Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Ruutu Bites Peters


Recommended Posts

Both clips show he was clearly bitten. I think it should become a rule and the nhl should make it a harsh one. If the refs had seen it the most Ruutu would have recieved is and unsportsmanlike misconduct and an extra 2 minutes becasue he drew blood. Until a new rule is made this is all players are most likely to recieve. Lets just hope there a only a few, if any, copy-cats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say he gets 10 games.
I'll agree, but Supplementary Discipline is such a crap-shoot, I wouldn't be surprised if it was anywhere in the 5 to 15 games range...

higher than 10 because:

1) Ruutu has "repeat offender" status

2) Ruutu isn't a star who would get preferential treatment -- in fact, while Avery might have been the "most hated" player, I think Ruutu is considered by many as the "dirtiest" player -- and the league would see this as a chance to get him out of there for a while...

lower than 10 because:

the potential for serious injury was small...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a joke that was by the nhl commitee to give him only 2 games this league is getting to be a total joke....I think they should change the disciplinary committee all together.....2 GAMES BIG DEAL

2 games, .... plus $31,000 of salary.

I thought it would be 2-3 games. That's all it needs to be; he was biting through a leather glove. Now, if he actually bit a finger off or something it would need to be more. ;):D

Face washing is just about as cowardly (and not that Ruutu doesn't partake of that himself). You won't see Peters face-washing Ruutu again, at any rate.

Peters, on the bite: "It's not good for the game of hockey." (but concentrated face washing is? :blink: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 games, .... plus $31,000 of salary.

I thought it would be 2-3 games. That's all it needs to be; he was biting through a leather glove. Now, if he actually bit a finger off or something it would need to be more. ;):D

it's not exactly "plus" $31k in salary, that's the salary he forfeits for the 2 game suspension... if a player could be suspended but not have to forfeit salary, it could seem like a reward on some teams...

another way to look at it is, why should Ruutu get paid for those two games when he's not going to be playing in them because of his own actions...

Ruutu is a "repeat offender", which should have increased the number of games... so, 2 games means the actual biting is only worthy of 1 game and the second was for being a "repeat offender"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine Ruttu and Avery on the same team.....man what a "freak show" Frankly I laughed when I saw this the first time and was :blink: but what would one expect when putting fingers in that mans mouth really. Both of them is kind stupid and to blame for the whole thing (clearly mostly Ruttu, but still fingers in a mans mouth ??) Got to keep the sex out of the game guys, rent a hotel room :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole situation is ridiculous. On one hand you have Peters and the other Ruutu. They're both a couple of morons if you ask me. Peters might not have the reputation that Ruutu does, but I could care less about him getting bitten by Ruutu and then screaming about it like a child. Ruutu deserves the suspension, but it's not like he bit someone who is considered a moral crusader. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not exactly "plus" $31k in salary, that's the salary he forfeits for the 2 game suspension...
Yes, it is 'plus' if one considers the two distinct. Heck, I'd take pay for no work; not sure sure I'd work for no pay. I imagine the $31K hurts Ruutu more than the two games 'not playing', especially when the team sucks as bad as Ottawa does right now.

(At least Mike Fisher is taking it all in stride, keeping his mind off the Sens' woes -- word is he's dating Carrie Underwood. ;):D )

This whole situation is ridiculous. On one hand you have Peters and the other Ruutu. They're both a couple of morons if you ask me. Peters might not have the reputation that Ruutu does, but I could care less about him getting bitten by Ruutu and then screaming about it like a child. Ruutu deserves the suspension, but it's not like he bit someone who is considered a moral crusader. :rolleyes:
Exactly. Peters is the wrong person to be 'complaining' -- and what exactly did he expect by washing his glove all over Ruutu's face anyway?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it is 'plus' if one considers the two distinct. Heck, I'd take pay for no work; not sure sure I'd work for no pay. I imagine the $31K hurts Ruutu more than the two games 'not playing', especially when the team sucks as bad as Ottawa does right now.

Exactly. Peters is the wrong person to be 'complaining' -- and what exactly did he expect by washing his glove all over Ruutu's face anyway?

that's just it, you shouldn't consider the two distinct... all suspensions mean you forfeit salary... it's not like they're suspending him and want $31k out of his pocket, they're just not going to pay him the money he isn't going to earn because he won't be playing those games...

and I know we've all seen that this is NOT the case in the NHL, but NHL discipline/rules should be applied equally to everyone, like the law... it shouldn't matter how despicable the 'victim' is or how angelic the offender is, you should punish the 'act' that was committed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's just it, you shouldn't consider the two distinct... all suspensions mean you forfeit salary... it's not like they're suspending him and want $31k out of his pocket, they're just not going to pay him the money he isn't going to earn because he won't be playing those games...
I expect "not playing" for an NHL player is not the same as a regular Joe getting a "day off" -- Ruutu will still have to travel with the club, practice and attend the game. Heck, if you have to attend, you may as well play -- that's the fun part!! :D . Any way you cut it, it's $31,000 (less taxes) out of his pocket that he expected to be there when he did his budget for the year. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect "not playing" for an NHL player is not the same as a regular Joe getting a "day off" -- Ruutu will still have to travel with the club, practice and attend the game. Heck, if you have to attend, you may as well play -- that's the fun part!! :D . Any way you cut it, it's $31,000 (less taxes) out of his pocket that he expected to be there when he did his budget for the year. ;)
you would think, but I've heard with my own ears (as opposed to someone else's ears I borrowed? :lol: ) an unnamed (mostly because I can't remember his name right now and don't want to look it up) MLB catcher admit he faked an injury to get out of a game early... and this wasn't the everyday catcher, he was the back-up, or at best a partial platoon, who certainly didn't get to play everyday, and here he was lying to get out of playing on a day he did get to start...

you don't think Ruutu has budgeted for 'acting like a ****'? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole situation is ridiculous. On one hand you have Peters and the other Ruutu. They're both a couple of morons if you ask me. Peters might not have the reputation that Ruutu does, but I could care less about him getting bitten by Ruutu and then screaming about it like a child. Ruutu deserves the suspension, but it's not like he bit someone who is considered a moral crusader. :rolleyes:

+1

Biting should not be in the game - but neither should face washing (and that was a pretty dirty, extended face wash). IMHO Ruutu should have gotten 10 games & Peters should have gotten 2.

Ps, I think MacTavish had the best line:

"Yeah, I've seen it lots.

Guys get hungry. Was it in the third period?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you would think, but I've heard with my own ears (as opposed to someone else's ears I borrowed? :lol: ) an unnamed (mostly because I can't remember his name right now and don't want to look it up) MLB catcher admit he faked an injury to get out of a game early... and this wasn't the everyday catcher, he was the back-up, or at best a partial platoon, who certainly didn't get to play everyday, and here he was lying to get out of playing on a day he did get to start...

you don't think Ruutu has budgeted for 'acting like a ****'? :lol:

:lol: I was thinking the same thing (and expecting you to, as well ;) ) as I was typing that statement. :lol:

It's funny, how in Avery's case for example, it can be the best thing (Sloppygate, then) that ever happened to a club. Dallas is achieving more without him in the dressing room now (never mind, not on the ice). At some point a salary can be a "sunk cost" (it can be more beneficial to pay a guy to not play; heck, they do it with coaches all the time!! :D ) Ruutu is not there yet, but seems as if he may be heading there.

+1

Biting should not be in the game - but neither should face washing (and that was a pretty dirty, extended face wash). IMHO Ruutu should have gotten 10 games & Peters should have gotten 2.

Ps, I think MacTavish had the best line:

"Yeah, I've seen it lots.

Guys get hungry. Was it in the third period?"

Yes, McT should go on stage; he did well with that one -- didn't even crack a smile 'till the reporters all burst out laughing. :lol:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...