|
Post by riverrat on Oct 8, 2013 13:50:29 GMT
Good news. The league can do without him. Respect to Cloutier for acting swiftly and decisively.
|
|
|
Post by shan93 on Oct 8, 2013 14:24:53 GMT
"The Elite League is currently reviewing both incidents and will report their findings shortly." seems as though the league still plan on doing something about it though?
|
|
flyersforlife01
Junior
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 540
EIHL Team: Fife Flyers
NHL Team: Pittsburgh Penguins
|
Post by flyersforlife01 on Oct 8, 2013 15:32:58 GMT
Does this mean whoever Hull replace Campbell with, that they will still not be able to play until the suspension is complete?
|
|
|
Post by blueline on Oct 8, 2013 15:55:00 GMT
This is why Hull as released Campbell . He is no longer a Hull player when the ban is decided so they can ice 11 imports.
|
|
|
Post by harlan on Oct 8, 2013 16:42:35 GMT
This is why Hull as released Campbell . He is no longer a Hull player when the ban is decided so they can ice 11 imports. This is totally wrong IMO. Any ban that a player has got whether Brit or import has to be given to the club as well irrespective of whether they release that player or not. A club has to have responsibility for any of its players actions. Otherwise what is to stop a club from hiring an out and out knuckle dragger for a few games, let him off the leash to do whatever he wanted and he goes and gets banned for 10 games, said club release that player with immediate effect only to go and get another knuckle dragger in. Hull have to have responsibility for Campbell, he was their employee when the actions took place
|
|
|
Post by ojc123 on Oct 8, 2013 18:24:46 GMT
Might be a cynical 'get rid' so they can get another import or might be a principled stand. Either way, I'm not surprised. The incidents on-ice and off-ice were a disgrace from what I saw on the video. Campbell wasn't a bad player when he played hockey but was always a liability.
|
|
tam
Junior
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 742
|
Post by tam on Oct 8, 2013 18:31:59 GMT
normal rules are you cant replace a banned player, i presume hull are trying to bypass that rule by dumping him, its a sore lesson for them if it doesnt work and they play the season with one short, we will have to see what the league makes of it. they have to punish hull somehow or every team would have guys in the wings to replace banned players
|
|
|
Post by riverrat on Oct 8, 2013 18:41:44 GMT
47 game ban. Including fighting off the ice, eye gouging, kneeling to the head and driving opponent head into the ice. Idiot. The only surprise is I thought fighting off the ice would carry higher tariff. No mention of how many games Hull play short.
|
|
spudeeelad
Junior
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 949
EIHL Team: Manchester Storm
NHL Team: Tampa Bay Lightning
|
Post by spudeeelad on Oct 9, 2013 8:56:51 GMT
47 game ban. Including fighting off the ice, eye gouging, kneeling to the head and driving opponent head into the ice. Idiot. The only surprise is I thought fighting off the ice would carry higher tariff. No mention of how many games Hull play short. The guy has always been a hot head, but can be a very good player when he wants to be. The footage does not show what happened to make Campbell fight and the footage of the hit shows its quite a nasty one. Can you honestly say you would react differently if you believe the player who threw that dangerous check purposely tried to injure you as Campbell may have believed? Phone is being stupid so correcting above here - to make Campbell fight off the ice - how do you know someone didn't spit in his face or something?
|
|
spudeeelad
Junior
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 949
EIHL Team: Manchester Storm
NHL Team: Tampa Bay Lightning
|
Post by spudeeelad on Oct 9, 2013 9:02:31 GMT
This is why Hull as released Campbell . He is no longer a Hull player when the ban is decided so they can ice 11 imports. This is totally wrong IMO. Any ban that a player has got whether Brit or import has to be given to the club as well irrespective of whether they release that player or not. A club has to have responsibility for any of its players actions. Otherwise what is to stop a club from hiring an out and out knuckle dragger for a few games, let him off the leash to do whatever he wanted and he goes and gets banned for 10 games, said club release that player with immediate effect only to go and get another knuckle dragger in. Hull have to have responsibility for Campbell, he was their employee when the actions took place No. A club cannot control the mind of an individual. If I walk into work and decide to punch a customer, why should my company get punished? I alone made the decision to what I did...
|
|
spudeeelad
Junior
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 949
EIHL Team: Manchester Storm
NHL Team: Tampa Bay Lightning
|
Post by spudeeelad on Oct 9, 2013 9:08:36 GMT
Good news. The league can do without him. Respect to Cloutier for acting swiftly and decisively. Not at all. Quick and decisive action would have been to release him immediately, releasing the news Monday morning. Not waiting until they caught wind of how long the ban was going to be. I believe if the ban was like 10-15 games they wouldn't have acted at all.
|
|
|
Post by Ironjaw on Oct 9, 2013 10:29:10 GMT
This is totally wrong IMO. Any ban that a player has got whether Brit or import has to be given to the club as well irrespective of whether they release that player or not. A club has to have responsibility for any of its players actions. Otherwise what is to stop a club from hiring an out and out knuckle dragger for a few games, let him off the leash to do whatever he wanted and he goes and gets banned for 10 games, said club release that player with immediate effect only to go and get another knuckle dragger in. Hull have to have responsibility for Campbell, he was their employee when the actions took place No. A club cannot control the mind of an individual. If I walk into work and decide to punch a customer, why should my company get punished? I alone made the decision to what I did... Aye you can't now say hull should play an import short. If a Brit gets banned they don't have to play a Brit short. Makes no sense. He's banned for 47 games it's no Hulls fault.
|
|
|
Post by harlan on Oct 9, 2013 10:48:33 GMT
No. A club cannot control the mind of an individual. If I walk into work and decide to punch a customer, why should my company get punished? I alone made the decision to what I did... Aye you can't now say hull should play an import short. If a Brit gets banned they don't have to play a Brit short. Makes no sense. He's banned for 47 games it's no Hulls fault. So its ok for Flyers, Clan, Giants and Devils to be a player short because they got banned but not ok for Hull to be a player short just because they sacked him. He was representing Hull and wearing their shirt at the time of the ban. They have to take responsibility for him
|
|
finchy
Pro
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 1,567
EIHL Team: Fife Flyers
NHL Team: New Jersey Devil
|
Post by finchy on Oct 9, 2013 10:53:34 GMT
This is totally wrong IMO. Any ban that a player has got whether Brit or import has to be given to the club as well irrespective of whether they release that player or not. A club has to have responsibility for any of its players actions. Otherwise what is to stop a club from hiring an out and out knuckle dragger for a few games, let him off the leash to do whatever he wanted and he goes and gets banned for 10 games, said club release that player with immediate effect only to go and get another knuckle dragger in. Hull have to have responsibility for Campbell, he was their employee when the actions took place No. A club cannot control the mind of an individual. If I walk into work and decide to punch a customer, why should my company get punished? I alone made the decision to what I did... The company could get punished under those circumstances if you were acting in a capacity whereby you were representing the firm- I'm amazed you would think otherwise. The company could then seek recompense from the employee. That's the way it works. It’s a pity for Hull, but there are EIHL rules regarding imports being suspended which dictate that you need to play an import short whilst they are suspended. I think it’s only right as teams carry spares and it would be too easy for the richer club to not be penalised for the actions of their players. Clubs ARE responsible for the actions of their players and they have to accept that even if a player fails to follow instructions. How often do you hear about football teams being fined for “failing to control their players”?- happens a lot. You suggesting that we should have a culture where a player can cause mayhem/injury and the club isn't affected at all as long as they release him? Seriously? Hull knew what they were getting with Campbell and other clubs including us have probably run similar risks with other players. If they get to play with 11 imports after 1 is suspended then it's a joke to be honest.
|
|
spudeeelad
Junior
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Posts: 949
EIHL Team: Manchester Storm
NHL Team: Tampa Bay Lightning
|
Post by spudeeelad on Oct 9, 2013 11:05:25 GMT
No. A club cannot control the mind of an individual. If I walk into work and decide to punch a customer, why should my company get punished? I alone made the decision to what I did... The company could get punished under those circumstances if you were acting in a capacity whereby you were representing the firm- I'm amazed you would think otherwise. The company could then seek recompense from the employee. That's the way it works. It’s a pity for Hull, but there are EIHL rules regarding imports being suspended which dictate that you need to play an import short whilst they are suspended. I think it’s only right as teams carry spares and it would be too easy for the richer club to not be penalised for the actions of their players. Clubs ARE responsible for the actions of their players and they have to accept that even if a player fails to follow instructions. How often do you hear about football teams being fined for “failing to control their players”?- happens a lot. You suggesting that we should ahve a culture where a player can cause mayhem/injury and the club isn't affected at all as long as they release him? Seriously? Hull knew what they were getting with Campbell and other clubs including us have probably run similar risks with other players. If they get to play with 11 imports after 1 is suspended then it's a joke to be honest. I am aware of what you just said. But, be realistic. Unless everyone has a police officer stood next to them, including someone who will police the policeman and so on, how can you possibly stop someone acting out and doing stuff? Hull have already been punished by the damage to their reputation and standing. It could even be a type of financial penalty if a potential sponsor stopped looking at the club after seeing this in the press. Funny you highlight the injury part, because how do you know that the player involved in the original check on Campbell didn't set out to injure him?
|
|