Keefe and Quinney Bans
- Thread starter Block 2 Noise Boys
- Start date
Something doesn't balance either side of the equals sign here.
Much of it once again highlights the lack of support of the officiating of games from the League as a whole.
There are no stripeys out there that want players hurt or ignore safety issues. There just aren't. However in this case here is what puzzles me:
Assuming nobody saw the incident (explaining the lack of a whistle) then using their reports as part of the decision process is pointless.
If the mentioned scoring chance were a part of the thinking, then that would indicate the incident WAS seen, and therefore someone should be asking why the hell a game wasn't stopped for a motionless player.
In the absence of either of the above being true or of any use, then video was used. If that is the case then a Shanahan style release of the video and decision in detail would protect Hanson's integrity and decision, and prove conclusively what happened.
The lack of concrete evidence this decision suggests means that people will assume 'best guess' technology was used, and the ensuing criticism that we now see will run and run.
We will never be seen as balanced and fair in our views of this process in Cardiff as a combination of shouting about getting screwed (which has happened) and having #26 play for us for years means we have lost our voice.
Doesn't mean a decision, or it's presentation, can't be totally shonky. I feel for the good folk who have to polish this turd for public consumption.
As for non-contact with the head causing a knockout or concussion? That can easily happen. A severe contact with the upper torso (and I am NOT saying that's what this was) can result in sufficient whiplash to cause the brain to strike the inside of the skull and cause a blackout and concussion.
Most concussions are said to occur without contact to the head, and a jarring is sufficient to lose consciousness and cause concussion.
Again - not saying there was no contact to the head and for sure it was a filthy hit on a fellow pro, but head trauma and head impact are far from mutually exclusive.
Much of it once again highlights the lack of support of the officiating of games from the League as a whole.
There are no stripeys out there that want players hurt or ignore safety issues. There just aren't. However in this case here is what puzzles me:
Assuming nobody saw the incident (explaining the lack of a whistle) then using their reports as part of the decision process is pointless.
If the mentioned scoring chance were a part of the thinking, then that would indicate the incident WAS seen, and therefore someone should be asking why the hell a game wasn't stopped for a motionless player.
In the absence of either of the above being true or of any use, then video was used. If that is the case then a Shanahan style release of the video and decision in detail would protect Hanson's integrity and decision, and prove conclusively what happened.
The lack of concrete evidence this decision suggests means that people will assume 'best guess' technology was used, and the ensuing criticism that we now see will run and run.
We will never be seen as balanced and fair in our views of this process in Cardiff as a combination of shouting about getting screwed (which has happened) and having #26 play for us for years means we have lost our voice.
Doesn't mean a decision, or it's presentation, can't be totally shonky. I feel for the good folk who have to polish this turd for public consumption.
As for non-contact with the head causing a knockout or concussion? That can easily happen. A severe contact with the upper torso (and I am NOT saying that's what this was) can result in sufficient whiplash to cause the brain to strike the inside of the skull and cause a blackout and concussion.
Most concussions are said to occur without contact to the head, and a jarring is sufficient to lose consciousness and cause concussion.
Again - not saying there was no contact to the head and for sure it was a filthy hit on a fellow pro, but head trauma and head impact are far from mutually exclusive.
Thread starter
#26
With the previous tough stance that Hanson alleges will be in force now that he is in charge of overall discipline, it is incomprehensible that an "alleged deliberate" collision with an official can be regarded as warrants a 6 game ban (1st offence of this nature) and yet an "Avoidable blind side "charge" resulting in an injury" can only warrant 4 games.
I know I have Devil tinted spectacles, but even casting those aside, there is simply no reason or "above-board" justification that the former offence should be regarded and punished more severely than the latter. Not even Alaistair Campbell could spin that interpretation.
The adjudication simply beggars belief and adds yet more substance to the view that not all clubs are treated the same.
I know I have Devil tinted spectacles, but even casting those aside, there is simply no reason or "above-board" justification that the former offence should be regarded and punished more severely than the latter. Not even Alaistair Campbell could spin that interpretation.
The adjudication simply beggars belief and adds yet more substance to the view that not all clubs are treated the same.
Well that is exactly what I thought would happen, no balls at all.
Keefe's elbow clearly made contact with conboy's head, knocked him out before he hit the ice and on the video Keefe's elbow was still going up following through after making contact after a blind side hit. It was a deliberate attempt to injure / end a players career, Keefe knows what he was doing but he is safe playing for Belfast.
This for the elite league says we are stamping out checks to the head etc. but if you play for a big arena team you can go after a player with a deliberate attempt to injure and we'll just slap your wrists so don't worry.
I used to really enjoy watching hockey but it has been a chore for the last number of years thanks to officiating and unfair judgments between top and lower teams. Well this has made up my mind, as another poster mentioned this is my last season watching the Disney league.
I hope Conboy is ok and I'm sorry as a league we won't protect players outside of the top 3 teams. Hopefully he'll make a full recovery. Also feel sorry for Cardiff and the other lower teams who are constantly discriminated against but that is the Elite league in a nutshell.
Congratulations you've managed to turn a hockey mad fan into someone who detests the sport after watching elite league hockey. Nobody will ever take this league seriously while it is run by muppets.
Keefe's elbow clearly made contact with conboy's head, knocked him out before he hit the ice and on the video Keefe's elbow was still going up following through after making contact after a blind side hit. It was a deliberate attempt to injure / end a players career, Keefe knows what he was doing but he is safe playing for Belfast.
This for the elite league says we are stamping out checks to the head etc. but if you play for a big arena team you can go after a player with a deliberate attempt to injure and we'll just slap your wrists so don't worry.
I used to really enjoy watching hockey but it has been a chore for the last number of years thanks to officiating and unfair judgments between top and lower teams. Well this has made up my mind, as another poster mentioned this is my last season watching the Disney league.
I hope Conboy is ok and I'm sorry as a league we won't protect players outside of the top 3 teams. Hopefully he'll make a full recovery. Also feel sorry for Cardiff and the other lower teams who are constantly discriminated against but that is the Elite league in a nutshell.
Congratulations you've managed to turn a hockey mad fan into someone who detests the sport after watching elite league hockey. Nobody will ever take this league seriously while it is run by muppets.
I don't understand this whole "this is a charge, so a first offence". If you look at the Shan-a-ban videos the "having form" is for the kind of hit, not the exact penalty called.
So a blind side charge resulting in an injury would be considered form after a recent "checking to the head" ban.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
So a blind side charge resulting in an injury would be considered form after a recent "checking to the head" ban.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Not sure why you quoted me specifically as I agree with you and my post criticises the decision, how it was arrived at and how it has been delivered.
Most topics here lately have become increasingly binary - folk getting labelled as 100% pro or con something.
However I think we are all in agreement that this decision is not reflective of either what is fair and proper or what is consistent with the severity of previous bans this season for other offences. But we can debate and criticise that without it needing to be vitriolic or histrionic (not saying you haven't been doing that) - some of the wording I have seen on Twitter has been, erm, 'decorative' regarding the decision.
There are two glaring errors in this decision for me:
1) Keefe's previous form for dirty hits has been ignored. Whether this is or is not viewed as a hit to the head it is late, blind and dangerous. That should mean more games added as his last ban for a dangerous hit was only as recent as 21st September.
2) THe original ban Keefe received was arguably way too soft. He was assessed a 2+10 checking to the head penalty, it was reviewed and the MINIMUM tariff of 3 games was assessed. The only reason we weren't going bananas then is it was against Dundee of course. Still wrong though.
So what Moray has effectively said here is this:
A Hit to the head warrants less games (3) than a late body check (4).
The likelihood of any repeat offender not wearing #23 or #26 for Cardiff having a significantly higher ban for a dirty hit less than one month after his last one is pretty low.
I do wonder if the same legal team Doug used to use to threaten the League when they were looking at giant's players (or opponents) bans ihas been inherited by Adey. And sadly no, I am not making that last part up
WD
Most topics here lately have become increasingly binary - folk getting labelled as 100% pro or con something.
However I think we are all in agreement that this decision is not reflective of either what is fair and proper or what is consistent with the severity of previous bans this season for other offences. But we can debate and criticise that without it needing to be vitriolic or histrionic (not saying you haven't been doing that) - some of the wording I have seen on Twitter has been, erm, 'decorative' regarding the decision.
There are two glaring errors in this decision for me:
1) Keefe's previous form for dirty hits has been ignored. Whether this is or is not viewed as a hit to the head it is late, blind and dangerous. That should mean more games added as his last ban for a dangerous hit was only as recent as 21st September.
2) THe original ban Keefe received was arguably way too soft. He was assessed a 2+10 checking to the head penalty, it was reviewed and the MINIMUM tariff of 3 games was assessed. The only reason we weren't going bananas then is it was against Dundee of course. Still wrong though.
So what Moray has effectively said here is this:
A Hit to the head warrants less games (3) than a late body check (4).
The likelihood of any repeat offender not wearing #23 or #26 for Cardiff having a significantly higher ban for a dirty hit less than one month after his last one is pretty low.
I do wonder if the same legal team Doug used to use to threaten the League when they were looking at giant's players (or opponents) bans ihas been inherited by Adey. And sadly no, I am not making that last part up
WD
Exactly my point also.
Keefe - whether our Belfast based friends agree or not (and they loved to have a go at Maxi about this) - is now an established late and dirty hitter with little regard for his fellow pros.
If he does something even remotely similar this year, anything less than well into double figures will make those in Cardiff yelling the loudest look prophetic, not biased.
Keefe - whether our Belfast based friends agree or not (and they loved to have a go at Maxi about this) - is now an established late and dirty hitter with little regard for his fellow pros.
If he does something even remotely similar this year, anything less than well into double figures will make those in Cardiff yelling the loudest look prophetic, not biased.
I am much more of a fan of natural justice and am personally pleased that first game back is in his barn against the Devils. Chance for Conboy to get ready for a drop the gloves retribution at puck drop for me.
This has been brewing for a while and Keefe took his chance to show his true colours by taking Conboy out cheaply on the blindside, no credit for doing that. Just hope that he can now keep himself out of trouble and avoid any bans and get himself fit for the double header.
Really like what Brent said about Quinney's ban "Rupert responded after the Adam Keefe hit on Andrew Conboy. It's simple, if a player takes liberties with one of our players in that manner they need to be prepared for another Cardiff Devils player to answer the call. We are a team and Rupert responded on behalf of a teammate and we have no issue with that action. We look forward to having Rupes back in our line-up on Sunday night v Coventry in the BBT."
So really happy that first game back will be against Devils, no chance for this to die down.
This has been brewing for a while and Keefe took his chance to show his true colours by taking Conboy out cheaply on the blindside, no credit for doing that. Just hope that he can now keep himself out of trouble and avoid any bans and get himself fit for the double header.
Really like what Brent said about Quinney's ban "Rupert responded after the Adam Keefe hit on Andrew Conboy. It's simple, if a player takes liberties with one of our players in that manner they need to be prepared for another Cardiff Devils player to answer the call. We are a team and Rupert responded on behalf of a teammate and we have no issue with that action. We look forward to having Rupes back in our line-up on Sunday night v Coventry in the BBT."
So really happy that first game back will be against Devils, no chance for this to die down.
Doesn't have to, but will yes. The split of arena / rink teams is even around the board table. Worth pointing out that we have had similarly skewed disciplinary decisions with what, three different heads of discipline now? One of which was a panel of three?
Point is the only ones who can change this are the owners themselves. Which is why it never will, any more that we'll get relegation and promotion with the EPL.
Loudest voice wins in the EIHL, and most fans = loudest voice. Sad truism.
Point is the only ones who can change this are the owners themselves. Which is why it never will, any more that we'll get relegation and promotion with the EPL.
Loudest voice wins in the EIHL, and most fans = loudest voice. Sad truism.
I really don't believe there is any conspiracy by Hanson to protect or be more lenient to so called Arena teams. I would imagine that it was pretty much a guess on behalf of the officials the other night, no whistle was blown immediately ( hinting very strongly that Hicks didn't see the incident ) and the linesman maybe thought it was a check to the head. Either way, the officials got it very wrong, play should have been stopped immediately ( despite what our new saviour of Mr Hicks, Angel 15 aged 31 thinks ) and let me assure you, I would feel the same way if it had happened to an opponent ( as my previous condemnation of some of Max's borderline hits will confirm )
I think Hanson is a pretty honest judge of things and he has given his view as a charging offence rather than a check to the head, that's the way he sees it, and Keefe has been punished accordingly. Keefe now walks a very fine line for future offences of charging and checking to the head !! Would hope that Conboy gets his retribution by dropping the gloves against Keefe late in the next game rather than straight from the first face off as has been suggested, ( Keefe is no slouch either, so could be a very interesting scrap if it happens ) hopefully by that time we will also have another D man in place who can also step in when required.
I think Hanson is a pretty honest judge of things and he has given his view as a charging offence rather than a check to the head, that's the way he sees it, and Keefe has been punished accordingly. Keefe now walks a very fine line for future offences of charging and checking to the head !! Would hope that Conboy gets his retribution by dropping the gloves against Keefe late in the next game rather than straight from the first face off as has been suggested, ( Keefe is no slouch either, so could be a very interesting scrap if it happens ) hopefully by that time we will also have another D man in place who can also step in when required.
My initial thoughts were that he would receive about 6 to 8 games because IMO (and many others) the hit was late. The incident has been looked at numerous times (many in slow motion) by Mr Hanson, and his conclusion is it was charging......no matter how many complaints there is about it that will not change.
Hicks didn't even call it initially, nor did the linesmen, and then made the call after a discussion
Keefe didn't do himself any favours with the raising of his arm after the hit, but Hanson deems it WASN'T checking to the head.
A post early on this topic said that if Conboy had done the same thing he would have had about 10 games......surely if he had done the SAME thing he would have got 4 games, just like Keefe did.
I don't accept this "arena teams" complaint about decisions. If after reviewing your have committed an offence you will get a ban regardless.
and this "everyone is against Cardiff" attitude too. I just don't see what is based on. They weren't against Cardiff when the pre season incident was reduced were they?
Its complaints when its against you, and none when it goes for you, it can't be both ways.
Hicks didn't even call it initially, nor did the linesmen, and then made the call after a discussion
Keefe didn't do himself any favours with the raising of his arm after the hit, but Hanson deems it WASN'T checking to the head.
A post early on this topic said that if Conboy had done the same thing he would have had about 10 games......surely if he had done the SAME thing he would have got 4 games, just like Keefe did.
I don't accept this "arena teams" complaint about decisions. If after reviewing your have committed an offence you will get a ban regardless.
and this "everyone is against Cardiff" attitude too. I just don't see what is based on. They weren't against Cardiff when the pre season incident was reduced were they?
Its complaints when its against you, and none when it goes for you, it can't be both ways.
What is the saddest thing is how frustrated and disinfranchised this makes fans of the rink teams feel and how this drive fans away always helping to maintain the status quo. The smaller teams will also struggle to maintain fans whilst this exists. The overriding feeling is that we are just there to make up the numbers during the year before the end of season arena gong show.
