No Suspension For Cooke – Idiocy Revealed
Posted by jtbourne on March 10, 2010 · 15 Comments
ShareThis
I received a great email from a reader today, which I think people should see. He made the following point:
“Campbell said the Richards hit set a precedent. I’ve not had a problem with the NHL’s suspensions and reasons for suspension this season unlike many others, but this one is absolutely ridiculous. There have been a couple precedents set, and one that directly involves Cooke.
Authors note: the following were video links, embedded below.
Precedent
Suspension
in reference to previously set precedent
The Anisimov hit Cooke was suspended for was ‘a check to the neck/head area.’”
Enjoy the videos in succession.
Reference:
Precedent:
In reference to previously set precedence:
Think those hits are accidents?
*****
I wrote a piece for The Hockey News on what I think should be a factor in making head shots legal/illegal. The GMs made nearly the exact same proposal I was hinting at. Check it out here.
I'm a hockey player turned writer. After playing for Alaska Anchorage in the WCHA (NCAA), I carried on with an NHL tryout (New York Islanders in 2007) before spending a couple seasons in the AHL/ECHL (last year was 2008-09). My father, Bob Bourne, won four Stanley Cups with the Islanders in the '80's, as did my fiancee's dad, Clark Gillies. I'm now the web editor for theScore's hockey blog "Backhand Shelf."
I watched Cooke play in Vancouver for years and loathed his play and his character. When he was signed by Pittsburgh (Penguins fan) I was quite unhappy, but last year he surprised me by playing hard-nosed hockey devoid of his character-defining cheap shit.
Into the playoffs he began to revert back to ‘Matt Cooke,’ but he was still under control, and was not dangering others in his usual way. He completely won my respect (and I’m sure his teammate’s <–I believe this is a strong point to make) and admiration for his play, which previously was at zero.
This year he’s picked up where he left off in Vancouver, and last year’s Lady Bing-like (for him of course, I can’t think of a better way to say it) season is forgotten, and the thought “Yeah but last year he played so honourable!,” makes me feel stupid. Dumber than a puck and smart like a fox.
“smart like a fox” Exactly. Check out 0:35 in clip 2, 1:15 in clip 3, and 1:00 in clip 1. Trevor Linden and Joe Sakic probably wouldn’t throw those hits but if you make them legal, someone will, there’s a lotta money on the line. Kinda gross to see Mike Richards bend his knees on his way in, presumably to drill Booth a little harder without leaving his feet? Check it out at 0:53, that guy is getting prepared to cork someone in the head and he knows it.
I read an article a while back where the author said Trevor Linden used to say/shout “heads up!” or “incoming!” if he was about to hit a guy that didn’t seem to know he was there. It would be nice if players had more respect for each other, and people stopped robbing the elderly, and hyenas didn’t kill lion cubs in nature shows. In the meantime, it’s nice to see a rule against this madness, finally. I’m looking forward to Coach’s Corner this Saturday.
Colin Campbell is a knuckle dragging neanderthal and the new era of the sport needs forward thinking people in it’s leadership. Campbell is inconsistent at best with his decisions and seems more concerned with the history of the game than the well being of it’s players. The fact that Campbell was a mediocre fringe player himself makes you wonder if he doesn’t have a soft spot for fellow “grinders” like Cooke.
Love how Campbell said next year it would be a penalty/suspension. Does that mean for the rest of the season a player can get away w/ that type of hit? The precedent now is this season it’s not punishable.
Why was the league able to pass the Avery rule last season immediately and this one they can’t? Are they really more concerned w/ a player acting the fool and bothering Marty B then they are headshots?
//Does that mean for the rest of the season a player can get away w/ that type of hit?//
Yes.
The inmates have been left to run the asylum. They’ve been given carte blanche. I would not be surprised if the next player carried out on a stretcher isn’t loaded into an ambulance, but a hearse.
today’s blog is the equivalent of a teacher popping in a video and kicking there feet up
Haha, settle, that was an adendum to yesterdays. Check the date, a-hole
Today’s will be up in a hot sec.
kitten fister has something up [i]their[/i] ass this morning.
Cooke left his feet check he checked Anisimov. That was charging.
His check on Savard broke no current rule. Thus, there was no penalty and no basis for a suspension.
The new head-shot rule is coming too late; at worst, it should have been adopted last summer. But, it wasn’t. The GMs decided that dirty, dangerous headshots should be permissible provided that the player delivering the check didn’t break another rule. That is the idoocy—not Colin Campbell’s decision not to suspend Matt Cooke.
haha, got black out drunk last nite so who knows what the hell is up there. my appologies
Good call cbuckser, at 0:36 Mr. Cooke is airborn.
At no point do both of his feet leave the ice (his right ‘toe’ on the ice – semantics maybe, but not in light of the reason he was suspended).
He received a minor for interference, and the official language for the suspension was: “deliberate check to the head area”
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/299875-matt-cooke-hit-with-a-two-game-suspension-but-where-is-the-consistency
Cooke wasn’t suspended because the Richards/Booth hit set a precedent.
The precedent at the time was “star players can get away with anything”. The current precedent is “everyone can get away with anything”
Somebody should redefine the word “consequences” for mr. Campbell…
TW Tom Curran, Neanderthal’s were not dumb at all. They had a pretty advanced tribal society going on back then. Please stop insulting our fellow Hominids and reveal Campbell for the creature that he is… It’s gotta be somethingwith the mental capacity of plankton…
Best thing about the whole ‘rule debate’ is that they were quick enough to bring in the ‘Avery Rule’ after big Sean upset Brodeur with nothing more than some stupid antics (and lets be fair, it was well within the rules at the time and in my opinion a stroke of genius on Avery’s part!) – Avery is a grade A pest, but what he did to Brodeur was distracting but no where near the ‘head shots’ calibre of dangerous. And yet it’s going to take until NEXT season to properly deal with schmucks like Cooke?
A Pittsburgh supporting friend of mine asked why we were all ragging on Cooke when Bertuzzi has done much worse in the past, Richards has done similar this very season and Phaneuf has had his moments as well – I simple pointed out all of those three can actually play the game (admittedly big Bert not as well these days), while Justin is spot on – Cooke is judged by his grade of sand paper!
There is another angle to this debate that Ron and Don brought up last Saturday, namely that any deliberate attempt to injure, whether in the context of a legal hit or not, is penalty and suspension worthy.