its pretty fair...i haven't seen the replay yet...what did joly get a 12 game suspension for last year?

irocz2804 wrote:

its pretty fair...i haven't seen the replay yet...what did joly get a 12 game suspension for last year?

For hitting coach( if one can call him a coach) sauter

thats funny right there...

not to beat a dead horse but i just saw the news replay and they did 2 takes one in slow-mo and there was most definatly an elbow in there...

TexasCougar wrote:

Well Brain-0....seeing as I didn't mention any players name, maybe YOU should check your facts. Oh wait.....you must be an Okie???

hmmm... i did...and guess what.... i was right. What a tool

LOL you notice how TexasCougar hasn't said anything back, right?


OWNED

I'm surprised that he got as many games as he did. i really did figure he'de get 4 or 5 at most. after seeing the video, you can clearly see Fleck winde up & unload on Clayton's head. how anyone can view this as "unintentional" is beyond me

Posted on Fri, Dec. 30, 2005
Clayton's aggressor will sit 10
BY KOLLEN LONG
The Wichita Eagle

Rest easy, Thunder fans. Star forward Travis Clayton said he can live with the 10-game suspension the Central Hockey League handed out to Oklahoma City's Tyler Fleck on Thursday.
Fleck received a match penalty for intent to injure after he delivered a blow to Clayton's head, causing a concussion, during the third period of Oklahoma City's comeback victory on Tuesday. On Wednesday, an emotional Clayton said he would consider retirement if the CHL didn't come down hard on Fleck.
While the 29-year-old Clayton, who isn't expected to play for at least two weeks, still harbors hard feelings against Fleck, he said the punishment is fair. The 10-game suspension is the CHL's longest this season.
"I think the league did the right thing," Clayton said before the Thunder's game against Youngstown. "I'm happy with it. There's no place in hockey for blows to the head like that, but now we can at least move forward."
Then came the words that nervous Thunder fans needed to hear: "I'm far from retired. I enjoy the game too much."
Duane Lewis, CHL director of operations, said that Fleck deserved the match penalty. However, Lewis said the league concluded that Fleck "didn't set out to deliberately injure another player."
Lewis described the jabbing motion that Fleck made with his forearm before the contact with Clayton's head as a "reactionary move."
"It looks like Fleck is setting up for a solid body check," Lewis said. "Travis moves slightly to the right because he sees the hit coming. The player (Fleck) then -- in reaction -- puts his arm out to complete the hit. It's hard to get in a player's head, but it doesn't look like there was an intent to injure."

So does this mean he will not retire?

Quote:

Lewis described the jabbing motion that Fleck made with his forearm before the contact with Clayton's head as a "reactionary move." "It looks like Fleck is setting up for a solid body check," Lewis said. "Travis moves slightly to the right because he sees the hit coming. The player (Fleck) then -- in reaction -- puts his arm out to complete the hit. It's hard to get in a player's head, but it doesn't look like there was an intent to injure."

So my question still remains if the league feels that it was not an intent to injury situation and a reaction to Clayton avoiding the check then I ask why is there a suspension for 10 games? It sounds as if there was an unfortunate chain of events that led to the injury. Once again the lobbying get the win. Witchita complaining and the idle threat of retirement made the league's hair stand on end. I am sure that they were concerned about the financial impact to the Thunder could have been devastating and that is understandable but a suspension for "incidental contact" is unjustified.

Well...I certainly don't understand how they could look at the footage that I saw, and say that there was no intent to injure. The arm clearly comes up and delivers a severe blow to the head. It's impossible to get into the guys head, and know what he was thinking; maybe it was just a reaction, but it was a blow to the head, whether there was intent, or not. But I think that describing the event as "incidental contact" makes it obvious that you haven't yet seen the footage. I hope someone can post it soon.

To be honest the video is actually shows it to be even nastier than I first thought. I thought it was a pretty much clean hit he just got his elbow up.

After watching the video (several times) nothing but Fleck's elbow hits Clayton.

The "incidental contact" was an interpertation on my behalf of the statement from the league president.

yes you are an idiot... you have no right to reinterprate what was said by the league in their ruling... shut the fuck up you OKC PUTZ... go git a job and quit with your stupid justifications

Quote:

The "incidental contact" was an interpertation on my behalf of the statement from the league president.

OK, I can accept that. Although I haven't seen where the league said anything like that. Basically, by giving 10 games, they are saying that it was a severe blow to the head, with an elbow or forearm, and that is not acceptable, and will be punished. I wouldn't say that the league ruling that it wasn't "intent to injure" can be interpreted as "incedental contact".

That is my interpretation.

ICT,

Read the quote and shut the fuck up. Your fan based emotions are clouding your one functioning synapse. The league president made the statement and that was the breakdown of the statement. I am sure as politically correct as possible.

Not sure when the next time we play okc is after Fleck comes back but wouldnt it be great to see Mr. Hewitt come back for one night?

cockroach wrote:

irocz2804 wrote: its pretty fair...i haven't seen the replay yet...what did joly get a 12 game suspension for last year? For hitting coach( if one can call him a coach) sauter

He probably should have gotten a raise instead of 12 games!

prutz wrote:

ICT, Read the quote and shut the fuck up. Your fan based emotions are clouding your one functioning synapse. The league president made the statement and that was the breakdown of the statement. I am sure as politically correct as possible.

Until you see the video you probably should hold your comments....the leagues interpetation is just that. I have the hit on tape and have watched it several times...there is NO doubt that it was hit to the head, and a very violent one at that. Whatever the league feels happened is what we will live with....10 game suspension is what Fleck got so it is time to move on.

PUTZ --
your interpretation is bullshit... the league pres didn't say what you claimed he said... you are putting words in his statement, that he didn't include. There was no innocous (sp?) statement made by him that required you to reinterperate it.

"reactionary move" that is what you quoted him as saying... that statement in no way indicates that he thought there was no intent to injure.. in fact one could determine that had he not made that "reactionary move" he may not have made his intended hit to Claytons head... so quit with your bullshit.

Zany_Sports_Lady wrote:

However, Lewis said the league concluded that Fleck "didn't set out to deliberately injure another player." Lewis described the jabbing motion that Fleck made with his forearm before the contact with Clayton's head as a "reactionary move." "It looks like Fleck is setting up for a solid body check," Lewis said. "Travis moves slightly to the right because he sees the hit coming. The player (Fleck) then -- in reaction -- puts his arm out to complete the hit. It's hard to get in a player's head, but it doesn't look like there was an intent to injure."

I know I'm kind of repeating this, but this sounds a little to prepared. Why did the league pass down a 10 game suspension and defended Fleck's "reactionary move?"