At the NHL GM meetings in Florida they drafted a rule to be considered for implementation next year regarding headshots. However, since that rule is not in place yet, there is no real grounds to suspend Cooke on.
No real grounds, but this is where the ethical side of the issue comes into play.
Although there is no rule against hits such as this one in place, the facts have to be considered. Savard suffered a grade 2 concussion and will likely not play for the remainder of the season.
So why should Cooke play?
If a player lays out a hit on a player causing serious injury, there should be consequences. Cooke is a repeat offender, and if you look at clips of his 'headshots' from previous games, they are all identical. Just because there is no rule specifically pertaining to headshots, there's no ethical reason why a repeat offender should not have been given a minimum of three games.
Down Goes Brown puts it best when he says that the league put themselves in this position by not creating a rule against headshots years ago. With players such as Cooke in the game, it puts many of the star players in danger, and it creates an unsafe environment for the game.
Martin St Louis has one of the best quotes from a player about this incident, saying that if Cooke isn't suspended for that hit then what exactly does warrant a suspension?
Cooke blindsided Savard. There is no doubt about that.
Savard now has a grade 2 concussion, and he is doubtful to play for the rest of the season.
This is not the first time Cooke has done something like this.
Why isn't he suspended?
No comments:
Post a Comment