HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Florida Panthers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

NHL explains why Nash didn't get suspended

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-25-2013, 03:43 PM
  #1
Mogo
#GameOver
 
Mogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 15,434
vCash: 814
NHL explains why Nash didn't get suspended



What ********!! Had that been the other way around Kopecky hitting Nash we all know the results

Mogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:50 PM
  #2
zeroG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somerville, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,185
vCash: 540
some better angles in that video. based on initial angles, i was upset as well but after seeing this, i'm ok with the decision.

zeroG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:02 PM
  #3
HockeyRulez
Let's Go Panthers!
 
HockeyRulez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Sunshine State
Country: United States
Posts: 2,926
vCash: 500
this is kinda old news.... but ya I thought he should've been suspended at least a game....

HockeyRulez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:21 PM
  #4
adam graves
Panther 20 yr sth
 
adam graves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: south florida
Country: United States
Posts: 9,257
vCash: 500
That video shows why no suspension although no excuse for Nash leaving feet.

adam graves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:22 PM
  #5
Ghoste
#CatsAreComing
 
Ghoste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,492
vCash: 500
Here's Kerry Frazer's take on it.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=419086

-ghoste

Ghoste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:27 PM
  #6
Madhatter73
Registered User
 
Madhatter73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 669
vCash: 500
It was worth a charging major, but the explanation blows.

He didn't turn before the hit, his momentum carried him after he shot.

As for targeting the head, I agree, but he was in an extremely vulnerable position at the time and Nash had plenty of time to pull up. Instead he forced him head-first into the ice. One game would have been warranted just to send a message.

It's a good thing Kopecky hadn't been injured, or Nash might have also had to pay a $100 fine.

Madhatter73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 05:52 PM
  #7
Android 16
Registered User
 
Android 16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 9,069
vCash: 500
I want an explanation as to why there was no penalty called on the play.

Android 16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 06:25 PM
  #8
Lola
Future Panthers
 
Lola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 3,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghoste View Post
Here's Kerry Frazer's take on it.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=419086

-ghoste
Interesting. I have to wonder if the refs will learn anything from this. There's all this outrage at Shanahan, but really, the refs should have caught this. Even if they were watching the puck and not the player, there is a moment when a second pair of skates come into your line of vision and go vertical, right before Kopecky hits the ice.

Refs make soft calls all the time. I don't know why they didn't err on the side of caution on this particular play and call something.

Lola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 12:57 PM
  #9
Acadmus
pastured mod
 
Acadmus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vermont
Country: United States
Posts: 16,646
vCash: 500
Rule 159a sec. 23 clearly states "No serious infraction shall result in discipline if enacted against a player from a smaller market team by a popular member of a large market team unless decapitation results. If decapitation results and the infraction can not be blamed on the player of the smaller market team, then some pittance can be extracted from whatever cash the player from the large market team has in his wallet at the moment of the Board's ruling."


After reading Kerry Frazer's take on this, it's clear the decision is just so much more bull**** from the NHL.

Acadmus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 01:18 PM
  #10
Desert Panther
Resident Lurker
 
Desert Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Frisco, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,463
vCash: 205


I think this is a better explanation. Note the email addresses at :55 (the oj simpson jury and vince mcmahon )

Desert Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 03:06 PM
  #11
Acadmus
pastured mod
 
Acadmus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vermont
Country: United States
Posts: 16,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lola View Post
Interesting. I have to wonder if the refs will learn anything from this. There's all this outrage at Shanahan, but really, the refs should have caught this. Even if they were watching the puck and not the player, there is a moment when a second pair of skates come into your line of vision and go vertical, right before Kopecky hits the ice.

Refs make soft calls all the time. I don't know why they didn't err on the side of caution on this particular play and call something.
There's outrage at Shanahan because he's supposed to be the failsafe...refs can miss things, as Frazer points out, one official blew his assignment while the others did exactly what they were supposed to do. That happens, there's a lot going on out there. But Shanahan's office is supposed to impose penalties even when there is no call in cases like this where there's either complete disregard for safety or a clear intent to injure. The lack of serious suspensions or fines except when the league randomly decides to make an example of an old has-been (read: Marty McSorley) is why players continue to pull crap like this on a regular basis.

Acadmus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 04:12 PM
  #12
zeroG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somerville, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,185
vCash: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Rypien Farts View Post
I want an explanation as to why there was no penalty called on the play.
frasier explains why. there was a coverage gap and nobody saw it. i agree, nash left his feet and that bothers me but he coasting for quite a while before the hit, having lined up kopy. also agree that kopy didn't turn at the last minute and nash could've avoided hitting him BUT nash didn't make contact with his head.

i don't think shanahan could justify suspended nash based on the replay, though a charging call probably should've been made during the game. basically, split the difference between shanahan and frasier.

zeroG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 05:21 PM
  #13
Lola
Future Panthers
 
Lola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 3,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acadmus View Post
There's outrage at Shanahan because he's supposed to be the failsafe...refs can miss things, as Frazer points out, one official blew his assignment while the others did exactly what they were supposed to do. That happens, there's a lot going on out there. But Shanahan's office is supposed to impose penalties even when there is no call in cases like this where there's either complete disregard for safety or a clear intent to injure. The lack of serious suspensions or fines except when the league randomly decides to make an example of an old has-been (read: Marty McSorley) is why players continue to pull crap like this on a regular basis.
Don't misunderstand me, I *get* the reason why everyone is upset with Shanahan. My point is, if the refs don't learn from this situation, the cycle will continue (as you pointed out). At some point, the refs need to be called out by the NHL brass. If the players/coaches call out the refs they get penalized.

Lola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2013, 07:45 AM
  #14
Benched
Registered User
 
Benched's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,628
vCash: 50
He did NOT turn prior to contact so there goes point number one on there list.

Targeted the head? Questionable. He definitely had time to slow down and he definitely led with an elbow.

Player looking down in open ice without the puck, plenty of time to pull up, elbow leading, questionable motive. Yeah, horrible explanation.

Benched is offline   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 05:31 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.