Brendan Shanahan defends decisions, rebukes backlash from Shea Weber ruling

Brendan Shanahan takes a lot of criticism in his position as head of player safety, particularly in the postseason. But he's defending his decisions and shooting down some critical theories.

Shanahan has handed down nine suspension in the postseason. (Getty Images)

There is no position in the NHL that is more scrutinized than that of head of player safety, a position held by Brendan Shanahan. I'd wager that's the case even over NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, whose day-to-day decisions aren't felt as much as Shanahan's.

He is in the unfortunate position of everybody having an opinion on his rulings. The added criticism comes from the fact that, sooner or later, he will make a ruling against every fan's favorite team.

And all that pressure? It has only ramped up in the postseason when things got off to a very rocky first step. As in, Shea Weber's infamous head smash of Henrik Zetterberg's head into the glass on the first night of the playoffs. That only earned Weber a fine of $2,500 and a lot have pointed to that as akin to the opening of Pandora’s box.

Not Shanahan.

In an interview with USA Today's Kevin Allen, Shanahan backed his decision on the Weber ruling and shot back at critics labeling that as the day the dogs were unleashed.

"I don't think Andrew Shaw decided to run a goalie because of Shea Weber," Shanahan said. "I don't think he woke up that day and said, 'I think that decision means I can run goalies.'

"I never exonerated Weber for what he did. I think where people have the right to disagree with me is the level of punishment imposed."

I took that right. For me it felt like Weber was exonerated, a fine that small -- the highest allowed by the CBA -- seemed so insignificant that it felt like he walked.

With that said, Shanahan's take about Shaw, who was suspended three games for his collision with Coyotes goalie Mike Smith, is on the money. I never bought into the idea that a player sees somebody get away a small punishment for something and then will try to push the envelope in another way. So little is planned, things just happen instantly in the game.

What I do think it did, though, is alter the expectations. It's hard to look at a guy like Smith and tell him what he did was three games worse than what Weber did. He set a precedent.

But the thing with the NHL's criteria is that precedents and consistency are a risky proposition. Each case is dependent on a few variables, which can make it hard to compare crime to crime. That's another point that Shanahan touched on with Allen.

"It's always strictly about the player who is in front of me," Shanahan said. "This was the ninth suspension of the playoffs. I've read that I'm supposed to be sending a message. Well, which player deserves the unfairness of going into a hearing and getting a sentencing not based on the facts, the play, or his history. ... Each player, to me, deserves honesty for his hearing."

So much for the theories that the 25-game suspension for Raffi Torres sent a message that his office is about to get a lot tougher.

One of the welcome additions of the Shanahan era in the NHL has been the transparency of the department, specifically the explanations he gives. This interview with Allen is another example and shows he does hear the critics but isn't being affected by them.

For more hockey news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnHockey and @BrianStubitsNHL on Twitter and like us on Facebook.