Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBC)   NHL show they are Cooking the books in the playoffs   (cbc.ca ) divider line
    More: Obvious, NHL, Tyson Barrie, playoffs, Vincent Lecavalier, medial collateral ligaments, Ryan McDonagh, Marc Savard, Paul Stastny  
•       •       •

1978 clicks; posted to Sports » on 24 Apr 2014 at 12:52 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



55 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-24 11:41:17 AM  
Still think it should have been balance of the playoffs, plus ten..  Would still have been less than the last suspension, but *potentially* more.

...and the 10 to start a season is a killer for getting into that season. The likely 5 will slow him down a bit, so look for another cheap shot as he tries to keep up, sometime early next season.
 
2014-04-24 12:36:49 PM  
I agree, it should have been longer.
 
2014-04-24 12:56:21 PM  
I feel like a turd for defending Cooke but the article mentioned Erik Karlsson's achilles tendon thing.  I am sorry but that was clearly unintentional.
 
2014-04-24 12:56:21 PM  

change1211: I agree, it should have been longer.


Like forever...
 
2014-04-24 12:56:29 PM  
He is a menace everywhere he goes
 
2014-04-24 12:56:45 PM  
I'm sure politics was involved in this.
 
2014-04-24 12:56:58 PM  
For crying out loud Tie Domi got more than this for the Neidermeyer cheap shot and he had nowhere near Cookes rap sheet at the time.
 
2014-04-24 01:00:32 PM  
Fark Cooke.
 
2014-04-24 01:02:41 PM  

Flappyhead: For crying out loud Tie Domi got more than this for the Neidermeyer cheap shot and he had nowhere near Cookes rap sheet at the time.


Well, it was Neidermeyer, who was killed by his own troops in Vietnam...

If you intentionally injure someone, you should be out as long as they are out plus a few games. If it is bad enough to end their career, you should be criminally prosecuted and be able to be sued for lost wages.
 
2014-04-24 01:02:43 PM  
So no Match Penalty for Cooke?
 
2014-04-24 01:05:08 PM  

sno man: Still think it should have been balance of the playoffs, plus ten.


Hits to the head and hits to the knee during the playoffs should all be "balance of the playoffs + something" with the coach unable to fill the emptied roster spot.
 
2014-04-24 01:05:34 PM  
He was only given 2 minutes in the game where it actually happened. At a minimum it should've been 5, and they should apply that extra 3 minutes to the beginning of tonight's game.

/hope 5 of his suspension games happen in the 2014-2015 season
 
2014-04-24 01:08:27 PM  

show me: Flappyhead: For crying out loud Tie Domi got more than this for the Neidermeyer cheap shot and he had nowhere near Cookes rap sheet at the time.

Well, it was Neidermeyer, who was killed by his own troops in Vietnam...

If you intentionally injure someone, you should be out as long as they are out plus a few games. If it is bad enough to end their career, you should be criminally prosecuted and be able to be sued for lost wages.


I've wondered what the effects would be if, for intent-to-injure suspensions, the injured player receives the injurer's pay for the duration of their recovery time. So even after your 7 game suspension, you're playing for someone else's savings account until they can come back.
 
2014-04-24 01:10:22 PM  

Muta: sno man: Still think it should have been balance of the playoffs, plus ten.

Hits to the head and hits to the knee during the playoffs should all be "balance of the playoffs + something" with the coach unable to fill the emptied roster spot.


Nice add.  Now we just need to get you a job at the NHL.
 
2014-04-24 01:12:30 PM  
He should be just done. Tossed from the league, and never allowed back.
 
2014-04-24 01:12:39 PM  
Guys like Avery, who never hurt anyone, get run out of the league, and a guy running around damaging peoples careers get to play again in a week.

Avery got SIX GAMES because he said something that wasnt very nice, after never being suspended before (or since). Cooke tries to ends players careers (repeatedly) and gets basically the same thing.
 
2014-04-24 01:14:50 PM  
Ok, I'll be that guy and say that you would put a stop to nonsense like this far more effectively by getting rid of the instigator rule and allowing a little "frontier justice" like in days of yore. I bet Matt Cooke would think twice about doing crap like this if he knew the next shift he had after his 2 minutes in the box, all 5 guys from the opposing team were going to pummel the shiat out of him.
 
2014-04-24 01:16:20 PM  
Seeing as the league won't protect it's players by suspending Cooke for life, perhaps the NHLPA should just stop accepting his membership checks for the good of the rest of their membership.
 
2014-04-24 01:22:14 PM  

Dick Gozinya: Ok, I'll be that guy and say that you would put a stop to nonsense like this far more effectively by getting rid of the instigator rule and allowing a little "frontier justice" like in days of yore. I bet Matt Cooke would think twice about doing crap like this if he knew the next shift he had after his 2 minutes in the box, all 5 guys from the opposing team were going to pummel the shiat out of him.


Everybody knows this to be true.  Nobody's going to do a thing about it because it makes hockey look barbaric.  The layman doesn't understand that the game can sometimes reach levels of violence that exceed mere fights.
 
2014-04-24 01:23:04 PM  

LemSkroob: Guys like Avery, who never hurt anyone, get run out of the league, and a guy running around damaging peoples careers get to play again in a week.


Avery got run out of the NHL because he sucked.
 
2014-04-24 01:24:29 PM  
jesus h christmas.

The NHL showshow  it is
 
2014-04-24 01:29:41 PM  
But, but, he's a good penalty killer! Active in the community!
 
2014-04-24 01:38:01 PM  
Give him a Lucic, only have to pay a fine it'll be worth it.
 
2014-04-24 01:41:01 PM  

Flappyhead: Avery got run out of the NHL because he sucked


He didn't suck as much as he just wasn't worth what he wanted and was a polarizing personality.  There are worse players than him in the league.

I was hopeful that Cooke could turn it around.  It really felt like he had actually made a change in his style of play, but this was nasty.
 
2014-04-24 01:45:36 PM  
Well, he got the 2nd-longest suspension in history for a kneeing incident, so let's calm down a bit.

I would have been fine with 4-6 or 8-10 or more if they wanted to really use the Cooke card, even though current CBA says he's technically clean.

My point all along has been the inconsistency, as there have been chargings and boardings not even given a 2-min penalty on-ice.

I've posted this in other threads, but why does Bickell's horrible knee-to-knee get 0 games?
 
2014-04-24 01:49:55 PM  

GavinTheAlmighty: I was hopeful that Cooke could turn it around. It really felt like he had actually made a change in his style of play, but this was nasty.


Worst case scenario: he truly is a vile piece of sh*t with nary a concern for the well-being of opponents on the ice.

Best case scenario: a plucky try-hard who, despite all his experience AND fines and suspensions for previous behavior, is still really, really clumsy with the placement of his knees, elbows, etc even when compared to other assholes in the league. But by gosh he means well. Just super clumsy.

Even if you strain to take the most positive rosy possible outlook, he's not really a sympathetic figure because one's intentions no longer matter when they keep f*cking up in ways that leave others around them broken.
 
2014-04-24 01:52:04 PM  

flynn80: Give him a Lucic, only have to pay a fine it'll be worth it.


i36.photobucket.com

i36.photobucket.com
 
2014-04-24 02:02:42 PM  

a4dzac: Well, he got the 2nd-longest suspension in history for a kneeing incident, so let's calm down a bit.

I would have been fine with 4-6 or 8-10 or more if they wanted to really use the Cooke card, even though current CBA says he's technically clean.

My point all along has been the inconsistency, as there have been chargings and boardings not even given a 2-min penalty on-ice.

I've posted this in other threads, but why does Bickell's horrible knee-to-knee get 0 games?


Probably because the plays are only similar in that they involve knees.  Bickell makes glancing contact with Sobotka's body before the legs connect.  If Sobotka doesn't try to dodge it, the majority of the impact is above the waist.  Yes, Bickell's approach was reckless and thus warranted a penalty, but he lead with the shoulder.   On the other hand, Cooke makes no upper body contact, and was in no position to do so - his hit was 100% entirely knee on knee and could have been nothing else.
 
2014-04-24 02:23:28 PM  

TJWitz: Probably because the plays are only similar in that they involve knees.


Please, glancing contact my ass.  The intent is exactly the same.

Sobotka luckily avoided injury, Bickell isn't Cooke, and Seabrook's idiocy overshadowed it all anyways.

I just feel bad for Barrie.
 
2014-04-24 02:29:46 PM  
I'd sue the league for not doing enough to protect the players. The guy goes out and takes people's knees out...for fun.

The league should have axed Cooke long ago.
 
2014-04-24 02:42:54 PM  

Muta: I feel like a turd for defending Cooke but the article mentioned Erik Karlsson's achilles tendon thing.  I am sorry but that was clearly unintentional.


When I saw that hit I was like "yeah but it's Cooke, how can you ever give him the benefit of the doubt?".  After this one, I think it should have been balance of the playoffs and 10 games next year and if he ever does it again ban him from the league.  The pattern of him going after people to hurt them (and succeeding) has too much evidence to ignore.  I don't mind the tough guys or the on the edge guys, in fact I like the physical players and the hitting within reason, but goons who intentionally try to hurt people can't be allowed to get away with it.  After the Savard hit really anything he did probably should put him out of the league.
 
2014-04-24 03:11:07 PM  

a4dzac: TJWitz: Probably because the plays are only similar in that they involve knees.

Please, glancing contact my ass.  The intent is exactly the same.

Sobotka luckily avoided injury, Bickell isn't Cooke, and Seabrook's idiocy overshadowed it all anyways.

I just feel bad for Barrie.


Bickell makes contact with Sobotka above the waist, prior to the knees hitting - go watch the replay again if you have to.  It's definitely a reckless hit and worth at least a minor penalty, possibly 5 and a game.   However, Cooke is in no position to make any upper body contact with Barrie, and doesn't.  His knee is extended the entire time and he leads with it - Bickell's knee is out but he leads with the shoulder, still making contact despite Sobotka's evasion.  If you want to judge intent on some other criteria, feel free, but that's what the league is looking at.

Here, I'll provide you a direct link which explains the differences directly from the NHL:  http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=995&id=464955&navid=DL | NHL|Microsite-PlayerSafety
Several nasty knees in there that are definitely penalties but not worthy of a suspension, very similar to the Bickell hit.
 
2014-04-24 03:12:14 PM  
At this rate, they'll end up removing body-checking from the game to prevent this sort of thing.  As a hockey player myself, the game can definitely be played without body-checks, but as many will attest, it changes the game a fair amount.

/ Or put players on rotating bases that slide in specific channels along the length of the ice.
// TV timeout when the puck gets stuck behind the net.
 
2014-04-24 03:23:32 PM  

flynn80: Give him a Lucic


I LOVE that this is a thing now!

i.imgur.com
 
2014-04-24 03:49:41 PM  

astro716: I've wondered what the effects would be if, for intent-to-injure suspensions, the injured player receives the injurer's pay for the duration of their recovery time. So even after your 7 game suspension, you're playing for someone else's savings account until they can come back.


show me: If you intentionally injure someone, you should be out as long as they are out plus a few games. If it is bad enough to end their career, you should be criminally prosecuted and be able to be sued for lost wages.


This gets brought up a lot, and is bad for several reasons.  Your hearts and heads are in the right spot, but the unintended side effects of this is extremely damning for ways that can be best explained in a simple example:

Team A calls up a marginal AHL player.  He is a "gritty" player that is known more for his big hits, agitation, and pugilism rather than his scoring, speed, hands, or hockey sense.  He is one that has little to no chance of ever truly cracking an NHL roster on any permanent basis (Every team** has several of them in their farm systems to fill out the rosters).  They tell him, "Go after our division rival's super star.  If you hurt him, fantastic, you've done your job.  We'll cover the fine (happens more often than you think).  If he flips out (or defends himself), go down.  We'll get you diagnosed with a concussion or mysterious upper/lower body injury.  You'll still get paid, hell, you'll get the superstar's salary as a raise.  You'll still get to skate and practice with the team, but we'll declare you "not game ready".  This will force our rivals to play without their top skill regardless.

The results of that potential rule is even MORE goonage and injury, not less.  It's one those rules that means well, but suffers from "The Law of Unintended Consequences".

**Offer not valid for the Sabres, who has them in the NHL.  I'm looking at you, John Scott.  You don't think for a moment that if this rule was in place that when Kessel slashed him off the face-off that he would've went down clutching his knee in a way that only Nancy Kerrigan could appreciate in order to keep Kessel out for 3 months?
 
2014-04-24 04:52:46 PM  

sno man: Muta: sno man: Still think it should have been balance of the playoffs, plus ten.

Hits to the head and hits to the knee during the playoffs should all be "balance of the playoffs + something" with the coach unable to fill the emptied roster spot.

Nice add.  Now we just need to get you a job at the NHL.


First, we need to greenlight Bettman getting iced.
 
2014-04-24 04:53:50 PM  

flynn80: Give him a Lucic, only have to pay a fine it'll be worth it.


Would've been better if Lucic fought him, but he's in the Western Conference so...
 
2014-04-24 05:02:47 PM  
Throw Cookie in a small dark room containing nothing but an assortment of eating utensils and a starving John Scott on PCP.
And then keep the door locked for about a week.

/Two men enter, slightly heavier man leaves
 
2014-04-24 05:23:26 PM  
abmoraz:

The results of that potential rule is even MORE goonage and injury, not less.  It's one those rules that means well, but suffers from "The Law of Unintended Consequences".

Wise post is wise.

The only way to do this is to hit the organizations who employ people who do this.  My preferred solution is something along these lines (asterisks are for my notes, below):

Following a player's fourth suspension* during the course of their career, (only suspensions which cause 2+ man-games lost to injury, or are ruled by the Department of Player Safety as an "intent to injure" - whether or not an injury occurred - will apply)**, the NHL reserves the right to fine the organization employing the player an amount of not more than twice the player's annual salary***.  This fine will reduce the organizations salary cap by a corresponding amount during the following season.

*I allow three suspensions because, frankly, people honestly and legitimately do make mistakes.  This allows for players to make those mistakes and learn from them (I disagree that many of the injuries which happen as a result of a "bang-bang" play are intentional).  Four such suspensions show a clear pattern of behavior.

**Clarification that we're talking about people who are recklessly (or intentionally) causing injury.  So somebody who gets suspended for talking some harmless smack about a player's ex-girlfriend isn't running afoul of this rule.

***This is a fine to an organization, not a player, coach (etc).  As in the New Jersey Devils/Kovy situation, it falls outside the bounds of the CBA.  The reason it's not lower is that fining a team $250k for the actions of a plug doesn't really do a lot to dissuade it.  While $500k isn't a whole lot better, most players who keep doing this stuff tend to be outside of an entry-level contract, which means you're really talking about $1.5-3 million in salary.  Which, in turn, means a potential fine of $3-6 million.  Teams WILL notice that sort of money.

****And here's what makes teams stop employing these people.  Cooke makes $2.5 million.  Reducing a team's salary cap the next season by that sort of amount is absolutely crippling for a LOT of teams.  NHL implements this, players like Cooke are gone inside of a year (I'd allow a single additional compliance buyout for teams who wish to divest themselves of such players).  Nobody but NOBODY wants to get penalized like this.
 
2014-04-24 05:44:44 PM  

FightDirector: abmoraz:

The results of that potential rule is even MORE goonage and injury, not less.  It's one those rules that means well, but suffers from "The Law of Unintended Consequences".

Wise post is wise.

The only way to do this is to hit the organizations who employ people who do this.  My preferred solution is something along these lines (asterisks are for my notes, below):

Following a player's fourth suspension* during the course of their career, (only suspensions which cause 2+ man-games lost to injury, or are ruled by the Department of Player Safety as an "intent to injure" - whether or not an injury occurred - will apply)**, the NHL reserves the right to fine the organization employing the player an amount of not more than twice the player's annual salary***.  This fine will reduce the organizations salary cap by a corresponding amount during the following season.

*I allow three suspensions because, frankly, people honestly and legitimately do make mistakes.  This allows for players to make those mistakes and learn from them (I disagree that many of the injuries which happen as a result of a "bang-bang" play are intentional).  Four such suspensions show a clear pattern of behavior.

**Clarification that we're talking about people who are recklessly (or intentionally) causing injury.  So somebody who gets suspended for talking some harmless smack about a player's ex-girlfriend isn't running afoul of this rule.

***This is a fine to an organization, not a player, coach (etc).  As in the New Jersey Devils/Kovy situation, it falls outside the bounds of the CBA.  The reason it's not lower is that fining a team $250k for the actions of a plug doesn't really do a lot to dissuade it.  While $500k isn't a whole lot better, most players who keep doing this stuff tend to be outside of an entry-level contract, which means you're really talking about $1.5-3 million in salary.  Which, in turn, means a potential fine of $3-6 million.  Teams WILL notice that sort of money.

* ...


Not to poke holes in your attempt at a rule, but here is how I would take advantage of such a ruling. Depends if the 4 suspensions are within a single team or with all of the teams.

4 suspensions within a team: Trade the guy off after the 3rd infraction, even going as far as setting up a trade in advance with another GM for another goon.

4 suspension total: After the 2nd infraction, of which you asked the guy to do, you trade him to a team you A) might encounter in the series, or B) might encounter a team that you will encounter in the series. The guy now is a mole in the other team, biding his time. What if when he gets the 3rd they bench him? You guarantee his salary and rehire him later, as a coach for goons, or a good NHL salary in the AHL. If they dont bench him forever, then he gets the 4th and you have won the game.

See? There is always a way to play the system.
 
2014-04-24 05:55:03 PM  

Lonestar: See? There is always a way to play the system.


OK, counterpoint:

As soon as an player makes an on-ice play that could be hypothetically judged by the Department of Player Safety as having a non-zero chance to cause injury, or actually causes an on-ice injury in any fashion, the player, the person who hired him, and the person(s) responsible for operations the team both when the player was hired and when the player committed the action or potential action, (irrespective of their current team allegiance or employment) will be shot twice in the back of the head, and their families billed for the bullets.


/the POINT was, you have to hit teams in their wallets and their ability to field a team if you don't want these people to be part of the league. Stop being deliberately obtuse.
//yes, I'm aware that by this rule, every hockey player ever would be shot.  Aside from that, though, it's pretty loophole-less aside from the whole "actually destroys the sport", thing.
///this was Bettman's plan all along
 
2014-04-24 06:07:10 PM  
And yet Lucic still gets to play.  League is a joke.  Cooke's crime is that he doesn't play for Boston.  If he did this would be a token minumum fine at worst.
 
2014-04-24 06:36:24 PM  

Warlordtrooper: And yet Lucic still gets to play.  League is a joke.  Cooke's crime is that he doesn't play for Boston.  If he did this would be a token minumum fine at worst.


You can play hockey with a sore testicle. You can't play hockey with a torn MCL. Apples and farking aircraft carriers, buddy.
 
2014-04-24 06:43:10 PM  

Warlordtrooper: And yet Lucic still gets to play.  League is a joke.  Cooke's crime is that he doesn't play for Boston.  If he did this would be a token minumum fine at worst.


Really? Are you that stupid? Whose career has Lucic ended? A shot to the nuts is a cheap shot. Cooke tries to maim.
 
2014-04-24 06:45:13 PM  

soopey: Warlordtrooper: And yet Lucic still gets to play.  League is a joke.  Cooke's crime is that he doesn't play for Boston.  If he did this would be a token minumum fine at worst.

You can play hockey with a sore testicle. You can't play hockey with a torn MCL. Apples and farking aircraft carriers, buddy.


Intent to injure.  End of story.
 
2014-04-24 06:49:38 PM  

Dick Gozinya: Ok, I'll be that guy and say that you would put a stop to nonsense like this far more effectively by getting rid of the instigator rule and allowing a little "frontier justice" like in days of yore. I bet Matt Cooke would think twice about doing crap like this if he knew the next shift he had after his 2 minutes in the box, all 5 guys from the opposing team were going to pummel the shiat out of him.


I dislike the instigator penalty as much as the next guy but removing it will just swap one problem for another.  Every 4th liner will be grabbing a star player every shift without it.  Think the optics and whining are bad now?  Wait until a 4th liner grabs a star player, feeds him fists, and it doesn't result in a power play.

They need to just throw the book at offenders under the current ruleset.  They won't but removing instigator penalties won't do anything but make it worse.
 
2014-04-24 06:51:44 PM  

Flappyhead: soopey: Warlordtrooper: And yet Lucic still gets to play.  League is a joke.  Cooke's crime is that he doesn't play for Boston.  If he did this would be a token minumum fine at worst.

You can play hockey with a sore testicle. You can't play hockey with a torn MCL. Apples and farking aircraft carriers, buddy.

Intent to injure.  End of story.


Just curious - how long would you suspend Lucic for that then?
 
2014-04-24 07:01:33 PM  

Hastor: Flappyhead: soopey: Warlordtrooper: And yet Lucic still gets to play.  League is a joke.  Cooke's crime is that he doesn't play for Boston.  If he did this would be a token minumum fine at worst.

You can play hockey with a sore testicle. You can't play hockey with a torn MCL. Apples and farking aircraft carriers, buddy.

Intent to injure.  End of story.

Just curious - how long would you suspend Lucic for that then?


Considering his recent history I'd go with 4-5 games.  The NHL would never do that, of course, which is the problem.  You want to cut back on this kind of crap you drop the hammer hard the first time and never let up.  Sooner or later guys either get the message or GMs get sick of losing cap space to them.
 
2014-04-24 07:31:04 PM  
WHAR TONIGHT'S THREAD WHAR????
 
2014-04-24 07:32:06 PM  
How much damage can the league let one guy do? Cooke's a wrecking ball, even compared to hockey from 20+ years ago when players got away with more. There's playing with an edge, and there's playing dirty. Or dumb, if you want to believe Cooke doesn't mean to injure so many guys.  Whether he's maiming players on purpose or just has no control over his movements, he's a menace that should be a pariah in the NHL.

Here's hoping he's fired up the Avs. Sucks to lose Barrie, but Colorado has overcome a lot this season to shock everyone. And, sure, a part of me is hoping that McLeod runs Brodin, but that part is small and petty, mostly pushed by reading homer Wild fans defend a guy like Cooke simply for wearing a sweater they respond favorably to. I really don't want to see things get stupid. I just want the Wild to lose and for Cooke to find some other line of work.
 
Displayed 50 of 55 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report