Carpo
Post-Happy
Posts: 596
|
Post by Carpo on Jan 13, 2005 21:06:29 GMT 1
Couldn't have said it better myself. The Elite League need to sort themselves out QUICK! Why exactly? Romaniuk has done an awful check from behind. 3 games sounds about right. From what's been said, Payette punched him (2+2), onto the ground, and continued to punch him (2+2 should become a match) and for ignoring the officials and continuing to punch him that's a second match. I'll say, well done EIHL for starting to crack down on this sort of play. |
|
|
|
Post by King Rich on Jan 13, 2005 21:22:22 GMT 1
I weakly disagree Carpo. I'm not sure of the rules but I don't think there was any need to put additional penalties on.
|
|
Carpo
Post-Happy
Posts: 596
|
Post by Carpo on Jan 13, 2005 21:45:32 GMT 1
From a rules POV:
527 - EXCESSIVE ROUGHNESS
Any player who committs an action not permitted by the rules that may cause or causes
an injury to an opponent, to a team or game official shall be assessed a:
- Match penalty (MP)
That rule basicaly covers the referee's/disiplijnary committee in this sort of situation.
The key wording is 'may cause'.
Generally speaking, hitting a person on the floor is regarded as excessive.
|
|
|
|
Post by madfrank on Jan 13, 2005 22:15:01 GMT 1
Romanuick checks from behind - 3 match ban but as I understand it no harm done
Payette - execessive roughness - 2 match ban, once again as I understand it no harm done
Christian cripples a player who will be out for the rest of the season and may never be the same again - 2 match ban - lots of harm done
Peron hospitalises Cullen causing actual bodily harm and gets off scot free
Speaks volumes doesn't it
Devils and Blaze management - please appeal and fight this vigourously - Sally are you reading this ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Claret & Blue Army on Jan 13, 2005 23:17:14 GMT 1
Romanuick checks from behind - 3 match ban but as I understand it no harm done Payette - execessive roughness - 2 match ban, once again as I understand it no harm done Christian cripples a player who will be out for the rest of the season and may never be the same again - 2 match ban - lots of harm done Peron hospitalises Cullen causing actual bodily harm and gets off scot free Speaks volumes doesn't it Devils and Blaze management - please appeal and fight this vigourously - Sally are you reading this ? Call Mulder & Scully to sort out this obvious conspiracy  |
|
madcat
Wow, I Can Post
Posts: 144
|
Post by madcat on Jan 14, 2005 0:47:46 GMT 1
Slightly off topic...maybe...but can anyone confirm if the game in Cardiff tonight against London (rink challange) actually counts towards Russ's ban..If it does I think the eihl is having a laugh at our expense... it is a nothing game and it does not seem fair that we lose a player for two league games that can cost us points when tonights game costs them nothing.  |
|
Carpo
Post-Happy
Posts: 596
|
Post by Carpo on Jan 14, 2005 0:50:08 GMT 1
I don't know, but the usual ruling goes as follows:
If the challenge game was approved BEFORE the ban was imposed, then the game does count towards the suspension.
If the challenge game was approved AFTER the ban was imposed, then the game does not count towards the suspension.
I would guess it works this way, but i'm not certain.
|
|
|
|
Post by GazzatheDevil on Jan 14, 2005 12:21:05 GMT 1
The rink Cup game DID count towards the suspension so Russ wont be eligible for sunday but will play in the Second leg of the challenge cup
|
|
|
|
Post by sixreasons on Jan 14, 2005 16:35:22 GMT 1
I can't say anything about Romaniuk,but i was thinking about the situation,and as far fetched as it seems is it possible Andre got the 2 match ban to stop any retaliation on Christian tommorrow.It just seems coincidental,that it will be Christians first game against us coming off his ban,and Andre gets his penalty upgraded like i say it sounds far fetched,but with the league board who can be sure of anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy Martin 88 on Jan 14, 2005 18:08:50 GMT 1
I can't say anything about Romaniuk,but i was thinking about the situation,and as far fetched as it seems is it possible Andre got the 2 match ban to stop any retaliation on Christian tommorrow.It just seems coincidental,that it will be Christians first game against us coming off his ban,and Andre gets his penalty upgraded like i say it sounds far fetched,but with the league board who can be sure of anything. good point , maybe we should do something about it like tell the refs there c**p , not just moan about it LETS DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!! ( no offence intened ) They need a kick up the as$ . we could link up with a few other teams too. get the backing off a few hundred people? |
|
|
|
Post by Claret & Blue Army on Jan 14, 2005 18:40:46 GMT 1
It does seem a tad convenient
|
|
|
|
Post by GazzatheDevil on Jan 14, 2005 18:52:10 GMT 1
I'm suprised you lot find the refereeing so bad only twice this season i have found it really unbearable. I think the situation arises here is the Disciplinery comitee in getting some consistency to their bans that they dish out.
It seems they look at the fixture list more than the actual incident that took place
|
|
|
|
Post by Claret & Blue Army on Jan 14, 2005 18:56:06 GMT 1
I'm suprised you lot find the refereeing so bad only twice this season i have found it really unbearable. I think the situation arises here is the Disciplinery comitee in getting some consistency to their bans that they dish out. It seems they look at the fixture list more than the actual incident that took place Couldn't put it better myself |
|
Carpo
Post-Happy
Posts: 596
|
Post by Carpo on Jan 14, 2005 19:44:01 GMT 1
One thing to remember of course is because of the nature of it, the disiplinery committee changes from incident to incident....
So your not really going to get consistancy are you...
|
|
|
|
Post by sixreasons on Jan 14, 2005 19:56:16 GMT 1
No but some of there desicions seem completely bizzare.
|
|
