Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2019 8:56:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Jan 29, 2019 9:07:33 GMT
Not embargoed then? I'll wait until I see the explanation before passing comment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2019 9:14:21 GMT
Seems Cardiff have now taken the page down.
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Jan 29, 2019 9:21:25 GMT
How strange.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,374
Member is Online
|
Post by iginla on Jan 29, 2019 9:32:58 GMT
Presumably they jumped the gun and upset the powers that be by announcing it too early. If 6 games is true then that’s a ridiculous decision when Tyson Marsh only got two games for a much nastier hit on Brad Moran.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2019 9:33:14 GMT
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,374
Member is Online
|
Post by iginla on Jan 29, 2019 9:43:55 GMT
Well,I’ve read some crap over the years in the EIHL but I think that decision and Dops explanation is the best one yet. It’s no wonder we don’t see many hits these days,why would you bother if you were a player when you risk decisions like that. Might as well wrap the players up in cotton wool,forget ice hockey and go watch netball ! 🙄
|
|
|
Post by samjohnson345 on Jan 29, 2019 9:46:03 GMT
Please can someone explain to me because it might be me being naïve. How can he get additional games for being a repeat offender when the hit on Venus didn’t even get him a ban at all from memory? Are they classing it as a repeat offence because Venus spent time out injured? If he’d been banned once for a couple games then the repeat offence take would make more sense surely? Again, I get it if I’ve missed something or misinterpreted something but I’m confused!
|
|
|
Post by NottinghamMatt on Jan 29, 2019 9:48:59 GMT
So we appeal now with a load of lawyers and get it reduced to 2... precedent set by oh yes the Cardiff Devils
|
|
|
Post by pantherlee on Jan 29, 2019 9:50:31 GMT
Please can someone explain to me because it might be me being naïve. How can he get additional games for being a repeat offender when the hit on Venus didn’t even get him a ban at all from memory? Are they classing it as a repeat offence because Venus spent time out injured? If he’d been banned once for a couple games then the repeat offence take would make more sense surely? Again, I get it if I’ve missed something or misinterpreted something but I’m confused! I thought exactly the same thing. Was the hit on Venus even called by the refs on the night?
|
|
Jord v4
Ken Westman
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 2,714
|
Post by Jord v4 on Jan 29, 2019 9:50:38 GMT
So we appeal now with a load of lawyers and get it reduced to 2... precedent set by oh yes the Mardiff Devils Corrected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2019 9:51:53 GMT
Please can someone explain to me because it might be me being naïve. How can he get additional games for being a repeat offender when the hit on Venus didn’t even get him a ban at all from memory? Are they classing it as a repeat offence because Venus spent time out injured? If he’d been banned once for a couple games then the repeat offence take would make more sense surely? Again, I get it if I’ve missed something or misinterpreted something but I’m confused! I assume this is why he is deemed a repeat offender; eliteleague.co.uk/2018/10/01/dops-panthers-rissling-suspended-for-1-game/Although I suppose Panthers could argue who's 'JAYEN' Rissling?! FWIW the elbow against the Squeelers warranted a longer ban in my opinion. The 6 games for the Mosey hit is just laughable.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Jan 29, 2019 9:52:09 GMT
Oh my oh my. Now the league announce the reasons. They stated
"This puts the responsibility on #93 Jaynen Rissling to avoid head contact. Instead, the check missed the body of the opposing player and all the contact and force was expelled through the head of the opposing player."
So one of 3 options. 1. They havn't watched it all. 2. They havn't taken the time to watch it slow motion and see initial contact wasnt to the head. 3. They are just chosing to ignore the facts and lie through the statement due to the injury.
If they mentioned perhaps use of elbows or something for the reason then I can see that is open to interpritation. Principal point of contact wasn't the head. Fact.
|
|
|
Post by pantherlee on Jan 29, 2019 9:55:29 GMT
Where have DOPS even been anyway? Last season you couldn’t get through a weekend without seeing a DOPS report of suspensions and reviews yet hardly a peep this season and they’ve suddenly been resurrected for this. I’m sure there are many examples from around the league you could pick but as I only watch panthers where were they when Lepine was chucked for a deliberate spear? Something stinks about this
|
|
|
Post by panthers4ever on Jan 29, 2019 9:56:24 GMT
What a joke Dops is
|
|
Jord v4
Ken Westman
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 2,714
|
Post by Jord v4 on Jan 29, 2019 9:59:30 GMT
Please can someone explain to me because it might be me being naïve. How can he get additional games for being a repeat offender when the hit on Venus didn’t even get him a ban at all from memory? Are they classing it as a repeat offence because Venus spent time out injured? If he’d been banned once for a couple games then the repeat offence take would make more sense surely? Again, I get it if I’ve missed something or misinterpreted something but I’m confused! I thought exactly the same thing. Was the hit on Venus even called by the refs on the night? It was the sheff game he got the one game ban for. The Venus hit was clean.
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Jan 29, 2019 10:01:02 GMT
Well,I’ve read some crap over the years in the EIHL but I think that decision and Dops explanation is the best one yet. It’s no wonder we don’t see many hits these days,why would you bother if you were a player when you risk decisions like that. Might as well wrap the players up in cotton wool,forget ice hockey and go watch netball ! 🙄 www.play-netball.co.uk/nottingham/
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,374
Member is Online
|
Post by iginla on Jan 29, 2019 10:57:22 GMT
Well,I’ve read some crap over the years in the EIHL but I think that decision and Dops explanation is the best one yet. It’s no wonder we don’t see many hits these days,why would you bother if you were a player when you risk decisions like that. Might as well wrap the players up in cotton wool,forget ice hockey and go watch netball ! 🙄 www.play-netball.co.uk/nottingham/Ah nice one.....that’s looks a bit more exciting than the EIHL. 👍
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,374
Member is Online
|
Post by iginla on Jan 29, 2019 11:00:52 GMT
Where have DOPS even been anyway? Last season you couldn’t get through a weekend without seeing a DOPS report of suspensions and reviews yet hardly a peep this season and they’ve suddenly been resurrected for this. I’m sure there are many examples from around the league you could pick but as I only watch panthers where were they when Lepine was chucked for a deliberate spear? Something stinks about this They’ve been quickly resurrected as the “department to help Steelers make the play offs”. I’ll give you one guess which two teams have to play Sheffield in several games during Rissling and Ulmer’s bans ! 🤔
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Jan 29, 2019 11:10:58 GMT
What an absolute farce. This league is a joke.
Six game ban for being six inches taller than Mosey.
A game per inch. Sounds about right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2019 11:17:37 GMT
What a surprise there's no welsh on here moaning today giving their 'opinion' 🙄
|
|
Jord v4
Ken Westman
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 2,714
|
Post by Jord v4 on Jan 29, 2019 11:23:39 GMT
I don't think DOPS had much choice to be honest.
They had to ban Ulmer so they then had to ban Rissling. It's a spherical objects reason they've given but they had to do something. I can understand their actions on this one, even though I completely disagree with them.
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Shirt on Jan 29, 2019 11:26:50 GMT
I don't think DOPS had much choice to be honest. They had to ban Ulmer so they then had to ban Rissling. It's a spherical objects reason they've given but they had to do something. I can understand their actions on this one, even though I completely disagree with them. I agree. There was nothing else they could do.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,244
Member is Online
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 29, 2019 11:29:52 GMT
Well,I’ve read some crap over the years in the EIHL but I think that decision and Dops explanation is the best one yet. It’s no wonder we don’t see many hits these days,why would you bother if you were a player when you risk decisions like that. Might as well wrap the players up in cotton wool,forget ice hockey and go watch netball ! 🙄 www.play-netball.co.uk/nottingham/What's netball done to deserve that? Not surprised he got banned tbh, but both seem rather excessive.
|
|
|
Post by wgray on Jan 29, 2019 11:37:27 GMT
Deep down I thought Rissling would get a ban but 6 games is ridiculous. There is contact with the head due to the size difference, but from that video footage how can they categorically say the head was the initial point of contact?
The statement contradicts itself as well, “With time, space and speed all taken into consideration, it is felt in the opinion of the DOPS that #93 Jaynen Rissling did not have time and was not deliberately or intentionally making a body check with head contact. However, in all incidents, when an illegal action occurs that is avoidable, the responsibility is on the checker to avoid head contact.”
So they’re saying he’s not intentionally checked him to the head but he should still avoid head contact?
Part of me is saying take it on the chin and move on, but in all honesty I hope we request a review and try to get the ban reduced.
|
|