So was Daniel Briere. I almost lost it when I heard Briere expressing his complete surprise and displeasure with the suspension:
"More shocked. I think surprised is not strong enough. Honestly, I'm shocked. I honestly didn't think I would get more than, after everything else, all of the suspensions that have been handed out the last couple of years and this year, honestly, I didn't think I was going to get a game. Then I thought, ok yes I am a repeat offender, they'll probably give me a game because of it. I'm shocked that it was more than a game."I was shocked it was not more. As far as I am concerned, the only difference between the Briere incident and the Marty McSorley-Donald Brasher incident a few years back was the victim was not seriously injured. The intent was very much the same. If you want to take scary attacks like that out of the game you have to punish by intent, not effect. And there has to be a set standard of punishment.
Which leads me to an idea. It's time to change the suspension formula. Cap lost salary at, say, a percentage of the player's income per incident, but allow him to continue a suspension beyond that point. If Briere had to sit out 6 or more games, a sentence I feel would be more adequate, he is hurting his team significantly.
This would better allow the NHL to punish for intent rather than outcome. Perhaps even more importantly this would allow the NHL to set actual standards for various transgressions. If you attack a player with your stick, you automatically sit out 10 games, regardless of how badly the victim is injured. If you blindside a guy, it is 5 games, or whatever.
There has to be some standards finally set on these issues, and they have to start punishing based on intent rather than injury.