James Neal Suspended Two Games by NHL
Colin Campbell and the NHL decided that despite no record whatsoever of bad plays, that despite a complete lack of intent, that James Neal's hit from behind on Derek Dorsett was worthy of a two game suspension.
Note: Just so we're clear, I agree that Neal deserved punishment and it could have been much worse. But it feels as if the NHL is reacting to injury and not the hit itself. See: Rob Scuderi hit. This is a classic example of a boarding penalty, and the NHL suspended Neal because of it. Like I've said on Twitter, now it's just an matter of the NHL being consistent with these suspensions.
Not as bad as some wanted, but a bit harsher than I anticipated. It's what I expected, however.
The crackdown on head injuries is going to lead to these types of suspensions and perhaps that's a good thing. I'm all for protecting the players. Yet it's frustrating to see a suspension come only when an injury occurs; Stephane Robidas took an nasty cross check in the back straight into the boards earlier in the game; the hit set off a big scrum and Rick Nash was penalized for it. But if Robidas had broken some bones in his face and received a concussion, Nash would be facing Campbell as well. Is that what is fair?
So this is hurtful in a couple of ways for the Stars and James Neal. First off, James Neal will be a 'repeat offender' for any borderline hits going forward, which is tough for a young player who plays as physical as he does. Second, Neal is arguably the Stars most consistent and explosive player on offense this season and with the Stars fighting the consistency bug, losing him for two games is going to hurt.
More from Mike Heika and Greg Wyshynski after the jump.
The league just had meetings about dangerous play and hits to the head, and this was a very visible injury, and I think that had to factor into the decision. The league is sending a message to everyone that any kind of dangerous hits won't be tolerated.
Hopefully, they will be consistent with that going forward.
My guess is Warren Peters will be in Saturday against New Jersey, and if I was guessing, I would say Brenden Morrow will play left wing on a line with Brad Richards and Loui Eriksson.
Just like I stated this morning, Neal's hit on Dorsett came at the absolute worst time. The NHL has stated it's going to crack down on head injuries and hits from behind and with the media causing an uproar over these hits the NHL was basically forced to punish Neal in this manner. Forget the inconsistencies in suspensions so far this season; the NHL has re-set itself moving forward and this is an example of that.
Derek Dorsett did not have the puck and Neal hit him from behind into the boards. It was not an intently vicious hit, no elbow was thrown; it's just unfortunate for everyone involved that Dorsett hit the glass as that angle. The resulting way he fell to the ice didn't help much.
Greg Wyshynski has a great take on the hit as well, and I have to completely agree with him.
The "optics" of the hit make this a slam-dunk suspension, according to the NHL Wheel of Discipline. High hit to the back of the head, sandwiching Dorsett's noggin against the glass, and then the Blue Jackets player flopping to the ice like a marionette with his strings cut.
Anyone that's been following Colin Campbell's thought process on these things had to know something was coming Neal's way.
There was just too much that went right (or wrong) for Neal not to get suspended, and that's unfortunate. It's the way the NHL has handled these hits all season long, especially when there's an injury involved. Campbell explained the lack of suspension for Rob Scuderi by saying "he's never been in trouble before, and the hit player wasn't injured." Dorsett was injured, and a suspension followed. That's the way the wheel is spinning.
Here's the video of the hit. I must warn you though; the announcers are not on the Stars' side on this one.
0 recs |
19 comments
|
Comments
"Appeared to leave his feet"
He left one foot, maybe.
Every time I see it I am struck by what a normal looking hockey play it was.
I personally had a game of my own, and didn’t get to watch the game. I thought by the statline the boarding and game misconduct must have been a brutal hit. That looks like a completely normal hit, I don’t even really see the boarding.
I don’t think Neal deserved a suspension at all, the intent wasn’t there at all. I think it’s a joke to suspend off injury.
Exactly
If Dorsett doesn’t go down the way he did, odds are good the boarding isn’t even whistled and play just continues. Toss in the little spin and drop, however, and the league is handed the perfect PR moment on a silver platter. They’ve been dying for the chance to drop a suspension on some (as yet) little known youngster to distract the media.
I wouldn’t have any problem with the suspension if I had even the tiniest smidgen of faith that it showed a true shift of emphasis from the league toward protecting the players. They have shown time and time again that the only thing they’re concerned for is saving their own backsides.
by MileHighAir on Nov 20, 2009 10:43 PM CST up reply actions
Basically they said
That because there was a head injury, expect a suspension.
Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.
by Brandon Worley on Nov 20, 2009 5:19 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks TSN Panel
I can’t help but think your short-sighted words helped this suspension along.
I also can’t help but notice you all said not one word about Rick Nash’s equally dangerous hit in the first on Stephane Robidas.
Of course, since Robi wasn’t injured and Nash is a star in the NHL, that’s probably why.
Defending Big D Free to use and easy to join, as well as easy to use and free to join!
TheStarsFans Like your neighborhood bar, but drunkier
YNWA Because do you really want to root for ManU?
Exactly
I also think Dorsett’s little dance helped as well. If he collapses straight to the ice or wobbles down like anyone who’s experienced a concussion has done, I’ll buy it. But his little delayed spin-a-rama followed by a blatantly forced arm toss at the end is complete bull. Even if you want to buy his spin, the way his arm moved completely opposes the physics of what his body naturally should have done given his spinning/falling slowly motion. The flick of the arm doesn’t happen unless it’s intentional.
I agree that Neal deserved something, but to get 5, 10 and 2 games for a hit to the shoulder blade and free acting lesson is a BS call.
I think Dorsett was legitimately hurt. The blank stare as he was being helped off the ice said it all.
Defending Big D Free to use and easy to join, as well as easy to use and free to join!
TheStarsFans Like your neighborhood bar, but drunkier
YNWA Because do you really want to root for ManU?
by Brandon Bibb on Nov 20, 2009 9:42 PM CST up reply actions
nash's hit
was way more dangerous. not only did he cross-check robidas, but he tripped beforehand, causing robidas to go face first with no protection from his helmet.
if dorsett had his bucket strapped on better, or didn’t turn his body to the play, we wouldn’t be talking about this.
Mike Richards didn't get anything for that hit he made.
The way he was flying across the ice on that one made it a lot more dangerous.
Neal’s suspension was probably justified in line with the NHL’s current stance, but double standards in this league are so obvious, just like the NBA.
Remember to retire Fin's number, Mark.
Feel your pain Stars fans … Tuomo Ruutu had a similar hit on Darcy Tucker and got three games despite no history, then Corvo got boarded by Sean Bergenheim last Friday and only got two minutes for … charging? All because Corvo was able to skate away.
by Cory Lavalette on Nov 21, 2009 12:14 AM CST reply actions
I know it's bad...
but Dorsett falling down was very comical. Watching that almost made the suspension worth it.
I just wish the league wasn’t so inconsistent about handing out suspensions. Was Neal’s hit any worse than the Richards hit on Booth?
Neal’s not a goon; he had no intention whatsoever of hurting Dorsett. That’s the way Neal plays. Someone just got hurt this time.
I think that Neal was screwed a little on this, but that’s just my call. Fortunately the next two games are against East opponents, so a grim situation is merely gloomy now.
Dallas Stars 4 Life: Stars Blogging From Hockeyville, Iowa
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Nov 21, 2009 9:33 AM CST reply actions
Only two?
Christ, Curtis Glencross got three for an even less vicious hit.
And yet Alexander Ovechkin can slewfoot someone and have the league turn a blind eye…
Turned a blind eye? He was fined for it and it really was not even a blatant slew foot. It was reckless but it wasn’t anywhere near the level of a Malkin slew foot or Artyukhin on Niskanen. I feel like the people that love commenting on the AO slew foot haven’t even watched the clip more than once.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 21, 2009 1:53 PM CST up reply actions
A couple grand fine is nothing. Especially not for a guy with a history of cheap shots that the league has a habit of overlooking.
Down Goes Brown nailed how the league handles dirty play by star players vs. everyone else quite nicely:
Saw the flow chart. It’s hysterical. “History of cheap shots” isn’t accurate in really any sense of the word. Sounds like you think you have some evidence though.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 21, 2009 2:16 PM CST up reply actions
At the end of it, you can just tell the commenter is talking shit.
After talking how common the hit is and crap, he says at the end “if you don’t make that hit, it’s going to eliminate that hit”. I don’t see how that makes sense. If Neal doesn’t make that hit, the rest of the NHL isn’t going make that hit?

by 




















