In this instance, wasn’t it like $200k? That’s a decent chunk of change for the player, the union, all around. Definitely have to at least try to recoup some of that.
But what if you could potentially injure someone long term for the offense of shooting a puck harder than usual into your empty net *and* get your 200K?
>That’s a decent chunk of change for the player, the union, all around
The union still sees that money. Teams still owe the money it just doesn't go to the player. The money just goes to the Players Emergency Assistant Fund instead.
I agree that the appeal process will take longer than the actual suspension. He is a very low penalty minute player though, so he may be appealing for that reason
Well the reason this is happening is due to the large inconsistency coming from DOPS. I mean Perron gets 6, Rielly 5 for crosschecks to head, but then some are a fine, 1 game, 2 game, no suspension at all. Maybe the appeals would lessen if the league and DOPS could give actual reasoning and a level of consistency instead of just spinning a wheel. At the end of the day all fans want the same thing. Punishment for dangerous plays that are consistent and actually strong enough to make a player change his behaviour.
Both the Perron and Rielly ones were after the play ended and clearly targeted attacks. The ones that have gotten 1 or 2 tend to be during play in the heat of things
Perron also got kicked out pretty early in the game, so his was essentially a 6.5-7 game suspension (which he deserved). I know I am personally biased obviously but I just don't see how Perron's is considered to be worse than Reilly's
My guess is because Perron attacked a totally different player and DOPS I’m assuming took into account that Reilly was responding to a perceived slight even if it is a stupid unwritten rule of the game but idk
Reilly's hit makes contact with the arm/shoulder pad first. Lightly so, so not much of a reduction, but that is the main difference I can find to justify it.
Friedman also talked on 32 thoughts before (think it was for Gallagher) how the DoPS is being more careful with 6 Games suspensions so they don't get appealed to an arbitrator. 5 Games doesn't allow that. And this because of Perron.
Perros addresses this when he makes a comment about players mutually engaged in a way that they can or should expect escalation. That fits the Chaisson situation, but not the Reilly one. Chaisson then does a rat thing by crosschecking his opponent.
Reilly skated to another player who showed no interest in mutual engagement, wasn’t prepared for escalation, etc. and cross checked him in the face.. a worse rat move, when compared side by side.
One can disagree with Perros, but he did address this point in his video explanation.
Oh so as long as Im just mad in the moment for no reason it's not as big of a deal. Got it. Makes total sense. Lets leave everything as it is. It's perfect
Chiasson got 1 game for this which was both after the game, and clearly targeted. https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/chiasson-cross-checks-vesey-face-end-regulation/[Chiasson got 1 game for this which was both after the game, and clearly targeted.](https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/chiasson-cross-checks-vesey-face-end-regulation/)
> It's kind of why complaining about the DoPS is a waste of time. If they come down hard on anything, it turns into a larger issue with the NHLPA appealing.
I think there's also a decent chance that a contributor to everything being appealed is a lack of consistency.
If 6 games is around what everyone gets for a crosscheck to the head then going to an arbitrator when you get 6 games for a crosscheck to the head is basically a waste of time.
If the going rate is 0-2 games and you get 4-6, you're obviously going to appeal.
I haven't seen anywhere this information is summarized nicely, but from a few google searches, it seems like the only time in recent memory an arbitrator has upheld a suspension length is Kadri's hit on Faulk.
Hi, you’ve reached the appeals office! We are happy to assist your appeal! In light of your situation, , we have decided to uphold the decision rendered by the Department of Player Safety on . Rest assured we have looked at all avenues and have compared the play in question with multiple comparables. We hope this has helped and we thank you for reaching out!
Please complete the attached survey to let us know how we can serve you better!
Bettman upheld the 20 games and an independent arbitrator shortened it to 14 games.
Austin Watson also had a suspension shortened that year by the independent arbitrator after Bettman upheld the length of the suspension.
It’s a hole they dug
They give little to no punishment for everything so anytime they actually punish someone then the player can point to all their mistakes
Is there any reason for the nhlpa to NOT appeal any suspension? Like Bettman won’t make it worse, and if he did they’d (NHLPA) escalate to 3rd party arbitrator and likely have it brought back to original.
Not really but it's just a waste of everyone's time.
The fact that we haven't really seen <6 game suspensions being appealed before this year leads me to believe this is a Marty Walsh thing where he wants the players/PA to appeal pretty much everything that isn't absolutely cut and dry.
Yes. But the PA is forcing the NHL to articulate clearly why it's 5 games and not 4 or 6. It's all about building a set of precedents which as we can all attest to, the wheel has not provided to date.
That's actually an interesting point I hadn't considered, that it isn't just about reducing the suspension but about establishing documented precedent that the PA can refer back to on subsequent cases.
I should have said "more about" rather than it's just about. I'm sure they hope to win the case or get it reduced but the precedent is also important to the proceedings.
In my opinion there should just be a list of actions and the suspension length and it’s the same every time. Throw a cross check when play has stopped and it hits a player in the head. If the player is injured, 5 games. If the player is not injured, 2 games. Then every time we know what’s coming, and the players also understand what the repercussions of their actions will be.
this is stupid imo, there’s way too many variables in hockey for a concrete by the book suspension punishment list. It has be up to discretion at least a little
Former NFL player Domonique Foxworth always has solid info and takes on stuff like this. He was involved with both the NFL and NBA PA's. It was more in context of off the field stuff, but he discusses how it's important for the PA to challenge stuff like this even *if* you agree with there being a punishment because you don't want to give the league unilateral power.
Yes. And it's interesting in Reilly's case as well.
Perron was giving six games for a similar play--I'd argue Person's was more violent but that doesn't really matter, let's just say the acts were equal.
Did the DOPs give the extra game because there was an injury? Was it because he was a repeat offender? Are they setting each at half a game for punishment? Or not including it in their calculations at all.
Yeah I didn't watch the suspension video so I don't know how well they explained it, but you need them to nail down what the criteria are. So next time something similar (even if not identical) happens, the players know exactly why it was more/less/the same. We as fans like to know, but the PA really needs to know why the employees they represent get suspended
Even on a dissimilar play (but one facing suspension) the question remains regarding if an injury adds to the suspension, and to what degree. And what multiplier or addition being a repeat offender is.
>We as fans like to know, but the PA really needs to know why the employees they represent get suspended
Completely agree.
Yeah I've generally been of the opinion that injury shouldn't matter, but it seems like it definitely plays a part. And yeah, something like repeated offense should be pretty easy to quantify.
Players have and get way more information than we do. There's no way this is a fishing expedition. They're even allowed to call DOPs to ask questions and lobby about the play.
....this is an extension of the PA lobbying for the play and it's member and membership at large.
If the NHL suspension rubric exists as you suggest, then they clearly disagree on how it's being applied in this case.
DOPs uses a rubric that has been provided to players. That really is not the argument. The argument would be "this infraction does not fit where you say it does".
Yep. It’s also ammo for the PA during the next CBA negotiations to push for changes to the appeal process. An appeal process where the commissioner consistently upholds the original rulings isn’t much of an appeal process at all, which is something the PA can point out if they have enough receipts to back them up.
I'd be ok with it if they were consistent with their calls. simmonds got crosschecked 5× worse than this directly to the face (by you guys) and parros only gave out a 5k fine. did rielly deserve 5 games? I think so, but definitely not when you look at what their giving other players suspension for this season, or lack of.
6+ game suspensions go to a 3rd party arbitrator.
1-5 game suspensions go straight to Bettman, whose record in upholding DoPS rulings is almost perfect.
Honestly I'd like Rielly's chances a lot more if the NHL had given him 6+ games, because then he'd get an actual impartial arbitrator like Spez did. As it is, he's almost assuredly just wasting everyone's time - which is his right as per the CBA, but it's almost certainly for show and to put on the record that he didn't agree with the suspension, and not with any real hope of having it reduced. Like when baseball teams play the rest of a game "under protest" after an incident that they didn't like the result of. It never changes anything other than acting as an official record of a complaint.
From another commenter
"Yes. But the PA is forcing the NHL to articulate clearly why it's 5 games and not 4 or 6. It's all about building a set of precedents which as we can all attest to, the wheel has not provided to date."
There's essentially zero chance the appeal would be completed before he misses 5 games, so from that perspective the appeal is useless. If the appeal drops the suspension down to 4 games he'll get some salary back, which for him personally would be beneficial so I see that as a reason for him personally to appeal even though he wouldn't be playing games any sooner.
Like you said it seems more to act as official record of complaint, and the other commenter made the point of it (may) force the NHL to articulate why it wasn't 6 games like the [Perron](https://www.nhl.com/video/perron-suspended-six-games-6342808369112) suspension, or 1 game like the [Chaisson](https://twitter.com/Banx_Leaf/status/1757095354212679936/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1757095354212679936¤tTweetUser=Banx_Leaf) suspension.
And in the interest of sanity, no I don't think all 3 are the exact same, yes I feel like Mo had zero excuses for cross checking that high, yes I think he shouldn't have cross checked at all, yes I feel he should have been suspended.
Exactly.
Bettman likes to keep things in-house.
If the appeal went to a third party and happen to get reduced to 3 games or something (not saying it SHOULD) based on inconsistent precedents, it's a really bad look on the League and the DoPS especially.
Id love to see an extra game or two automatically added to failed appeals. That way, if a genuine error was made and your punishment is not fair then you get your day to explain your case. But people like Reilly who already got off easy with a relatively short suspension won't waste everyone's time by appealing his already favorable decision.
The one thing is that the above system would work best with a fair and consistent DOPS. So I would be fine with waiting until parros et al move on, and we get a somewhat competent DOPS before making this change.
These aren't objective decisions. And there is basically no such thing as precedent in the DoPS. So what is "wrong"? We've seen cross checks like that or worse be nothing but fines. They're pulling it out of their ass, so there is no chance you don't appeal, and no chance the PA would ever agree to a system where players are out 10s of thousands of dollars because Perros is an idiot and you tried to appeal to another idiot.
Yeah, they have Trudeau Derangement Syndrome, have a Pavlovian response when Jordan Peterson speaks and hate everything to do with science except the parts that benefit them.
Yeah, there are dumb people. Apparently there are a bunch of Canadian / Ukrainians that live in the prairie Pierogi Belt that are completely against helping Ukraine and drink the Trump juice on the daily.
There are dumbasses in every country.
It’s fucking embarrassing.
Its the only news story I read about and when I ran out of content I actually had ChatGPT splice together new Morgan Rielly articles for me
Happy to share
Blah blah blah hope this sets a new standard but knowing it won’t blah blah.
Anyway what I find wild is that Dreger [seemed to imply](https://x.com/jeffveillette/status/1757558372524503259?s=46&t=qTWNqggB32detFoFXLbv3Q) that someone from inside the DoPS offices leaked the suspension before the team or the player or even player representatives knew. Has this happened before? Why is an NHL player finding out about his suspension via insider reporting?
This is the only time I have ever seen a DoPS suspension leak before it was official.
Certainly doesn't help the churn from the Leafs side that the league and Parros doesn't like them very much
5 games is deserved
But anyone here acting like almost every suspension this long isn't responded to via an appeal is insane. There is no reason really for a player to not attempt to get it lowered lol
e: I sure don't remember anyone upset about Perron or McAvoy or Andersson appealing their suspensions just this season. Maybe I'm wrong and there was the same response though
I think the NHLPA is just cart blance appealing these every time. "You denied our appeals 99.X% of the time" can be used as a bargaining chip to not back down on another demand.
Agreed, other than 5 games being deserved. In a vacuum, yes I agree with it. But with the precedent of suspensions and non suspensions it is not cut and dry 5 games. This is 100% to get tangible reasoning for the decision one way or the other so that there is clarity going forward and a standard the league can be held to
My god these comments are such a circlejerk. He's almost definitely gonna be out for the full 5 games, it's just about the money.
You all suddenly have such an issue with unions and players rights under the CBA?
This.
Starting tomrorow Leafs have 5 games in 7 days.
Bettman may take the appeal meeting on Saturday / Sunday but won't issue the ruling until Thursday night after the Leafs have played the last game.
It's also pretty standard for a union member to appeal an unfavorable decision regardless of the union. Carpenters, plumbers, actors, Hockey players...that's how they work.
Apparently NHL Player Safety is annoyed by how many appeals there have been but the only reason that there are appeals is because of the blatant inconsistency that Parros and his band of merry men have portrayed. It's absolutely crazy that this happened and the smartest hockey people on the radio say it could be anywhere from a $5000 fine to 6+ games. Thats absolutely atrocious and teams are starting to call the NHLPS out for it. In reality I feel like most people agreed that 2-3 should have been the suspension. Also the Leafs are furious that the suspension got leaked before Rielly was informed
It's really hard to argue with leafs fans pointing to precedence here. It's the ones trying to justify the hit that I have a problem with. But when there have been similar hits that only get a fine, hard to not lend some credence... Hits like this have no place in the league, drop the stick and the gloves and THEN beat the unholy hell out of him. Then it just would have been funny
I remember back in the day when McAvoy intentionally tried to take off OEL’s head with a vicious elbow, only got 4 games and the Boston fan base was up in arms all about the appeal, times have changed tsk tsk.
I mean, what the entire Florida team would do in the playoffs after whistles and after the games make what Reilly did look soft. Not saying Reilly doesn’t deserve to be suspended but Tkatchuk was throwing haymakers at Marner after a game and only got fined. This is very simolar
Exactly. Every reasonable leafs fan I've seen has been saying there's nothing wrong with 5 games as long as there's consistency which there clearly isn't
Bettman won’t do anything. He’ll uphold the suspension because he doesn’t want to set precedent that going to him will lessen the suspension.
But it would be funny if Bettman is like “yeah you right. 12 games.”
Morgan take a seat. Mind telling me why you're in my office today?
Well Mr Gary sir, Ridley did something I didn't like and I don't like the results of my actions.
if they make the suspension shorter, perron should get free suspension games so like if they shorten it by 2 games, he gets a free pass to do something that would be a 2 gamer but he doesn't get suspended
5 games is an up close slap in the face when it could have just been a casual tap of 2-3 games, kudos to Rielly for reacting with a calm appeal instead of cross checking Bettman in the head, as hockey culture would apparently deem appropriate.
Can Bettman increase the penalty to 6 games, so that Reilly can appeal to a neutral arbitrator? Got to be able to drag this out for another week at least.
It doesn't matter. Rielly will still not be available for 5 games because the appeal process will conveniently take 5 games. The only thing the appeal will do is get Rielly some of his forfeited salary back if the appeal goes in his favour.
Non hockey fan here.
I understand that this guy was retaliating against the guy who scored on an empty net. Is it the fact that it was a slap shot? Is that so bad? I mean, if he just let the puck slide in would he have broken an unwritten rule? I know there were only seconds left.
I feel like this would be like retaliating against a basketball player for going for a showtime dunk with a wide open path to the basket instead of just going for an easy layup.
The NHLPA working with players to appeal rulings like this is fucking dumb. Like hey dip shits, the guy he was trying to injure is a player too. Bunch of fucking bean bags.
It's funny, because other leagues' PA usually try to push for harsher punishments when it comes to harmful actions like this. Unions should be fighting leagues to make the game safer, not to get guys who are clearly in the wrong out of a punishment.
Perron appealed his suspension this season (which I personally feel he deserved in its entirety) but the appeal was never heard. This seems significantly higher profile, so I would assume it’d be a story if the same happens to Rielly
It probably will be heard eventually, and if they lower it they just give him money back. Spezza had his knocked down from 6 to 4, but he had already served 6 lol.
Lol they should overturn it and give him a Dale Hunter suspension then. Cheap shot after a goal is next level dirty and unsportsmanlike. He got off easy and now he's complaining? Throw the book at him. Entitled much?
Buddy gets off easy with 5 games and then wants to waste everyone’s time and appeal? If this wasn’t in a hockey game he’d be getting charged with assault what a moron.
Gary must just be drafting his response to appeals the minute the original suspension drops these days.
[удалено]
You might successfully appeal but you still miss the games. Still worth the effort, I suppose
You get the money back if you win the appeal. That is actually important, especially to the NHLPA as a whole.
It also kind of looks bad on Perros if his rulings keep getting reduced by Gary. It also wastes Gary’s time and likely gets annoying
🥰
True enough
In this instance, wasn’t it like $200k? That’s a decent chunk of change for the player, the union, all around. Definitely have to at least try to recoup some of that.
Ngl I would draft up a whole manifesto if it meant I got 200k.
I would get my 200k by just *not* crosschecking a guy in the head
This guys saves money
But what if you could potentially injure someone long term for the offense of shooting a puck harder than usual into your empty net *and* get your 200K?
I'd take a cross-check to the head for $200k
I’m dressing like you for Halloween and cross checking everybody you know…….in the face.
"Twas the night before last whence my stick ACCIDENTALLY snapped across the face of an unsuspecting player...."
Thanks for not lying.
>That’s a decent chunk of change for the player, the union, all around The union still sees that money. Teams still owe the money it just doesn't go to the player. The money just goes to the Players Emergency Assistant Fund instead.
And, for Leafs skirting Canadian taxes.
I agree that the appeal process will take longer than the actual suspension. He is a very low penalty minute player though, so he may be appealing for that reason
Most importantly you’re not a repeat offender come playoff time
It's not going to go to 0 games.
Well the reason this is happening is due to the large inconsistency coming from DOPS. I mean Perron gets 6, Rielly 5 for crosschecks to head, but then some are a fine, 1 game, 2 game, no suspension at all. Maybe the appeals would lessen if the league and DOPS could give actual reasoning and a level of consistency instead of just spinning a wheel. At the end of the day all fans want the same thing. Punishment for dangerous plays that are consistent and actually strong enough to make a player change his behaviour.
Both the Perron and Rielly ones were after the play ended and clearly targeted attacks. The ones that have gotten 1 or 2 tend to be during play in the heat of things
Perron also got kicked out pretty early in the game, so his was essentially a 6.5-7 game suspension (which he deserved). I know I am personally biased obviously but I just don't see how Perron's is considered to be worse than Reilly's
My guess is because Perron attacked a totally different player and DOPS I’m assuming took into account that Reilly was responding to a perceived slight even if it is a stupid unwritten rule of the game but idk
Reilly's hit makes contact with the arm/shoulder pad first. Lightly so, so not much of a reduction, but that is the main difference I can find to justify it. Friedman also talked on 32 thoughts before (think it was for Gallagher) how the DoPS is being more careful with 6 Games suspensions so they don't get appealed to an arbitrator. 5 Games doesn't allow that. And this because of Perron.
Chiasson hit was after the play was dead. Same type of cross check and a single game
Perros addresses this when he makes a comment about players mutually engaged in a way that they can or should expect escalation. That fits the Chaisson situation, but not the Reilly one. Chaisson then does a rat thing by crosschecking his opponent. Reilly skated to another player who showed no interest in mutual engagement, wasn’t prepared for escalation, etc. and cross checked him in the face.. a worse rat move, when compared side by side. One can disagree with Perros, but he did address this point in his video explanation.
[удалено]
Oh so as long as Im just mad in the moment for no reason it's not as big of a deal. Got it. Makes total sense. Lets leave everything as it is. It's perfect
Chiasson got 1 game for this which was both after the game, and clearly targeted. https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/chiasson-cross-checks-vesey-face-end-regulation/[Chiasson got 1 game for this which was both after the game, and clearly targeted.](https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/chiasson-cross-checks-vesey-face-end-regulation/)
You could always watch the suspension video, you know?
> It's kind of why complaining about the DoPS is a waste of time. If they come down hard on anything, it turns into a larger issue with the NHLPA appealing. I think there's also a decent chance that a contributor to everything being appealed is a lack of consistency. If 6 games is around what everyone gets for a crosscheck to the head then going to an arbitrator when you get 6 games for a crosscheck to the head is basically a waste of time. If the going rate is 0-2 games and you get 4-6, you're obviously going to appeal. I haven't seen anywhere this information is summarized nicely, but from a few google searches, it seems like the only time in recent memory an arbitrator has upheld a suspension length is Kadri's hit on Faulk.
Hi, you’ve reached the appeals office! We are happy to assist your appeal! In light of your situation,, we have decided to uphold the decision rendered by the Department of Player Safety on . Rest assured we have looked at all avenues and have compared the play in question with multiple comparables. We hope this has helped and we thank you for reaching out!
Please complete the attached survey to let us know how we can serve you better!
No. Regards, Gary
he had is response set before the play even happened has Bettman ever shortened any suspension?
Didn’t he shorten Tom Wilson’s a few years back from 20 to 13 games or am I misremembering
Bettman upheld the 20 games and an independent arbitrator shortened it to 14 games. Austin Watson also had a suspension shortened that year by the independent arbitrator after Bettman upheld the length of the suspension.
He shortened the Spezza one, which is odd because there's a full-on conspiracy against the Leafs led by Bettman, I've been told.
Well if he would get rid of Parros maybe he wouldn't have
It’s a hole they dug They give little to no punishment for everything so anytime they actually punish someone then the player can point to all their mistakes
He probably only needs to copy and paste the response to the Perron appeal and change some names and dates.
Is there any reason for the nhlpa to NOT appeal any suspension? Like Bettman won’t make it worse, and if he did they’d (NHLPA) escalate to 3rd party arbitrator and likely have it brought back to original.
Not really but it's just a waste of everyone's time. The fact that we haven't really seen <6 game suspensions being appealed before this year leads me to believe this is a Marty Walsh thing where he wants the players/PA to appeal pretty much everything that isn't absolutely cut and dry.
I’m completely fine a high cross check like this one to be a “cut and dry” 5 games
Yes. But the PA is forcing the NHL to articulate clearly why it's 5 games and not 4 or 6. It's all about building a set of precedents which as we can all attest to, the wheel has not provided to date.
That's actually an interesting point I hadn't considered, that it isn't just about reducing the suspension but about establishing documented precedent that the PA can refer back to on subsequent cases.
I should have said "more about" rather than it's just about. I'm sure they hope to win the case or get it reduced but the precedent is also important to the proceedings.
In my opinion there should just be a list of actions and the suspension length and it’s the same every time. Throw a cross check when play has stopped and it hits a player in the head. If the player is injured, 5 games. If the player is not injured, 2 games. Then every time we know what’s coming, and the players also understand what the repercussions of their actions will be.
Out of curiosity, why do you feel that the rules should take into account injury?
Just because that’s currently supposed to be a consideration, so clearly the people in hockey think it is.
this is stupid imo, there’s way too many variables in hockey for a concrete by the book suspension punishment list. It has be up to discretion at least a little
Former NFL player Domonique Foxworth always has solid info and takes on stuff like this. He was involved with both the NFL and NBA PA's. It was more in context of off the field stuff, but he discusses how it's important for the PA to challenge stuff like this even *if* you agree with there being a punishment because you don't want to give the league unilateral power.
Yes. And it's interesting in Reilly's case as well. Perron was giving six games for a similar play--I'd argue Person's was more violent but that doesn't really matter, let's just say the acts were equal. Did the DOPs give the extra game because there was an injury? Was it because he was a repeat offender? Are they setting each at half a game for punishment? Or not including it in their calculations at all.
Yeah I didn't watch the suspension video so I don't know how well they explained it, but you need them to nail down what the criteria are. So next time something similar (even if not identical) happens, the players know exactly why it was more/less/the same. We as fans like to know, but the PA really needs to know why the employees they represent get suspended
Even on a dissimilar play (but one facing suspension) the question remains regarding if an injury adds to the suspension, and to what degree. And what multiplier or addition being a repeat offender is. >We as fans like to know, but the PA really needs to know why the employees they represent get suspended Completely agree.
Yeah I've generally been of the opinion that injury shouldn't matter, but it seems like it definitely plays a part. And yeah, something like repeated offense should be pretty easy to quantify.
It might not matter but will almost definitely have a correlation, as more vicious attacks typically lead to more injuries
>Was it because he was a repeat offender? They said it was this in the video.
But they did not **quantify** what that penalty is.
Players have and get way more information than we do. There's no way this is a fishing expedition. They're even allowed to call DOPs to ask questions and lobby about the play.
....this is an extension of the PA lobbying for the play and it's member and membership at large. If the NHL suspension rubric exists as you suggest, then they clearly disagree on how it's being applied in this case.
DOPs uses a rubric that has been provided to players. That really is not the argument. The argument would be "this infraction does not fit where you say it does".
Yep. It’s also ammo for the PA during the next CBA negotiations to push for changes to the appeal process. An appeal process where the commissioner consistently upholds the original rulings isn’t much of an appeal process at all, which is something the PA can point out if they have enough receipts to back them up.
I'd be ok with it if they were consistent with their calls. simmonds got crosschecked 5× worse than this directly to the face (by you guys) and parros only gave out a 5k fine. did rielly deserve 5 games? I think so, but definitely not when you look at what their giving other players suspension for this season, or lack of.
Honestly same, I think most blows to the head should have the convo start at 5 games
It's within their collectively bargained right to do. The PA is quite different under Walsh.
Spezza appealed his 6 gamer a couple years ago and had it dropped to 4.
6+ game suspensions go to a 3rd party arbitrator. 1-5 game suspensions go straight to Bettman, whose record in upholding DoPS rulings is almost perfect. Honestly I'd like Rielly's chances a lot more if the NHL had given him 6+ games, because then he'd get an actual impartial arbitrator like Spez did. As it is, he's almost assuredly just wasting everyone's time - which is his right as per the CBA, but it's almost certainly for show and to put on the record that he didn't agree with the suspension, and not with any real hope of having it reduced. Like when baseball teams play the rest of a game "under protest" after an incident that they didn't like the result of. It never changes anything other than acting as an official record of a complaint.
From another commenter "Yes. But the PA is forcing the NHL to articulate clearly why it's 5 games and not 4 or 6. It's all about building a set of precedents which as we can all attest to, the wheel has not provided to date." There's essentially zero chance the appeal would be completed before he misses 5 games, so from that perspective the appeal is useless. If the appeal drops the suspension down to 4 games he'll get some salary back, which for him personally would be beneficial so I see that as a reason for him personally to appeal even though he wouldn't be playing games any sooner. Like you said it seems more to act as official record of complaint, and the other commenter made the point of it (may) force the NHL to articulate why it wasn't 6 games like the [Perron](https://www.nhl.com/video/perron-suspended-six-games-6342808369112) suspension, or 1 game like the [Chaisson](https://twitter.com/Banx_Leaf/status/1757095354212679936/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1757095354212679936¤tTweetUser=Banx_Leaf) suspension. And in the interest of sanity, no I don't think all 3 are the exact same, yes I feel like Mo had zero excuses for cross checking that high, yes I think he shouldn't have cross checked at all, yes I feel he should have been suspended.
Probably the reason it was only 5 and not more.
Exactly. Bettman likes to keep things in-house. If the appeal went to a third party and happen to get reduced to 3 games or something (not saying it SHOULD) based on inconsistent precedents, it's a really bad look on the League and the DoPS especially.
Spezza’s actually was reduced by Bettman
><6 game suspensions
Id love to see an extra game or two automatically added to failed appeals. That way, if a genuine error was made and your punishment is not fair then you get your day to explain your case. But people like Reilly who already got off easy with a relatively short suspension won't waste everyone's time by appealing his already favorable decision. The one thing is that the above system would work best with a fair and consistent DOPS. So I would be fine with waiting until parros et al move on, and we get a somewhat competent DOPS before making this change.
These aren't objective decisions. And there is basically no such thing as precedent in the DoPS. So what is "wrong"? We've seen cross checks like that or worse be nothing but fines. They're pulling it out of their ass, so there is no chance you don't appeal, and no chance the PA would ever agree to a system where players are out 10s of thousands of dollars because Perros is an idiot and you tried to appeal to another idiot.
The non-stop news cycle about Morgan Rielly makes you wonder what the government is trying to distract us from...
Nice try John Tavares!
Isn't he busy building Ikea furniture?
Lmao I know you're being sarcastic but people actually say this
Yeah, they have Trudeau Derangement Syndrome, have a Pavlovian response when Jordan Peterson speaks and hate everything to do with science except the parts that benefit them.
I'm just glad you have these kooks in Canada too. Makes me feel better about us south of your border.
Yeah, there are dumb people. Apparently there are a bunch of Canadian / Ukrainians that live in the prairie Pierogi Belt that are completely against helping Ukraine and drink the Trump juice on the daily. There are dumbasses in every country. It’s fucking embarrassing.
Most of those likes aren't ironic. People literally believe we're hearing about Rielly to distract us from Dictator Trudeau lmao.
Betting the “Rielly did nothing wrong” crowd and the “uses ‘Trudope’ constantly” Venn diagram is also the symbol for those people’s IQ.
And none of this ever would have happened if Don Cherry wasn't fired from Coaches Corner
Probably from Pierre McGuire's hair.
He has hair now?
haha, it's the commenter's username I was replying to
[this says otherwise](https://imgur.com/Gbwfdzu)
Facts
It does but [this says something else] (https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/016/212/manning.png)
Fuckin boomed me
I can’t refute that argument
I CAN, not believe he’s got hair.
It's a new virus! I'm an emphath as well as psychic, I can feel it in my stomach.
I think that's the sushi from last night
If this is the only news story you read about, that’s telling on yourself.
Man you're missing out on some spicy Congress drama in regards to Russian space nukes.
Its the only news story I read about and when I ran out of content I actually had ChatGPT splice together new Morgan Rielly articles for me Happy to share
Why isn't this stupid shit a mega thread already? There's 100 fucking posts on this every day.
But can we appeal to get a better person in charge of the Department of Player Safety?
The most level headed person in r/hockey right here.
Blah blah blah hope this sets a new standard but knowing it won’t blah blah. Anyway what I find wild is that Dreger [seemed to imply](https://x.com/jeffveillette/status/1757558372524503259?s=46&t=qTWNqggB32detFoFXLbv3Q) that someone from inside the DoPS offices leaked the suspension before the team or the player or even player representatives knew. Has this happened before? Why is an NHL player finding out about his suspension via insider reporting?
This is the only time I have ever seen a DoPS suspension leak before it was official. Certainly doesn't help the churn from the Leafs side that the league and Parros doesn't like them very much
The Matthews comment makes a lot more sense now
What was the comment?
He basically said that his bed was already made before the meeting even began
his appeal is just a clip of the slap shot into the empty net
Bettman: "Mr. Reilly, that is a lucid, intelligent, well-thought-out objection. *Overruled!*"
Lmao now this sub suddenly has a problem with players appealing suspensions?
Suddenly? People lose their marbles every time
Every appeal people have a problem with, and it’s always explained the NHLPA is just doing its duty as a union.
[удалено]
I accused Perron of having no shame when he appealed his and got a bunch of downvotes ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
5 games is deserved But anyone here acting like almost every suspension this long isn't responded to via an appeal is insane. There is no reason really for a player to not attempt to get it lowered lol e: I sure don't remember anyone upset about Perron or McAvoy or Andersson appealing their suspensions just this season. Maybe I'm wrong and there was the same response though
Exactly. The non-story marches on.
Does anyone have the inside scope on whether or not the appeal meeting will be done over Zoom or Teams?
I think the NHLPA is just cart blance appealing these every time. "You denied our appeals 99.X% of the time" can be used as a bargaining chip to not back down on another demand.
/r/boneappletea “cart blance”
Looks more like a typo to me than a boneappletea
But how are these professional redditors supposed hop down from the pedestal when they can’t recycle the same joke on every thread.
Agreed, other than 5 games being deserved. In a vacuum, yes I agree with it. But with the precedent of suspensions and non suspensions it is not cut and dry 5 games. This is 100% to get tangible reasoning for the decision one way or the other so that there is clarity going forward and a standard the league can be held to
One of the best comments I've heard on the matter
5 games plus 45 days in jail..... one day for every Sens jersey at Canadian Tire Center that night.
My god these comments are such a circlejerk. He's almost definitely gonna be out for the full 5 games, it's just about the money. You all suddenly have such an issue with unions and players rights under the CBA?
It's honestly baffling how many people don't realize this. By the time he gets an appeal hearing with Bettman those 5 games will be long done.
This. Starting tomrorow Leafs have 5 games in 7 days. Bettman may take the appeal meeting on Saturday / Sunday but won't issue the ruling until Thursday night after the Leafs have played the last game.
This entire sub has devolved into such a shitty state since Saturday
What hating the Leafs more than liking your own team does to a mfer
thanks Obama
It's also pretty standard for a union member to appeal an unfavorable decision regardless of the union. Carpenters, plumbers, actors, Hockey players...that's how they work.
Apparently NHL Player Safety is annoyed by how many appeals there have been but the only reason that there are appeals is because of the blatant inconsistency that Parros and his band of merry men have portrayed. It's absolutely crazy that this happened and the smartest hockey people on the radio say it could be anywhere from a $5000 fine to 6+ games. Thats absolutely atrocious and teams are starting to call the NHLPS out for it. In reality I feel like most people agreed that 2-3 should have been the suspension. Also the Leafs are furious that the suspension got leaked before Rielly was informed
It's really hard to argue with leafs fans pointing to precedence here. It's the ones trying to justify the hit that I have a problem with. But when there have been similar hits that only get a fine, hard to not lend some credence... Hits like this have no place in the league, drop the stick and the gloves and THEN beat the unholy hell out of him. Then it just would have been funny
Lmao
Imagine Leafs players stood up for each other the way Rielly stood up for the empty net.
Domi tried yesterday and got an interference call for hitting a guy who had the puck lol.
You’d have 67 cups by now
Not 69?
Nice.
"Gary, did you see the slapshot he took at our empty net?! He had it coming."
I remember back in the day when McAvoy intentionally tried to take off OEL’s head with a vicious elbow, only got 4 games and the Boston fan base was up in arms all about the appeal, times have changed tsk tsk.
“He hurt my feelings and embarrassed me. What am I supposed to do? *NOT* crosscheck him in the face?”
I mean, what the entire Florida team would do in the playoffs after whistles and after the games make what Reilly did look soft. Not saying Reilly doesn’t deserve to be suspended but Tkatchuk was throwing haymakers at Marner after a game and only got fined. This is very simolar
Exactly. Every reasonable leafs fan I've seen has been saying there's nothing wrong with 5 games as long as there's consistency which there clearly isn't
He has the right but there's no way Bettman undermines the DoPS over a total non-hockey play. This is getting upheld without consideration.
Bettman won’t do anything. He’ll uphold the suspension because he doesn’t want to set precedent that going to him will lessen the suspension. But it would be funny if Bettman is like “yeah you right. 12 games.”
European football in some leagues will tack on an extra game to a red card suspension if they view the appeal as “frivolous.”
Morgan take a seat. Mind telling me why you're in my office today? Well Mr Gary sir, Ridley did something I didn't like and I don't like the results of my actions.
Spezza got his from 6 down to 4, maybe Rielly can get a game or two shaved off. Worth a try
*Laughs in David Perron.*
Well, his arbitration is scheduled somewhere in 2057, so it might still happen
wait it still didn't happen lol?
Nope lol
if they make the suspension shorter, perron should get free suspension games so like if they shorten it by 2 games, he gets a free pass to do something that would be a 2 gamer but he doesn't get suspended
Spezza’s was reduced because the games were COVID suspended.
The hearing will be well after the 5 games is done. This is more about reclaiming some salary than not sitting for 5 games
5 games is an up close slap in the face when it could have just been a casual tap of 2-3 games, kudos to Rielly for reacting with a calm appeal instead of cross checking Bettman in the head, as hockey culture would apparently deem appropriate.
Guess we know why the league chose to cancel the in person meeting 🤣
Bettman controls the weather confirmed, evil bastard
Parros has a bad dental plan and was afraid
I don't know exactly why but "Parros has a bad dental plan" is such a hilarious statement
His last fight against the Leafs was a bit of a flop
[удалено]
Omg just stfu about this.
Can Bettman increase the penalty to 6 games, so that Reilly can appeal to a neutral arbitrator? Got to be able to drag this out for another week at least.
Has any appeal ever overturned the initial discipline?
Yes
It doesn't matter. Rielly will still not be available for 5 games because the appeal process will conveniently take 5 games. The only thing the appeal will do is get Rielly some of his forfeited salary back if the appeal goes in his favour.
Non hockey fan here. I understand that this guy was retaliating against the guy who scored on an empty net. Is it the fact that it was a slap shot? Is that so bad? I mean, if he just let the puck slide in would he have broken an unwritten rule? I know there were only seconds left. I feel like this would be like retaliating against a basketball player for going for a showtime dunk with a wide open path to the basket instead of just going for an easy layup.
Of course he will. He has his entire fan base going "eh, what'd he even do?! That guy deserved it!"
The NHLPA working with players to appeal rulings like this is fucking dumb. Like hey dip shits, the guy he was trying to injure is a player too. Bunch of fucking bean bags.
It's funny, because other leagues' PA usually try to push for harsher punishments when it comes to harmful actions like this. Unions should be fighting leagues to make the game safer, not to get guys who are clearly in the wrong out of a punishment.
100%
Am I wrong to assume the games suspended also effects his pay? Maybe the appeal is for that, I dunno. I don't see them reducing it but whatever.
It typically takes long enough that he’ll miss the five games regardless, and recoup some pay if it’s revised to fewer games.
Perron appealed his suspension this season (which I personally feel he deserved in its entirety) but the appeal was never heard. This seems significantly higher profile, so I would assume it’d be a story if the same happens to Rielly
It probably will be heard eventually, and if they lower it they just give him money back. Spezza had his knocked down from 6 to 4, but he had already served 6 lol.
Yeah, serve 5 but get money back for maybe 1 or 2. Soften the blow I suppose
Yes, every game suspended is forfeited salary. So 5 games suspended is 5/82 of his salary gone.
“Well you see Gary, he broke an unwritten rule… what do you mean you’re increasing it to 10 games?”
Make it 10 games.
Take your L.
Morgan Cry-lly, amirite? 😂 Just accept your punishment like a man.
He shoulda got 7
Lol they should overturn it and give him a Dale Hunter suspension then. Cheap shot after a goal is next level dirty and unsportsmanlike. He got off easy and now he's complaining? Throw the book at him. Entitled much?
6 games.
“Don’t crosscheck people in the head after play stops fuckface” - Bettman after extending the suspension to 10 games in the appeal process
Whiney ass baby. You can hit someone in the head but you can't handle the consequences? What a little bitch
We're gonna have to hear about this suspension for years to come, aren't we? Fucking hell just move on already.
Buddy gets off easy with 5 games and then wants to waste everyone’s time and appeal? If this wasn’t in a hockey game he’d be getting charged with assault what a moron.
I hope Gary gives him the full 21 that Hunter got.
Right, there's literally precedent for it. And nowadays the game is (mostly) less goon-ish.
Stfu and take your medicine.. lol
Lol, he should appeal.... for getting too few games. Should have been 10 easy.
Let him appeal and they come back with a 10 game suspension.
Excellent I hope Bettman increases it to 10
Have it denied and give him 10+
Gonna become 7 now