Missed Opportunities: Rick Rypien

Suspensions in the NHL are the stuff of legends. Two games for making a lewd gesture, two games for slamming your opponents head into the boards from behind. Six games for a dirty comment about your ex-girlfriend, four games for breaking your opponent's leg with a two-handed chop.
From the very beginning, we all knew they would blow this, too, right? More after the jump.

Six games. Six. For grabbing a fan, the NHL gives Rick Rypien six games.
According to Hockey Joe's Wheel of Justice, this incident landed squarely on "Avery." As you all know from reading the previous posts, I was squarely in the 20+ games camp, and my suggestion was at least half the season. The NHL had a chance to make a statement here, and instead, they went with a whisper quiet "tsk, tsk."
To be sure, I was one of very few people who felt this needed a harsh reprisal. Russo believes they got it right, Puck Daddy's Greg Wyshynski believes they missed the mark, but only by a handful of games. There will certainly be more reaction out on the internet today from all of the pundits. The decision to agree or disagree is up to you. Here is my case for why they got it wrong.
A Precedent
From the NHL.com release:
"Prior to each season, all clubs and players are advised that under no circumstances are club personnel permitted to have physical contact with fans, or enter, or attempt to enter the stands," Commissioner Gary Bettman said. "We hold NHL players to a high standard, and there simply is no excuse for conduct of this nature. Fortunately, this incident is not typical of the way NHL players conduct themselves and is not typical of the way Mr. Rypien had conducted himself during his career."
It is not typical of the way NHL players conduct themselves. Correct. However, one did, and they have in the past, as has been noted multiple times with Mike Millbury back in the 70's, among others. A side note from the release reads this:
It's the longest suspension for player-fan interaction since March 20, 1982 when Vancouver's Doug Halward was suspended for seven games.
Players grabbing, attacking, punching, squirting, or spitting at fans has happened in the past. It is going to happen again. A seven game benching for Halward did not prevent Rypien from doing it, why would six games for Rypien prevent someone else from doing it in the future?
As I said in my original post about this topic, it is not the severity of the contact with the fan that makes me feel this deserved a statement making suspension. It is the fact that there was negative physical contact with a fan at all. The precedent needed to be set before something worse happens, not after.
It is clear that there is a history of players going after fans in the NHL. It may not be a long and detailed history, but it has happened on multiple occasions. What is it going to take before they do crackdown? Is it going to be like with headshots, where they wait for the worst possible scenario before they act?
The Message
With any punishment the message should be clear. In management, or in parenting, the punishment should send a message that this behavior is not acceptable. Generally, that punishment should fit the crime. A write up for being late too many times, or being grounded from the phone for not following what ever rules govern phone use. Sometimes, the message needs to be severe and swift. Fired for telling off the CEO in an email, or the car taken away for getting speeding ticket.
This isn't normal management, and it isn't parenting. The principles of it still apply. There are times when an "over reaction" are called for. Clearly the three, four, even seven game suspensions for physical interaction with fans are not getting the message across. It was time for the league to make it clear just how serious it was against ending these types of incidents.
Well... I guess they made it clear how serious they were about it.
Mitigating Factors
But Bryan, what about the eye gouge? The fact that Rypien has no prior offenses? The emotional state of Rypien? The fan threatening legal action?
First off, the eye gouge is a joke. Ridiculousness at its best. I won't even take more than a second to address it. It didn't happen. Nice try.
As for having no prior offenses, it also doesn't matter. No one currently in the league has a prior offense of this nature. They shouldn't need to. If Rypien had been suspended before, say for a dirty cross check, should it affect how the league made this decision? No. It shouldn't. It's a different crime, with a totally different meaning. Suspensions for one ice incidents are one thing. When Rypien grabbed the fan, he crossed the line from hockey into the real world.When that happens, the ramifications are huge. Well... they are if the people in authority positions don't pretend it means nothing.
Rypien was angry. I get it. People do stupid thing when they are angry. When I get angry, it is usually my cell phone that takes the brunt of it, which winds up costing me money and making me feel stupid afterward. However, when you get angry and take it out on people? Well... that is not acceptable. Fans should never, ever have to fear that a player is going to attack them, even for a second. I guarantee there are people out there watching how this played out, shaking their heads, and saying "See, that's why we don't like hockey."
James Enquist threatening legal action, even if only implying it, was not something I agree with. However, it has little effect on the NHL's decision. If the NHL would have let it effect them, it would have been unprofessional. Granted, legal action seems tacky and petty, but what happens in the court room should not play into the decision the NHL makes here.
Wheel of Justice, Turn, Turn, Turn. Teach Us the Lesson that We Should Learn
For this, I turn to the original creator of the Wheel of Justice, Joe Yerdon at ProHockeyTalk:
Does this now mean that the standard is set at six games if you completely embarrass the NHL? Apparently so, because telling fans that they don’t really have a vested interest in making sure that when they buy a ticket they won’t run the risk of being assailed by the players doesn’t seem to stand out to the league. I’m not looking to make Rick Rypien into everything that’s wrong with the NHL here, but the league pooh-poohing this with a relative slap on the wrist seems foolish.
...
The league isn’t condoning what Rypien did, but they’re sure not hammering the point home in saying they’re disgusted by it either. Like it or not, the NHL has now made it so that grabbing a fan in the stands counts as much as hurling insults on camera and for the league, that might be the worst PR out of all this.
The NHL has taught is a few lessons here:
- Attacking a fan is less egregious than attacking a ref. So if you are upset with the referees, don't push them,push a fan instead.
- The safety of its fans is not as important as making sure someone without a history is treated fairly.
- They are nowhere near as serious about ending this type of incident as they think they are.
- They have no spine.
Bottom line, the league blew this: The league blew this opportunity so well, the fluffers at Vivid entertainment are jealous. Kids... don't look that up, OK? I don't need a six game suspension from Bettman as well.
Rick Rypien is a nobody. Six games is nothing to him, and losing him for six games means nothing to the team, nor the league. If the Canucks need a goon, they will simply call up Manitoba and get someone new. They are likely a better team without him. The only way anything good could have come from this is if the league would have made an example of Rypien, and sent the message that they actually care about this type of issue. They didn't, and it shows that they don't.
This will happen again. Next time, maybe it's worse. Eventually, the league is going to have to crack down, and crack down hard. Otherwise, another idiot like Rick Rypien is going to do something idiotic, and someone is going to get hurt. In the immortal words of Casablanca, you will then regret it. "Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life."
Of all of the "Missed Opportunities" posts I have written, this one is by far the biggest missed chance to do the right thing.
I truly hope the Canucks organization has the brains to send this idiot back to Manitoba to play out his contract, and then to not re-sign him. Sorry, pal. You don't deserve to be in the NHL.
A side note before I end what will be (hopefully) the last post about Rick Rypien from me:
I know from Twitter and from reaction via email and in the comment section that there are people out there that don't agree with me on this. To those people, I say this: I welcome your right to disagree, even to not like me because of my opinion. However, I don't care that you don't like it. It is my opinion, and I am as much entitled to it as you are to yours. If you do not like what we are writing, don't read it. You and your 40 some followers and the three people who read your blog can all get together and talk about how much you don't like me, OK?
89 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
On the bright side
BRAD Staubitz won’t have to wait as long to pay back Rypien for the sucker punch.
My bet is that Rypien never sees the light of day after this lifts. That is… if the Canucks have a brain, which I guess I’m not comfortable betting on.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
A seven game benching for Halward did not prevent Rypien from doing it, why would six games for Rypien prevent someone else from doing it in the future?
dude, it’s been 28 years since that. seriously, not even Rypien was born at that point, let alone myself. in fact, half of the current Canucks roster wasn’t even born yet!
Nucks Misconduct writer, ambassador and pseudo-moderator. Also on Twitter
"Waist-down, Toews is huge!" TSN's Ray Ferraro
I tend to agree
No matter how long the suspension, even a lifetime ban, wouldn’t prevent anyhting like this from EVER happening again. There will always be idiots out there, and it will happen again regardless.
exactly
it’s just unfortunate for us that both these times involved Canucks players. that’s just a whim of fate.
Nucks Misconduct writer, ambassador and pseudo-moderator. Also on Twitter
"Waist-down, Toews is huge!" TSN's Ray Ferraro
To be clear
I was hoping for more games as well. I just don’t think it would affect the overall frequency of these occurences league-wide.
i was expecting 10 myself.
Nucks Misconduct writer, ambassador and pseudo-moderator. Also on Twitter
"Waist-down, Toews is huge!" TSN's Ray Ferraro
I thought
around 15
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
A seven game benching for Halward did not prevent Rypien from doing it, why would six games for Rypien prevent someone else from doing it in the future?
Is that a typo? That is a ludicrous statement.
I truly hope the Canucks organization has the brains to send this idiot back to Manitoba to play out his contract, and then to not re-sign him. Sorry, pal. You don’t deserve to be in the NHL.
Jeez, I know you don’t give a rat’s ass about the fact that Rypien had no prior offences but even this statement is bold and one I completely disagree with. Believe me, I’m not wearing rosy Rypper glasses. I just think the ruling was fair.
Nucks Misconduct
"Then I will see you in hell!'" - Han Solo
"We live in a country where John Lennon takes eight bullets, Yoko Ono is walking right beside him and not one hits her. Explain that to me, God! Explain that to me!!" -Dennis Leary
by Sean Zandberg on Oct 22, 2010 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions
I still enjoyed your post though, don’t get me wrong. You are providing the opposite side of the coin on this matter.
Nucks Misconduct
"Then I will see you in hell!'" - Han Solo
"We live in a country where John Lennon takes eight bullets, Yoko Ono is walking right beside him and not one hits her. Explain that to me, God! Explain that to me!!" -Dennis Leary
by Sean Zandberg on Oct 22, 2010 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I can respect that you think the ruling was fair. Many people I have a great deal of respect for agree with you. I think six games is short sighted, and does nothing to prevent it from happening again.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
28 years. Correct. The NHL brought it up as precedent, so it is fair game. Also, it shows that this continues to happen, despite players being punished with these minor suspensions. Regardless of if these players had been born or not, they need to have an example to learn from, and it was already there, and they didn’t.
Suspending someone for 40 games would have left a clear memory for all players to come that this is not acceptable. A six game suspension is easy forgettable. That’s my point. 40 games is not.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
40 games would have left a clear memory for players
and it still would happen again. Rypien and any other player in that situation isn’t pausing to think about the possible punishment. Should the suspension have been longer? I think so. But a longer suspension won’t stop future offenders.
The problem is that you never know until you try. The NHL won’t even attempt to send a message.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
You’re holding this incident on too high of a pedestal, IMO. 40 games for that? Then what about other infractions? Increase the duration of those as well? Where is the balance?
And I agree with Waldo that increasing the length of the suspension would not stop future offenders. It’s called “heat of the moment”. Some players are more hot headed than others.
Nucks Misconduct
"Then I will see you in hell!'" - Han Solo
"We live in a country where John Lennon takes eight bullets, Yoko Ono is walking right beside him and not one hits her. Explain that to me, God! Explain that to me!!" -Dennis Leary
by Sean Zandberg on Oct 22, 2010 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions
And I agree with Waldo that increasing the length of the suspension would not stop future offenders.
I’d call it diminishing returns. At some point the deterrent maximizes it’s deterring value. You could make it a lifetime ban and there will still be a player that does it sometime.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Then make it an automatic season ban, and those that continue to do it can all get the maximum punishment. At least then the league has done what it can, rather than pussy footing around it.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Based on the 28 years between incidents, I’m guessing 6-7 games is approaching diminishing returns for a case like this.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions
I don’t want there to be balance. You attack a fan, the punishment should be the harshest the league ever hands down.It is not “this incident” I am holding too high. It is “this incident” that others are holding up too high. It is not about this one, isolated event. It is about attacking fan, and making it clear that no matter how small or non-harmful the attack, it is not acceptable.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Wow
holy minnesota tinted glasses. OK, so I’m a canucks fan, but that doesn’t mean I think Rypien should not be punished for that incredibly stupid act. But, seriously…u think it warrants more than 6 games? For scrunching some douchebag’s sweater a bit? Come on. I originally thought 8 games, but 6 is not missing the boat. We’re not talking about Artest taking a swing or three or domi popping some idiot who jumped into the box here…we’re talking about grabbing a jersey and very quickly letting go of it. Also, for perspective: Doan gets three games for taking someone’s head off with a blind side hit, and no righteous indignation from you there? Please don’t say ’it’s not like doan’s a dirty player with a history though’, cuz that would just magnify the fact that you’re being fan-tinted-ridiculous.
Also, the eye gouge…u really think this guy who’s never lost his cool like that in his whole hockey career just out of nowhere decided to go off on a rage and scream at the linesman ‘he gouged my eye!’? You realllllly think he just randomly made that up? Come on. I’m not saying it excuses rypien’s actions, just that it is a valid explanation for them. To make a definitive statement like ‘it didn’t happen’ (or even ‘it definitely did happen’) is pretty hard to pull off, u not being there on the ice with a clear view of it all. I’m sure that an eye gouge wasn’t intentional (and if it was then that to me is massively more egregious than ruffling the princess’ jersey a bit), but I can see no situation in the world where rick rypien would scream that out to the linesman randomly. I’ll give u the benefit of the doubt, u being in minny and not knowing or following the canucks players like we do, but this guy is not one to make that kind of shit up. If it was burrows or kesler or samuelsson I might have a question (although still wouldn’t be convinced), but no not rypien.
Anyways, this was a crappy thing that shouldn’t have happened, Rypien was in the wrong, and the punishment is just. Don’t get all miffed that it wasn’t 20+ games, that just sounds ridiculous.
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
Actually
on the eye gouge deal, if he was going to make something up to offer explanation for his spaz out, wouldn’t it make more sense and give him better optics to say he got tagged in the jewels than having his eye poked? Even if they didn’t believe it the linesmen and refs would definitely cringe to that one… :)
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
We miss you Twitch.
If I’m not allowed to speak for others, I miss you Twitch. (In a purely platonic, non-homosexual way.)
I thought Bettman would crack down on him harder too, just to set an example, but I would be inclined to agree that a 5-8 would be adequate, 10 would be on the heavy side, and anything more would be unreasonable.
Also, the more I hear Gillis talk about it, the more I think he’ll be back. Yes, he’ll be on a tight leash, yes he’ll probably have to be on his best behaviour, but I still like him, what he has to offer to the team, and definitley the effort he brings every damn game.
Watching the Canucks for so long, Rypien’s definitely not the type to make crap up like that. Obviously, just because he was eye gouged doesn’t mean he can spaz at a fan, but I believe that’s largely why he wanted another shot at Staubitz.
by Vancouverguy on Oct 22, 2010 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions
"Another shot at Staubitz"
This is where the eye gouge could have potentially come into play. If, in the first altercation or during the flow of action, Staubitz gouged his eye, I could see the problem. I haven’t looked at the video of the first fight or anything that led to the second, but that’s the only way it’s conceivable.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
We miss you Twitch.
If I’m not allowed to speak for others, I miss you Twitch. (In a purely platonic, non-homosexual way.)
Well thanks man, especially for that critical bracketed part, cuz it mighta been wierd without it.
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
Doan, etc
The difference is that he accosted a fan. A customer. Someone who should be off-limits. A fan is not part of the on-ice activity of the game. That’s the difference. That’s why it’s worse.
Oh, and on the eye gouge, Go through the video, there are multiple angles, and see when it could have possibly happened. Unless someone on the bench did it, or Staubitz has 10 inch fingers, it’s exceedingly unlikely in the two seconds before the ref split them.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
I agree
the fans should be off limits…my point was more that Doan’s hit was substantially more dangerous to the recipient’s health and well being. The only thing dangerous about Rypiens move was, as you stated very well in your article, the possibility of escalation. The thing is, this type of thing is not a ‘message-able’ (is that a word) offense. Giving more games sends no message, giving less games sends no message. These incidents happen as a result of someone snapping, not logical thought…fear of punishment doesn’t affect the thought process in any way. In the case of a bad hit, that’s just common sense (and yes accidents can happen), and threat of punishment can stop someone from that. Punishment can’t stop someone who’s in a moment of irrationality, only their particular psychological borders can. I would personally never hit someone outside of self defense, no matter how mad I am; that’s my border. Yours may be similar. It doesn’t mean I wouldn’t punch a wall or throw something in a red rage, and afterwards i’d be all mad at myself for breaking my phone/ipod/laptop/tv remote/pet/baby (no the last couple are a joke).
Back to the eye gouge…we don’t know it happened in that particular scrum, and we don’t know it was staubitz…rypien may have assumed it was staubitz and it could have been someone’s stick, a flying glove, his own finger…i’m not saying that. I’m saying that for Rypien to shout ‘he gouged my eye’ tells me that something gouged his eye; sorry, I just don’t see how or why he would make that up.
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
agreed
But I’m saying I just couldn’t see it in that instance, and I looked.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
I looked at that video a lot of times, and I didn’t see an eye gouge, but I sure saw a sucker punch.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Oct 22, 2010 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
For real
and I’m sure little angel Rypien would NEVER make anything up…
Apparently
you’re sure that little devil rypien definitely would! And that little angel Staubitz would never do anything bad. Well, I guess it’s easy to stand on your perfectly worded non shorthand pedestal with a completely shut mind and positively KNOW that there is only one side to the story. How long have you been a tea partier, anyways?
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
You talking to me? I’m the furthest thing from a tea partier you never met.
I don’t have any time for Staubitz either, who year before last injured Zack Stortini in a fight with a very dirty and dangerous takedown that was way outside “the code”. I’m just describing what I saw in this instance, which was:
1. Staubitz slewfooting Edler (something which has received little mention)
2. Rypien sucker punching Staubitz
3. Rypien manhandling the linesman
4. Rypien lunging into the stands to grab a fan in a threatening manner
Suspension is way too short, but if they gave Staubitz a game for the slewfoot that would be alright in my books too.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Oct 22, 2010 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Well
actually I was talking to CitySlicker cuz he said
and I’m sure little angel Rypien would NEVER make anything up…
I agree with u on all points Bruce, except I don’t think it was way too short. My original comment was 8 games…6 is plenty. My point stands though, I can see no circumstances where it would make sense for Rypien to say ‘he gouged my eye’ at the point that he did say that unless someone or something gouged his eye. It’s nonsensical…the guy was off his nut at the time he said that to the linesman… I just don’t see any player making that up in that kind of agitated state, and I especially don’t see a guy like rypien who IS a pretty clean player making that up. Yeah, he fights, but no one’s ever accused rypien of being dirty (til now). I also did not see an eye gouge…what I’m saying is in this case with all the context around it, I do believe that something or someone poked him in the eye, and I believe that’s what set him off.
I was talking earlier about blind rage…I can tell you in my 40 plus years I’ve only once ever in my life that I can think of gone into a blind rage, and it was when someone got me in the eyeball. So maybe my vision of it is a little skewed (pun not really intended there) and I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt based on my own experience, but knowing what I know of rypien, seeing the events unfold live and on a bajillion replays, I 100% believe rypien was poked in the eye. I also believe that going after the fan was a very big no-no and that punishment was definitely warranted. Thirdly, I believe that punishment was adequate, if a bit shorter than my original thoughts on it. So there. :P
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
Agreed
That slewfoot was ridiculous, as was his crosscheck to Rypien’s neck.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
I never said anything about Staubitz. However, you appear to believe
Rypien’s word is beyond reproach, that’s just not the case.
“Back to the eye gouge…we don’t know it happened in that particular scrum, and we don’t know it was staubitz…rypien may have assumed it was staubitz and it could have been someone’s stick, a flying glove, his own finger…i’m not saying that. I’m saying that for Rypien to shout ‘he gouged my eye’ tells me that something gouged his eye”
Yeah, or maybe it never happened. But, I would never accuse you of pretending like you positively KNOW anything…Whatever.
No idea what the tea party reference is about, those rednecks love poor grammar.
self defense
So your saying that the fan had every right to hit Rypien after he put his hands on him? In self defense. I’m in no way standing up for the fan, but this could have been way worse. If he felt threatened enough, and with a professional hockey coming at you (who was just throwing punches on the ice) what stops you from throwing a punch or pushing back.
The 6 game suspension does almost nothing for a player like Rypien, who sits out on a regular basis anyways. He hasn’t even played in half the games so far this year. I wouldn’t say a 20 game suspension would be right, but 6 games only? He has played in only 3 of the first 7. So the suspension is actually only like 2 or 3 games for him. Should’ve given him 10-15, which doesn’t really hurt the Canucks as he would only be playing in 5 of them anyways. With the higher amount, it sets more of a precedent but actually hurting the team less.
No not at all
I’m saying my personal boundary for violence is to protect myself. Obviously rypien’s is not that. What I was getting at is that in the midst of irrational red rage, the threat of punishment doesn’t halt actions, only your own psychological boundaries do. For instance if someone is a fighter; he may swing at a dude in a red rage but may never do so against his girlfriend/wife/mother because he has a line he doesn’t pass even in that act of purely irrational rage. Or maybe their line doesn’t stop at domestic violence, and then u get a wife beater/child abuser. I was using my own line as an example; it really had nothing to do with what rypien did beyond the blind rage circumstances. Sorry if I didn’t make that clear.
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
Yeah, in professional sports the fans have to be on the other side of that line you don’t cross no matter what.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Oct 22, 2010 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions
All of these issues have been addressed in other threads. For you benefit, I will repeat them, yet again.
1. I don’t care that it in a Minnesota / Vancouver thing. This has nothing to do with the teams, nor the rivalry. It has to do with a player accosting a fan. No, I do not wear Minnesota tinted glasses. Thank you for trying that weak argument though.
2. As I have said in this post and others: I don’t care that this isn’t the same as Artest. They needed to make the statement BEFORE it becomes Artest.
3. Doan’s hit was on the ice. Rypien’s wasn’t, and it crossed a line into the real world where things like this are not accepted. It is not comparable to anything that has happened on the ice. Players assume risk. Fans do not.
4. I do think he randomly made up the eye gouge. He was trying to cover his own ass. Regardless, I don’t care. There is nothing on video showing an eye gouge, and in fact, all video shows the contrary. When all evidence points to him lying, I have to say he is lying. Show me evidence of an eye gouge, and I will apologize immediately.
5. The fan being a douche or not, means nothing, and calling him names solves nothing. It only shows the bitterness involved with your comment, and is not worthy of a response.
6. So, the goon, wouldn’t make something like this up, but your Captain would? Nice.
7. I will get miffed if I so choose. As I said in the post above, I know I am in the minority on this. It needed a huge response to end it. 6 games for someone who is gone in the first place… it’s nothing but a joke.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Wow...
…when you don’t like a point you go word nazi? Nice!
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
Ha
I agree with your retort to the original poster. Its pretty obvious an outburst like that cannot be tolerated, but I can almost assure you rypien will be quiet and go about his business from here on out. The punishment fits, and even alluding to legal action is shameful in my opinion. The guy has a better hockey game story than pretty much everybody. I don’t know if ‘minny’ was sarcastic but i laughed anyhow. I hope the poor boy didn’t get nasty glove smell on his crispy sweater. I somehow believe this will remain an isolated incident. Its really not a big deal. Every responsible parent will now have a concrete, situational example of how not to behave during a hockey game.
"Halak me now.."
The Stallion pt. 5
this was misplaced, but is in response to twitchy's post beginning "wow"
"Halak me now.."
The Stallion pt. 5
By the way
For all of those people blaming the Xcel Energy Center for not having a barricade between the players bench/tunnel and the fans, well, here is the area behind the visitors bench in Rogers Arena in Vancouver.
Yep, no plexiglass, no barricade. Nothing.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
Gasp!
What’s going to protect those poor visiting hockey players from losing their tempers and grabbing some evil fan who is mocking them verbally?!?!?…
Oh, right. Self control and a league that understands how to drill it into players’ minds that there are boundaries you should never cross.
another by the way
Watching the Wild vs Oliers game last night, I’m pretty sure they didn’t have plexi between the fans and the bench/tunnel. I think they placed a security guard there while players were moving in and out. That 60 year old guy in the blue blazer will do a heck of a job preventing some enraged hockey player from grabbing a fan….
by minnesotagirl71 on Oct 22, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Wrong. In Edmonton the visiting players go out the Zamboni entrance at the end of the rink, and there is a tunnel that extends out when the time comes. One of the issues in Minnesota concerns the fact that the tunnel is there but there was precious little time to activate it in the seconds between Rypien going apeshit right in front of the bench and being “escorted” off the ice right after that.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Oct 22, 2010 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Kevin Bieksa acknowledged today that Vancouver has the same problem with separation from fans and players
Nucks Misconduct
"Then I will see you in hell!'" - Han Solo
"We live in a country where John Lennon takes eight bullets, Yoko Ono is walking right beside him and not one hits her. Explain that to me, God! Explain that to me!!" -Dennis Leary
by Sean Zandberg on Oct 22, 2010 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions
so because one player goes apeshit...
we should have to add plexi to ensure fan safety? College and high school tourneys are played at the X. People love to sit near their players bench – little kids get high fives and fit bumps from their favorite high school and college players. It’s a great experience for them. Let’s not let one apeshit “professional” hockey player ruin the fan experience.
by minnesotagirl71 on Oct 22, 2010 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions
They do in Vancity too. The difference is it is not tTHAT open. The X place there has a long tunnel, a lower floor, and is wider.
In Rogers, it is similar, like the pic above. What that does not show is that in Vancity, it is deeper. Players have to reach up to the hands that are high fiving them.
A security guard that shows up late probably felt a little sheepish too. That is probably his spot.
In a legal sense, there may be a problem with the X as opposed to other rinks. Most of them, the tunnel is deeper. Just a little different logistically.
I know nathan wants to make it the same…but unfortunately it is not. Similar…but if that pic pulls back , you would see that only a guy like Boogey or Alberts would be tall enough to engage. Its just not totally the same. Sorry my friend.
;-)
I thought 5, was expecting 10, and am OK with 6.
"If I'd written the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people—including me—would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism."
—Rolling Stone, February 15, 1973 Hunter S Thompson
oops...higher floor. You know what I am getting at I think.
"If I'd written the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people—including me—would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism."
—Rolling Stone, February 15, 1973 Hunter S Thompson
Hay BR
This is the email I sent that dipshit SI reporter:
“Jim,
What parallel universe do you live in? “Rowdy”? The guy was CLAPPING. He wasn’t hanging over the edge, he wasn’t flipping birds. He was standing in front of his seat CLAPPING when Rypien attacked. Where on God’s green earth are you seeing this guy do anything other than put his hands together? Please, please tell me. Please tell me where in the video you see the guy reach down and insult Rypien’s mother. Please tell me where you see him take a swing. He doesn’t. Because he was clapping.
It’s “sports” reporters like you that show why all you need for a communications degree is 120 credits in “how do you feel”. Watch the video again. Dude is there with his brother, putting his left and right together when Rypien decides to go all mongoloid.
I will say that if it’s just a matter of vision, I do apologize and wish you well in your new career as an NHL referee.
Peter Eggert
Duluth, MN"
As an unbiased fan
(I am an Avs fan, and hate both Canucks and Minnesota equally). I still don’t think the league was far off in this case.
I mean the crux of the argument for more games seems to be to set a precedent as a deterrent to players. But is such a deterrent really necessary (in this case)? Are there really players chomping at the bit to go into the stands and take fans on in a fight but the only thing holding them back is the potential for a suspension, and now that they know that they only get 6 games (and that’s for, lets face it, a pretty mild confrontation) they can feel free to assault fans for minimal punishment? I don’t think any length of suspension is really going to be a deterrent, because there’s really not much to deter.
Even if you argue that suspensions are a deterrent for this (which you clearly are) it’s been 28 years between comparable incidents (at least from your research.). And the last time the Halward got a 7-game suspension. Last time I checked 28 years between incidents means that the 7 game suspension was clearly a pretty good deterrent. I mean how many players did the suspension deter for the last 28 years (and the answer is: no one knows) . So maybe the NHL should have added an extra game to Rypien’s suspension.
Players grabbing, attacking, punching, squirting, or spitting at fans has happened in the past. It is going to happen again.A seven game benching for Halward did not prevent Rypien from doing it, why would six games for Rypien prevent someone else from doing it in the future?
So you;ve accepted than no suspension is going to completely eliminate this kind of interaction from the game, and yet 28 years between comparable incidents isn’t acceptable so the NHL should suspend them longer so that you can completely eliminate this. Which you’ve already dismissed as an impossibility? I guess I don’t see the logic behind such a statement.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 3:18 PM CDT reply actions
Where did I accept that “no suspension is going to completely eliminate this kind of interaction?” I said that 6 and 7 game tiny little suspensions won’t do it.
The 28 year mark is simply the one the NHL threw out there as the longest suspension for this type of incident. It is not the most recent.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Players grabbing, attacking, punching, squirting, or spitting at fans has happened in the past. It is going to happen again.A seven game benching for Halward did not prevent Rypien from doing it, why would six games for Rypien prevent someone else from doing it in the future?
The 28 year mark is simply the one the NHL threw out there as the longest suspension for this type of incident. It is not the most recent.
I haven’t been able to find anything where a hockey player went into the stands since that incident (that doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened, just that I can’t find it). Everything I’ve found, like the stuff here, has been the fan crossing that fan-player barrier first or older than 1982
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions
None of the incidents with players squirting water at fans were initiated because a fan yelled something at the player? They all involved fans crossing the physical barrier first?
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Unless the fan is the wicked witch of the West and is going to melt from the water, squirting a water bottle at a fan is not comparable.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions
The rule does not distinguish severity, thus it is comparable.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Physically confronting a fan endangers them. Squirting water at them does not endanger the fan at all. They are not even remotely close to comparable.
This feels like you’re calling for the NHL to solve a problem it simply doesn’t have, and is in no real danger of having.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Read the rule. I know they aren’t comparable in severity. The league does not distinguish in the rule.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Severity is obviously a factor in the comparison whether the rule is the same or not. The NHL specifically left the ruling vague and open-ended because they know this. Had Rypien charged the stands and walloped on an old lady for 5 minutes with his stick he certainly would have gotten more than 6 games. Had he squirted the fan with a water bottle on the way by he probably would have gotten a lot less. The league does distinguish (as does most rules) so the severity certainly does matter.
Stealing a $2 candy bar is not comparable to stealing $499 TV, but they are both petty theft (depending on local and state laws etc). A judge/jury isn’t going to make a comparison between the two in any court of law.
You’ve now spent 3 comments (poorly) arguing technicalities instead of addressing the overall point, which is that you are arguing that this serves a greater overall deterrent, when
there’s really nothing much to deter or
if there was, then these already established punishments obviously have been a pretty good deterrent.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 23, 2010 12:16 AM CDT up reply actions
And you have spent multiple comments (poorly) trying to convince me I am wrong, when it is clearly impossible to do so. But hey, why chalk it up to the fact that you and I don’t agree on this, rather than arguing about it ad nauseum?
I don’t care that you think my argument is not good enough. I’m not the one trying to convince you that you are wrong. Believe what you want to. I think Rypien should be suspended for 40 games. I think the NHL needed to send a message. You don’t. Why keep trying to convince me I’m wrong? Are you going to win some kind of prize? Extra cool bonus points on the interwebz?
I have my opinion, you have yours. Welcome to disagreement. I appreciate that you think my argument is weak, but I don’t care. Anything else?
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
fair enough
But that’s not how debate really works. You presented your logic, in an open forum no less. I pointed out what I think, and still think, are a number of logical flaws. If you didn’t want to have a discussion about it, you probably shouldn’t post it in an open forum. You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but I’m certainly entitled to question you when the logic you use in reaching your conclusion doesn’t make sense, and it really doesn’t.
If you’re going to put the effort into posting something 1,500 words long, especially something you know is going to be controversial, put the effort into defending your position.
I enjoy debate. I stopped by to hopefully intelligently and rationally discuss an important issue in hockey with someone who has a different opinion. Instead of a defense of the original position I got technicalities and a good ol “It’s my opinion”.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 23, 2010 12:56 AM CDT up reply actions
I put in the original post that I knew that people would not agree, and that my opinion on this is on the fringe. I already know that. The technicalities are what my logic is based on. Your technicalities are what yours is based on. We have a differing opinion, and you seem to want to spend five days going back and forth on the same points. We don’t agree. Why waste our lives debating the smallest detail of it?
I did post it in an open forum, and you should feel free to come and debate anytime. However, I grow weary of arguing about the same point every time you comment again. You feel that this is not a big deal, that the suspension fits, and that the fact that it only happens every 28 years is acceptable. So do most of the MSM, and so do most of the blogs and comments on this and at Nucks Misconduct. That’s great. You win, OK? More people agree with you than agree with me. Congrats. If you would read the post, I am not shocked by that.
I have no reason to defend my position, do I? I presented my case above. You can agree or disagree, and we can debate from here until next week, but it changes nothing. I’m still going to think this is a much bigger deal than you do, and until you attempt to see it from my perspective, we get nowhere. We just dance and dance around the fact that you don’t think it is a big deal, and I do.
So. Any other points you would like to discuss, or do you just want to tell me my logic is flawed (your opinion) and that this isn’t as big a deal as I think it is (your opinion).
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
Hit post too soon. Apologies.
As for the overall deterrent argument, I’m not sure what else you want me to say about it. Just because I have made my argument that I think it would serve as a deterrent, and then you counter it with your opinion does not render my thought illogical. The NHL has never made a bold statement with a long suspension for engaging a fan. You have no case that it wouldn’t work, just as I have no case that it would.
Big difference between theft and engaging a fan. One is a crime, punishable by the law. One is a violation of league rules and is punishable by the Commissioner of the NHL. One involves courts, juries, and judges, and the other is one guy making a decision with no recourse for the player.
All I said is that the small suspensions they have handed out haven’t worked, so why keep handing them out? Why not send a message, rather than stick with what you have done when it has yet to send the message you say you want to send?
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
I’m still going to think this is a much bigger deal than you do, and until you attempt to see it from my perspective, we get nowhere.
That’s exactly what I was trying to do. I didn’t, and still don’t, understand your logic at all, and was asking you how you came to your conclusion. I’m not debating you to change your opinion, that’s not really the point of debate. I’m debating you to get a better understanding of your opinion. Maybe it’s the scientist in me, but when people bring up good points and challenge my position it makes me think about my position at a deeper level. That’s why it’s so frustrating when you answer me with trivialities instead of addressing the larger point I was trying to make.
Back to the discussion at hand
The NHL has never made a bold statement with a long suspension for engaging a fan….All I said is that the small suspensions they have handed out haven’t worked, so why keep handing them out? Why not send a message, rather than stick with what you have done when it has yet to send the message you say you want to send?
I guess my biggest misunderstanding is why you believe smaller suspensions haven’t worked, and why the NHL even needs to make a bold statement. I don’t see some sort of epidemic of player-fan engagements going on, and I have a hard time believing this is some catalyst for a string of those happening.
Usually when you send a message through punishment it’s because there’s a bigger underlying issue at hand that you’re trying to nip in the bud. You say smaller punishments haven’t worked, but I see the exact opposite. In the 70’s these kinds of things happened intermittently, The NHL started handing out suspensions (which hurts the players both in the wallet and on the ice) and it stopped happening for pretty much 28 years.
as an aside…
I’d argue that engaging a fan physically is a crime, it could be assault and charges could conceivably be pressed (and probably couldn’t be pressed for squirting a watter bottle at a fan, which is yet another way in which they aren’t comparable but that’s besides the point)
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 23, 2010 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions
Maybe it’s the scientist in me, but when people bring up good points and challenge my position it makes me think about my position at a deeper level. That’s why it’s so frustrating when you answer me with trivialities instead of addressing the larger point I was trying to make.
Let me say again. This is my opinion. I don’t feel need to explain how I came to form my opinion. If that is upsetting to you, I apologize, but sometimes, people have an opinion about something based solely on the fact that it is their opinion. Just because you say they are trivialities does not make it fact that they are. It would be your… wait for it… opinion.
I am not a scientist. I am a hockey writer. I don’t always need justification for my opinions, and just because you call for one does not make you entitled to one. Again, I apologize of that upsets you. 99% of the time there are concrete facts that can be used to form a logical argument in defense of a position. This falls in the 1%. This is a matter of emotion. I feel the NHL screwed this up, and I feel that they needed to send a message.
Please tell me that you don’t think I need to justify my reasons for feeling something.
As for your argument about this not being an epidemic, it has been asked an answered so many times I am going to puke if I address it again. My opinion on the matter is clear. As is yours. I’m done.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
I do agree that a deterrent isn't necessary
You need punishment for fucking idiotic behavior that is destructive to the public image of the NHL.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
Agree
I’m certainly not arguing that Rypien shouldn’t be punished, or even punished severely. But a 6-7 game suspension is a pretty severe punishment. That’s 7% of a players salary, plus, for a 4th liner like Rypien, that’s seven games he’s not in the lineup, susceptible to be forgotten which increases likelihood that he’ll be demoted/scratched/re-signed. It’s not “nothing” like you blog partner says in the main post
I understand the comparison’s to Avery’s suspension, but that only shows how stupid his suspension was at the time. I think 6 games is a little light, but not outside the boundaries of reasonable.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 22, 2010 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions
I would've made it an even 10 for stupidity
But that’s just me. 6 isn’t egregious. 15 wouldn’t have been out of line.
Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.
Not quite 28 years. This was closer to Barnaby than any other. 10 years ago he grabbed a senior.
Got 4 games. With inflation…6 is about right …no?
;-)
"If I'd written the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people—including me—would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism."
—Rolling Stone, February 15, 1973 Hunter S Thompson
I don’t remember that. I’’d argue that he got off very easy. I don’t remember the circumstances though so it’s difficult to say.
Your mama so ugly they call her "The Avs Powerplay"
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 23, 2010 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions
When I think of the word assault, I think of someone getting bloodied. The fan claiming this is was an assault…well thats ridiculous. He got grabbed. Thats all. He’s lucky he didn’t get more.
Wheel of Time, save my soul, find a way; may it be as the pattern has chosen, oh Wheel of Time..
by TheDragonReborn on Oct 22, 2010 3:37 PM CDT reply actions
Also...
I hate to put on my Chicago tinted glasses at this point, but Hjalmarsson’s hit wasn’t full on from behind, and he didn’t slam Pominville’s head into the boards.
For the record, I’m a Wild fan first, and I think the Rypien suspension is good enough.
Wheel of Time, save my soul, find a way; may it be as the pattern has chosen, oh Wheel of Time..
by TheDragonReborn on Oct 22, 2010 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Please see post about Minnesota Law. While you may feel “assault” is something more violent, the law disagrees. I have used the word assault, accost, assail…. all interchangeably. Probably shouldn’t, but they all mean the same thing to me in this case. The fans was grabbed. He was assaulted/accosted/assailed. Choose your own word.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
I was referring more to the “victims” use of the word than yours. I read Puck Daddy’s article before I cam here and saw the fans statement over there.
Wheel of Time, save my soul, find a way; may it be as the pattern has chosen, oh Wheel of Time..
by TheDragonReborn on Oct 22, 2010 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Gotcha. He keeps talking about civil action, which he has no case for.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
The thing that gets me about this is that it’s been, what, 28 years since the last form of physical violence towards a fan by a player? (And, mind you, I mean physical violence — not giving them an impromptu shower.)
Yeah…Seven games wasn’t enough then and maybe six won’t be enough now, but even if you kick Rypien out for 40 games or a whole season, what’s to say that 28 years from now someone’s going to remember it?
No offense towards Rypien…But it’s Rick Rypien. It’s not like they’re suspending Kesler or one of the Sedins. It’s Rick Rypien. Whether it’s six games or 40, twenty-odd years from now there won’t be many that remember the incident any more than “Hey, you remember that game where some Canucks player grabbed a fan? What was his name again?”
I think the more important point that many people are glossing over is the fact that the team got fined as well. At the end of the day, I think that a fine to the team is a lot more likely to curb this sort of thing than a suspension. If you’re in the business world and you do something that costs your employer $25,000, you’ll likely get a good talking to and some sort of action taken from your employer, whether public or no. I wouldn’t expect it to be publicized, but I would expect that the Canucks will at least sit Mr. Rypien down and have a chat with him, letting him know exactly how stupid what he did was.
I would suggest
that a 25k fine to a company with a payroll of 54 million dollars (wait…actually that 54 million is just the players…we could probably add another 10-25 million on there for the hundreds of support staff) is actually going to get you AT MOST a talking to. Now if it’s a 25k fine to a company with a revenue stream of under 1 million a year, then yeah, that’s a little more troublesome.
Also at 575k a year, 6 games out of rypiens salary hurts him a bit more than 6 games out of Daniels…it’s only the team it hurts less….and i’m pretty sure you’re not suggesting team’s get punished for a players’ stupidity, are you?
"F#ck eco-anything, f#ck your tatoos. F#ck all you junkies and f#ck your short memories."
"You'll be playing in England the rest of your career" Alex Burrows
"When I shake it, I shake it all up, You probably think that my pants have the mumps. It's just my sugarlumps bump ba bump.They look so good, that's why I keep 'em in the front" FotC
25K to a multimillion dollar corporation is pocket change. It’s like fining you a dime.
The 28 years argument means nothing to me. Do people remember the times Chris Simon was suspended for long stretches? I bet they will. How many players have been suspended six games? How many can you name? Now… how many guys have been suspended for more than 20? Maybe two or three?
It would have absolutely sent a message. One that would be remembered. Now? It will be forgotten before the end of the month.
Editor:Hockey Wilderness Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota Owner: Komissaari erämaa
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
The Rage argument is BS
The person makes a choice, trust me I know. There have been plenty of times I have seen red and walked away to stop myself from saying something I knew I would regret. And there have been times when I didn’t care about the consequences and said it anyway. You make that choice. Don’t give me the rage BS.
http://twitter.com/knowsknothing
Relax, everyone, I'm joking.
As in ROID-Rage??
Many of the arguments being made for the length of the suspension are blurring the lines between a fan and a hockey player.
Sure, what Rypien did wasn’t all that bad. He didn’t throw a punch, he didn’t rip him over the rail etc.. The severity of what Rypien did has little do with why he should actually be suspended.
The NHL DOES NOT EXIST SO HOCKEY PLAYERS CAN PLAY HOCKEY. The NHL exists because there are fans that pour money into their team so they can watch the hockey players play hockey. Get it? Play hockey? People don’t pay for tickets so they can be attacked by hockey players, they pay for tickets so they can watch hockey players play hockey.
The NHL doesn’t need to “send a message” to other hockey players as much as they need to “send a message” to the fans. They need to show the fans that they’re completely serious about the fans’ safety. Do you think that 6-7 game suspension is sending that message? That’s up for debate, but I don’t really think it is.
You also can’t compare hockey players injuring hockey players to hockey players attacking fans. That’s completely misguided. Hockey players play hockey with the full knowledge that they may get their asses ran into the boards which could end their career. That’s just hockey. Fans, however, buy tickets with the belief that they are not hockey players, and don’t need to worry about getting their lights punched out by a person who clearly cannot control their emotions. See the difference there?
Owner of The Haves & Havlats in the Hockey Wilderness League
by ADN on Oct 22, 2010 5:27 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Suspension
I have to disagree with the thought that the league missed the boat and that a stiffer suspension would deter other infractions in the future. That is like saying that the death penalty has done its job in eliminating murder. In the heat of the moment anything can and will take place. Infractions and intent have to dealt with on an individual basis as each infraction occurs. Six games seems appropiate, noting that this behavior is a rare occurance.
Ugh.
6 games for Rypien?! Really? What a joke.. then again the NHL is famous for being inconsistent. They should have made an example of out Rypien’s poor behavior/judgement.
"Danny Valencia is a fricking stud! Hide your daughters!"
-Denard Span

by 

















