DOHOPs Report: Explanation of the existing disciplinary process and Its application

Original text by Lyle Seitz from the video:
In light of the win2day ICE Hockey League season to date and the increased attention surrounding supplementary disciplinary decisions, this DOHOPs report is intended to explain the disciplinary process as it exists and how it is applied. This report does not seek to defend or influence personal opinions. All stakeholders are entitled to their views.

The purpose of this document is to outline the facts, procedures, and burden of proof required to reach disciplinary decisions in highly judgment-based situations. Most importantly, all disciplinary decisions are made through a process agreed upon by all ICE Hockey League teams, as defined in the ICE Hockey League game book under the disciplinary section. While it is understandable that fans and media may not fully understand this process, it is essential that teams do, as they collectively vote on and accept these procedures and must lead by example.

Firstly, I'm going to demonstrate league comparisons. The ICE Hockey League operates in line with comparable professional leagues, including neighboring leagues with a similar style of play, as well as the NHL as the leading international benchmark. A factual database comparison of supplementary discipline incidents involving player-to-player actions demonstrates that the ICE League is consistent with peer leagues.

Differences in public perception are subject and opinion-based. Comparisons to unrelated or non-corresponding incidents are not procedurally valid. As this chart demonstrates, the first column is the amount of teams in each league.

Second column is total games played in regular season per team. Third column is the total amount of games played per league in a season. Fourth column is amount of physical player-to-player incidents requiring supplementary discipline.

The fifth column is the amount of games suspended, otherwise known as amount of man games lost. And the last column provides a factual comparison to the other leagues, as the average suspension length in the ICE Hockey League is 1.64 games to date, which demonstrates the ICE League suspension length is slightly higher than the average of 1.57 games. Secondly, I'm going to explain the disciplinary process and authority.

The ICE Hockey League follows a defined and mandatory disciplinary process, as approved by all teams and published in the ICE League Gamebook. The league itself does not issue disciplinary decisions for physical player-to-player incidents. These decisions are determined by the Player Safety Committee.

When assessing whether an incident warrants supplementary discipline, the Player Safety Committee applies an established threshold using the following categories. Either, number one, no supplementary discipline required. Number two, category one, careless. If determined in that range, it's one to two games. Or, category two, reckless, which would be in a category of two to four games. Or category three, intentional, which is four plus games.

Mitigating and aggravating factors, including repeat offender status, are considered when determining the final discipline. This categorical framework is not unique to the ICE League, and is comparable to systems used in other professional hockey leagues. Third, is the explanation of the separation of physical discipline and conduct matters.

No professional league applies a single disciplinary threshold that equates player-to-player physical infractions with non-physical conduct being detrimental, prejudicial, or discriminatory toward a person, group, or team. Accordingly, the disciplinary catalog for on-ice physical incidents is independent from conduct-related regulations, including but not limited to ICE League ethics, diversity, and conduct policies, which all teams and players agree to, and which are also defined within the game book.

The ICE Hockey League Disciplinary Senate operates on two levels
First, the Justice Commission, responsible for league disputes, game authentication, legal support to the legal presidency, formalization of decisions, and verdicts against team officials.
Secondly, is the Department of Player Safety, compromised to the Director of Hockey Operations and members of the Player Safety Committee, responsible for player safety and physical on-ice incidents. A physical player-to-player incident requiring supplementary discipline has no procedural correlation to non-physical conduct cases.

For those seeking threshold comparisons, historical precedents does exist, including, such as, incidents involving two players from the same team receiving 10-game suspensions plus fines in the past, incidents involving physical abuse of and the resulting disciplinary threshold. And there are more examples. So, in this context, the supplementary discipline imposed on Mr. Lewington is consistent with prior suspensions and fines under the established framework.

In summary, it is imperative that teams and players representing the league, and ultimately each other, maintain professional conduct at all times. I see participants and club members are expected to act professionally in all forms of conduct, whether physical, verbal, or written. The league has supplied, explained, and implemented procedures that have been agreed to by all teams.

Coaches and players are required to follow the procedures outlined in the accepted game book. As the league moves forward through the remainder of the 25-26 season, the agreed upon disciplinary process will continue to be applied consistently. Just to be crystal clear, the standard for supplementary discipline will not change in the season.

If individuals or teams do not agree with the league's fundamental rules or procedures, those concerns must be formally brought forward for discussion and potentially agreed upon by all teams at the conclusion of the season.