellish, but in this situation he actually got hit with a stick.

Is it a slippery slope and could absolutely lead to the NHL deciding to hand out fines based on a player's reputation, as opposed to solely basing these decisions off what happens on the ice.

Whatever, at least there's no suspension attached.

 

[thelos]

You're absolutely correct, I see little things like this happen all the time. Not going to defend Clutts or say he didn't embellish, but in this situation he actually got hit with a stick.

Is it a slippery slope and could absolutely lead to the NHL deciding to hand out fines based on a player's reputation, as opposed to solely basing these decisions off what happens on the ice.

Whatever, at least there's no suspension attached.

Maybe that is what the NHL is trying to change?

 

[CodeE]

Maybe that is what the NHL is trying to change?

Then you need to adopt an all-or-nothing approach. The problem is not that the NHL has decided to really enforce it, it's that they're being inconsistent with who they decide to punish. This type of thing happens far too often and the NHL will often sit on their hands.

 

[YEM]

Because I watch a lot of games and see refs do it all the time.

because in yr opinion, since you may have seen it done other times, that is absolutely what happened this time?

that is some extremely unsound reasoning

 

[thelos]

Then you need to adopt an all-or-nothing approach. The problem is not that the NHL has decided to really enforce it, it's that they're being inconsistent with who they decide to punish. This type of thing happens far too often and the NHL will often sit on their hands.

Well another thing to consider is, Since he was fined for this it means it was at least his 2nd dive that the league called him about this year. I havent seen the one from the blues game, but should we really pity a player who gets his warning for diving in Dec and by January has already reverted back to diving/embellishing?

 

[Nynja*]

Del Zotto had a full on dive vs the Pens that resulted in the Downie vs Schenn fight that went unpunished, some consistency would be nice.

Its possible Del Zotto got tagged for that dive, but the first one is just a private warning. Second time you get flagged they shame you publically and fine you.

Thats probably why Clutterbuck got tagged here. He already got a warning, and now he was embellishing badly again.

 

[Off Sides]

While I'd tend to agree that the NHL is probably being inconsistent as that is the way they apparently like to be, but since the warnings are not made public, we really do not know who is and who has not been warned so it difficult to say they are being inconsistent just yet.

Although if I were to guess, I doubt anyone from the NHL is going to call this sort of thing on the players who generate the most revenue, but we'll see I guess.

 

[CodeE]

Well another thing to consider is, Since he was fined for this it means it was at least his 2nd dive that the league called him about this year. I havent seen the one from the blues game, but should we really pity a player who gets his warning for diving in Dec and by January has already reverted back to diving/embellishing?

Nobody is asking you to pity Clutterbuck. He lost $2,000 which would suck for anybody but it's not that bad considering his yearly salary.

The point is to make sure incidents like these are handled each and every time they happen, or else give some leniency in situations like this where it's clear the stick makes contact with Clutterbuck.

 

[Rand0m]

ITT: people who don't understand the player gets the public fine only AFTER the player was privately warned once this season.

After a warning, a player should be extra careful not to embellish. The actual fined offense may not be the worst but it's also definitely not the first.

 

[The Underboss]

It is what it is and hopefully he doesn't continue to do it. We don't need that distraction.

 

[Felix Unger]

Whats this, #2 this season as far player fines for embellishment? Amount of the fine is a drop in the bucket for these guys but hopefully it comes with a little bit of humiliation.

You think Cal Clutterbuck cares about his reputation?

Do you think that other players think less of Cal Clutterbuck because of this? Do you think his teammates do? His coach?

Cough. Erm. Hm.. Serious now... Humiliation.