I hadn't read Wyshynski's article before but a couple of parts of it I really agree with.
Firstly
We can all see why Fretter snapped, and there are think pieces written that justify it. But the idea that this deliberate, violent and forceful act of retribution gets a single game (already mandated by the match penalty), or triple what the victim gets for self defense, is an astoundingly bad look for the EIHL and the sport itself.
I agree it's not as bad as Bertuzzi but it's a leaping attack to the back of the head and neck from the blindside so I definitely think its more than 1 game. In the leagues own rules (basically IIHF rules) it states any check to the head supersedes any other penalty so how they've banned him for one game for charging I never know. I'd have gone up to 8-10 games for this one.
1 game basically means anyone in the league now has a free run to randomly attack anyone you feel like. Meanwhile a couple of weeks ago other guy got banned 2 games for throwing a water bottle on the ice....
Again, this is "hockey logic," which is why "hockey logic" is dumb.
Also this. A pitiful disciplinary decision probably means now we get 2 random tough guys having to square off, cos neither Goulakos or Fretter are fighters (and Goulakos is out with concussion anyway).
I watched the video before reading anything and honestly what stood out to me most was the kick. The hit was vicious but a kick you don't see to often.
I wouldn't describe it as a kick as much as an involuntary reaction to someone jumping on you. HOWEVER, with a blade strapped to your foot you can't do that and actually I'd have gone 5 games of a ban for Goulakos for this and the hits.
