anyone see the attempted decaffination of giroux by malkin? think shanny might take a look at that?
It's the perfect example of a play that illustrates that while intent matters, the extent of the injury also matters. Depending on the degree of contact, no contact, and extent of the subsequent injury, that exact play and decisionmaking on Malkin's part warrants no review, two games, five games, 10 games, 25 games.
I wouldn't even look at it. If he connects, and the player leaves the game with facial fractures, I'd feel far differently.
so, just for the purposes of argument, chris simon's samurai attack a few years back (on orr maybe?)... if he pops up from the hit with that deranged look on his face and swings for the fences at the head of the guy who hit him, but misses, nothing happens? does it depend on how egregious the attempt is?
I think that saying the injury is all that matters is absurd, but so is that assertion that it's only intent. Part of the problem is the difficulty in making windows into men's souls. It's not always easy to gauge intent.
Every time, the impact on the target is going to be a factor. It shouldn't be all consuming, but it's going to matter. Malkin will walk because he didn't connect.
Had Giroux a black eye, a concussion, or a fractured orbital bone today, you'd see far different reactions from the league, all stemming from an incident in which the transgressor had precisely the same intent.
Let's look at another recent incident. If Ryan Miller, freshly crumpled from an aggressive charge, connects with his hard goalie stick swing against the leg of Milan Lucic, and the latter leaves the game with a serious lower body injury, it certainly receives a heck of a lot more attention than it did in the end.
Connecting, not connecting and the consequences for the target are always going to matter. Both Miller and Malkin are fortunate they did not connect.