John Jaeckel: "Reckless And Dangerous"
- John Jaeckel

Looking forward to your Nashville preview.

5 games.... I'm fine with that. IMO Danny could've got a game and a fine, but as someone said, his injury would make any suspension moot.

This has been analyzed to sh!t. I for one am ready to move on. Hopefully, for the sake ofthe hockey universe, we see you guys in the 1st round, even if it unlikely, how freaking awesome would that be?
- TLinden16

Except that it would have established a history of supplemental discipline that could potentially be a factor in the future. Now, next time he's still a "first time" offender.

i have a hard time understanding how A) shanny didn't even acknowledge that he knew sedin had hit keith with a head shot first even though sedin got nothing! and B) right after the keith headshot did anybody catch that little biotch burrows come in and drive his knee right into duncan keiths mid section? we all noticed it at the game! did the hawks send a tape to shanny of that incident?
C) as long as you want to talk about sedin missing time, how come shanahan had not even addressed the toews situation, which goes back to the SJ game! look at the tape, toews got that concussion from a blatent hit by joe thornton by the benches! why all the hush hush about that 1 shanny? and shame on john mcdonough & stan bowman for not squawking about the toews hit the way the canucks and their coach does every time 1 of them are wronged! and yet they have 2 of the biggest offender who wil fight NO ONE tough when it comes to the rough stuff! 3& 14! and don't tell me that either of them will ever step up to answer the bell for 1 of their mates ! especially 14!
either of them could have introduced them selves to brandon bollig any time that night but they probably chose to hide behind a kid who's been on their team all of about a dozen games!

once again boys, take away the instigator rule, alot of that shlit stops both ways!
- wonthecup10

Time to move on.

Except that it would have established a history of supplemental discipline that could potentially be a factor in the future. Now, next time he's still a "first time" offender.
- Ogilthorpe2

Seriously, it's Daniel Sedin. He's a thin Swedish guy that plays a slow moving, passing game. I doubt anyone is afraid of what he'll do when he comes back from injury. I've meet him in person and is not intimidating.

Beyond which, that first time offender tag has an experation date. He won't be getting a suspension any time soon.

Seriously, it's Daniel Sedin. He's a thin Swedish guy that plays a slow moving, passing game. I doubt anyone is afraid of what he'll do when he comes back from injury. I've meet him in person and is not intimidating.
- micah555

That may be, but what I said is still true. Daniel's injury does not make any suspension he may have gotten completely moot as was suggested. In my opinion his hit was questionable at best, and slightly dirty at worst. Obviously nowhere near as bad as Keith's hit, but I think he should have gotten a fine at least.

That may be, but what I said is still true. Daniel's injury does not make any suspension he may have gotten completely moot as was suggested. In my opinion his hit was questionable at best, and slightly dirty at worst. Obviously nowhere near as bad as Keith's hit, but I think he should have gotten a fine at least.
- Ogilthorpe2

The league is nowhere near that point yet. It was a slow moving hit delivered by a small guy with negligible hitting ability. I know a lot of Hawks fans see it as some big head shot, but that's not what happened. When/if the league says you can contact the head at all, Daniel will not touch people's heads with his 1 (maybe) hit a game. He's not a dirty, or even a physical, player. He doesn't try to hurt people and, as far as I know, he never has (other than breaking hearts, of course).

The league is nowhere near that point yet. It was a slow moving hit delivered by a small guy with negligible hitting ability. I know a lot of Hawks fans see it as some big head shot, but that's not what happened. When/if the league says you can contact the head at all, Daniel will not touch people's heads with his 1 (maybe) hit a game. He's not a dirty, or even a physical, player. He doesn't try to hurt people and, as far as I know, he never has (other than breaking hearts, of course).
- micah555

First, they are about the same size (6' 1", 190 ish) and Keith would never be described as a physical D-man. What I saw in the replay of Daniel's hit on Keith was a last second upward lunge with deliberate intent to hit Keith high. When you come at a guy, while extending upwards to raise your shoulder to head level, it's pretty tough to argue that he didn't target the head.

Keith deserves ten, and Sedin deserves nothing for the hit on Keith? Please.

Here's another way of looking at it. How much did you think Kronwall deserved for the hit on Kesler 12/21? Honestly. Don't lie for the sake of argument. Tell the truth.

And how much did he get?

I know they're somewhat different kinds of plays. But was there intent to injure in both cases? Yes. Any idiot knows it.

Does Kronwall have a track record of trying to take guys heads off (even though some of his hits are clean)? Yes.

I have no issue with suspending Keith. But it's time Shanahan stopped soft-pedaling certain guys. It's become laughable. And yes, anyone asking, I do think Kronwall is guilty of dirty hits almost as often as not.

Some are clean. Some are not.
- John Jaeckel

calm down its only chompsey

As I stated in the previous thread...the league has ruled.

Keith hit bad (obviously)
Sedin hit good (hockey play? Uhhh ok...)

so have at it boyz (nothing will change).

I do believe Keith received an appropriate punishment, but the Sedin hit still bothers me.

As I stated in the previous thread...the league has ruled.

Keith hit bad (obviously)
Sedin hit good (hockey play? Uhhh ok...)

so have at it boyz (nothing will change).

I do believe Keith received an appropriate punishment, but the Sedin hit still bothers me.
- ArlingtonRob

Agree.
however the retaliatory hit always gets the penalty.

It wasn't a tough hit, he wasn't "hitting a girl" it isn't comparable to what (insert player name) from Vancouver does.
It was a cheap shot. There are no comparisons.
It was a guy losing his cool in a bad way, right when the team can possibly put themselves in a position for home ice in the 1st round.

Do I understand his reaction? Yes
Does it matter why it happened? nope
does it make it any less of a poor choice? nope

as i said last blog, Keith should learn from how (20 yr old rookie) Shaw reacted to Dorsett's repeated crosschecks the other night. Don't. but, now he'll have 5 games to think about that... while Dylan olsen gets 23 minutes a game.

I must say, I enjoy how this game and incident has stirred the pot of hatred that had grown slightly tepid because of the two teams' absence from each other since January. Welcome back to the brawl, everyone.


All in all, I don't have an issue with the ruling. Even though it was a first offense, it was an incredibly dirty play, no way around it, and it is the exact type of play the league is trying to eliminate. After watching the play probably a hundred times, and even though I am a staunch 'Hawks fan, three games would have been a mere slap on the wrist.

More than five though? A couple points factor in that'd make me disagree. First, it's the first "offense." And before I start getting replies posting Ruslan Salei or Matt Cooke videos, the league qualifies these offenses by previous suspensions or fines. There has to be criteria here moving forward, just like the legal system. Anything else would be merely anecdotal, and arguments would go on ad nauseum just like they do on these boards from time to time.

Secondly, although not explicitly stated in the video (although mentioned briefly) I think that Daniel's hit factored into the decision. This was not an unprovoked attempt to injure by any stretch of the imagination. Had that play not happened in the corner, you wouldn't have seen this ugly play happen, period. I think Dunc got some leeway (and should have) because of this. These things can't be completely judged in a vacuum, context factors in heavily.

As much as the league doesn't want to admit it, I think there's a little kernel of "let them police themselves" still at work behind closed doors - And I have no issue with that.

doan was not a chicken wing - he stuck his elbow out cause benn was going around him, plus he is a repeat offender and he had been fined the week before for another hit.
doesn't matter how you hit a guy in the head - headshot is headshot. treat them each the same. repeat offenders keep getting x number of games added on for each instance
i know i must be looking at it too simplistically - it just seems too simple.
total disrespect for other players and the game is pretty easy to detect (knee to groin) - again, easy to punish
- dpard

I will also say this, whether a guy lines someone up with his head down, gets a running start, leaves his feet, raises his elbow to the chin and Shanahan calls it a "borderline hockey play" or a guy puts a retaliatory elbow to another guy's chin, the common denominator is recklessness/intent to injure.

What Keith did was dumb.

Again, you put the shoulder to someone, don't leave the ice, fine.

But some of these "hockey play" hits (with raised elbows, skates well off the ice, etc) are clearly meant to knock guys out— out of games, out of consciousness, whatever. And there are "repeat offenders" on this, even if Shanahan does nothing about it, known leaguewide. Shanahan needs to be called out on this.

JJ

I have no problem with Shanahan dropping the hammer on Keith. Taking head shots at another player, no matter the reason, is gutless and there is no room for it in the game. If that's the way you want to play, go to the ECHL or your local beer league.

But I agree with you that Shanahan has been extremely inconsistent with what he deems suspension worthy. But, that's a theme with this league, from the on-ice officiating and every thing else throughout. The league is consistently inconsistent, as maddening as that can be.

Agreed, Keith did deserve a suspension. I think most of us can agree on that. It's too bad the players in general don't have enough respect for each other to curtail this and it's equally frustrating that the NHL doesn't seem to have any idea on how to deal with it.
- jhawk159

the nhl needs to look to to the nfl for help in addressing head shots since i think the nfl has somewhat figured it out

i have a hard time understanding how A) shanny didn't even acknowledge that he knew sedin had hit keith with a head shot first even though sedin got nothing! and B) right after the keith headshot did anybody catch that little biotch burrows come in and drive his knee right into duncan keiths mid section? we all noticed it at the game! did the hawks send a tape to shanny of that incident?
C) as long as you want to talk about sedin missing time, how come shanahan had not even addressed the toews situation, which goes back to the SJ game! look at the tape, toews got that concussion from a blatent hit by joe thornton by the benches! why all the hush hush about that 1 shanny? and shame on john mcdonough & stan bowman for not squawking about the toews hit the way the canucks and their coach does every time 1 of them are wronged! and yet they have 2 of the biggest offender who wil fight NO ONE tough when it comes to the rough stuff! 3& 14! and don't tell me that either of them will ever step up to answer the bell for 1 of their mates ! especially 14!
either of them could have introduced them selves to brandon bollig any time that night but they probably chose to hide behind a kid who's been on their team all of about a dozen games!

once again boys, take away the instigator rule, alot of that shlit stops both ways!
- wonthecup10

well said

As I stated in the previous thread...the league has ruled.

Keith hit bad (obviously)
Sedin hit good (hockey play? Uhhh ok...)

so have at it boyz (nothing will change).

I do believe Keith received an appropriate punishment, but the Sedin hit still bothers me.
- ArlingtonRob

A few of us have been calling for two year for the Hawks to toughen up. How times on here has someone quoted Sean Connery's the Chicago way line from Untouchables? It's a shame that when the team finally grows a pair this had to happen.

The hit was atrocious. As much as I love the fact that Keith (Keith! of all people) was willing to stand up for himself, that hit has no place in the game.

John Jaeckel: "Reckless And Dangerous"
- John Jaeckel

Although I dont think it will ever happen, I wish the NHL would put up videos explaining why someone was NOT suspended.

the nhl needs to look to to the nfl for help in addressing head shots since i think the nfl has somewhat figured it out
- molly2522

Please - they'd probably come back with bounty systems.

Assuming some teams don't already have them in place.

Please - they'd probably come back with bounty systems.

Assuming some teams don't already have them in place.
- StLBravesFan

hope this was meant as a joke and not serious discussion of a big issue in the nhl

I will also say this, whether a guy lines someone up with his head down, gets a running start, leaves his feet, raises his elbow to the chin and Shanahan calls it a "borderline hockey play" or a guy puts a retaliatory elbow to another guy's chin, the common denominator is recklessness/intent to injure.

What Keith did was dumb.

Again, you put the shoulder to someone, don't leave the ice, fine.

But some of these "hockey play" hits (with raised elbows, skates well off the ice, etc) are clearly meant to knock guys out— out of games, out of consciousness, whatever. And there are "repeat offenders" on this, even if Shanahan does nothing about it, known leaguewide. Shanahan needs to be called out on this.
- John Jaeckel

There is one NFL lineman (James Harrison - Steelers) who has consistently applied excessive force to NFL quarterbacks against the wishes of the league who wants to protect their star pivots. They deal with his indiscretions by continually increasing the amount of the fine they levy on him - I think the last one was $100,000.
Maybe that is the way to go - a combination of games suspended / no pay and a supplementary additional fine.

I can't think of a perfect solution - Rene Bourque elbows Backstrom with totally obvious intent. He gets 5 games and Backstrom has missed 43 with no timetable for returning. Caps may miss the playoffs as a result. Sedin and Toews may not play again this season.

The NHLPA has to be part of the solution as it relates to handling obvious intent to injure incidents. But that is where unions rarely are helpful.

I consider myself an impartial observer. I have no particular fondness nor dislike for either the Hawks or Canucks. My thought right after the play was it warranted a 4-5 game suspension. So I think it is quite appropriate.

There is one NFL lineman (James Harrison - Steelers) who has consistently applied excessive force to NFL quarterbacks against the wishes of the league who wants to protect their star pivots. They deal with his indiscretions by continually increasing the amount of the fine they levy on him - I think the last one was $100,000.
Maybe that is the way to go - a combination of games suspended / no pay and a supplementary additional fine.

I can't think of a perfect solution - Rene Bourque elbows Backstrom with totally obvious intent. He gets 5 games and Backstrom has missed 43 with no timetable for returning. Caps may miss the playoffs as a result. Sedin and Toews may not play again this season.

The NHLPA has to be part of the solution as it relates to handling obvious intent to injure incidents. But that is where unions rarely are helpful.
- RickJ

Maybe the NHL needs to look at punishing the team as well by losing a roster spot for a player serving a suspension.

Maybe the NHL needs to look at punishing the team as well by losing a roster spot for a player serving a suspension.
- jhawk159

I've thought that, too.

Only problem I see is that unlike the other sports, hockey plays all of the skaters that dress - even Scott get a couple of minutes per game. Playing one short leads to tired players leads to more injuries, especially if for a large number of games.

But I still agree with it - losing Keith for 5 games hurts, but not as much as if you couldn't replace him.

Benn played the puck, Sedin was never even in reach of it. A very narrow minded way of looking at the hits....
- boonerbuck

But in both cases, the action of the offending player is dangerous and reckless, regardless of the position of the puck. Would you feel any better, as a Canucks' fan (or a fan of hockey for that matter) if Daniel was out and injured and misses the playoffs because of a reckless hit that happened while he played the puck? I don't think so, and neither do I.

So my point is not that Keith doesn't deserve to be suspended -- I think he does. I just have a hard time understanding how in two similar actions, the crime of the repeat offender is less than that of the first-time offender. My verdict would have been thus:

Doan gets 3 games.
Keith gets 2, plus he would no longer have the coverage of being a first-time offender.

If he had of ran him over while hitting his head, it would have been three. Since he threw a chicken-wing elbow out and caught him in the jaw, I think 5 is deserved.
Chicago still gets out of this better. Missing Sedin is going to hurt Van a lot more than missing Keith will hurt Chi.