Terry Jones of the Edmonton Sun opened his article by writing, "For Connor McDavid it was, in a way, like being hit headfirst into the boards from behind, getting suckered by a vicious elbow to the head intended to injure, and driven into the ice away from the play."
Excuse me while I stifle my laughter.
Ken Campbell of The Hockey News wrote, "If the league is going to apply that standard to McDavid when he steps on the wrong side of the rulebook, it’s only fair that it should also apply its own rules against the players who step on the wrong side of the rulebook to try to stop him from being the best player in the world" before trying to invoke the memories of Maurice "Rocket" Richard using his stick to assault an opponent before punching a linesman that saw him suspended for the final three games of the regular season and the entire playoffs.
Again, I stifle laughter at the false equivalency.
Two games for targeting the head with a check is what the league has set for the standard regardless of intent, malice, nefariousness, or any other factor. The NHL has made it clear that it can't be gladiatorial war out on the ice, and players that target the head with a check will sit for two games at minimum regardless of the circumstances.
The Edmonton Journal asked fans for their thoughts, and there was the usual disbelief that the league would suspend someone of McDavid's skill, but they actually got some responses that show not all fans are blinded by pure fanaticism.
"I think if that had happened to him, we'd be crying foul and you got to treat other players the same," Nima Maham told the newspaper. "The NHL's really got to give every player the same standard. I'm not happy about it, but if he goes hitting people and there's no penalty, it's open season."
And that's the rub: if McDavid isn't suspended for this hit, it sends the wrong message to the rest of the league, the fans, and the world. It says that as long as you're a superstar, you're above the law when it comes to the norms set by the league for this type of infraction. This isn't about making an example out of McDavid, but exactly the opposite - that he isn't outside the rule of law despite him being one of the league's best players and most marketable superstars.
You can say that by simply suspending him for such a docile play that they, in fact, are making an example out of him when comparing the recent suspension given to Evgeni Malkin for swinging his stick at an opponent. While that may be valid, each infraction should be judged on their own to assess a fair penalty for each poor decision. While I agree it's not fair that Malkin only got one game for his stick swing, I also feel it is fair that McDavid was judged by the league's own standard it has set for those who players whose initial point of contact for a check on an opponent is the head. I can't stress this enough: stick-swinging is violent, unnecessary, and completely unavoidable, but it's also different than a two-game suspension standard that the league has set for a check that makes contact with an opponent's head as the primary point of contact.
As much as this will affect the Oilers and their playoff hopes, the call for McDavid's two-game reprieve from action is the right call. The Oilers can be unhappy all they want, but McDavid needs to be better than to put himself in that situation. It's unfortunate that he'll miss time, but the league has made it clear that superstars play by the same set of rules as everyone else.
And that's exactly how it should be.
Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!
No comments:
Post a Comment