Stolarz suspension

THE place on the web to discuss happenings in the OHL. If it's just about the WHL, QMJHL or NHL, it doesn't belong here.

Moderators: stuffedwolf, TopShelf, Magellan, noofadmin

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Wallbanger » Fri Apr 25, 2014 8:07 am

The Man22 wrote:It's really simple. If Stolarz is going to play in the Memorial Cup then the suspension needed to be cut short.

It's an unfair advantage for the "other" teams in the tournament. The 3 teams that play London should play against London's best line up. If Stolarz is not eligible for one of the games then the first team the Knights play would have an unfair advantage because on paper said team would play against London's back up. The other 2 teams would have to beat the Knights starting goalie.

Simple.


I look at a team playing short-handed due to suspensions the same way I look at injuries for teams....'suck it up'
Especially since most suspensions are self-inflicted by the player/team!

If they cut short suspensions then they should also bring make the rule that Memorial Cup teams can pick up one player from the league they are representing! But will fans complain it
would make a mockery of the Memorial Cup?...If it does, then so does allowing a suspended player back in!
^ I believe that could only be used to replace an injured player.
As a penniless Canadian society if I want to add my 2 cents worth to any debate I must now round it down therefore I would be back to zero resulting in my opinion being now and forever worthless.
User avatar
Wallbanger
NOOFer
 
Posts: 5796
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Robbie_Rayzor » Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:08 pm

The Man22 wrote:It's really simple. If Stolarz is going to play in the Memorial Cup then the suspension needed to be cut short.

It's an unfair advantage for the "other" teams in the tournament. The 3 teams that play London should play against London's best line up. If Stolarz is not eligible for one of the games then the first team the Knights play would have an unfair advantage because on paper said team would play against London's back up. The other 2 teams would have to beat the Knights starting goalie.

Simple.


Do you need a cat scan? How is it fair to the other teams? A guy commits this offence and then gets a get out of jail free card? Take off those glasses, the rose lenses have affected your brain.
Darryl Sutter to Jerome Iginla one night in Montreal..."Did you bring your dress tonight? No? Well you shouldve because you're playing like a woman."
Belleville Bulls 9
London Knights 2
User avatar
Robbie_Rayzor
NOOFer
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:30 am
Location: Belle Vegas

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby The Man22 » Fri Apr 25, 2014 11:41 pm

No Robbie I don't need a Cat scan. I made a valid point. You don't like it and you name call. Classy as always.

It's making the tournament a level playing field for the teams from the O, W and Q. If the O and Q have to play the Knights with Patterson in net it might be an easier victory then with Stolarz in net. That will put the W team at a disadvantage as they would have to beat Stolarz.

Let's not forget that goal differential plays a part in tie breakers. A better goalie in net could mean a goal or two less per game for the O and Q teams against the Knights.

If this was any other team in the world there would be no issues. It's the Knights so it's wrong in every way.

This is not the first nor the last time this has happened.
The poster formerly known as the The Man

2005 Memorial Cup Champion London Knights
Si-vrett #25
Bowl-u #10
pr+MUST = PRUST NOT pOOOOOOST
User avatar
The Man22
NOOFer
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 2:50 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Danger Girl » Sat Apr 26, 2014 1:07 am

The Man22 wrote:It's really simple. If Stolarz is going to play in the Memorial Cup then the suspension needed to be cut short.

It's an unfair advantage for the "other" teams in the tournament. The 3 teams that play London should play against London's best line up. If Stolarz is not eligible for one of the games then the first team the Knights play would have an unfair advantage because on paper said team would play against London's back up. The other 2 teams would have to beat the Knights starting goalie.

Simple.


I know bizarre logic when I see it, and this is bizarre logic. But I'll play along. Stolarz has 2 games of suspension left. So in the interest of fairness to the other teams, how about he sits out the first 3 games.
Donna

24 OHL arenas and counting...

If the instigator rule is killing hockey now, having to fight every time you throw a clean hit would kill hockey even faster.
User avatar
Danger Girl
NOOFer
 
Posts: 7144
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby The Man22 » Sun Apr 27, 2014 4:34 am

I don't disagree with your logic Danger Girl. Have a look at some of the suspensions that were taken back in the past for the Memorial Cup.

The precedence was set and with much worse suspensions. I am not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just saying.
The poster formerly known as the The Man

2005 Memorial Cup Champion London Knights
Si-vrett #25
Bowl-u #10
pr+MUST = PRUST NOT pOOOOOOST
User avatar
The Man22
NOOFer
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 2:50 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Robbie_Rayzor » Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:37 am

The Man22 wrote:No Robbie I don't need a Cat scan. I made a valid point. You don't like it and you name call. Classy as always.

It's making the tournament a level playing field for the teams from the O, W and Q. If the O and Q have to play the Knights with Patterson in net it might be an easier victory then with Stolarz in net. That will put the W team at a disadvantage as they would have to beat Stolarz.

Let's not forget that goal differential plays a part in tie breakers. A better goalie in net could mean a goal or two less per game for the O and Q teams against the Knights.

If this was any other team in the world there would be no issues. It's the Knights so it's wrong in every way.

This is not the first nor the last time this has happened.


Yeah, I see now. The other sucker teams had goalies that played by the rules and didn't try to take an opposing player's head off. Jokes on them! They could have been slashing guys left right and centre with impunity!

Seriously, give me a break. You don't see how this could be viewed as unfair to the other teams?
Darryl Sutter to Jerome Iginla one night in Montreal..."Did you bring your dress tonight? No? Well you shouldve because you're playing like a woman."
Belleville Bulls 9
London Knights 2
User avatar
Robbie_Rayzor
NOOFer
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:30 am
Location: Belle Vegas

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Otto » Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:33 pm

Robbie_Rayzor wrote:
The Man22 wrote:No Robbie I don't need a Cat scan. I made a valid point. You don't like it and you name call. Classy as always.

It's making the tournament a level playing field for the teams from the O, W and Q. If the O and Q have to play the Knights with Patterson in net it might be an easier victory then with Stolarz in net. That will put the W team at a disadvantage as they would have to beat Stolarz.

Let's not forget that goal differential plays a part in tie breakers. A better goalie in net could mean a goal or two less per game for the O and Q teams against the Knights.

If this was any other team in the world there would be no issues. It's the Knights so it's wrong in every way.

This is not the first nor the last time this has happened.


Yeah, I see now. The other sucker teams had goalies that played by the rules and didn't try to take an opposing player's head off. Jokes on them! They could have been slashing guys left right and centre with impunity!

Seriously, give me a break. You don't see how this could be viewed as unfair to the other teams?


What about buying back suspensions?
User avatar
Otto
NOOFer
 
Posts: 15804
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 4:29 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby The Man22 » Mon Apr 28, 2014 3:31 pm

I could live with buying back suspensions. Only if money went to charity.
The poster formerly known as the The Man

2005 Memorial Cup Champion London Knights
Si-vrett #25
Bowl-u #10
pr+MUST = PRUST NOT pOOOOOOST
User avatar
The Man22
NOOFer
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 2:50 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Danger Girl » Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:30 pm

Otto wrote:
Robbie_Rayzor wrote:
The Man22 wrote:No Robbie I don't need a Cat scan. I made a valid point. You don't like it and you name call. Classy as always.

It's making the tournament a level playing field for the teams from the O, W and Q. If the O and Q have to play the Knights with Patterson in net it might be an easier victory then with Stolarz in net. That will put the W team at a disadvantage as they would have to beat Stolarz.

Let's not forget that goal differential plays a part in tie breakers. A better goalie in net could mean a goal or two less per game for the O and Q teams against the Knights.

If this was any other team in the world there would be no issues. It's the Knights so it's wrong in every way.

This is not the first nor the last time this has happened.


Yeah, I see now. The other sucker teams had goalies that played by the rules and didn't try to take an opposing player's head off. Jokes on them! They could have been slashing guys left right and centre with impunity!

Seriously, give me a break. You don't see how this could be viewed as unfair to the other teams?


What about buying back suspensions?


ALL teams are on level playing fields when it comes to buying back suspensions - not just those hosting the Memorial Cup. You can't compare the two situations.
Donna

24 OHL arenas and counting...

If the instigator rule is killing hockey now, having to fight every time you throw a clean hit would kill hockey even faster.
User avatar
Danger Girl
NOOFer
 
Posts: 7144
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Otto » Mon Apr 28, 2014 5:09 pm

Danger Girl wrote:
ALL teams are on level playing fields when it comes to buying back suspensions - not just those hosting the Memorial Cup. You can't compare the two situations.


All teams are on a level playing field when it comes to reviewing suspensions for playing in the Memorial Cup are they not?
User avatar
Otto
NOOFer
 
Posts: 15804
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 4:29 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby 6tk » Mon Apr 28, 2014 5:39 pm

Robbie_Rayzor wrote:

The other sucker teams had goalies that played by the rules and didn't try to take an opposing player's head off.



Amazing! I love it when people need to exaggerate an incident to try and drive home a point!
User avatar
6tk
NOOFer
 
Posts: 504
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 3:59 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Robbie_Rayzor » Mon Apr 28, 2014 5:46 pm

AND I Love it when people totally downplay a major incident to suit thier pathetic comeback so aren't we both content.
Darryl Sutter to Jerome Iginla one night in Montreal..."Did you bring your dress tonight? No? Well you shouldve because you're playing like a woman."
Belleville Bulls 9
London Knights 2
User avatar
Robbie_Rayzor
NOOFer
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:30 am
Location: Belle Vegas

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Danger Girl » Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:28 pm

Otto wrote:
Danger Girl wrote:
ALL teams are on level playing fields when it comes to buying back suspensions - not just those hosting the Memorial Cup. You can't compare the two situations.


All teams are on a level playing field when it comes to reviewing suspensions for playing in the Memorial Cup are they not?


No. All other teams take at least 16 games to get to the Memorial Cup.
Donna

24 OHL arenas and counting...

If the instigator rule is killing hockey now, having to fight every time you throw a clean hit would kill hockey even faster.
User avatar
Danger Girl
NOOFer
 
Posts: 7144
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Otto » Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:30 am

Danger Girl wrote:
Otto wrote:
Danger Girl wrote:
ALL teams are on level playing fields when it comes to buying back suspensions - not just those hosting the Memorial Cup. You can't compare the two situations.


All teams are on a level playing field when it comes to reviewing suspensions for playing in the Memorial Cup are they not?


No. All other teams take at least 16 games to get to the Memorial Cup.


So your issue isn't with the suspension being reduced it's with the suspension being reduced for a back door host? If it were a team that won it's way into the Memorial Cup that had a players suspension reduced then you would have no issue with it?
User avatar
Otto
NOOFer
 
Posts: 15804
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 4:29 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby MagicMan » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:48 pm

I think what some individuals are failing to do by comparing Stolarz suspension to the O'Keefe suspension are apples and oranges. From everything I have seen that has been written about that O'Keefe was suspended indefinitely and they lifted the suspension. Indefinite could have been 2 games, 8 games, this case it turned out to be 24. With Stolarz he had a set suspension given to him by the league and they lifted the remaining 2 games. If the OHL wanted to do something they should have not given him a suspension at all. If you don't like the last 2 games of the suspension maybe the Knights should have played better and forced the series to 7 games or better yet actually win the series. Instead London got a nice handout from the OHL. It's up to London to make the best of it or they will just be called the Buffalo Knights or the London Bills take your pick.
MagicMan
NOOFer
 
Posts: 1829
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:50 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Otto » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:43 pm

MagicMan wrote:I think what some individuals are failing to do by comparing Stolarz suspension to the O'Keefe suspension are apples and oranges. From everything I have seen that has been written about that O'Keefe was suspended indefinitely and they lifted the suspension. Indefinite could have been 2 games, 8 games, this case it turned out to be 24. With Stolarz he had a set suspension given to him by the league and they lifted the remaining 2 games. If the OHL wanted to do something they should have not given him a suspension at all. If you don't like the last 2 games of the suspension maybe the Knights should have played better and forced the series to 7 games or better yet actually win the series. Instead London got a nice handout from the OHL. It's up to London to make the best of it or they will just be called the Buffalo Knights or the London Bills take your pick.


Any idea what the circumstances were for Chris Neil?
User avatar
Otto
NOOFer
 
Posts: 15804
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 4:29 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby JROC » Tue Apr 29, 2014 10:42 pm

The Man22 wrote:No Robbie I don't need a Cat scan. I made a valid point. You don't like it and you name call. Classy as always.

It's making the tournament a level playing field for the teams from the O, W and Q. If the O and Q have to play the Knights with Patterson in net it might be an easier victory then with Stolarz in net. That will put the W team at a disadvantage as they would have to beat Stolarz.

Let's not forget that goal differential plays a part in tie breakers. A better goalie in net could mean a goal or two less per game for the O and Q teams against the Knights.

If this was any other team in the world there would be no issues. It's the Knights so it's wrong in every way.

This is not the first nor the last time this has happened.


So by your rationale, if a player has to miss the iirst game or two of the round robin due to injury, they should have to sit out the entire round robin? Perhaps the 2005 Knights cup deserves an asterisk because they played a different goalie (Coleman) in their 3rd game than their first two (Dennis)? Also if a player does something worthy of a suspension in game 1 or 2 of the round robin, they shouldn't be suspended due to the same logic?

Speaking of memorial cup fairness, is it fair that one team got a guaranteed spot in the cup 2 times out of 4 while 17 other OHL teams didn't even get it once?
for a better OHL forum with a competent moderatior check out http://thenewnoof.yuku.com/
JROC
NOOFer
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:53 pm

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Danger Girl » Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:31 am

Otto wrote:
Danger Girl wrote:
No. All other teams take at least 16 games to get to the Memorial Cup.


So your issue isn't with the suspension being reduced it's with the suspension being reduced for a back door host? If it were a team that won it's way into the Memorial Cup that had a players suspension reduced then you would have no issue with it?



No, my issue is with the League's willingness to throw out its own rules in order to ice what it thinks is the best possible team at the Memorial Cup, whatever it takes. If Stolarz had been a oft-scratched benchwarmer, this wouldn't be an issue and he'd be sitting the first 2 games.
Donna

24 OHL arenas and counting...

If the instigator rule is killing hockey now, having to fight every time you throw a clean hit would kill hockey even faster.
User avatar
Danger Girl
NOOFer
 
Posts: 7144
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Nelli27 » Wed Apr 30, 2014 10:12 am

I am a Knights' fan who doesn't accept that logic either since it would imply that there's never any grounds for suspending a player during the Memorial Cup. Of course, there must be certain suspension-worthy cases that would extend into the Memorial Cup tournament. One shouldn't get a free pass to play in the Memorial Cup. However, this is not to say that Stolarz did not deserve to have his suspension reduced.

The rules are in place to allow for an appeal. A precedent has been set to shorten suspensions to permit players to play in the Memorial Cup. NOTE: the fact that there is this precedent doesn't mean that one can cite the 'precedent' and a suspension will be automatically reduced. And, in fact, the precedent was NOT the reason justifying the reduction of the suspension.
The appeal process means that each case (O'Keefe, Simon, Stolarz, or whomever) needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case bases. So, a player can have his suspension upheld into the Memorial Cup or reduced to allow him to play...it's left to the discretion of the committee/league.

If you're not happy with the decision, it's not the fault of the Hunters or Knights fans although if it makes you feel better, take your shots!

And, if you actually subscribe to the theory that the Knights' organization is the beneficiary of league 'favours' creating an uneven playing field, and you still follow the league, what does that say about YOU?
"One man is as ten thousand for me, if he is best" (Heraclitus, fr.49)

"It is not a foregone conclusion that the quest for truth for its own sake is simply in harmony with the needs of man as a social and political being", Leo Strauss.
User avatar
Nelli27
NOOFer
 
Posts: 2040
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:08 pm
Location: London

Re: Stolarz suspension

Postby Danger Girl » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:09 pm

Nelli27 wrote:I am a Knights' fan who doesn't accept that logic either since it would imply that there's never any grounds for suspending a player during the Memorial Cup. Of course, there must be certain suspension-worthy cases that would extend into the Memorial Cup tournament. One shouldn't get a free pass to play in the Memorial Cup. However, this is not to say that Stolarz did not deserve to have his suspension reduced.

The rules are in place to allow for an appeal. A precedent has been set to shorten suspensions to permit players to play in the Memorial Cup. NOTE: the fact that there is this precedent doesn't mean that one can cite the 'precedent' and a suspension will be automatically reduced. And, in fact, the precedent was NOT the reason justifying the reduction of the suspension.
The appeal process means that each case (O'Keefe, Simon, Stolarz, or whomever) needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case bases. So, a player can have his suspension upheld into the Memorial Cup or reduced to allow him to play...it's left to the discretion of the committee/league.

If you're not happy with the decision, it's not the fault of the Hunters or Knights fans although if it makes you feel better, take your shots!

And, if you actually subscribe to the theory that the Knights' organization is the beneficiary of league 'favours' creating an uneven playing field, and you still follow the league, what does that say about YOU?



You can't cite O'Keefe as precedent. O'Keefe was suspended "indefinitely". Stolarz was suspended for a definite number of games. They didn't reduce O'Keefe's sentence at all. Perhaps they should have suspended Stolarz "indefinitely" then reinstated him before the Memorial Cup. I would have felt much better about that. I think many of us would have. And we'd chalk it up to just another suspension they got wrong. But the way they did it reeks of favoritism and foul play.

If it is justifiable to repeal the suspension of a star player who took a baseball-type swing to another player's head, then there really isn't anything to talk about here and the "discretion of the committee" is a joke. This was exactly the type of non-hockey play that should be penalized the most.

This being said, I don't think the League has purposely favored the Knights. In this case, the Knights happened to benefit. But I think the same decision would have been reach had it been a star player on any other host team.
Donna

24 OHL arenas and counting...

If the instigator rule is killing hockey now, having to fight every time you throw a clean hit would kill hockey even faster.
User avatar
Danger Girl
NOOFer
 
Posts: 7144
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: Detroit

PreviousNext

Return to New OHL Open Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron