Martin Havlat has been suspended by the NHL for kicking Boston defenceman Hal Gill in the groin during a game last Saturday night. Anyone with a good head on their shoulders can understand why he's been punished, and why five games was necessary. In the 2003-04 season, he also kicked Eric Cairns (then of the Islanders) in the crotch - with the blade of his skate, no less - and he delivered a vicious cross-check to the face of Mark Recchi in a game against the Flyers. Simply put, Havlat is quite the cheap-shot artist, and NHL disciplinarian and director of hockey operations Colin Campbell has recognized this and acted accordingly.

Now, the qualifier for comprehending the suspension - namely, having a good head on one's shoulders - would appear to include many in the Senators' organization, namely captain Daniel Alfredsson and GM John Muckler, both of whom indicated that they agreed with the league's decision to suspend Havlat, and that five games was an appropriate length. Head coach Bryan Murray, however, seems to be having trouble with it: "I thought he might get maybe as much as three games. Hal Gill, to me, got off scot-free; I have no problem with a suspension of some sort, but to me, you couldn't have taken it more than (Havlat) did, and that's a really extreme penalty."

The "it" that Havlat apparently couldn't have taken more of was presumably the hit from Gill that landed him on the back of the net in the first place, which spurred the kick. Gill, understandably upset, then roughed Havlat up with two hard shoves before Chris Neil came in to fight him; it was certainly nothing grievous, and nothing that Havlat didn't immediately deserve. For the NHL to have shortened the suspension due to the fact that Gill retaliated - albeit in a much more acceptable manner - would be ridiculous; it does not change the fact that Havlat has a habit of kicking players in the groin when he has blades attached to his feet. For his own sake, Havlat had better learn his lesson from this suspension; he is quickly elongating a résumé of cowardly cheap shots that is going to make him a target in the NHL if he isn't careful.

"Hi, I'm Sean Avery, and I still haven't shut my trap."

Edmonton Oilers forward Georges Laraque has alleged that Kings forward Sean Avery (remember him? 05-09-27; 05-02-12) called him a "monkey" during a scrum in an Edmonton-Los Angeles game last week. Laraque, who is black, said afterwards, "I knew the league wouldn't be able to do anything because there were no witnesses, but you want to tell them in case it ever happens in the future. I'm not deaf. I heard it or I wouldn't have (reported it). This is pretty serious stuff, something you don't play around with." Avery has denied that he said anything, and other Kings players claim that they heard no such comment; the NHL, with a lack of evidence, will take no action.

I'm not going to suggest that Avery should be reprimanded when there is absolutely nothing incriminating against him save Laraque's word - and Laraque is no angel himself - but is it really that difficult to believe that Avery, who is infamous by this point for the ridiculous stupid bile that he spews, would make such a comment? Of course not. The Oiler winger has stated that he will not pursue any on-ice vengeance (smart of him, given the whole Bertuzzi-Moore incident), and a shouting match between the two teams in the Staples Center parking garage amounted to nothing. But I'm sure that there would be a few smiling faces around the NHL if Laraque managed to catch Avery traversing the neutral zone with his head down sometime soon...nothing says "shut your face" like a big, clean check. Delicious.

The Shootout Post

I've been putting this one off for as long as possible, but it's finally time.

By now, many of you have seen at least one NHL shootout, even though the season's still young. I actually had the dubious privilege of seeing one in person, at the Senators' 6-5 defeat of the Leafs on October 10. Was it exciting? Maybe. Nerve-wracking? Absolutely. A vulgar gimmick introduced to titillate people who previously didn't care about hockey in the least? You bet your ass.

I'm not sure how ties became such a faux pas; many people seem to detest the lack of resolution. If a draw is so horrible, why not just keep overtime going? Leave the extra point for an overtime loss, because no one wants to watch 4 extra periods of pure defence in the regular season, but just keep the periods coming until somebody scores. No one ever decided a baseball game on a home run derby, did they? What about a basketball game on a dunk competition?

The other obvious upside about keeping overtime rolling is that it's still a team sport. Fans still get to see huge hits, great playmaking, stunning defensive plays (and breakdowns), and it's all in search of just one massive goal. Instead, look at the kinds of players who would likely be excluded in a shootout (unless, of course, it were to go several rounds without a resolution); say goodbye to power forwards and hulking defencemen. So long, Brendan Shanahan and Keith Primeau. See ya, Scott Stevens and Dion Phaneuf. If you can't dangle the puck on a string, the coach likely isn't going to look at you; a 100 mph slapshot loses a lot of its worth if the goalie can square to the shooter without worrying about a pass.

Shootouts have received a fair bit of interest so far; it's probably just as well, since they're here to stay anyway. In a poll commissioned by the NHL Fans' Association, 60% of random respondents approved of the switch, compared to 54% of those who consider themselves "hardcore fans." Obviously, with both of those numbers being above the halfway point, the league isn't about to repeal the rule, but it should be noted that NHL brass was expecting a much higher approval rating, particularly in the random respondents' category. It also bears mentioning that this polling data comes 5 games into the new season; 41 games in, let's see how fans feel. That would give them a reasonable amount of time to become acclimatized to the new rules, and would eliminate any responses that were positive just for curiosity's sake (it's easy to imagine that many people who answered the poll confused the notions of "approval" and "intrigue.")

At any rate, no amount of bellyaching on my part is going to convince Gary Bettman and the NHL Competition Committee to give shootouts the boot, so I suppose I'd better get used to them.

But you still can't make me like them.