What They’re Hiding: Insider Reveals the Dirty Secret Behind Soft Player Safety Decisions

The NHL’s main insider shares what’s truly going on behind the scenes.

A couple of events this month in the National Hockey League have brought a lot of criticism towards the NHL’s Department of Player Safety, as fans are upset about the seemingly easy punishments given for serious actions on the ice.

The backlash started when Radko Gudas, the captain of the Anaheim Ducks, got only a 5-game suspension for a knee-on-knee hit that caused Toronto Maple Leafs captain Auston Matthews to end his season with an injury.

This backlash grew stronger when, this past Sunday, the Player Safety department announced just a 3-game ban for Florida Panthers player A. J. Greer after what looked like a clear attempt to hurt Connor Zary from the Calgary Flames.

While many blame the NHL for this situation, recent remarks from the league’s top insider imply that the NHL isn’t the only one at fault.

On Monday, NHL insider Elliotte Friedman shared the actual reason behind these lesser suspensions.

 

“I can say that the league doesn’t want to often have their decisions challenged and overturned,” Friedman explained on the 32 Thoughts podcast. “They have shown they don’t want to handle appeals or get overturned; it’s not something they enjoy. ”

Those appeals are filed by the National Hockey League Players Association, which is supposed to represent the players who were hurt. According to Friedman, the NHL simply prefers not to have bigger suspensions that could lead to losing appeals.

“They’re lawyers, and they don’t like it when their decisions get overturned on appeal,” Friedman said.
According to someone close to the matter, the only way to improve things is if the players ask for changes to happen.

“The only way things are going to change is if the players ask for it,” Friedman mentioned.

But this also brings its own issues, because it might give the league more power during discussions about the agreement.

“Then they will need to talk it over with the league. . . so there are many difficulties in making change happen,” Friedman explained.

 

This would give the league a strong advantage when talking about deals, allowing them to request things like adjustments to how the appeals system works. Friedman thinks the Players Association will avoid that option.

“I have a feeling that the players won’t be interested in doing that if it means changing how extra discipline is handled,” said Friedman.

If someone thinks more suspiciously, they might claim that the league is creating a problem on purpose to have more power during talks, but that’s just a thought I’m sharing, not a statement.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*