Clarkson suspension?

[GhostofPotvin29]

I'm not 100% sure how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension.

Because if the NHL is saying that this hit is worthy of a suspension while another similar hit is not worthy of a suspension then which is the truth?  Why is one headshot a suspension and another isn't?  Personally, I'd just like consistency.

And I don't think the drunk driving comparison holds water because the NHL has access to video to view every headshot whereas if you're not caught drunk driving it's because you weren't viewed doing it.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm not 100% sure how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension.

Because if the NHL is saying that this hit is worthy of a suspension while another similar hit is not worthy of a suspension then which is the truth?  Why is one headshot a suspension and another isn't?  Personally, I'd just like consistency.

And I don't think the drunk driving comparison holds water because the NHL has access to video to view every headshot whereas if you're not caught drunk driving it's because you weren't viewed doing it.

That's fine and dandy. Good point.

It doesn't take away from the fact that it was a blatant head shot from Clarkson.

I'd like consistency too. Doesn't seem to be coming though. I still want Clarkson suspended though.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I'm not 100% sure how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension.

Because if the NHL is saying that this hit is worthy of a suspension while another similar hit is not worthy of a suspension then which is the truth?  Why is one headshot a suspension and another isn't?  Personally, I'd just like consistency.

And I don't think the drunk driving comparison holds water because the NHL has access to video to view every headshot whereas if you're not caught drunk driving it's because you weren't viewed doing it.

That's fine and dandy. Good point.

It doesn't take away from the fact that it was a blatant head shot from Clarkson.

I'd like consistency too. Doesn't seem to be coming though. I still want Clarkson suspended though.

It was a headshot, but I was simply arguing from the "how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension" perspective - you could say it's not worthy of a suspension by comparison with other recent hits that haven't resulted in suspensions.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm not 100% sure how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension.

Because if the NHL is saying that this hit is worthy of a suspension while another similar hit is not worthy of a suspension then which is the truth?  Why is one headshot a suspension and another isn't?  Personally, I'd just like consistency.

And I don't think the drunk driving comparison holds water because the NHL has access to video to view every headshot whereas if you're not caught drunk driving it's because you weren't viewed doing it.

That's fine and dandy. Good point.

It doesn't take away from the fact that it was a blatant head shot from Clarkson.

I'd like consistency too. Doesn't seem to be coming though. I still want Clarkson suspended though.

It was a headshot, but I was simply arguing from the "how anyone can say that it's not a hit that's worthy a suspension" perspective - you could say it's not worthy of a suspension by comparison with other recent hits that haven't resulted in suspensions.

See, I get what you're saying and I agree that the league isn't consistent. It just doesn't change the fact that Clarkson broke a rule that is 'suppose' to result in a suspension....

 

[2badknees]

I kind of liked Cherry's quote from the other night, where he said Shanahan should just tell the whole league that the next guy who blatantly targets the head gets a 20 game suspension, and see if that makes a difference.

These 2-4 gamers aren't a deterrent, aren't changing any attitudes and just serve to annoy fans with their inconsistency.