Originally Posted by Chili con Carne
Do they need to prove intentional slash to the head, or just intentional slash (with the results - e.g. hit him in the head - being inconsequential to intent, but playing a role in the suspension assessment)?
Hadn't thought about the intentional slash v. intentional slash to the head. It being the IIHF and not a criminal court I would doubt they break it down this technically.
There is no reason for him to slash anyone in that instance so I don't mind seeing some consequences. Just going out on a limb here, but if I owned some kind of antique sword (just an example) and I was swinging it around recklessly and injured someone, I am probably going to be held responsible for it.
I agree that players are responsible for their sticks and thats why when his stick hit the American he deserved, and received, a penalty. However when reviewing for suspensions intent is usually a large part and I don't see intent, or even reckless disregard for safety here, just a slash that took a bad bounce and hit the America in the head. Finally, as much as I hate this argument, the American skated off without injury. Given Boone Jenner's 3 games, and the other 1 game suspensions this tournament, 4 games for: an incidental high stick, without intent to injure, and no injury seems out of line to me.
12 team H-2-H 1 year league, daily roster 3 goalie start minimum
2xC, 2xRW, 2xLW, 4xD, 3xUtil, 2xG, 5 Bench
G, A, P, +/-, PIM, PPP, SHP, GWG, Hits, W, SV%, GAA
C: Stamkos,Thornton, Riberio, Stepan, Desharnais, Clune
LW: Moulson, Dupuis, Prust,
RW: Kessel, P. Kane, Wheeler, Stempniak
D: Hamonic, Zidlicky, Franson, Muzzin
G: Bryzgalov, Hiller, Fasth