HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

No suspension coming from Boarding Penalty on Plante

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-28-2011, 01:22 AM
  #26
ThePresent83
Registered User
 
ThePresent83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sherwood Park
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,854
vCash: 500
I liked the call on the ice... i might not have given him the game.

-2 for boarding i think was fair without injury
-5 for boarding resulting in injury was fair

Then I'm on the fence about the game misconduct, not really sure how refs decide what is just a five minute major and what is a five minute major plus game.

Anyway, happy with the call, cant suspend that when it was mostly plante's doing.

ThePresent83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 01:27 AM
  #27
Arpeggio
Registered User
 
Arpeggio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,569
vCash: 500
Plante did not turn his back. He got hit in the shoulder at an angle that turned his body into the boards. It wasn't from behind and he didn't turn, just a hard, unfortunate hit.

Arpeggio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:14 AM
  #28
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePresent83 View Post
I liked the call on the ice... i might not have given him the game.

-2 for boarding i think was fair without injury
-5 for boarding resulting in injury was fair

Then I'm on the fence about the game misconduct, not really sure how refs decide what is just a five minute major and what is a five minute major plus game.

Anyway, happy with the call, cant suspend that when it was mostly plante's doing.
A game misconduct is mostly always called on a 5-minute major charging penalty. It's in the rules.

Narnia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:17 AM
  #29
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elpol View Post
I think somebody else in another thread already said this: Perhaps the only solution is for the Oilers to take their toys, leave the NHL and start their own league. Seriously Narnia, all that time you spend crafting those wonderful, haiku-like posts is having a detrimental effect on your judgement. Even Judge Judy and Judge Brown will tell you that hearsay and circumstantial evidence won't stand up in court. Any court. Just saying it over and over doesn't make it so. Even most Americans agree that there were no WMD's in Iraq. Time to move on.
Sutton was suspended for the hit on Landy and Landy himself said he should be more careful but Shanaban still suspended Sutton.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePresent83 View Post
I liked the call on the ice... i might not have given him the game.

-2 for boarding i think was fair without injury
-5 for boarding resulting in injury was fair

Then I'm on the fence about the game misconduct, not really sure how refs decide what is just a five minute major and what is a five minute major plus game.

Anyway, happy with the call, cant suspend that when it was mostly plante's doing.
It frustrates me to no end when Sutton gets suspended twice for hits. The Oilers players have been hit the same way with no SD. Where's the consistency as there seems to be open season on Oilers players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arpeggio View Post
Plante did not turn his back. He got hit in the shoulder at an angle that turned his body into the boards. It wasn't from behind and he didn't turn, just a hard, unfortunate hit.
It was still a dirty hit no matter how you look at it. Weiss intention was to hurt Plante and he succeeded.

Narnia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:56 AM
  #30
awesomo
HARD!
 
awesomo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: location, location
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,715
vCash: 500
I came in here to read replies from narnia .... For the lols


No suspension needed, 'twas clean check that had unfortunate results

awesomo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 03:06 AM
  #31
nexttothemoon
light.end.tunnel
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 50
I would have thought at least a 1 game suspension would have been a decent response to a dangerous hit that could/did cause a concussion since that seems to be the whole point of what the NHL is trying to eliminate or at least reduce from the game.

I'm not surprised though that there was no suspension as inconsistency has been the trademark of the Shanahan suspension process so far this year.

A league that doesn't implement no-touch icing when several players have suffered near career ending injuries can't be expected to be consistent with their suspension and supplementary discipline process either.

I don't have my homer glasses on... and I realize many other teams have had issues with the inconsistencies as well... but I have certainly seen several situations this year where Oiler players have been targets of questionable hits yet no suspensions were forthcoming.

My response (as un-PC as it might be) is that the Oilers take some heads off opponents and the consequences be damned. There should be a fund set up by the fans that pays the players fines... and let guys like Sutton/Peckham etc do their best to make their opponents know the team won't take ****. Of course that won't happen but I've got no problem with tit-for-tat play. If it takes some bloody opposing players to get some respect back for the franchise... so be it.

nexttothemoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 05:48 AM
  #32
OilerOlli*
 
OilerOlli*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,458
vCash: 500
Why a suspension? Don't see it.
Was a bit stupid by Plante the way he put himself in that position.

OilerOlli* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 01:43 PM
  #33
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexttothemoon View Post
I would have thought at least a 1 game suspension would have been a decent response to a dangerous hit that could/did cause a concussion since that seems to be the whole point of what the NHL is trying to eliminate or at least reduce from the game.

I'm not surprised though that there was no suspension as inconsistency has been the trademark of the Shanahan suspension process so far this year.

A league that doesn't implement no-touch icing when several players have suffered near career ending injuries can't be expected to be consistent with their suspension and supplementary discipline process either.

I don't have my homer glasses on... and I realize many other teams have had issues with the inconsistencies as well... but I have certainly seen several situations this year where Oiler players have been targets of questionable hits yet no suspensions were forthcoming.

My response (as un-PC as it might be) is that the Oilers take some heads off opponents and the consequences be damned. There should be a fund set up by the fans that pays the players fines... and let guys like Sutton/Peckham etc do their best to make their opponents know the team won't take ****. Of course that won't happen but I've got no problem with tit-for-tat play. If it takes some bloody opposing players to get some respect back for the franchise... so be it.
In one of the Edmonton Sun articles, Sutton asks how many games he would have gotten for the same hit. He probably would have had the book thrown at him. Vancouver gets away with dirty hits not only against the Oilers but against other teams. The Weiss hit was the 5th dirty against the Oilers this season by the Canucks and that is including the pre-seaon.

Narnia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 01:57 PM
  #34
Silver
Registered User
 
Silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Posts: 5,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Narnia View Post
In one of the Edmonton Sun articles, Sutton asks how many games he would have gotten for the same hit. He probably would have had the book thrown at him.
Because Sutton is stupid enough to say that to a reporter.

A smart criminal lets his lawyer do the talking. Sutton is not smart.

Silver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:01 PM
  #35
Sayuri
Registered User
 
Sayuri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Narnia View Post
In one of the Edmonton Sun articles, Sutton asks how many games he would have gotten for the same hit. He probably would have had the book thrown at him. Vancouver gets away with dirty hits not only against the Oilers but against other teams. The Weiss hit was the 5th dirty against the Oilers this season by the Canucks and that is including the pre-seaon.
It doesn't help your case to compare things that aren't linear. It has already been stated that repeat offenders will be dealt with more harshly than others, it should come as no surprise to anyone that anything Sutton does will be viewed more aggressively.

This was told to all the teams, fans and media at the beginning of the season. If this is a conspiracy you'd like to pursue it would do you more good to research other games and find actual comparable incidents to support your claims. Applying them to every situation just won't work.

Sayuri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:05 PM
  #36
convotutor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
Narnia seems to have a crush on sutton.
It was a clean as you can get shoulder to shoulder hit that resulted in an unfortunate injury.
If you cant see this, you need a time out and think.

convotutor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:15 PM
  #37
ziploc
Registered User
 
ziploc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,500
vCash: 50
Very impressed by the knowledgeable, non-homerish reponses from most of the posters in this thread. I know Oilers and Canucks fans don't, uh, like each other much, but it is good to see when some objectivity comes out.

When Weise first made the hit, and I saw the result, I assumed 5 and a game, possibly SD. But after seeing multiple replays, it looked more like possibly a 2 min charge, maybe nothing, and an unfortunate injury. But I understand the ref only had one quick look at it and had to make a call.

ziploc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:21 PM
  #38
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sayuri View Post
It doesn't help your case to compare things that aren't linear. It has already been stated that repeat offenders will be dealt with more harshly than others, it should come as no surprise to anyone that anything Sutton does will be viewed more aggressively.

This was told to all the teams, fans and media at the beginning of the season. If this is a conspiracy you'd like to pursue it would do you more good to research other games and find actual comparable incidents to support your claims. Applying them to every situation just won't work.
It was also stated that Sutton was not deemed a repeat offender by the NHL, but was treated as such anyways. So he basically said he's going outside of the guidelines based on his prejudices. Which is pretty obviously the case when you look at some of his other wishy-washy calls. Scrubs are getting the shaft, and unfortunatly Sutton is deemed to be one of them.

...kind of off topic, sorry.

Cawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:23 PM
  #39
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
I kinda thought Plante turned into the boards just before the hit which is stupid at best.
In anycase in the NHL its silly to be in that position staring into the boards. Just looking for trouble. We seem to have more players that put themselves in no mans land than any team I've seen.

I call that team Hemsky.

Its like watching dumb and dumber

This. Already stated this in a prior post on another thread. No way should this ever have had a suspension attached to it. I even question the 5 minutes. These guys have to stop turning face first into the boards at the last minute in an effort to not get hit. Just dumb on Plantes part, and he's lucky he wasn't seriously hurt. Matthieu Roy used to do this a lot when he played here, and he could never understand why he was always getting hurt.

Stoneman89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:28 PM
  #40
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz View Post
It was also stated that Sutton was not deemed a repeat offender by the NHL, but was treated as such anyways. So he basically said he's going outside of the guidelines based on his prejudices. Which is pretty obviously the case when you look at some of his other wishy-washy calls. Scrubs are getting the shaft, and unfortunatly Sutton is deemed to be one of them.

...kind of off topic, sorry.

Andy Sutton was and is deemed a repeat offender by the NHL long before he signed here. Prior to his latest banishment, he had 7 fines or suspensions for on ice issues. And most of those were obviously well before Brendan Shanahan holstered up.

Stoneman89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:29 PM
  #41
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by awesomo View Post
I came in here to read replies from narnia .... For the lols
No suspension needed, 'twas clean check that had unfortunate results

Hey........Don't tease crazy people.

Stoneman89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:38 PM
  #42
Insta
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Insta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,776
vCash: 500
Hit wasn't suspension worthy. It is a borderline 2 min penalty, 5 since there was an injury on the play but that's it.

Insta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:39 PM
  #43
Joe Hallenback
Registered User
 
Joe Hallenback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 7,968
vCash: 777
Don't think it is a dirty hit but it isn't a good one either. Plante knows he is going to get hit and he also knows he has to play that puck. If he doesn't make a play on the puck he could end up on the next plane to OKC so he tries to make a play and pays the price. The problem with Wiese is that he has the guy at his mercy. Like any D going back for the puck you are at the players mercy when he is behind you. He could just rub him out but instead he chooses to hit him as hard as he can.

FYI Plante doesn't turn into the boards. He makes a back hand back up the boards and Weise hits him on the shoulder that takes him into the boards face first. Guess what happens when you get hit from the sides in hockey? You go forward.

Nothing against that and if Plante doesn't hit his face against the boards he probably goes after Wiese and pounds him out. I am just disappointed the Oilers responded so blah after.

Joe Hallenback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 02:47 PM
  #44
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneman89 View Post
Andy Sutton was and is deemed a repeat offender by the NHL long before he signed here. Prior to his latest banishment, he had 7 fines or suspensions for on ice issues. And most of those were obviously well before Brendan Shanahan holstered up.
According to Shanahan's mouth he isnt. Go watch his video.

Cawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 03:15 PM
  #45
nexttothemoon
light.end.tunnel
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Hallenback View Post
I am just disappointed the Oilers responded so blah after.
I agree as well. The Oilers have to stop being doormats especially against scab teams that play dirty/chippy hockey like the Nucks.

nexttothemoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2011, 06:53 PM
  #46
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexttothemoon View Post
I agree as well. The Oilers have to stop being doormats especially against scab teams that play dirty/chippy hockey like the Nucks.
And get 17 minutes as a result. Petrell defended a teammate earlier and he ended up with 19 minutes. The NHL protects goons and chip shot artists and the team that has the dirty hit against them gets victimized by either 17 or 19 minutes in penalties.

On top of that, do you want a player that was injured getting more injured than he already was?

Narnia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2011, 02:32 PM
  #47
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,906
vCash: 500
Not suspension worthy at all.

Plante was in an awkward position. I thought the 5 minute major was harsh.

2 minute minor.

hockeyaddict101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2011, 07:40 PM
  #48
aspin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Regina
Posts: 1,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafters View Post
I really don't understand how there was no suspension. It was a 5 min Major for boarding, there seems to be a lot of people claiming it was a legal shoulder to shoulder hit. Maybe Shanahan has forgotten that players can be suspended for hits that don't target the head. Here is the Rule regarding Boarding according to the NHL rulebook...Even though Weise hit Plante Shoulder to Shoulder, he DID hit him while he was in a defenseless and dangerous position just a couple feet from the boards....should be a suspension no matter if it was shoulder to shoulder or from behind. Only reason I can see for there being no suspension would be if Plante put himself in a dangerous position....but he was just skating back to the puck....

41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize the contact. However, in determining wheter such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

Any unnecessary contact with a player playing the puck on an obvious “icing” or “off-side” play which results in that player hitting or impacting the boards is “boarding” and must be penalized as such. In other instances where there is no contact with the boards, it should be treated as “charging.”

41.2 Minor Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a minor penalty, based on the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, to a player guilty of boarding an opponent.

41.3 Major Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a major penalty, based on the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, to a player guilty of boarding an opponent (see 41.5).

41.4 Match Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by boarding.

41.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is imposed under this rule for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed.

41.6 Fines and Suspensions - Any player who incurs a total of two (2) game misconducts under Rule 41 and/or Rule 43, in either Regular season or Play-offs, shall be suspended automatically for the next game of his team. For each subsequent game misconduct penalty the automatic suspension shall be increased by one game.

When a major penalty is imposed under this rule, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall be imposed.

If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28).
Can someone please update me with Plante's status. Does he have a concussion and was there an estimate oc how long he would be out?

aspin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2011, 07:58 PM
  #49
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
Can someone please update me with Plante's status. Does he have a concussion and was there an estimate oc how long he would be out?
According to the Oilers website, Plante has a concussion and is out indefinitely. He's also on IR.

Narnia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2011, 11:10 PM
  #50
SeriousBusiness
T.Hall da man
 
SeriousBusiness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,613
vCash: 500
The hit looked a lot worse at first blush (which I think led to the misconduct). But after watching it on the replay, it was clean.

SeriousBusiness is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:54 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.