- This topic has 56 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"plod16":jywufq7i wrote:It should be noted that hitting someone with a stick is equivalent to assault with a weapon and that carries 5 years imprisonment, spitting is an assault, probably under the Crimes Act and carries 2 years imprisonment. Personally, it would appear the suspensions are around the wrong way!!!
[/quote:jywufq7i]Maybe you are reffing the wrong game then. I wouldn’t recommend reffing either rugby, or basketball, or soccer, or baseball or just about any other sport that puts players in contact with eachother. Cricket perhaps? Your conscience would be at rest there.
"vpatrol":3aknmolb wrote:Maybe you are reffing the wrong game then. I wouldn’t recommend reffing either rugby, or basketball, or soccer, or baseball or just about any other sport that puts players in contact with eachother. Cricket perhaps? Your conscience would be at rest there.
[/quote:3aknmolb]I think his point was that under the criminal code, spitting and hitting with a stick are one way around, under ice hockey discliplinary code, the relative punishments are reversed.
I not that the Auckland club has a schedule of suspensions that are given, I guess this means players can know what they are up against when going to tribunal, much like NRL judiciary.
http://aiha.org.nz/admin/senior-suspension-schedule.aspx%5B/url:182kjigt%5D
On that spitting is a 10 game, and swinging stick is 5.
Is it worth the NZIHL having a schedule like this, to avoid accusations of bias for bans?I wouldn’t spit, but if I did I would like to know that the tribunal who hypothetically doesn’t like me, can make my ban longer than some one they do like.
I also wonder how did Challis get the spit out of his helmet without getting himself through his cage, I also understand he was involved in similar incident in Worlds….so prior offences should be taken into account.
I think the length of the season needs to be taken into account when setting bans. In NHL you play like a million games so a 10 game suspension is long but not the whole season. If you got 10 game in NZIHL you miss pretty much the whole season.
Thats why i think it is dangerous to have automatic suspensions, 1 game in NZIHL is a 1/16th of the season. In NHL its like 1/120th or something so far less of punishment.
The NZ Inline Hockey association has a national schedule of recommended suspensions. Very useful when I chaired their southern disciplinary committee. Once you’ve found someone guilty you just look at the range, and if it’s a first offence pick the bottom, if they’re a repeat offender you head towards the top, and then consider any special circumstances that mean you want to adjust or suspend part of the sentence.
There’s a national register of disciplinary procedures so you know what a player has done previously, or elsewhere.
Ice Hockey discipline is much less transparent, and certainly not as consistent across different locations/levels.
You can’t use previous offending in conjunction with a new charge, it goes against natural justice and the only result would be an unfair hearing.
Previous matters should be used to determine the suspension periods.
I think that Canterbury have a suspension schedule.
The DC process is inconsistent and needs to overhauled, preferably over the summer.
"Kyle":1biyn7mu wrote:"vpatrol":1biyn7mu wrote:Maybe you are reffing the wrong game then. I wouldn’t recommend reffing either rugby, or basketball, or soccer, or baseball or just about any other sport that puts players in contact with eachother. Cricket perhaps? Your conscience would be at rest there.
[/quote:1biyn7mu]I think his point was that under the criminal code, spitting and hitting with a stick are one way around, under ice hockey discliplinary code, the relative punishments are reversed.
[/quote:1biyn7mu]As would an a scrap in rugby, a head butt in soccer, a flagrant foul in basketball etc etc. Bringing up criminal code is a tired old argument and a waste of time on a hockey forum.
"plod16":2f6ebic2 wrote:You can’t use previous offending in conjunction with a new charge, it goes against natural justice and the only result would be an unfair hearing.
[/quote:2f6ebic2]That was my point. It only comes up at the punishment stage.
My point was that if compared with the criminal courts, then the suspensions would have been the other way around.
By playing hockey and any contact sport, you are allowing some one else to assault you, this is implied consent. When actions fall outside this, then other obvious courses of action are available to you and most commonly is by way of the disciplinary process. I think you would find that for the most serious cases, there is the possibility for criminal/civil process, just ask Jared McCracken or the guy McSorley injured.
i think they were around the right way WAA high stick = BSW broken jaw a little bad for sure 2 games good call
Splitting is not hockey just disgraceful 5 games maybe little harsh but good call
The high sticking like a number of offences, carries a much different penalty if determined to be deliberate. The high sticking mentioned here was deemed to be accidental, and I understand no evidence was presented or suggested that it was deliberate.
Spitting isn’t considered to be anything other than deliberate.
It would be good to have a suspension sched for the country. Given we have many different competitions of different #games it makes sense to have guidelines that reflects this and is consistent between regions / clubs / national competitions.
The person who put in place the NZIHA suspension guidelines, also put in place the Auckland guidelines.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.