Agree, the Marchment hit on McCabe was 10x worse - he got a $5K fine and no penalty during the game - because reasons. Kadri was twice suspended for hits for several playoff games for hits where the opponent did not miss a shift. Liljegren was slew footed this year by Marchand who is a repeat offender. Liljegren missed several weeks with a high ankle sprain yet there no call nor suspension. It is sickening but it's reality.
- winsix

Think about how this play would be ruled under different circumstances. If this happened during a puck battle along the boards, it'd be a 2 minute minor. If it was a play away from the puck in the first period, maybe 5 and a game.
But because it was at the end of the game it should be 5+ game suspension? (frank) right off. 1 game max is what it deserves.
You're right, there have been plenty of fines this year for doing much worse.

It's an opinion. Thanks for your opinion and also thanks for calling your opinion a fact.
- winsix

no problem. Here to help

Gudas has a full NTC and has said he rejected contract offers from Toronto and Edmonton because they are too hockey mad cities. He's not waiving it now to go to Toronto.

Also Rielly is offered an in person hearing which carries a 5 game minimum.

He gets 1 game max. Book it.
- mjones242

In-person meeting says 5.

Think about how this play would be ruled under different circumstances. If this happened during a puck battle along the boards, it'd be a 2 minute minor. If it was a play away from the puck in the first period, maybe 5 and a game.
But because it was at the end of the game it should be 5+ game suspension? (frank) right off. 1 game max is what it deserves.
You're right, there have been plenty of fines this year for doing much worse.
- UsernameUnknown

The NHL has always punished hits after the whistle more severely.

See Hunter, Dale.

Gudas has a full NTC and has said he rejected contract offers from Toronto and Edmonton because they are too hockey mad cities. He's not waiving it now to go to Toronto.

Also Rielly is offered an in person hearing which carries a 5 game minimum.
- wreckage

Incorrect.

"If the infraction might require a suspension of six games or more, the offending Player is offered the opportunity to an in-person hearing."

An unperson hearing does not guarantee any suspension. But it could..Maybe...Might.

We all know Parros is going to go on the unreasonable side here. I hope he does, and the Leafs appeal again, and Parros looks like the fool he is.

You gotta give to get.

You’re copacetic.

Failure is fine.
- Arctic_AARDVARK

Ok.

Just dont want to trade for crap

Incorrect.

"If the infraction might require a suspension of six games or more, the offending Player is offered the opportunity to an in-person hearing."

An unperson hearing does not guarantee any suspension. But it could..Maybe...Might.

We all know Parros is going to go on the unreasonable side here. I hope he does, and the Leafs appeal again, and Parros looks like the fool he is.
- rSole

How is it "offered" when he was pretty much told, this is what you are getting? Did not hear that George Parros actually has said, "Hey Morg, if you want, come on in for a chat." It was more, "Hey Morg. I am gonna need you to come into the office for a chat", sort of thing.

The NHL has always punished hits after the whistle more severely.

See Hunter, Dale.
- Atomic Wedgie

You're right. And understandably so. Which is where the 1 game suspension comes in.
If this was during play, it'd be somewhere between a minor penalty and a 5k fine.
Having 5+ is bonkers.
I still think it'll be 4. Which is also bonkers.

Crazy how many opposing fans care about the Leafs today.

Hilarious how they live rent free in some peoples heads

Think about how this play would be ruled under different circumstances. If this happened during a puck battle along the boards, it'd be a 2 minute minor. If it was a play away from the puck in the first period, maybe 5 and a game.
But because it was at the end of the game it should be 5+ game suspension? (frank) right off. 1 game max is what it deserves.
You're right, there have been plenty of fines this year for doing much worse.
- UsernameUnknown

What is right or wrong does not matter in this case. The reality is, there is an in-person hearing which generally means 5 games minimum. There is significant evidence that suspensions do not go in favour of the Leafs. It was a really stupid play by Rielly. He will get 5 games or more and the Leafs will appeal. A cross-check to the neck or head is a no-no.

Here is one of the ugliest cross-checks I can recall.

No penalty, Burke gave him a 4 game suspension. Kariya's jaw was broken on the play and was never the same player after this dirty hit. Suter also shortened the career of Gretzky with a dirty cross-check to the back during a US vs Canada game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tid_86o9M-o&t=3s

#ParrosisaPOS

The NHL has always punished hits after the whistle more severely.

See Hunter, Dale.
- Atomic Wedgie

Not always - see the Kariya hit above.

Incorrect.

"If the infraction might require a suspension of six games or more, the offending Player is offered the opportunity to an in-person hearing."

An unperson hearing does not guarantee any suspension. But it could..Maybe...Might.

We all know Parros is going to go on the unreasonable side here. I hope he does, and the Leafs appeal again, and Parros looks like the fool he is.
- rSole

Ok, technically it doesn't carry anything, but historically it's a 5 gamer minimum. Scheifele got 4 playoff games for something similar tho not as long after the play.

I did not think Leafs would be looking at the playoffs starting from a wild card position. Probably means a likely first round match up against Boston or the Rangers. Florida also looking very solid.

The NHL has always punished hits after the whistle more severely.

See Hunter, Dale.
- Atomic Wedgie

Read the room.

The hit was justified and it's just Parros holding a grudge.

Rielly plays more minutes than anyone on the Leafs — over 24 per game, including on a top pair with TJ Brodie and on the No. 1 power-play unit. His 43 points rank fourth on the team and more than the next three Leaf defenders combined.

Read the room.

The hit was justified and it's just Parros holding a grudge.
- golfingsince

the hit was appropriate and it deserves suspension

Read the room.

The hit was justified and it's just Parros holding a grudge.
- golfingsince

Our opinions do not really matter, we are fans, so logic is not relevant. Your opinion matters much less. Your input is scarcely above the value of what Spatso spews here.

I won’t condone the act, but I get it…maybe more than most.
- Woderwick

no worries 👍

i’ll condone it for you 👊🏿

I don’t agree with 99% of the “hockey code”, but my opinion is irrelevant.

You don’t disrespect your opponent by pulling poop like this.

So Rielly was 100% justified in hitting him.

The crosschecck to the face, however, was completely unjustified, and he will deserve a suspension.

6-10 games will be too much, but that’s what you get for being stupid.
- Atomic Wedgie

I agree that what it was a Richard move to take the slapper and that he deserved to answer for it. But not with a stick to the head. Go over, grab him and make him fight to teach him to show some damn respect, no problem. But again, you never use your stick on an opponents head...you just don't.

Crazy how many opposing fans care about the Leafs today.

Hilarious how they live rent free in some peoples heads
- Santo_44

huh

I agree that what it was a Richard move to take the slapper and that he deserved to answer for it. But not with a stick to the head. Go over, grab him and make him fight to teach him to show some damn respect, no problem. But again, you never use your stick on an opponents head...you just don't.
- jmatchett383

Agree

no worries 👍

i’ll condone it for you 👊🏿
- Skalapy

How is it "offered" when he was pretty much told, this is what you are getting? Did not hear that George Parros actually has said, "Hey Morg, if you want, come on in for a chat." It was more, "Hey Morg. I am gonna need you to come into the office for a chat", sort of thing.
- TC4145

No. The player is invited to attend the meeting, with PA reps, to present his side of the story. In person means that they are looking to hand out a more severe penalty. You can participate by phone if you prefer but it’s better to be there.

No. The player is invited to attend the meeting, with PA reps, to present his side of the story. In person means that they are looking to hand out a more severe penalty. You can participate by phone if you prefer but it’s better to be there.
- Canada Cup

I’m thinking 6-8

Leafs appeal - goes to 4.