Suter elbow on Downie - 2 Game Suspension (Mod Warning - Post 204)

[bad tape job]

Suter will end up getting 2 games. Been par for the course this year.

You are right. That's what he got and deserved. Two games off will do him good. He needs a rest.

 

[Dying Alive]

What I don't understand is why this gets a suspension against someone with a lengthy history of questionable play, when worse hits (subjective, I'll admit) against other players without a history get fines instead. If the NHL is going to pick and choose, like they have for years, why not defend their stars and give a slap on the wrist for everyone else? At least be consistent in their inconsistency, so to speak.

In regard to benefit of the doubt? Downie tries to sell calls all game long, night in and night out. That he's playing the next day, and didn't come back to a game that was over before it started tells me that the result wasn't suspension-worthy.


To boil things down, the NHL needs to pick one: Punish the play or punish the result. So far, they're flipping back and forth with very little rhyme or reason. This was an instance where I don't feel the result warranted a suspension. Should have been a 5 and a game, and a fine.

If they aren't going to pick one and stick with it? I don't see why this doesn't swing to the other end of the spectrum on this one.

Because the hit is what's important, not who is being hit. That's how it should be.

Of course, now that Suter is an offender I'm guessing you think that should be taken into consideration if anyone ever has a hearing for giving him a shot to the head?

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

ridiculous length.

 

[Vashanesh]

seriously? you just don't get it. please explain to me why the **** does it matter if the recipient of an offensive act like an elbow to head has a reputation or is a repeat offender or whatever?

Downie tried to sell the call all game long in the locker-room because the Pens really have anything to gain when a weak Wild team gets even weaker...

Where am I losing you? Downie is a questionable player. He always plays on the border, if not just past. Taking a ton of calls, trying to draw a ton of calls. You don't think there's ANY chance that he was trying to sell this to make it look worse than it was?

I would say the fact that he's playing less than 24 hours later says there's at least a chance. He doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt - in my eyes - because of exactly what I mentioned above. Not sure where that isn't adding up?

Because the hit is what's important, not who is being hit. That's how it should be.

Of course, now that Suter is an offender I'm guessing you think that should be taken into consideration if anyone ever has a hearing for giving him a shot to the head?

The NHL has proven time and time again that that isn't the case.

In regard to your second point, classic strawman with some loaded question thrown in. You're assuming that one suspension equates a career's worth of questionable play.

Suter isn't a dirty or even questionably dirty player. So, you can misinterpret my point to make your own however you'd like. But you're not comparing things on an even level.

 

[Zen Arcade]

I have no interest in defending Suter, now watch me do a bunch of mental gymnastics to defend Suter.

 

[Vashanesh]

I have no interest in defending Suter, now watch me do a bunch of mental gymnastics to defend Suter.

Where have I defended his actions? It's a bad hit that deserves punishment.

I'm arguing that the punishment doesn't add up to the circumstances.

 

[boredmale]

This is a farce, Downie deserves 2 games for getting his face in the way of Suter's elbow

 

[roquay]

Where am I losing you? Downie is a questionable player. He always plays on the border, if not just past. Taking a ton of calls, trying to draw a ton of calls. You don't think there's ANY chance that he was trying to sell this to make it look worse than it was?

I would say the fact that he's playing less than 24 hours later says there's at least a chance. He doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt - in my eyes - because of exactly what I mentioned above. Not sure where that isn't adding up?



The NHL has proven time and time again that that isn't the case.

In regard to your second point, classic strawman with some loaded question thrown in. You're assuming that one suspension equates a career's worth of questionable play.

Suter isn't a dirty or even questionably dirty player. So, you can misinterpret my point to make your own however you'd like. But you're not comparing things on an even level.

If you intentionally elbow someone in the head you should be suspended. That should be how it is. It's not like a hit where sometimes it's subjective, this was clear as day.

2 games is what half a week. That's nothing. Not really a deterrent to not do it again. Any clear hits to the head should start at 5 games and go up depending on severity.

 

[Cult of Hynes]

I think the real punishment for Suter would be having to play 30 minutes a night for the Wild more so than 2 nights of rest.

 

[PensPlz]

Curious what the league would of given Bort if he throw that sorta of Elbow into Jagr. I'm guessing a lot more than 2 games. Different set of rules for different players.

 

[flaneur]

the suspension should have been longer but since he has no prior suspension/fine history i understand why they only gave him 2 games.

the tarnishing of his reputation as a clean player and now having a suspension history is probably a bigger blow than the 2 game suspension.

 

[Cult of Hynes]

Curious what the league would of given Bort if he throw that sorta of Elbow into Jagr. I'm guessing a lot more than 2 games. Different set of rules for different players.

Yup, we know that. Hell, Crosby hit Kadri pretty dirty last year and wasnt given anything for it.

Dont whine about a double standard when your team benefits from it as well as anyone in the league when your two stars are subtly dirty.

 

[Vashanesh]

If you intentionally elbow someone in the head you should be suspended. That should be how it is. It's not like a hit where sometimes it's subjective, this was clear as day.

2 games is what half a week. That's nothing. Not really a deterrent to not do it again. Any clear hits to the head should start at 5 games and go up depending on severity.

FWIW, I agree with you. But, that's not the league we live with. At least not all the time.

I think the real punishment for Suter would be having to play 30 minutes a night for the Wild more so than 2 nights of rest.

Right about now, you're right, that has to be a hell of a punishment.

 

[illpucks]

Michael Russo @Russostrib · 45m 45 minutes ago
Ryan Suter loses $81,058.72 in salary #mnwild

Wow. That is basically someone's entire yearly salary in a good job. And he makes that in 2 games? Insane.

 

[NewAgeOutlaw]

In regard to benefit of the doubt? Downie tries to sell calls all game long, night in and night out. That he's playing the next day, and didn't come back to a game that was over before it started tells me that the result wasn't suspension-worthy.

Wow, this paragraph is speculative, irrelevant to Suter's actions on the play, and totally innacurate. I'm sure just for posting such nonsense you are on the nhl's short list for next head of the department of player safety!

Do you not realize how asinine it is to be talking about benefit of the doubt when it comes to Downie in this situation? There is no doubt. Suter elbowed him directly in the jaw. Only an idiot would think he didn't return to the game because he wanted to get Suter suspended because to believe that one would have to believe that getting a player on a team in a different conference a short suspension was more important to Downie then playing hockey. I'm sure they kept him out as a precaution as it is wise to do with potential head injuries and re-evaluated him today and found he could practice because he is ok.

Not only is your claim that he tries to sell calls irrelevant to Suter's actions, it is also untrue. Since he has joined the Penguins, I haven't seen anything of the sort from Downie.

I don't get what you are arguing anyway. It seems you believe that the dops is inconsistent. I can't argue that point as I agree. However, your solution seems to be that the dops should remain inconsistent, but under the specific stipulations that you see fit.

 

[ss53mech]

Wanted to wait for the outcome to cast my vote.
From a Pens fan:
-Suter isn't a known dirty player
-The hit is in the best light dangerous/dumb/wreckless and in the worst and obvious intent to injure
- DoPS is inconsistent and I disagree with how much they weight their justice on a players history

However, with all that said and when considering all the context I know, I think they got it right. I'm not here to argue, only to post my POV as that is what I enjoy most about the site, simply the opinions and their reasoning. Good day gents. Best of luck at sorting out your current..... difficulties Wild fans.

 

[CanadienShark]

What I don't understand is why this gets a suspension against someone with a lengthy history of questionable play, when worse hits (subjective, I'll admit) against other players without a history get fines instead. If the NHL is going to pick and choose, like they have for years, why not defend their stars and give a slap on the wrist for everyone else? At least be consistent in their inconsistency, so to speak.

In regard to benefit of the doubt? Downie tries to sell calls all game long, night in and night out. That he's playing the next day, and didn't come back to a game that was over before it started tells me that the result wasn't suspension-worthy.


To boil things down, the NHL needs to pick one: Punish the play or punish the result. So far, they're flipping back and forth with very little rhyme or reason. This was an instance where I don't feel the result warranted a suspension. Should have been a 5 and a game, and a fine.

If they aren't going to pick one and stick with it? I don't see why this doesn't swing to the other end of the spectrum on this one.

The way I interpreted your post, is that you believe that there should be some consistency in allowing stars to get away with ******** and call lesser players harsher.

In all seriousness though, I'm dead set against such favouritism.

 

[BluesyShoes]

Kind of looks like Downie is trying to slash him in the junk

 

[10coach*]

Wow. That is basically someone's entire yearly salary in a good job. And he makes that in 2 games? Insane.

Clayton Kershaw makes almost million dollars every time he takes the mound for the Dodgers for the next 6 years now that's nuts.

 

[PAZ]

Downie may be a lot of things, but he doesn't ever try to sell a call or fake an injury.

If Downie was truly ok at the time of the hit, I can guarantee you he would've popped right up and go crazy on Suter, rather than lay on the ice.

 

[Xavier Laflamme*]

Where am I losing you? Downie is a questionable player. He always plays on the border, if not just past. Taking a ton of calls, trying to draw a ton of calls. You don't think there's ANY chance that he was trying to sell this to make it look worse than it was?

I would say the fact that he's playing less than 24 hours later says there's at least a chance. He doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt - in my eyes - because of exactly what I mentioned above. Not sure where that isn't adding up?



The NHL has proven time and time again that that isn't the case.

In regard to your second point, classic strawman with some loaded question thrown in. You're assuming that one suspension equates a career's worth of questionable play.

Suter isn't a dirty or even questionably dirty player. So, you can misinterpret my point to make your own however you'd like. But you're not comparing things on an even level.

You trying to justify Suters actions because "Downie deserved it", is pretty sick and speaks to your character. Scary stuff.

 

[BigEezyE22]

Where am I losing you? Downie is a questionable player. He always plays on the border, if not just past. Taking a ton of calls, trying to draw a ton of calls. You don't think there's ANY chance that he was trying to sell this to make it look worse than it was?

I would say the fact that he's playing less than 24 hours later says there's at least a chance. He doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt - in my eyes - because of exactly what I mentioned above. Not sure where that isn't adding up?



The NHL has proven time and time again that that isn't the case.

In regard to your second point, classic strawman with some loaded question thrown in. You're assuming that one suspension equates a career's worth of questionable play.

Suter isn't a dirty or even questionably dirty player. So, you can misinterpret my point to make your own however you'd like. But you're not comparing things on an even level.

In case you hadn't noticed, this isn't about Downie getting suspended, it's about Suter. Downie did not try to sell a call. Maybe the ref saw that and hence no penalty on the play, but video showed otherwise, clear as day. And regardless of whether you think Suter should the get benefit of the doubt, problem is there is no doubt. That was as deliberate an elbow as you'll ever see.

 

[systemsgo]

What I don't understand is why this gets a suspension against someone with a lengthy history of questionable play, when worse hits (subjective, I'll admit) against other players without a history get fines instead. If the NHL is going to pick and choose, like they have for years, why not defend their stars and give a slap on the wrist for everyone else? At least be consistent in their inconsistency, so to speak.

In regard to benefit of the doubt? Downie tries to sell calls all game long, night in and night out. That he's playing the next day, and didn't come back to a game that was over before it started tells me that the result wasn't suspension-worthy.

To boil things down, the NHL needs to pick one: Punish the play or punish the result. So far, they're flipping back and forth with very little rhyme or reason. This was an instance where I don't feel the result warranted a suspension. Should have been a 5 and a game, and a fine.

If they aren't going to pick one and stick with it? I don't see why this doesn't swing to the other end of the spectrum on this one.

This just doesn't make any sense. Downie doesn't try to sell calls, if anything, he's a bit too crazy and gets an unhealthy number of 10 min misconducts, once from the penalty box and once even during a timeout. When Buff shoved him after he scored a goal, he jumped right up to try to get back in Buff's face. That's just the opposite of a guy who tries to sell calls. Downie is a guy with previous serious concussion issues, if I were a medical personnel of the team, I wouldn't let him back on the ice either.

 

[wej20]

Downie may be a lot of things, but he doesn't ever try to sell a call or fake an injury.

If Downie was truly ok at the time of the hit, I can guarantee you he would've popped right up and go crazy on Suter, rather than lay on the ice.

Exactly, Downie is very much in the vigilante justice camp.

 

[Greeneye]

2 games? This is one of the many reasons why the NHL is a joke. Reverse that situation and Downie gets 5. Blatant, malicious elbow directly to the head. I thought the NHL was trying to put an end to this sort of play?