Hockey Talk - Should the league take a stance...

[ForeverAutumn]

...and expel Chris Simon for good?

Here's a guy who's been suspended 7 times already. He's just back from a 25 game suspension which started last March and now he's suspended for another 30 games for stomping on a guy's foot when he's already down.

His teammates speak highly of him and say that he's a nice gentle guy off the ice. Well, you know what? He's an animal on the ice and obviously suspensions just aren't working as a deterent for him.

Guys like this are not good sportmen, don't set a good example for anyone else, and make hockey in general look bad. Get rid of him. If someone acted like he did off the ice they'd likely be serving time for assault. Why is this behaviour tolerated on the ice? Its disgusting.

Get rid of him before he causes someones career ending injury or worse.

[kexodusc]

My first reaction was quite similar to yours, FA.
But on this one, well, I don't know. The more I watch the stomp, the more it seems to be more of an attempt to piss the guy off more than hurt him.
People who don't play hockey might not understand how protected that area of the foot is or what it feels like to be stepped on there. It's not nearly as bad as any of his other offenses, IMO. It sure looks evil on TV though, but if Simon wanted to cause injury, he would have done something worse, and Ruutu would be injured right now. For the record, Ruutu continued the game and played the next night too.
The question then becomes if his punishment fits the fact he's a 7 time offender.
I think so.
It's probably even a bit excessive, but then, here's a guy who continues to prove he's incapable of keeping his composure, and doesn't seem to learn from or respond to prior suspensions very well.
If this was anybody else, the suspension would be around 4 games, give or take. But it's not.
Your last comment sums it up - are we endangering players (and the game) by keeping this guy around longer?
I think the answer has to be at least a solid "probably".
Maybe the league should have given the guy a final warning - any match penalty here on in will mean his permanent suspension.
I just think it's hard to oust him for this offence in light of some of the other dirty stuff that goes on.
And more importantly, it's difficult to suspend him permanently for this minor incident when guys like Bertuzzi, Tucker, and the entire Philadelphia Flyers are allowed to resume their careers following infinitely worse (successful) attempts to deliberately cause injury.
I think the NHL did a good job of managing the bloodlust of the media and non-hockey fan for retribution and punishment, while taking into account the severity of the incident and Simon's record. 30 games if fine.

[ForeverAutumn]

Bertuzzi should have never been allowed to play again IMO. I think that, at a minimum, if you injure a player in an obvious dirty hit then your suspension should be, at least, as long as the injured player is out of the game. If it's a career ending hit like Bertuzzi's was then Bertuzzi is out. Period. Let him appeal, but get him out of the game in the meantime. But that's another issue.

The issue in Simon's case is repeat offenders. If he didn't learn anything from a 25 game suspension that included the playoffs, then what good is 30 games going to do? The fact that he didn't injure Ruutu isn't relevant IMO. What if Ruutu moved his leg at the last second and Simon's hit landed further up. What if the ref bent down at that moment and his hand got in the way. It was a childish stomp that has no place in professional sports.

Sure, he's seeking counselling this time and maybe that will help...but maybe it won't. IMO he needs an indefinate suspension until he's finished with whatever counselling he's getting and has resolved whatever issues he has. The fact that there is a need for counselling implies to me that there is a bigger problem that needs to be dealt with here and, in the meantime, he's a loose cannon on the ice.

[kexodusc]

Bertuzzi should have never been allowed to play again IMO. I think that, at a minimum, if you injure a player in an obvious dirty hit then your suspension should be, at least, as long as the injured player is out of the game. If it's a career ending hit like Bertuzzi's was then Bertuzzi is out. Period. Let him appeal, but get him out of the game in the meantime. But that's another issue.

The issue in Simon's case is repeat offenders. If he didn't learn anything from a 25 game suspension that included the playoffs, then what good is 30 games going to do? The fact that he didn't injure Ruutu isn't relevant IMO. What if Ruutu moved his leg at the last second and Simon's hit landed further up. What if the ref bent down at that moment and his hand got in the way. It was a childish stomp that has no place in professional sports.

Sure, he's seeking counselling this time and maybe that will help...but maybe it won't. IMO he needs an indefinate suspension until he's finished with whatever counselling he's getting and has resolved whatever issues he has. The fact that there is a need for counselling implies to me that there is a bigger problem that needs to be dealt with here and, in the meantime, he's a loose cannon on the ice.
I really don't think we can play the game of what if this and what if that - you could what if every single contact a player makes. Here we have to judge intent and resulting damages, not much different than justice principles.

This definitely wasn't a hockey play. Was there intent to cause injury? I doubt it in this case, maybe an intent to hurt or casue pain, but not injure. Was it reckless and potentially dangerous to the other player. Absolutely. The past record definitely comes into play here. So what punishment do we dole out?
Can we base it all on his history? Do we now ban this guy for life for any little transgression? If he gets into a fight do we ban him? A high stick? A questionable hit? What about a sucker punch or face wash? All of those are more damaging than what he did, yet they're more "tolerable" because they happen more frequently in the sport. This play is visually dirty yet physically harmless. I have to keep coming back to that I guess, just can't get past it.

I certainly can't argue with your other points, and I guess this just comes down to a person's gut feeling. My sense is that this particular punsihment was already excessive and over compensated for the fact he had 6 suspensions previously. Now, if Simon hit someone from behind after a play with his stick or something truly intended to cause injury, then I'd have no hesitation in banning him for life. However, this stomp was just a bit of the (admittedly dirty) game within the game going on between 2 dirty players who were at each other all night.
The last kicking suspension was a 5 games suspension to a repeat offender in Martin Havlat. This penalty is 6 times as stiff. Seems reasonable.

[ForeverAutumn]

Do we now ban this guy for life for any little transgression?
Yes.

If he gets into a fight do we ban him?
Yes

A high stick?
Yes

A questionable hit?
Yes

What about a sucker punch or face wash?
Yes

I get what you're saying. I just get tired of these guys getting away with stuff that would otherwise land them in some serious trouble with the law because it's "part of the game". I just don't think that, in this case, a 30 game suspension will make much difference. It'll be interesting to see what happens the next time Simon loses his head.

[kexodusc]

I get what you're saying. I just get tired of these guys getting away with stuff that would otherwise land them in some serious trouble with the law because it's "part of the game". I just don't think that, in this case, a 30 game suspension will make much difference. It'll be interesting to see what happens the next time Simon loses his head.
I can appreciate your frustration with his poor learning abilities, and I agree this stuff shouldn't be in the game. I'm not trying to defend his actions, but I do feel the punishment should fit the crime.
Let's be very clear here. He's not getting away with anything. Simon is forfeiting over 300,000 in salary on an after tax basis, (he's not a high paid player), playing time, and what's left of his reputation - which will directly impact on his post hockey career possibilities.
In fact, I feel confident that he's losing considerably more money than this kick/ assault charge would cost 99% of people otherwise. I don't feel sorry for him, he gets what he deserves, but this punishment's severity is being diminished by too many people.