maufman said:With the national attention this has received, I'll be surprised if Thornton gets less than 20 games. If he had a record of disciplinary action, he'd be looking at much worse.
Not saying that's fair, but that's how I see it unfolding.
Fred in Lynn said:Allowing myself a moment to advocate for Satan, I'm not sure this philosophy works where the check that started it was deemed within the rules. If the rulebook, as opposed to unwritten codes which are inherently subject to vastly different interpretations, doesn't play the largest part in determining what is permissible and what is not, then there will be problems. I have a problem with the sort of check Orpik laid on Eriksson, because the NHL allows them although it said it was serious about protecting vulnerable players. Thornton wanted to Orpik to answer because the check. But the reason Thornton wanted a piece of Orpik is beside the point. At the end of the day, this was a freak outcome. Thornton wanted to fight Orpik and if they had squared up and Orpik turtled, Thornton's punishment would have been clear and is already spelled out in the rulebook (2, 5, 10, and a game). So in that respect, I think I'll be peeved if the NHL does anything other than talk about it. (I wouldn't cry if the automatic game misconduct went away and was instead a discretionary addition for the refs.) I'm rambling now, and sorry if my snip changed the context of your post in any way, ReardonsBeard. Edit: reading again, I think we're saying much of the same thing. My view is focused on the presumption that Orpik was in the wrong in the eyes of the rulebook. Shawn being right in the eyes of The Code doesn't win him style points with the head office. Mostly, bad luck for Thornton is driving this.
No problem, I think we're on the same page.
I suspect they will aim for 15-20 games at the onset and reduce it upon an appeal/contention to 8-12 total. His reputation, first time offense, and the circumstances which led to the event will see to that. The league failed to control an escalating confrontation, and when Orpiks failed to stand trial on the ice, it was a cascading failure across the board. Shanahan is no fool and understands the unwritten rules of the game. Furthermore, I'd be surprised if Thornton's reputation around the league took a major Cooke like hit considering how it all went down.
The best outcome here is no more than 10 games along with a public apology. This wasn't McSorely or Domi. It was a thug act that came out of a desire to protect his teammates after the league failed to do so. That is clear to everyone who was there and everyone who is going to make a decision.
Let justice be done.