Keefe and Quinney Bans

[Block 2 Noise Boys]

Hanson's quote
"The total suspension handed out to Keefe is four matches because of the distance he traveled, the very dangerous action which was unnecessary and the violent check on his opponent, causing an injury which could have been avoided."

It is therefore acknowledged that
(a) Keefe travelled distance (which to my recollection wasn't that far, but these are Hanson's words)
(b) the action was "very" dangerous
(c) unnecessary
(d) violent and
(e) caused an injury which "could" have been avoided

I believe Mr Hanson has now set a very dangerous precedent (inappropriate and inconsistent to my way of thinking) but I fully expect there to be more instances of this nature in the remainder of the season and it will be interesting to see how Mr Hanson manipulates future adjudications to those clubs in his favour.

These "Get off lightly" cards Hanson has introduced for his favoured clubs will drive many fans away from the game. First steps on a slippery slope indeed.

 

[Gospel]

But......he didn't step up, did he?
Neither did any of the Devils.
Sad to say........we don't have that support for a team mate characteristic in our players.[/quote]

Well I guess Rupes was prepared to leave the bench knowing he would immediately get chucked out. Sorry but I think that statement of intent shows more guts than just sitting there......and I believe that to be a competely natural reaction from Rupert. Well done.[/quote]



This shouldn't have been left to Quiney to deal with, others saw the hit or otherwise they wouldn't have reacted & as has been stated were stopped by the stripeys.

The guys on the ice should have dealt with this, Keefe was clearly ready for a reaction as hes looking around, yet nothing happens. There were 4 other guys out there, yes maybe 2 didn't see it but the others would have. They should have stepped up.

The ban for Keefe is, as we would expect, crap. The league clearly looking after the loudest member & shafting the rest. Clear hit to the head & should have been punished as such. Disgraceful.

I can see far more bans being handed out, probably to us again, in coming games if teams start taking liberties and we have to react. We should have set down a marker in earlier games that we wont be pushed around and we wouldn't have got to this situation.

 

[Deleted member 1337]

Are we really that surprised with this?

When it comes to the Arena team this happens all the time so we should be used to it by now.

Yes we should expect it, but we shouldn't except it though

 

[steve]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=459704

How proper reviews are done...

 

[ASHIPP]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=459704

How proper reviews are done...

Yep NHL don't tolerate anything that looks remotely like a head or neck injury. Some charges carry minimum 10 game ban. In other circumstances fines plus bans. Imagine £100,000+ fine. Ouch! Not going to do that again are you?

 

[WheresWally]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=459704

How proper reviews are done...

Yep NHL don't tolerate anything that looks remotely like a head or neck injury. Some charges carry minimum 10 game ban. In other circumstances fines plus bans. Imagine £100,000+ fine. Ouch! Not going to do that again are you?

surely if you are wanting a 10 ban as per NHL for what Keefe did, you must also want a 10 ban for Quiney as per NHL rules too? Ask Clarkson.

you cannot just pick isolated rules to suit, its all or nothing surely

 

[TheStub]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=459704

How proper reviews are done...

Yep NHL don't tolerate anything that looks remotely like a head or neck injury. Some charges carry minimum 10 game ban. In other circumstances fines plus bans. Imagine £100,000+ fine. Ouch! Not going to do that again are you?

surely if you are wanting a 10 ban as per NHL for what Keefe did, you must also want a 10 ban for Quiney as per NHL rules too? Ask Clarkson.

you cannot just pick isolated rules to suit, its all or nothing surely

Yes, as long as it is open and applied consistently.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[WheresWally]

im all for these rules and transparency, but think it is highly unlikely to happen here.
we will just have to tolerate the ones that are in place, until the powers that be get their act together

 

[Nott Simpson]

One of these days an "assault" will be reported to the Police and charges brought.

The is a precedent in British Ice Hockey as we all know.

 

[ASHIPP]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=459704

How proper reviews are done...

Yep NHL don't tolerate anything that looks remotely like a head or neck injury. Some charges carry minimum 10 game ban. In other circumstances fines plus bans. Imagine £100,000+ fine. Ouch! Not going to do that again are you?

surely if you are wanting a 10 ban as per NHL for what Keefe did, you must also want a 10 ban for Quiney as per NHL rules too? Ask Clarkson.

you cannot just pick isolated rules to suit, its all or nothing surely

Yep agree with you, WW. But consistency has to be the key. EIHL could learn this from NHL disciplinary regulations.

 

[Marty]

Kaleta doesn't play for an 'arena team' though!

 

[davel]

What's most scandalous about these bans is the ref and linesman appear to have got away with no action taken against them. Surely there main task is to ensure the safety of the players at all times. They failed miserably, and both appear to be officiating our game tonight.

 

[steve]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=459704

How proper reviews are done...

Yep NHL don't tolerate anything that looks remotely like a head or neck injury. Some charges carry minimum 10 game ban. In other circumstances fines plus bans. Imagine £100,000+ fine. Ouch! Not going to do that again are you?

surely if you are wanting a 10 ban as per NHL for what Keefe did, you must also want a 10 ban for Quiney as per NHL rules too? Ask Clarkson.

you cannot just pick isolated rules to suit, its all or nothing surely

I didn't say I wanted 10 games - I just want a clear, evidence based assessment process that can be articulated properly as in this case. Hanson tries to give clear explanations for his decisions, but the only thing consistent so far is the inconsistency.

I'm not trying to pick isolated rules to suit - plenty of that being done at elite HQ though.

 

[coedduon]

Keefe; "Superfly"
This guy has a tendency to go high from behind or from the blind-side - check out our previous match in Cardiff on Devils TV - just after 7mins of the coverage (3rd period) - Lord is out in front in a threatening position waiting for a pass/lose puck/rebound - the puck comes in, "Superfly" having been on the floor and fighting for the puck out wide skates in - again from a distance and at speed, launches himself elbows first and head high at the back of Lord, taking him out of the game - this prompts Pope to pick it up in commentry and refer to an earlier instance in the game where he had tried the same thing to Faulks.
Simply not good enough from Jimmy Superfly or from the match night officials, or subsequently from Hanson.
Who's next Mr Superfly?