You can read Tuesday's column here.
Some Pulitzer material right there. Wiley's ridiculous explaination makes me ill. Its too bad his half-rate officials can't keep a game under control and end the need for all these nonsense reviews.
thank you mr wiley for reinforcing my idea the league is out to get the komets. what does repeat offender got to do with the call at the time? what does dancing in the tunnel later have to do with the severity of the intent to injure on the play? just more words to deflect the chl not wanting the komets to bolt the league and win at the same time/ just another reason why i finally think its time to go echl.
Pretty clear that Schrock wasn't injured during the play and there was no intent to injure. Its called an award winning dive. There is no conspiracy against the Komets (as much as you people like to proclaim) Any time a player has multiple suspensions during the year for dirty hits (whether intentional or not) he becomes a player under the microscope to the league. Its their own doing. Several teams in the league have these types of players, not just Fort Wayne. Could the league become more consistant in handing out suspension? Absolutely. I think any fan for any team in this league can point out several times during the year where a player should been suspended or a longer suspension handed down... but there is no conspiracy against the Komets
I'm afraid that the simple answer to the question in the title of this thread is...yes, most certainly!
All one has to do is to read the words in the e-mail of Jim Wiley, Director of Hockey Operarations when he writes these words, "Mr. Henley, a repeat offender..."
Why in the world would he describe Henley in that fashion if his opinion isn't clouded. Jim, just let the officials call the game.
I'm not saying that a knee-to-knee hit is acceptable by any means. Just call the games fair and don't assume someone is a "repeat offender", his words not mine, so therefore they should be suspended.
What do you think now Anonymous? Still no conspiracy after Reaney wins his appeal?