I think the Grant Marshall example is an equal and hopeful example for Moore. Neck injuries seem to be on their own separate level from other injuries. Although cancer can be and should be considered a very tough condition to recover from, I think to compare it to Moore's or Marshall's injuries doesn't seem very germane. But, yes, I do agree with you now that players have come back from severe injuries, and, perhaps, Moore will do the same. One can hope.
Quote:
Originally posted by silent_jay
Not at all bent out of shape here, and I don't think Bertuzzi should be suspended for a year because Moore probably in my opinion won't miss a year. He will probably be back at the beginning of next year and possibly in the playoffs (although unlikely). Bertuzzi should of been suspended for the rest of the year. My original reaction of 5 games was a little off and after seeing a little more I the the rest of the year would of sufficed.
|
In a round-about way, you bring up a very interesting point about suspensions. Do you think it would be beneficial or even feasible for suspensions to be based upon the amount of time the injuried player is sidelined? For instance, let's say Moore is unable to play for 25 games, do you think it would be fair/appropriate for Bertuzzi to serve that amount of time? I've always been resentful of Ulfie taking out Neely's knee and career, and always thought it would be appropriate for Ulfie to serve the same sentence he gave to Cam (yes, I know Cam came back for a little bit, but was never the same). It is extreme, in a way, but it might prevent headhunters and blatant cheap-shots like Bertuzzi's. What do you think? Being the ex-player, would this sort of punishment stopped you from exacting revenge? The suspensions seem very arbitrary and not consistent.
Quote:
Originally posted by silent_jay
And yes the Canucks were fined in USD.
|
My bad. I got the bad information from ESPN.com; I suppose I should stick with TSN for hockey info.