Comments on: Leafs’ Lupul tweets confusion over NHL’s suspension standards

By: tackledummy1505

tackledummy1505 — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 11:21:04 +0000

Someone tell Lupul that Shanahan didn’t play for the Leafs and that his team isn’t considered one of the favorites in the NHL, nor does he have the last names of Malkin or Crosby. Therefore there is no consideration of his hits and warrants an automatic suspension. Shanahan is absolutely outrageous in his excuses for what he determines as a suspension. This is why a third party or someone outside the game should determine suspensions and fines. Not an ex-player who has shown favoritism to certain players and teams. Unless everyone can use the Matt Cook excuse of it, “being an accident and they didn’t mean to do it,” and get away with it. Lol it’s become a constant joke anymore

By: billsin20xx

billsin20xx — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:29:22 +0000

Not defending Kaleta’s hot at all, he should have been suspended (but so should Nash), but Kaleta hit Richards in the back, not the head. Unfortunately he then fell into the boards (and I do blame Richards for the hissy fit he then had – lol). So if TK had fallen into the boards or broke his skull landing on the ice without a helmet would that have made the hit suspendable?
Of course I ignoring that the no suspension was to keep the Rangers in the playoff hunt.

By: ndrick731

ndrick731 — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:28:29 +0000

Those hits are legal if u play for the Penguins. That might be why he is confused.

By: billsin20xx

billsin20xx — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:25:34 +0000

Totally agree. I think the only reason Nash wasn’t suspended was to keep the Rangers in the playoff hunt. Lupul should re-appeal and present the evidence of Nash’s deliberate hit from behind, leaving his feet and then striking the neck/head area (the helmet flew off, he hit his head too!) and ask for it to be compared to his.

By: packerswin96

packerswin96 — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 23:40:23 +0000

For once I am cheering for a “Leaf” I hope I don’t hear an apology from Lupul.

By: shortsxit34

shortsxit34 — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 23:21:31 +0000

It makes perfect sense:

1) Look at team logo on front of sweater
2) Look at name on back of sweater
3) ???
4) Hand out suspension accordingly

By: hockeygal67

hockeygal67 — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 22:40:54 +0000

It seems that they determined Nash’s hit as accidental as he tried to avoid contact. Lupal’s was clear he was going for the hit.

TO BE CLEAR, I’m not saying that’s what happened in Nash’s case, but there was circumstances before the hit that the league (and the officials at the game) seemed to have interpreted as contributing to Nash heading for a collision with Kopecky and his attempt to, if not avoid, at least lessen the impact, by trying to jump around him. NOT saying that’s what happened, but it’s an explanation in understanding why the two situations were viewed differently.

By: bcisleman

bcisleman — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 22:27:17 +0000

Lupul was just saying the same thing as almost everyone else. Shanny bent over backwards not to suspend Nash. Point of contact may have been shoulders but to say that hit wasn’t predatory defies obvious evidence and common sense. If that wasn’t predatory, there is no such thing as predatory. Nash likely has no history of suspensions because Campbell also went out of his way to avoid suspending a “star”.

By: coronakid76

coronakid76 — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 22:26:01 +0000

Uh Ho!!!! Lupul will end up with a 1 game suspension for intent to hurt Shannabans feelings and questioning Campbell’s stooge pigeon. There has to be consistency with these suspensions.