Morgan Rielly suspended for five games for cross-checking Ridly Greig in the head (Mod note in OP); upd: Rielly appealing his suspension (upheld)

[Ezekial]

Well, even if the appeal isn't finalized until all the games are served, a game or two retroactively off would be 40-80k back in his bank. It would also amend the precedent for future similar infractions, which for some reason the NHLPA wants to be lower despite ostensibly being concerned about the safety of their players.

At the end of the day I think it's as simple as one of those two types of players (injured vs suspended) is losing game checks.

 

[Micklebot]

At the end of the day I think it's as simple as one of those two types of players (injured vs suspended) is losing game checks.

Absolutely. "Some reason" is money.

 

[Ianturnedbull]

Yeah. That's two willing combatants.

In the real world, if two guys get in an agreed fight outside the bar, the police will bring them to the station and release them within hours.

There's a clear distinction between an agreed fight, and someone charging at an unwilling combatant...on the ice or in the streets.

That's why it's way more than a 5 min penalty. Because of that distinction.

It's shocking that some fans don't understand the distinction.

of course. the instigator is part of the rules too. fighting is allowed in the NHL. things get heated and chippy. it should not be any surprise when someone gets punched for adding insult to injury.

 

[Ezekial]

Absolutely. "Some reason" is money.

NHLPA also represents current rostered players and that is their scope, not former players.

 

[jbeck5]

You don't run around your workplace ripping slap shots into empty offices?

I've definitely ripped a few clappers at work.

 

[Leaf Fans]

When Rielly's appeal doesn't go through, is it truly a time to move on from this?

I think everyone has moved on. Even with an appeal any action is usually Retroactive

You have a very high opinion of your opinions.

Yes, and everyone else's. I think everyone's is important.

 

[jbeck5]

of course. the instigator is part of the rules too. fighting is allowed in the NHL. things get heated and chippy. it should not be any surprise when someone gets punched for adding insult to injury.

Right, and depending on how violent that instigator is, can result in disciplinary action.

It can range from Bertuzzi punishment , to carkner punishment, to just un in game penalty depending.

On this case, he used a hockey stick to do the hitting to the face, therefore has a suspension. It's a big no-no.

 

[Leaf Fans]

You're delusional if you think a 2 handed stick to the head long after the whistle for a player taking a harmless shot warrants only a fine where the max fine is pitiful

Yes, I would be if I thought that, but you are delusional if you think Morgan Rielly did that.

Anytime you cross-check someone in the head you should be suspended. If it happens after the whistle then you should get more games than if it was during the play.

It's pretty easy, most rationale people would agree.

I don't think any rational people would agree with that.

 

[umma gumma]

Yes, I would be if I thought that, but you are delusional if you think Morgan Rielly did that.


I don't think any rational people would agree with that.

I'm curious to hear the instances where a cross-check to the head is acceptable.

 

[Ianturnedbull]

Right, and depending on how violent that instigator is, can result in disciplinary action.

It can range from Bertuzzi punishment , to carkner punishment, to just un in game penalty depending.

On this case, he used a hockey stick to do the hitting to the face, therefore has a suspension. It's a big no-no.

What are we debating here? Why are you so in tuned with the history of fighting and infractions?

The reason I state the fighting reality is because of the way fans are making Rielly out to be a bad/dirty player. He's not. The emotion and defamation is so wild here. Some people on this very site are saying Rielly should have got 20 games. 20 games?

 

[jbeck5]

What are we debating here? Why are you so in tuned with the history of fighting and infractions?

The reason I state the fighting reality is because of the way fans are making Rielly out to be a bad/dirty player. He's not. The emotion and defamation is so wild here. Some people on this very site are saying Rielly should have got 20 games. 20 games?

I agree with you that this was very unlike Rielly.

But I don't think that should have much of affect on punishment when this was the act.

I would use someone's history when there's a 50/50 play and you can give them the benefit of the doubt.

This was different though. He skated across the ice to go hit someone with a stick in the face well after the whistle.

It's a very easy play to make an example and give a long suspension.

I'm not even mad at Rielly. I like him. He's not a dirty player at all. But what he did this one time was extremely dirty.


I think the reason you might see other people asking for longer suspensions is because you often see in other leagues where someone attacks someone with a stick and gets a full year ban or something. So people might say "why doesn't the NHL have the balls to do stuff like that on non hockey plays?"

Now I think a huge ban like that would be crazy for several reasons. This is their livelihood and not some amateur league. I get that. But I can atleast understand why that crowd of people would think that way.

I'm just trying to see this as neutrally as possible. The sens suck and aren't making the playoffs. The Leafs will likely make the playoffs easily. I don't hate Rielly. He's a good player. I honestly don't think there's anything wrong with people wanting him to have a lengthy suspension so every single player knows if you go target a player after whistles with headshots, you're going to miss a lot of time. I'd be ok with that.

But I was ok with 5 games and predicted 4 games.

 

[TheDoldrums]

You're describing plays that are agreed upon to be allowed in the game Re. Body checking.

This is not the same thing.

Imagine trying to compare agreed upon actions in a sport to illegal actions in that sport.

Some of you are also unbelievably weird.

I'm describing a facetious situation meant to mock you for comparing the response in a NHL game to someone in a normal career actually.

Even the punch in the face thing is stupid. You got insulted? Cool.

If someone walked up to you in the street and said "you suck at your job" and walked away...this is insulting..this is disrespectful. It's your career. Your livelihood.

Are you chasing him down to punch him in the face? Does he deserve concussion/brain damage/ permanent injury/ maybe death... Because he was disrespectful to you about your job?

Try applying any type of normal common sense to this, and it becomes extremely stupid sounding to try to defend Morgan Rielly attacking someone because he got his feelings hurt.

The situation you are describing happens all the time in hockey...people get punched for minor slights. They get punched for clean hits that are "agreed upon to be allowed in the game." Because this is a physical professional sport and not an office job. This is accepted by the vast majority of hockey fans, but here you are comparing simply the idea of physically responding to an insult to "maybe death."

 

[All Mod Cons]

It is actually quite insane that Kevin Weekes knew, way before Morgan, his agent and NHLPA.

 

[jbeck5]

I'm describing a facetious situation meant to mock you for comparing the response in a NHL game to someone in a normal career actually.



The situation you are describing happens all the time in hockey...people get punched for minor slights. For clean hits that are "agreed upon to be allowed in the game." Because this is a physical professional sport and not an office job. And there's no need to be hysterical and compare it to "maybe death."

Of course you're trying to mock others... Goes right up there with wanting violence after a non violent act.

Not surprised.

I agree with the second part that players are going to get emotional. I'm not commenting on Rielly. I'm commenting on the fans that aren't emotionally involved, looking at the play saying "yeah Ridley deserved that" or "yeah good on Morgan. I would have done that too"

You guys aren't emotionally involved and should be able to think more clearly. That's why I bring in real life situations to show the non emotional side of things.

People who aren't emotionally involved shouldnt be calling for violence towards people who did non violent things to other people you don't even know. We're just on the sidelines watching. We should be able to think more clearly without being blinded by momentarily emotional moments.

 

[PB37]

That was something out of the Dale Hunter playbook, it's not a surprise it's 5.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Right, and depending on how violent that instigator is, can result in disciplinary action.

It can range from Bertuzzi punishment , to carkner punishment, to just un in game penalty depending.

On this case, he used a hockey stick to do the hitting to the face, therefore has a suspension. It's a big no-no.

Frequently not.

I'm curious to hear the instances where a cross-check to the head is acceptable.

Presumably all the ones that escaped suspension and/or penalty?

 

[All Mod Cons]

That was something out of the Dale Hunter playbook, it's not a surprise it's 5.

Dale Hunter had 3563 pims. Rielly has 225 pims. There's not really a comparison between the two players.

 

[jbeck5]

Frequently not.


Presumably all the ones that escaped suspension and/or penalty?

Well the best comparison from this year for a b line crosscheck to the face after the whistle was Perron on Zub and he got 6 games.

I'm not too concerned about previous years, as the league often changes its stance on things. Something similar got 21 games as leaf fans have liked to mock. So obviously a similar play in previous years is irrelevant.

Was there any other cross check to the face this year after the whistle where the player went down and it wasn't a suspension?

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Hhof player vs emotional leafs fan. Lmao.

Ah the appeal to authority! King of kings in any discourse. Note to self....what does Sean Avery think?

 

[All Mod Cons]

One thing that irks fans is that, for some reason, games with Toronto being involved are treated differently than when they're not involved.

You look at every single game day thread of all 31 NHL teams and the most common comment is a variation of "we're not going to get calls because we are playing Toronto".

Meanwhile the Leafs are always near the bottom of the league in PP opportunities and bottom in 5v3 opportunities.

So if we forget anyone's opinion of the league is for or against the Leafs, I think we can all come together and admit that games with Toronto in are treated differently. We have all 32 fanbases agreeing on that.

The question is why? Why should those games be treated differently (not better or worse) than a game without Toronto being involved?

Once we figure the answer out to that, I think we can work on solutions.

 

[sr edler]

Rielly is a smooth-talking nice guy so not surprised he talked down his suspension a couple of games. You don't want this guy in an in-person hearing, he'll charm you to death.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

Yes, I would be if I thought that, but you are delusional if you think Morgan Rielly did that.

So what did Morgan Reilly really do according to you

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Well the best comparison from this year for a b line crosscheck to the face after the whistle was Perron on Zub and he got 6 games.

I'm not too concerned about previous years, as the league often changes its stance on things. Something similar got 21 games as leaf fans have liked to mock. So obviously a similar play in previous years is irrelevant.

Was there any other cross check to the face this year after the whistle where the player went down and it wasn't a suspension?

I like the way you add 50 caveats.

He's the only player ever to score a goal on Tuesday night of a leap year while his cousin is giving birth in Ecuador and the monks are picking 1 cup each of Goji berries in the Himalayas.

True, true.

 

[Relapsing]

Theres unwritten "codes" everywhere in life. Some of the takes over this incident have been hilarious to read.

Maybe I'm wrong, but the Sunday Truce to me was always a Rule of Engagement, not an unwritten rule. Like, on membership to the Barksdale, or other Baltimore, gangs, one would be given a little laminated card (maybe why Stringer opened up a print shop?!?!) and rule number 4 was the Sunday Truce.

 

[jbeck5]

I like the way you add 50 caveats.

He's the only player ever to score a goal on Tuesday night of a leap year while his cousin is giving birth in Ecuador and the monks are picking 1 cup each of Goji berries in the Himalayas.

True, true.

How is a cross check to the face after the whistle 50 caveats lmao.

Obviously they use parameters to determine discipline. I name a handful of parameters and you lose track and go to 50.

If you use less than a handful of parameters, you'll end up comparing vastly different plays. You need to be able to divide and differentiate them with at least a handful of parameters. Or else comparisons become useless. You'll be comparing a hit from behind with a cross check to the face if you reduce the parameters.