Listening to alot of old farts who played in the NHL pertaining to cheap shots nowadays, most of them seem to think part of it was fear. You knew that if you dished out a hit from behind or a vicious slash, there would be a big price to pay, you were going to get pummeled by someone and not down the road but right afterward. They would self police sort of speak. Beat the bloody snot bubbles out of the offender, in turn, guys would think twice before doing something stupid.
Seems to me the NHL has gone soft, instead of handing out these ridiculous inconsistent suspensions, let the players handle it themselves. I mean, you can still give them their 5-10 game suspensions but let them pay the price old school. Get rid of the instigator. I believe that if the instigator were to go, the cheap shots would go down.
Do you agree that no instigator penalties would equal less cheap shots?
2007-12-28 08:24:31 · 10 answers · asked by Bob Loblaw 7 in Sports ➔ Hockey
John-That line of thinking has so many holes it isn't funny. More than a TB goalie in fact.
Example- Alex Ovechkin hits Andre Roy from behind, you think Roy would be hurried back?
Also, by that theory, Chris Simon's last 2 suspensions totalling 55 games would be reduced to 0.
Don't even get me started on that weak spined Moore.
2007-12-28 10:19:16 · update #1
I disagree with you. The instigator rule has been around for 30 years now (October 1977) and the minor tweaking that has been made to the rule hasn't made much of a difference.
Personally, watching almost every game played for the past few years, I don't think the number of cheap hits have increased so much as they are far more scrutinized.
The Jones hit on Bergeron, or the hit on Alberts, are hits that are an everyday occurrence in the NHL. But with the new 'shot to the head' rules, more is made of it.
As much as everybody around the planet thinks that Stevens laid a clean hit on Lindros in 2000.............I guarantee you that same hit today gets 10 games.
I guess I've just seen so much, good and bad, that after a while you just think that everybody is a wimp
2007-12-28 12:26:37 · answer #1 · answered by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES!
Even when I played minor hockey this was still the code. And if we did drop the gloves were suspended for the next game as well but, if you didn't drop them and give the guy what for, the same dork would be doing what he wanted for as long as the game lasted. I made the choice quite a number of times because every so often you have to make a stand. And it isn't about the wild west mentality. It's the fact every player carries a potential weapon and you have to have some order to how it's used. Penalties are hardly a deterrent. A good pummeling however delivered the message loud and clear. The stick is for abusing the puck, not other players.
Dump the instigator already.
2007-12-28 17:37:56 · answer #2 · answered by PuckDat 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you in part.
I am not sure that simply removing the instigator call would take care of it.
I am not sure of what would, though.
I just know that what you said is pretty much spot on. That and the increased protection of pads these days have led players to slash more, and hook more, and grab more, and hit more, etc. I have seen some incredible slashes lately. Every time someone has the puck it looks like there are 5 lumberjacks trying to hack the stick in two almost.
Why not make the only thing a stick can come into contact with is the puck? Anything else is a slash.
Anyways, something needs to be done.
2007-12-28 16:49:49 · answer #3 · answered by hockeynut 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree. Let them police themselves.
Additionally, I would like to see an addition to suspensions though. If you injure another player illegally, you must sit until that player is able to return. Only then would you start serving a suspension if that was required as well. Bertucci would still be waiting for Moore to be able to skate. Instead of ending one career, he would have ended two. Pronger would have been out longer for his Stanley Cup elbows too.
Don't get me wrong, I love a good clean hit. Its that nasty stick work I can do without.
2007-12-28 18:06:07 · answer #4 · answered by John K 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Another good question would be:
Have you ever met a single person who liked the instigator rule or thought it was good for the game?
I haven't
2007-12-28 17:54:56 · answer #5 · answered by Zam 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Drop the instigator!
2007-12-28 17:40:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Definitely. The only reason why such a system is in place is because of power. Tons of democratic societies use this method, especially for "anti-crime." (Quotations are there because the current anti-crime system doesn't work....in both the US and Canada.)
2007-12-28 16:53:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
>Do you agree that no instigator penalties would equal less cheap shots?
Yes.
2007-12-28 18:43:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Old West justice always worked better!
Git-A-Rope!
2007-12-28 16:40:38 · answer #9 · answered by pricehillsaint 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree 100% all this pansy bs is just causing more problems
2007-12-28 16:28:32 · answer #10 · answered by BRAVESFAN 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋