Should Pronger have received a suspension for his hit on McAmmond?

Question

Ducks defenceman Chris Pronger has received his second one-game suspension of the Stanley Cup playoffs. Sure he’s a physical guy, but is he being singled out by the league to be made an example? Is he being treated fairly considering some of the other hits during the game?

Stanley Cup playoff coverage: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/indepth/nhl

Answer 1

Yes the suspension is warranted. I do not think he was head hunting for McAmmond, but he clearly made elbow to head contact resulting in an injury. To my memory, none of the other hits in the game resulted in as severe of an injury.

I don't think he is being singled out. The NHL has a long history of suspending players in the playoffs. What has changed is that with the new standard of enforcement we are going to see more shorter suspensions like this handed out in the playoffs. Given his style of play, Pronger is the most likely player to be penalized in this series. I believe that if someone else had delivered this hit, they would have received the same suspension.

Answer 2

This suspension and the previous one to Mr. Pronger in these playoffs are unfair and unwarranted. Yes he did get his elbow up and it's an illegal play in hockey. That's why they have a penalty for elbowing, which I might add Pronger received no such penalty for the play nor did he recieve a penalty for the hit in the Detroit series. He is being singled out because the NHL, rightly so, wants to crack down on head hunting so instead of hitting every average joe with a suspension for infractions during the regular season they're going after a big profile guy like Pronger during a playoff run. Holmstrom getting hurt from the hit that got Chris suspened last time was not Prongers fault, he went for the hit and instead of landing the hit and both players gliding off the boards like what usually happens, Scott N hit Holmstrom for the other side thus trapping him and Prongers momentum caused his hands to slide up an catch Holsmstrom in the head. Now this play against McAmmond was worse than that but in no way, shape or form deserves a one game suspension in THE STANLEY CUP FINALS!! If two referee's felt it didn't warrant even a two minute penalty, which I think he should have gotten a five minute major for but that's neither here nor there, then there's not need to be handing out suspensions. This is hockey, it's a rough game and people sometimes get hurt and guys sometime break the rules that's why we have the penalty box. Let the boys play.

Answer 3

This is Pronger's second suspension during the 2007 Playoffs. The first involved another "head" incident; hell yes he should have received a minimum of 2 games for this 'repeat' offense!! Very strange that in both cases he did not receive a penalty by the referees.

Give your head a shake; each and every player at that "level" are physical guys!!! They are all in top physical shape and play at intense levels!!

The fiasco with this Pronger's 2nd incident sends the wrong message. Yes the NHL polices themselves but a deterent has to be effective, in this case they are setting a precident. If you keep doing the same thing over each incident should receive a more severe penalty.

Minor hockey (other sports also) look to the NHL for leadership. The NHL is NOT providing that leadership in punishment. What if Pronger was a Dave Semenko, or Bob Probert? Would either 2 of these former players received just a 1-game suspension? I don't think so!!

In actuality, Mr. Pronger should be assessed the same number of games that Mr. McAmmond misses -- in other words if the injured player can't play then the culprit will have to sit out also!! That relates to whatever or wherever the importance of the game.

A lesson has to be sent to those primadonas that they are not above the law. No matter if it is the 1st game of the regular season or the last game of the playoffs. Rules are rules and should be administered based on the infraction NOT where they are in the playoffs!!!

Bettman had better step-in over Colin Campbell to re-evaluate the suspension. The league had the 'guts' in the Bertuzzi incident; in fact Bertuzzi shouldn't being playing yet considering his cowardly attack!!

Answer 4

He is being singled out because the NHL, rightly so, wants to crack down on head hunting so instead of hitting every average joe with a suspension for infractions during the regular season they're going after a big profile guy like Pronger during a playoff run. Holmstrom getting hurt from the hit that got Chris suspened last time was not Prongers fault, he went for the hit and instead of landing the hit and both players gliding off the boards like what usually happens, Scott N hit Holmstrom for the other side thus trapping him and Prongers momentum caused his hands to slide up an catch Holsmstrom in the head. Now this play against McAmmond was worse than that but in no way, shape or form deserves a one game suspension in THE STANLEY CUP FINALS!! If two referee's felt it didn't warrant even a two minute penalty, which I think he should have gotten a five minute major for but that's neither here nor there, then there's not need to be handing out suspensions. This is hockey, it's a rough game and people sometimes get hurt and guys sometime break the rules that's why we have the penalty box. Let the boys play.

Answer 5

wants to crack down on head hunting so instead of hitting every average joe with a suspension for infractions during the regular season they're going after a big profile guy like Pronger during a playoff run. Holmstrom getting hurt from the hit that got Chris suspened last time was not Prongers fault, he went for the hit and instead of landing the hit and both players gliding off the boards like what usually happens, Scott N hit Holmstrom for the other side thus trapping him and Prongers momentum caused his hands to slide up an catch Holsmstrom in the head. Now this play against McAmmond was worse than that but in no way, shape or form deserves a one game suspension in THE STANLEY CUP FINALS!! If two referee's felt it didn't warrant even a two minute penalty, which I think he should have gotten a five minute major for but that's neither here nor there, then there's not need to be handing out suspensions. This is hockey, it's a rough game and people sometimes get hurt and guys sometime break the rules that's why we have the penalty box. Let the boys play.

Answer 6

Holmstrom getting hurt from the hit that got Chris suspened last time was not Prongers fault, he went for the hit and instead of landing the hit and both players gliding off the boards like what usually happens, Scott N hit Holmstrom for the other side thus trapping him and Prongers momentum caused his hands to slide up an catch Holsmstrom in the head. Now this play against McAmmond was worse than that but in no way, shape or form deserves a one game suspension in THE STANLEY CUP FINALS!! If two referee's felt it didn't warrant even a two minute penalty, which I think he should have gotten a five minute major for but that's neither here nor there, then there's not need to be handing out suspensions. This is hockey, it's a rough game and people sometimes get hurt and guys sometime break the rules that's why we have the penalty box. Let the boys play.

Answer 7

The fiasco with this Pronger's 2nd incident sends the wrong message. Yes the NHL polices themselves but a deterent has to be effective, in this case they are setting a precident. If you keep doing the same thing over each incident should receive a more severe penalty.

Minor hockey (other sports also) look to the NHL for leadership. The NHL is NOT providing that leadership in punishment. What if Pronger was a Dave Semenko, or Bob Probert? Would either 2 of these former players received just a 1-game suspension? I don't think so!!

In actuality, Mr. Pronger should be assessed the same number of games that Mr. McAmmond misses -- in other words if the injured player can't play then the culprit will have to sit out also!! That relates to whatever or wherever the importance of the game.

A lesson has to be sent to those primadonas that they are not above the law. No matter if it is the 1st game of the regular season or the last game of the playoffs. Rules are rules and should be administered based on the infraction NOT where they are in the playoffs!!!

Answer 8

Yes, Pronger deserves to be suspensed but it should be for 3 games. The next offense should be 5 games and then 10 games. He should have received a match penalty automatically for the elbow to the head. That's a headshot, pure and simply. He may not have intended to hurt McAmmond but it was a blow to the head. The NHL should be giving the referees no choice but to give an automatic match for a blow to the head with anything, followed by suspensions and increasing the number of games automatically as well. This will stop the Headshots before a big star like maybe Sidney Crosby is taken out of the game, ending his career. Then it's too late fix the huge problem. The NHL needs to learn that the nature of the game is violent reactions but the referees and the NHL are the ones who have to make the players accountable for the actions, and they are the only ones who can deter the players. The NHL needs to act now. They have really missed the boat by not suspending Pronger for longer, then they would setting a real example to all the players that even a star player like Pronger is not above the rules.

Answer 9

No Pronger should have been suspended longer look at the dirty play by the ducks throughout the playoffs against Detroit, Canucks and now the Sens. And it is called playing on the edge Lmao.
The league allows certain players to get away with too many infractions whereas other players are penalized with a different set of rules. What if the player was Brad May or Chris Neil that threw the elbow? You bet your @@@ they would have got a longer suspension.
To me it seems like only the teams who do poorly financially make the good runs in the playoff plus the the wait just kills any sense of wanting to watch the playoffs. In my opinion if a team is doing poorly with the finances move them the owners that buy them have the dollars otherwise they would not own an NHL team. There is no point on leaving a team where the fans will not appreciate them.

Answer 10

deterent has to be effective, in this case they are setting a precident. If you keep doing the same thing over each incident should receive a more severe penalty.

Minor hockey (other sports also) look to the NHL for leadership. The NHL is NOT providing that leadership in punishment. What if Pronger was a Dave Semenko, or Bob Probert? Would either 2 of these former players received just a 1-game suspension? I don't think so!!

In actuality, Mr. Pronger should be assessed the same number of games that Mr. McAmmond misses -- in other words if the injured player can't play then the culprit will have to sit out also!! That relates to whatever or wherever the importance of the game.

A lesson has to be sent to those primadonas that they are not above the law. No matter if it is the 1st game of the regular season or th

Answer 11

Yes, a suspension was warranted and a longer one than was given.

Pronger's hit was a lazy, petty interference play that seemed deliberate. Other tall men in the game know where their elbows are; it seems unlikely that Pronger did not. It was not finishing a check like it was in the Holmstrom incident, it was a calculated lifting of the arm very quickly to strike fear and the head of McAmmond. It was done very nonchalantly and so casually and quickly that none of the referees were able to see anything wrong with what happened.

Given that this is a plain pattern in the career of Mr. Pronger, that he reacts petulantly when his team is losing or when he makes a dumb play like the own goal, the league should have escalated the suspension because he still doesn't get it. To his credit, he actually acted contrite this time instead of defiant.

Brian Burke did his usual effort to take the spotlight off his player and try to sow the seeds of doubt in the minds of the officials by fingering Chris Neil. The Neil missed hit on MacDonald was not technically a charge, and if MacDonald had remained standing rather than ducking, it would have been a clean hit. That said, Neil should have kept his arms down as he collided with MacDonald and could have gotten a penalty.