So the word has come down — 25 games for Raffi Torres. It’s certainly high for the standards that have been set (or not set) by Brendan Shanahan and the player safety group.
What is evident is that the league didn’t want Torres to play another game in the 2012 Stanley Cup playoffs. It is dramatic enough, at a time when many had been calling for big suspensions, to have an impact on the rest of the playoffs. One would hope so.
Mind you, in the past two nights, when the officials became much more vigilant after the whistle, much of the needless silliness of these playoffs has disappeared.
There is no question that Marian Hossa is the victim on the play. As fans and supporters of the game, we can only hope that he is back playing sooner than later, and there are no long-term effects from the hit.
But Torres is a bit of a victim here too. He is certainly a victim of his own stupidity over the past 13 months. He has been warned, fined and suspended for hits on Jordan Eberle, Brent Seabrook, Jan Hejda and Nate Prosser. Maybe, now he will understand that this type of hit doesn’t belong in the game, even though there was a time that it was considered legal. Late… but legal.
He is also a victim of another sort. He is a victim Brendan Shanahan’s late arrival to the dance. Soft examination of events early in the playoffs that resulted in little or no supplemental discipline, created an air of recklessness in this first round that gave people like Torres the thought that anything goes. Clearly, it does not. But you can understand why Raffi thought it did.
Shea Weber should have received a hearing (which he did not) and a suspension, rather than a fine of $2,500 of tip money for his WWE act on Henrik Zetterberg. Brent Burns should have received a hearing and suspension for a hit on Scott Nichol. He received neither.
This is a game where it is often discussed that a “tone” can be set early. People insist that players, refs, coaches all can set a “tone” the way 60 minutes of hockey can be played out. Well, Brendan Shanahan could have set a “tone” for these playoffs. He could have detailed that events beyond the rule book will be handled swiftly and harshly. Instead, he waffled and created a double standard. He ruled with an air of selective suspensions, to leave the stars of the game on the ice. How do you explain Arron Asham’s four games for a cross-check, as opposed to Nicklas Backstrom’s one game for a cross-check that was just as bad?
I don’t want to be typical of the hockey world, and say the Torres suspension is too much, because it probably isn’t. I can only hope that Torres, who does have some talent as a player, comes back next year (at some time) with a new lease on life. But I don’t want Brendan to think that all is now good with the world, because he acted harshly on a third-line player. I will also be interested to see if the next suspension reflects a different philosophy of supplemental discipline. I hope it does.
Much of the negative coverage of the playoffs really relates to five or six violent events on the ice. Shanahan had a chance to set a tone for these playoffs by being as proportionally harsh on those events as he was on Torres. It would have reflected well for the growth and interest in the game. Because beyond those events, we have seen some thrilling hockey and it is great hockey folks — some of the best ever.
Those early events should have been handled better by Shanahan and his group.
The Stanley Cup playoffs started on April 11th, not April 21st.