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 11:08:42 GMT
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 Flyers could well do the same if they so saw fit. However, the EIHL have to carry some blame themselves for this kind of action happening. Why? Normally when a player in an IIHF affiliated league is banned, it applies to all leagues. So a player who receives a ban in Finland is banned in Jamaica as well. But, the EIHL, because of it's usual egotistic ways, is not IIHF affiliated. As such, players can get another job elsewhere. There is nothing to stop Campbell going abroad for another job so no motive to think otherwise about his actions. Had he received this ban in EPL, it would have applied to other leagues also because the EPL is EIHA associated and EIHA is IIHF associated.
|
|
|
Post by Ironjaw on Oct 9, 2013 11:33:15 GMT
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 That's their choice, if they've got players banned for 4 or 5 games then they're hardly going to bin them. If a player gets a long ban then aye let the clubs sack them, he's still banned in this league for that time. You can't expect hull to play 47 games down an import. If fife wanted they could have binned Nickerson after the Cardiff game and got someone else.
|
|
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 11:41:48 GMT
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. 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? I'm not saying you can stop people doing stuff- the fact is though that a club is responsible for the actions of their players/employees when they are representing the club. I was making a general comment regarding players causing or trying to cause injury throughout the league. The original hit can be reviewed if Hull think it should be. Do you think because Hull are being punished in other ways that the league should change/bend it's own rules so they aren't also punished by playing 1 import down? That WOULD be a farce. As I've said, it's unfortunate for Hull, but he was their player.
|
|
|
Post by sparkymark75 on Oct 9, 2013 11:51:54 GMT
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 Flyers could well do the same if they so saw fit. However, the EIHL have to carry some blame themselves for this kind of action happening. Why? Normally when a player in an IIHF affiliated league is banned, it applies to all leagues. So a player who receives a ban in Finland is banned in Jamaica as well. But, the EIHL, because of it's usual egotistic ways, is not IIHF affiliated. As such, players can get another job elsewhere. There is nothing to stop Campbell going abroad for another job so no motive to think otherwise about his actions. Had he received this ban in EPL, it would have applied to other leagues also because the EPL is EIHA associated and EIHA is IIHF associated. The ban on International Transfers also applies to non IIHF affiliated leagues. So if he leaves the EIHL and wants to go to France, the IIHF would block the transfer. See article 407 in www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/The_IIHF/2012-2014_IIHF_Statutes_and_Bylaws.pdf
|
|
|
Post by --G-- on Oct 9, 2013 12:23:05 GMT
the hit was hard, but not dirty from what I could see. He stayed on his feet and didn't appear to focus on the head.
I agree Hull should be further punished for this. Your team, your problem. Otherwise whats to stop teams hiring goons for certain games to go mental, hurt key players and then get fired?
|
|
|
Post by stirlingflyer on Oct 9, 2013 12:52:37 GMT
Have Hull asked for the original hit to be reviewed? It looked clean to me.
|
|
|
Post by riverrat on Oct 9, 2013 13:07:32 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. That's your opinion, a jaundiced one I believe. Could it not be that as with most clubs Hull effectively shut down on a Monday following a weekend of games. Knee-jerk reactions never help these situations and given that I feel they acted as swiftly as can be expected. As for your ludicrous statement about someone spitting, where did that come from? Maybe someone in the crowd pulled a gun and Campbell was defending himself ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Bans handed out in the EIHL do stand in IIHF leagues but don't let facts get in the way of having a pop at an organisation which seems to be trying to make changes to the way it is run. There are numerous reasons for the Elite league not being a full IIHF affiliate, most being well established rules in the UK not being compatible. I'm sure I would not have reacted as Campbell did and most sportsmen wouldn't either. Otherwise we'd have carnage every week. Don't overreact and resort to name calling, some of this is my opinion but some is actual FACT.
|
|
|
Post by sparkymark75 on Oct 9, 2013 14:50:35 GMT
Campbell himself had to miss a few games at the start of an EIHL season with Sheffield after he received a ban (think it was for 5 games) at the end of the Australian season.
|
|
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 14:59:55 GMT
Flyers could well do the same if they so saw fit. However, the EIHL have to carry some blame themselves for this kind of action happening. Why? Normally when a player in an IIHF affiliated league is banned, it applies to all leagues. So a player who receives a ban in Finland is banned in Jamaica as well. But, the EIHL, because of it's usual egotistic ways, is not IIHF affiliated. As such, players can get another job elsewhere. There is nothing to stop Campbell going abroad for another job so no motive to think otherwise about his actions. Had he received this ban in EPL, it would have applied to other leagues also because the EPL is EIHA associated and EIHA is IIHF associated. The ban on International Transfers also applies to non IIHF affiliated leagues. So if he leaves the EIHL and wants to go to France, the IIHF would block the transfer. See article 407 in www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/The_IIHF/2012-2014_IIHF_Statutes_and_Bylaws.pdfPretty sure that could be overridden by EU employment law. Even still, nothing to stop him getting a job in EPL. No ITC required = no block.
|
|
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 15:02:15 GMT
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. That's your opinion, a jaundiced one I believe. Could it not be that as with most clubs Hull effectively shut down on a Monday following a weekend of games. Knee-jerk reactions never help these situations and given that I feel they acted as swiftly as can be expected. As for your ludicrous statement about someone spitting, where did that come from? Maybe someone in the crowd pulled a gun and Campbell was defending himself ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Bans handed out in the EIHL do stand in IIHF leagues but don't let facts get in the way of having a pop at an organisation which seems to be trying to make changes to the way it is run. There are numerous reasons for the Elite league not being a full IIHF affiliate, most being well established rules in the UK not being compatible. I'm sure I would not have reacted as Campbell did and most sportsmen wouldn't either. Otherwise we'd have carnage every week. Don't overreact and resort to name calling, some of this is my opinion but some is actual FACT. It came from the FACT you do not know what caused the off-ice events. If Campbell attacked a fan at random, or whether he was actually attacked first. You just don't know. If someone attacked me, I would sure as hell defend myself regardless of whether I was a hockey player or whatever. EDIT:- Also, in an ideal world, people would act on morality. Clubs wouldn't need to be punished because of the actions of a player. Everyone would be working together to combat such problems with fans, players and all other aspects. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world.
|
|
|
Post by riverrat on Oct 9, 2013 15:14:44 GMT
That's your opinion, a jaundiced one I believe. Could it not be that as with most clubs Hull effectively shut down on a Monday following a weekend of games. Knee-jerk reactions never help these situations and given that I feel they acted as swiftly as can be expected. As for your ludicrous statement about someone spitting, where did that come from? Maybe someone in the crowd pulled a gun and Campbell was defending himself ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Bans handed out in the EIHL do stand in IIHF leagues but don't let facts get in the way of having a pop at an organisation which seems to be trying to make changes to the way it is run. There are numerous reasons for the Elite league not being a full IIHF affiliate, most being well established rules in the UK not being compatible. I'm sure I would not have reacted as Campbell did and most sportsmen wouldn't either. Otherwise we'd have carnage every week. Don't overreact and resort to name calling, some of this is my opinion but some is actual FACT. It came from the FACT you do not know what caused the off-ice events. If Campbell attacked a fan at random, or whether he was actually attacked first. You just don't know. If someone attacked me, I would sure as hell defend myself regardless of whether I was a hockey player or whatever. EDIT:- Also, in an ideal world, people would act on morality. Clubs wouldn't need to be punished because of the actions of a player. Everyone would be working together to combat such problems with fans, players and all other aspects. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world. What are you on about? No-one attacked a fan.
|
|
Dstar1512
Rookie
Posts: 112
EIHL Team: Dundee Stars
|
Post by Dstar1512 on Oct 9, 2013 15:31:21 GMT
That's your opinion, a jaundiced one I believe. Could it not be that as with most clubs Hull effectively shut down on a Monday following a weekend of games. Knee-jerk reactions never help these situations and given that I feel they acted as swiftly as can be expected. As for your ludicrous statement about someone spitting, where did that come from? Maybe someone in the crowd pulled a gun and Campbell was defending himself ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Bans handed out in the EIHL do stand in IIHF leagues but don't let facts get in the way of having a pop at an organisation which seems to be trying to make changes to the way it is run. There are numerous reasons for the Elite league not being a full IIHF affiliate, most being well established rules in the UK not being compatible. I'm sure I would not have reacted as Campbell did and most sportsmen wouldn't either. Otherwise we'd have carnage every week. Don't overreact and resort to name calling, some of this is my opinion but some is actual FACT. It came from the FACT you do not know what caused the off-ice events. If Campbell attacked a fan at random, or whether he was actually attacked first. You just don't know. If someone attacked me, I would sure as @#!*% defend myself regardless of whether I was a hockey player or whatever. EDIT:- Also, in an ideal world, people would act on morality. Clubs wouldn't need to be punished because of the actions of a player. Everyone would be working together to combat such problems with fans, players and all other aspects. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world. What are you on about? Campbell went to the away dressing room and waited on the Dundee player coming off the ice and attacked him while he was being escorted to the dressing room, they fell into some fans while Campbell was still punching the player, security then bundled the Dundee player away. I believe the club should be penalised for not protecting the players, not penalised for the actions of an idiot.
|
|
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 15:51:22 GMT
It came from the FACT you do not know what caused the off-ice events. If Campbell attacked a fan at random, or whether he was actually attacked first. You just don't know. If someone attacked me, I would sure as @#!*% defend myself regardless of whether I was a hockey player or whatever. EDIT:- Also, in an ideal world, people would act on morality. Clubs wouldn't need to be punished because of the actions of a player. Everyone would be working together to combat such problems with fans, players and all other aspects. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world. What are you on about? Campbell went to the away dressing room and waited on the Dundee player coming off the ice and attacked him while he was being escorted to the dressing room, they fell into some fans while Campbell was still punching the player, security then bundled the Dundee player away. I believe the club should be penalised for not protecting the players, not penalised for the actions of an idiot. I was speaking hypothetically, because I don't know what triggers the off-ice events. So I was saying if a fan or someone had attacked Campbell and he acted in self-defence, then perhaps the penalty was harsh. However, if your version of events is correct, then the punishment fits the crime. I agree somewhat, but it depends. There is only so far a club can go, particularly with the limited budgets we have in the UK and the fact that off-ice stuff on match nights is usually monitored by volunteers. It is hard to realistically expect a club to have done better than what was done here.
|
|
Dstar1512
Rookie
Posts: 112
EIHL Team: Dundee Stars
|
Post by Dstar1512 on Oct 9, 2013 16:01:30 GMT
What are you on about? Campbell went to the away dressing room and waited on the Dundee player coming off the ice and attacked him while he was being escorted to the dressing room, they fell into some fans while Campbell was still punching the player, security then bundled the Dundee player away. I believe the club should be penalised for not protecting the players, not penalised for the actions of an idiot. I was speaking hypothetically, because I don't know what triggers the off-ice events. So I was saying if a fan or someone had attacked Campbell and he acted in self-defence, then perhaps the penalty was harsh. However, if your version of events is correct, then the punishment fits the crime. I agree somewhat, but it depends. There is only so far a club can go, particularly with the limited budgets we have in the UK and the fact that off-ice stuff on match nights is usually monitored by volunteers. It is hard to realistically expect a club to have done better than what was done here. The version of events are 100% correct. When a player is sent to the dressing room, security should be on the door as they are expected to stay their for the duration of the game, he managed to walk all the way to the other dressing room without being challenged. That is definitely something Hull and maybe others clubs need to look at.
|
|
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 10, 2013 9:00:01 GMT
I was speaking hypothetically, because I don't know what triggers the off-ice events. So I was saying if a fan or someone had attacked Campbell and he acted in self-defence, then perhaps the penalty was harsh. However, if your version of events is correct, then the punishment fits the crime. I agree somewhat, but it depends. There is only so far a club can go, particularly with the limited budgets we have in the UK and the fact that off-ice stuff on match nights is usually monitored by volunteers. It is hard to realistically expect a club to have done better than what was done here. The version of events are 100% correct. When a player is sent to the dressing room, security should be on the door as they are expected to stay their for the duration of the game, he managed to walk all the way to the other dressing room without being challenged. That is definitely something Hull and maybe others clubs need to look at. Quite possibly. But unless the rules changed recently, security was never a requirement. When we were in EIHL, we never had anything close to security. We just had a few volunteers.
|
|