Suspensions.

Towards the beginning of this blog's illustrious career, I wrote about injuries and how the league better protecting its players, especially in regards to head injuries. I feel now i have to revisit the idea of the league protecting its players, although this time it's from themselves.

So without making you think too much about, this topic was in large part brought on by the recent actions of the infamous Matt Cooke. Widely known throughout the league as a dirty player with a long list of "questionable" hits with the most famous being the hit on Marc Savard. I will not post the hit because you had to have seen it by now, and no reason to rehash it. But certainly this week Cooke's actions have come to the forefront yet again. After a blatant knee-on-knee hit on Alex Ovechkin during NBC's Game of the Week on Sunday afternoon (a national telecast) in which the Pens were all but defeated at the time of the hit, and a hit on Fedor Tyutin last night in which he left his feet to drive him into the boards, one has to wonder when will these dangerous players be handed a suitable suspension?

The league has already shown that it will hand out lengthy suspensions, but it seems that will only hand them out to mostly bit players that won't effect on a team's overall performance. Maybe this is where things need to change. While no one can argue that Matt Cooke is a vital part of the Penguins success, but he does playa role critical to the team's make up. He is very much an agitator and energy type player. He has also shown some offensive prowess, generally adding between 10-15 goals and overall about 25-30 points a season. While certainly nowhere near the totals of Crosby or Malkin, every little bit helps. Personally I think the absence of Cooke would hurt the team despite his minuscule offensive numbers.

The biggest problem lies in the league's reluctance to hand out hefty suspensions, simply because no one will be happy. Teams will cry if any of their players are suspended for too long (hell they cry about it now), and other teams will cry if players aren't suspended as much as another. This is no easy way to hand these things out, and I don't envy the disciplinary committee at all in that respect. However, given the leagues posturing about trying to outlaw hits to the head and make the league safer, the must crack down on both dirty plays and dirty players. While not wanted to revisit the infamous Savard hit, I can understand that the league was reluctant to hand out a suspension as under the rules at the time it was a "legal" hit, although everyone can agree it was late and dirty.

Part of the problem also lies with the fact that there are essentially no more enforcers in the league. Not to say that this is a bag thing, but the problem is that there is no more fear factor anymore. Back in the day, if you took a cheap shot at someone, there would be repercussions. Someone would come and settle the score. Now, yes there are agitators/energy guys, but too few true enforcers that can inspire that fear in the opposing team. I'm not saying we need to bring back "old time hockey" or that everyone needs a line that reminds you of the Broad Street Bullies where teams were afraid to come in to your building, but there needs to be a balance. If the league is unwilling to police its players, then the players should be allowed to police themselves. Let players put a bullseye on the backs of players who need it.

Now one can logically say, won't that also put a target of the skilled players and make them more susceptible to late hits/violence? I won't say no, but i cannot in good conscience say yes either. At the end of the day, the players need to learn that they aren't without culpability. Right now it seems that neither the players or league is willing to truly take a stand on the issue of dirty players or dirty plays, and someone really has to, before we see someone out of the league as a result of one of these situations.