really thought he'd get more. I guess that's the NHL's way of saying, "if you weren't Matt Cooke you wouldn't get anything but since you are....."Staggy wrote:7 games per McKenzie
Matt Cooke hit on Tyson Barrie
-
- ECHL'er
- Posts: 1679
- Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:44 am
- Location: me, 3 years Super League
Re: Matt Cooke hit on Tyson Barrie
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Matt Cooke hit on Tyson Barrie
7 is ok. he's a special case and deserves harsher punishment than everyone else.
-
- Junior 'A'
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 10:19 am
Re: Matt Cooke hit on Tyson Barrie
I think this "clean slate after 18 months" only relates to how players lose salary when suspended. And, I think it works like this:Beveridge wrote:Cooke isn't considered a repeat offender, correct? I thought once you went X amount of time under the new CBA, you lose repeat offender status.
On an initial 2-game suspension, a player loses 2 days of salary - the two game days.
If suspended a second time in 18 months, the player loses pay for the number of calendar days needed to complete the suspension. So, if it takes 4 days to complete a 2-game suspension, a player would lose twice as much salary.
I don't know how this works in the playoffs, when players only get bonus money, not salary.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 17885
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:24 am
- Location: The card table
Re: Matt Cooke hit on Tyson Barrie
If that was worth 7, than the Blues should be crying foul about Seabrook's 3.