What is “Shana-hammer” doing?

Through less than one round of NHL playoff action, senior vice president of player safety Brendan Shanahan has already levied out nine suspensions and two fines for a total of 16 games lost and $15,000 lost in checks.

To put those numbers into perspective: the entire 2011 playoffs yielded just seven suspensions in total.

Through this torrent of bans and fines, one thing that the league office has lacked in its rulings is consistency. Punishing players is fine when the reasoning is clear and the punishments follow a consistent model.

However, the issue that frustrates so many fans is that the league has layed out no outline for what can be considered a punishable play and to what extent that punishment can be.

At the moment, what seems like a one-game suspension in one instance becomes a three-game ban in another. Or what looks like a typical “hockey scrum” play can suddenly become a suspendible offense in the eyes of Shanahan.

In Game 1 of the Detroit-Nashville series, as time wound down on a Predators victory, the first of many violent incidents occurred between Nashville defenseman Shea Weber and Detroit forward Henrik Zetterberger.

Against the boards, with zero time on the clock, Weber took out his frustration on a defenseless Zetterberg, slamming the forward’s face into the glass not once, but twice.

The combination of factors--the game had ended, Zetterberg was in no position to defend himself, and Weber clearly attacked Zetterberg’s head--screamed of a suspension for Nashville’s star blue-liner.

Instead, the league decided to fine Weber a paltry $2,500, a whole 0.000033% of his $7.5 million salary for this season.

In another series between the Chicago Blackhawks and Phoenix Coyotes, Chicago forward Andrew Shaw entered the Coyotes zone on a dump-in, chasing the puck towards an unsuspecting Mike Smith, the  goaltender for  Phoenix. As Shaw attempted to make a play on the puck his shoulder made contact with Smith’s head, causing the goaltender to go down for several minutes as Coyote’s medical personnel attended to the downed net-minder.

Despite the agony Smith seemed to be in, he did not miss a minute of play and went on to stop 38 shots in a 3-4 OT loss.

While Smith seemed none the worse for wear after the incident, Shanahan came down hard on Shaw, suspending the rookie for three games.

After the game, Shaw told the media “it wasn’t the intent of hitting him, it was more of I didn’t have enough control to get out of the way.”

Despite the lack of intent to injure on Shaw’s part, Shanahan (or “Shanahammer” as some have begun to call him for his hard stance on violence) instead explained that regardless of intent it was up to Shaw to change his path towards the goalie.

These two very different cases offers a piece of the puzzle towards explaining the frustration felt by NHL fans, coaches, and players towards the work of the league office.

While Weber made a clear attempt to  injure Zetterberg, Weber came away with a mere slap on the wrist. Yet Shaw could potentially have played his last game of these playoffs, depending on the outcome of the series, for making a play on the puck in the flow of this ultra-fast game.

The fact that Shaw was suspended three games is not necessarily the issue. If that is the precedent set, so be it.

But if that is the case, then the league disciplinary office must be consistent with the calls and make sure other instances are ruled with a similar scale of punishment in mind.

Or even better, establish a clear set of rules that details what types of plays can result in punishment, and what types of punishments can be administered.

Under the current system, the only determinant on how a player is punished comes from the judgement of Shanahan. Aside from the NHL Rulebook stating the basic rules of the game, Shanahan has no guidelines on whether a rule infraction should result in suspension, fine, or nothing at all.

As a result, when a player finds himself under the scrutiny of the VP of player safety, anything is possible.

While fans can be frustrated with what the league office is doing with discipline, some of the onus certainly falls on the players and coaches as well. In the playoffs, the physical,  macho culture of the game comes to center-stage as teams attempt to prove their toughness and worthiness to lift Lord Stanley’s Cup. However, it seems this year the line has been crossed between picking the right fight versus simply picking any fight available.

Resolving this issue lies with the coaches and players only. While the actions of Shanahan have done nothing to give the players a clear indication of what play will yield what punishment, it belongs to the players to take a proactive step on their own. To find the right balance between playing tough and playing smart, or between fighting for a teammate or fighting to vent frustration.

In the end, while this year’s playoffs may not bring about much change, in the future it will take changes in both the players’ attitude and in the league office’s policy to build a product that all members of the game, from the fans to the coaches, can come to respect and enjoy.