Clarkson suspension?

[Rebel_1812]

You can't keep a good Clarkson down for long.

 

[Kin]

I take it you never watched the Boston game then.

No, the Boston game proves the point. If you think the  Seidenberg hit deserved a suspension and the Clarkson one did as well then the difference is attributable to both players' history which the league says is a factor. I'm sorry if you don't like that being true but it is, they say it is and they act accordingly.

Sorry Nik got to disagree, Chara hit on Pacioretty was the dirtiest thing I have seen in hockey since McSorely stick to Barser's head. Lucic running Miller over should of been five games aleast. I cant remember another team getting away with awful crap up until this week with Thorton. Nash should of got 5 games last year and the list goes not. Yes Clarkson deserved a fine, if that is all Shenn got for a crosscheck to the face.

So...what do you disagree with? It doesn't seem like you're disputing anything I said.

 

[Bates]

I disagree with you that history is not supposed to be part of decision to have a hearing. It is only supposed to be factor in length of suspension. Similar incidents are supposed to be viewed the same. Length of suspension can increase with history.

 

[Kin]

You also don't get an assault charge increased because you have a previous DUI.

Except you absolutely can and the problem with the analogy there anyways is that it's backwards. Clarkson's earlier offense is considered to be a very serious one. One that mandates a 10 game suspension in a league where you have to damn near kill someone to get 5 games.

So if you're on a probation of sorts for a very serious offense and you commit a minor one you can and will be treated very harshly. That's what happened here. You can disagree with it all you want but the NHL says pretty plainly that they do business like that.

 

[Bender]

You also don't get an assault charge increased because you have a previous DUI.

No, but it does have an impact on the severity of your sentence.

Don't some states have the three strikes you're out rule? Obviously your history and reputation speak volumes in specific jurisdictions.

 

[Bates]

Clarkson's previous suspension was a long one because the rule was made to address a very dangerous infraction when many players would jump on the ice and fight causing a dangerous situation for players and officials. It was written a little too simple and Clarkson paid the price even though what he did was no where near what this rule was created to cure. The NHL killed a mosquito with a sledgehammer when he was suspended for 10 games.

You also don't get an assault charge increased because you have a previous DUI.

Except you absolutely can and the problem with the analogy there anyways is that it's backwards. Clarkson's earlier offense is considered to be a very serious one. One that mandates a 10 game suspension in a league where you have to damn near kill someone to get 5 games.

So if you're on a probation of sorts for a very serious offense and you commit a minor one you can and will be treated very harshly. That's what happened here. You can disagree with it all you want but the NHL says pretty plainly that they do business like that.

 

[Kin]

Clarkson's previous suspension was a long one because the rule was made to address a very dangerous infraction when many players would jump on the ice and fight causing a dangerous situation for players and officials. It was written a little too simple and Clarkson paid the price even though what he did was no where near what this rule was created to cure. The NHL killed a mosquito with a sledgehammer when he was suspended for 10 games.

Yeah, you seem to be under the impression that we're talking about the wisdom or efficacy of the NHL's system of discipline. We're not. I'm saying that their actions here are consistent with their stated rationales.

Coming off the bench could be written in another way but clearly they keep it as it is because they think it's a serious issue which, again, is not an argument for anything other than their clear aims and reasons for suspending players.

I'm no mind reader or anything but I'm pretty sure that when a player gets suspended the way Clarkson did the league will tell them they're going to be under increased scrutiny. Again, you can not like that or think that's unfair but that should be the discussion, not that there's no possible explanation aside from an anti-Toronto, anti-Canadian, pro-Boston or, I don't know, pro-Freemason conspiracy dictating these things.

 

[bakeapples]

You can't keep a good Clarkson down for long.

You talking about Kelly Clarkson?

 

[bustaheims]

You can't keep a good Clarkson down for long.

So, when do the Leafs acquire this "good Clarkson?"

 

[ZBBM]

4th line when he comes back?  Honestly, if they play like this against PIT it will be hard to break up that 3rd line.

 

[AvroArrow]

4th line when he comes back?  Honestly, if they play like this against PIT it will be hard to break up that 3rd line.

Pretty much what I said in the GDT - don't disrupt these lines.

 

[hockeyfan1]

4th line when he comes back?  Honestly, if they play like this against PIT it will be hard to break up that 3rd line.

Pretty much what I said in the GDT - don't disrupt these lines.

Fax Carlyle. 

 

[Arn]

As I also said in the GDT, of our three missing forwards really I feel we only miss Bolland. Slide him on to the third line and McClement down to the 4th, mcclaren out of the line up and you have

JVR Kadri Kessel
Raymond Holland Lupul
D'Amigo Bolland Kulemin
Smith McClement Clarkson

And Bozak somewhere I guess but I prefer Smith. But those three top lines I like, especially if Kulemin is warming up...

 

[hockeyfan1]

As I also said in the GDT, of our three missing forwards really I feel we only miss Bolland. Slide him on to the third line and McClement down to the 4th, mcclaren out of the line up and you have

JVR Kadri Kessel
Raymond Holland Lupul
D'Amigo Bolland Kulemin
Smith McClement Clarkson

And Bozak somewhere I guess but I prefer Smith. But those three top lines I like, especially if Kulemin is warming up...

Not bad actually.  In this manner, Clarkson can prove more useful, or at least be put to better use.  Since the Leafs have him, might as well figure out a line to place him on & with.

So far, I'm still disappointed in what I've seen in Clarkson.  Hopefully in this way, he can find his niche.

 

[Bullfrog]

As I also said in the GDT, of our three missing forwards really I feel we only miss Bolland. Slide him on to the third line and McClement down to the 4th, mcclaren out of the line up and you have

JVR Kadri Kessel
Raymond Holland Lupul
D'Amigo Bolland Kulemin
Smith McClement Clarkson

And Bozak somewhere I guess but I prefer Smith. But those three top lines I like, especially if Kulemin is warming up...

Frustrating thing for me is that you know as soon as Bozak is back, he's on the 1st line and Kadri is back to bouncing between the other lines.

 

[nutman]

As I also said in the GDT, of our three missing forwards really I feel we only miss Bolland. Slide him on to the third line and McClement down to the 4th, mcclaren out of the line up and you have

JVR Kadri Kessel
Raymond Holland Lupul
D'Amigo Bolland Kulemin
Smith McClement Clarkson

And Bozak somewhere I guess but I prefer Smith. But those three top lines I like, especially if Kulemin is warming up...

Frustrating thing for me is that you know as soon as Bozak is back, he's on the 1st line and Kadri is back to bouncing between the other lines.

My big question is what happens if the Lupul line keeps rolling and, the sick start to return.

 

[Highlander]

Nice problem to have, I think Bolland is still a long way away and Bozak probably mid Jan with that kind of injury

 

[Arn]

The thing with lines like that is you don't have to anoint them 1,2,3,4 etc. Obviously your top line is the Kessel one but on any given night any of the other three can step up. Last night it was Raymond, Holland, Lupul. Tuesday it could be D'Amigo McClement Kulemin so you give them some of the Lupul line's ice time. The 4th line can easily play 10-12 minutes as we'll.

Maybe it makes too much sense.

 

[L K]

You can't keep a good Clarkson down for long.

So, when do the Leafs acquire this "good Clarkson?"

During the Maple Leafs Christmas special.  The one where we learn that the true spirit of Clarkson was within us all along.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm not 100% sure how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension. I mean, we can count all the ones the NHL has missed but once again(as in the Phaneuf suspension), it doesn't lessen Clarkson's guilt. And if we're going to use examples in real law situations, how often do you think the police are going to let me off for a DUI because they missed the two other guys that got drunk at the bar and drove home and didn't get caught?

He targeted the head of an unsuspecting player. It was play that shouldn't of happened and it had no need to happen. It in no way effected the game. It was a cheapshot. Add to it, the Leafs were getting their butts kicked and Clarkson comes off like a spoiled 2 year old.