fair… but what about stuart on landeskog or stoll on fowler? both these incidents were way dirtier than this play and resulted in much serious injuries than this… double standards smh

Posted by Oilers Rock from Edmonton, Alberta on 02/22/13 at 07:50 PM ET

Stuart on Landeskog was a clean hit on a puck carrier who skated into it trying to make a play on the puck (which he has every right to do) and, in doing so, basically lowered set himself up.  I wouldn’t necessarily have been upset if that was a suspendable hit because I want hits to the head out of the game, but it was far from dirty and wasn’t even really a hit with the head as “the principle point of contact”.  Perhaps most importantly, Landeskog saw the hit coming and skated into it anyway.

This Hall hit was, as Shanahan clearly demonstrated, against someone who never had the puck or had any justifable reason to be hit.  If you think these two hits are even in the same league, I’d suggest you remove your orange-tinted glasses and watch them both again.

The Stoll-Fowler hit you also sited should’ve been a suspension too.

Posted by shanetx from Floydada, Texas on 02/22/13 at 08:35 PM ET

I think Shanahan should offer a side option for two-game suspensions, a punch in the face from him himself.

Posted by Hippy Dave from Portland by way of Detroit on 02/22/13 at 09:15 PM ET

Good job Shanny.  And I’m not being sarcastic.  When I first saw this hit, even a couple of more times, I thought it was OK.  The explanation helped straighten me out.

Posted by wolverine on 02/23/13 at 12:27 PM ET