Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
Whaler1

Tom Wilson suspension

Recommended Posts

I found this in the NY Post interesting. It is the question I've always had about the NHLPA defending head hunting punks: what about all the other guys in the union who's heads are being hunted? Doesn't the union also represent them? It always seems like a knee-jerk thing to have to defend every individual against the league to try to keep the league in check. Sometimes, maybe a behind the scenes agreement that this only applies to 4 time re offending problem kids, and let it stand. Anyways:

 

 

The NHL established a precedent by suspending serial headhunter Tom Wilson for 20 games in the wake of his malevolent headshot against Oskar Sundqvist, and now here comes the NHLPA filing a grievance in order to make sure this precedent does not stand and become settled law.

 

The union is caught in a bind here as it engages in the effort to get one of its members back onto the ice so he can menace the other 750 or so of its dues-paying members as quickly as possible. Correct me if I’m wrong, but representing this thuggish recidivist who has been suspended four times within his last 105 games hardly seems to benefit the greater good of the PA.

 

It is time for a reckoning within the union, time for the membership to support severe penalties against the handful of miscreants who threaten the overwhelming majority’s health and livelihood. Time, once and for all, for the union to support outlawing all hits to the head.

 

image.gif

image.gif

image.gif

image.gif

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

Unions suck!  Okay Im good.  

Until you've worked for a profits-first, people-last org with no concerns about worker safety or adequate compensation.

 

Okay, I'm good too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Until you've worked for a profits-first, people-last org with no concerns about worker safety or adequate compensation.

 

Okay, I'm good too.

 

Ive been there. Doesn’t change my opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

Ive been there. Doesn’t change my opinion.

Not trying to. Just figured if a mod can state a political opinion on a board where they're not permitted, I'd make sure I could, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps instead of this conversation turning into a pro vs anti union debate it would be better to stick to this particular issue. Should the union defend the actions of a player that has a repeated history of dangerous play without the editorial remarks on unions in general

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to belabor my main point, but what has me confused is that the union represents the guys getting hit too, and there's a lot more of them, and they have a lot more to lose from letting these handful of predatory punks hunting their heads. I just wonder why the union doesn't represent the bigger part of the dues paying membership's heads and livelihoods when it comes to these multi repeat offenders. 

 

To me, it makes the union look like it is just knee-jerk reactionary to any suspensions. Like it must fight ownership for every inch of turf no matter the cost to it's members. 

 

In the case where a few guys are clearly wrong, why defend them at the expense of the rest of the players? This is not about money where the player gains and the league loses. This is about health and safety of, ironically union members. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, remkin said:

Not to belabor my main point, but what has me confused is that the union represents the guys getting hit too

 

I absolutely agree.  From what I'm reading the union is  trying to prevent the 20 games as becoming the standard for a suspension. I think the article uses the verbiage becoming case law. Still the only way to stop such behavior is with meaningful suspensions and fines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OBXer said:

 

I absolutely agree.  From what I'm reading the union is  trying to prevent the 20 games as becoming the standard for a suspension. I think the article uses the verbiage becoming case law. Still the only way to stop such behavior is with meaningful suspensions and fines.

 

But the thing is, this is 20 games for a guy already suspended multiple times in a short period. This is not the new norm for the vast majority, it would become the new norm for the handful of punks who will not change their game even after multiple suspensions. Those recalcitrant bad boys will never respond to a few games suspension because they calculate that their value is higher as wrecking balls and would drop a lot long term if they clean up their game. Wilson was brought in to do what he is doing. He's only going to change if he is forced to. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, remkin said:

But the thing is, this is 20 games for a guy already suspended multiple times in a short period

You are preaching to the choir rem.  I was just posting what I had read as a reason not my agreement. Perhaps having this hashed out between the union and league will lead to a positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...