HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Nashville Predators (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   Witt Suspended (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=238073)

preddevil 04-04-2006 02:16 PM

Witt Suspended
 
From the Tennessean:

"Predators defenseman Brendan Witt has been suspended by the NHL for one game because of a hit on Columbus forward David Yyborny in Nashville’s 3-1 loss Monday night"

http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/...RTS02/60404009

Joe T Choker 04-04-2006 02:29 PM

wow ... anyone else feel this is a bad suspension ... what is the term that Terry Crisp uses ... keep your head up and on a swivel ... bad move by the league office ... covering their @$$

DentonFreeman 04-04-2006 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seamus O' Toole
wow ... anyone else feel this is a bad suspension ... what is the term that Terry Crisp uses ... keep your head up and on a swivel ... bad move by the league office ... covering their @$$

So it doesn't matter that what Witt did was completely illegal? :help:

dru 04-04-2006 02:50 PM

You can't lead a check with your leg. A one game suspension is a slap on the wrist.

Witt is gone for one game, Vyborny could be gone the rest of the season.

preddevil 04-04-2006 02:51 PM

I don't know the league's specific guidelines, but it seems that there should be some intent to injure if there is going to be a suspension. If someone lines someone else up for an open ice hit and their knee hits the other guy's thigh, I can certainly see a penalty. The problem is there is no way to judge whether it was intentional or accidental in this instance. To me, there has to be clear intent.

SmokeyClause 04-04-2006 02:51 PM

Didn't see the hit, but I've long been a critic of the league when it came to handing out suspensions. I think they almost always err on the side of caution and players rarely receive their just desserts. If they actually go out of their way to suspend Witt, I am guessing they feel pretty strongly on the issue because there are dozens of obvious knee on knees that are ignored. He's lucky he got only 1 game. If the NHL truly thought he intentionally hit Vybes knee on knee, he should have gotten a ton more.

triggrman 04-04-2006 02:55 PM

He did stick his leg out, I understand the suspension.

JayGee 04-04-2006 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by preddevil
I don't know the league's specific guidelines, but it seems that there should be some intent to injure if there is going to be a suspension. If someone lines someone else up for an open ice hit and their knee hits the other guy's thigh, I can certainly see a penalty. The problem is there is no way to judge whether it was intentional or accidental in this instance. To me, there has to be clear intent.

Witt was lining up Vyborny for the hit but when Vyborny swerved at the blue line to avoid him, Witt stretched out his leg to make sure he didn't get by him. Don't think it was an intentional knee hit but he should be responsible for what he did. Kind of like a high stick. May not be your intent or fault but you have to suffer the consequences.

preddevil 04-04-2006 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayGee
Witt was lining up Vyborny for the hit but when Vyborny swerved at the blue line to avoid him, Witt stretched out his leg to make sure he didn't get by him. Don't think it was an intentional knee hit but he should be responsible for what he did. Kind of like a high stick. May not be your intent or fault but you have to suffer the consequences.

I can see your point, but hockey is a fast moving game. I've seen so many instances where a guy swerves at the last minute and the checker attempts to compensate and it ends up with some not quite legal contact. That's what penalties are for. To use your comparision. If a guy is swinging his stick to hit a flying puck and he hits another player, he gets a highsticking or slashing call. It takes an intentional swing at another player to warrant a suspension in most cases. The hit in question is the kind of thing that happens every night. I just don't see how this one is any different.

Joe T Choker 04-04-2006 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackets613
So it doesn't matter that what Witt did was completely illegal? :help:

there was no penalty on the supposed play, that is the very reason I have a gripe with the suspension ... retro-active suspensions have always been a bs way of saying ooops, we ****ed up, that's alright though ... we'll see you in the playoffs one of these days

David Singleton 04-04-2006 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seamus O' Toole
there was no penalty on the supposed play, that is the very reason I have a gripe with the suspension ... retro-active suspensions have always been a bs way of saying ooops, we ****ed up, that's alright though ... we'll see you in the playoffs one of these days

Unfortunately, officials do not always make the right calls or they don't always see what happened.

What if the whole Bertuzzi-Moore incident had happened behind the play with everyone concentrating on a rush going the opposite way? If the officials had not seen what happened, what exactly do they call? Do they make up a penalty?

It happens in every major sports league- a player may be suspended for their actions in a contest regardless of whether they were penalized at the time.

It is illogical to say that an action taken by someone can't be considered illegal unless someone empowered to make that decision says so at that time. That is analogous to saying a person can legally murder someone as long as a police officer didn't see them do it and arrest them at that time. While that may be extreme, it is also a correct anology.

Witt purposely stuck out his right leg, which is illegal (instinctive or not). This type of action often times leads to a knee-on-knee collision- known to be a very dangerous hit. While he may not have "wanted" to injure the opposing player, he knew that hit often results in injury- which is the "intent to injure". He should have been suspended and really for at least three games instead of the one. Having seen the Tucker incident, he should also have been suspended. He led with the elbow high and the knee.

I won't argue against the belief that Campbell does a very poor job, since I believe that myself. But, I also won't argue that Witt should have been suspended and whether Tucker was suspended should be mutually exclusive of Witt's suspension outside of the amount of suspension based upon the "intent to injure" being consistent.

David

JayGee 04-04-2006 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by preddevil
I can see your point, but hockey is a fast moving game. I've seen so many instances where a guy swerves at the last minute and the checker attempts to compensate and it ends up with some not quite legal contact. That's what penalties are for. To use your comparision. If a guy is swinging his stick to hit a flying puck and he hits another player, he gets a highsticking or slashing call. It takes an intentional swing at another player to warrant a suspension in most cases. The hit in question is the kind of thing that happens every night. I just don't see how this one is any different.

I agree with you that I've seen worse cases that have gone unpunished and I think Gallant's complaints probably forced the NHL to review it but that doesn't change the fact that is illegal contact. If Vyborny was able to get back up and play the rest of the game, I'm pretty sure that there wouldn't be a suspension. How much you hurt the player definitely has some swing in these cases.

I think that the case with the high stick is different because the player is actually trying to hit the puck and accidently hit someone else. With Witt, when he realized he was going to miss the check, he was intentionally trying to hit Vyborny with his leg to slow him down. Granted, he was probably not trying to knee him in the thigh to hurt him but you can't just throw your leg out when you miss a check.

preddevil 04-04-2006 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayGee
I agree with you that I've seen worse cases that have gone unpunished and I think Gallant's complaints probably forced the NHL to review it but that doesn't change the fact that is illegal contact. If Vyborny was able to get back up and play the rest of the game, I'm pretty sure that there wouldn't be a suspension. How much you hurt the player definitely has some swing in these cases.

I think that the case with the high stick is different because the player is actually trying to hit the puck and accidently hit someone else. With Witt, when he realized he was going to miss the check, he was intentionally trying to hit Vyborny with his leg to slow him down. Granted, he was probably not trying to knee him in the thigh to hurt him but you can't just throw your leg out when you miss a check.

I think what irks me about the whole situation is that this is another example of the league's lack of consistancy in officiating. If they want to give Witt a suspension for this, that's fine. Just do it every time somebody catches someone with their knee. I'm just sick of seeing penalties for infractions that are barely there side by side with no-calls for attempted murder.

X0ssbar 04-04-2006 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seamus O' Toole
... we'll see you in the playoffs one of these days

I had to double check and make sure you weren't a Wings fan b/c that sure sounded like a Wings fan comment.

Somebody gettin a big playoff head after only being there one year. It wasn't so long ago that your boys were hitting the greens around this time of year either.

Joe T Choker 04-04-2006 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Top Shelf
I had to double check and make sure you weren't a Wings fan b/c that sure sounded like a Wings fan comment.

Somebody gettin a big playoff head after only being there one year. It wasn't so long ago that your boys were hitting the greens around this time of year either.

ONE OF THESE DAYS ... please read the whole effing post before replying ... thanks

Bad Karma 04-04-2006 03:33 PM

If you watch Witt that is how he plays a lot of the time he doesn't connect on a lot of them but some he does.

X0ssbar 04-04-2006 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seamus O' Toole
ONE OF THESE DAYS ... please read the whole effing post before replying ... thanks

Oh..so no sarcasm or underlying meaning in that line at all..

Gotchya :thumbu:

Basher 04-04-2006 04:55 PM

The Jacket fans are on edge :hyper:

Teemu 04-04-2006 04:59 PM

Ill take any advantage we can get at this point :p:

barrytrotzsneck 04-04-2006 05:24 PM

with the way we've been playing, you've already got all the advantage you should need.

bluef0x* 04-04-2006 08:03 PM

Makes up for that blatant knee-to-knee against Milan Mihalek (the game where Witt and Parker were thrown out) which looked like an intent to injure (Mihalek has had knee surgery, and Witt didn't try to check him, just stuck is leg out)

Havn't seen Witt play much, does he make knee-to-knees this often?
Maybe they are watching him closeley and this is to let him know to knock it off?

Nitrous Mafia 04-04-2006 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Top Shelf
Oh..so no sarcasm or underlying meaning in that line at all..

Gotchya :thumbu:


That picture of Adam Foote is SWEET............... :biglaugh:



Is that enough sarcasm for you?

CCCP 04-05-2006 10:39 AM

Why did your GM traded 1st round pick for that idiot i have no idea!!! I am from DC area, i go to planty of CAPS games, so, i've seen a lot of Witt. He sucks!!!!!!!!!

hillbilly 04-05-2006 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCCP
Why did your GM traded 1st round pick for that idiot i have no idea!!! I am from DC area, i go to planty of CAPS games, so, i've seen a lot of Witt. He sucks!!!!!!!!!


you're wrong.

I figure I could follow that up with reasons for why you are wrong, but would that really get us anywhere. I just figured I'd skip past the logical stage of the discussion and get to the pissing match that would eventually follow.

SmokeyClause 04-05-2006 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluef0x
Makes up for that blatant knee-to-knee against Milan Mihalek (the game where Witt and Parker were thrown out) which looked like an intent to injure (Mihalek has had knee surgery, and Witt didn't try to check him, just stuck is leg out)

Havn't seen Witt play much, does he make knee-to-knees this often?
Maybe they are watching him closeley and this is to let him know to knock it off?

I think he's just slow and has trouble adjusting to shifty forwards carrying speed. It's not premeditated or intentional, it's just a function of his lack of agility. Whereas a guy like Weber can still get a shoulder into a darting forward, Witt just doesn't always have what it takes to move himself in the way properly and just has a knee-jerk reaction that ends up as trouble.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:20 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.