HFBoards

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

Fix the rules on low bridges/submarining?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-16-2012, 12:48 PM
  #1
nycpunk1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Medford, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Fix the rules on low bridges/submarining?

If it's their guy, it's the most dastardly clip ever seen in the game of hockey. If it's your guy, "What, hip checks are illegal now?" Obviously I'm referring to what has become seen, like it or not, as Brad Marchand's signature move. The low bridge or submarine, or whatever you want to call it. Here's how it generally plays out for me:

First response -- "That's a dirty play. He needs to get that *** out of his game. WTF is he thinking?" The referees call it clipping. Then I see the replay, and it's pretty clear that it's not a clip. No knee contact, or even attempt at knee contact. He's going low, but the point of contact is always right at the thighs. Clearly he's practiced this. A lot. Hmm. Does Marchand have a little brother...?

How does the NHL, which has specifically told Marchand that this kind of move is legal, then gone on to suspend him for it, come up with a clear rationale for which of these are legal and which are dirty? If it's all left to an obscenity type rule (I know it when I see it), calls are going to be wildly inconsistent.

I think they need to call it a hip check, but clarify when a hip check is legal. To me, the classic hip check is when a defender finishes his check by closing off a route by the boards. Puck carrier tries to get through, he gets crunched between a hip and the boards. All you have to do to avoid this kind of hip check is (a) skate faster, or (b) go around by getting inside. Good luck with (b) if it's Chara.

The difference with a few of Marchand's hits this year is the direction of the hit. Hip checks move perpendicular to the skater-- you're going North-South, I hit you East-West, or pretty close to it. The hit obviously comes in a lot lower than a shoulder check, but all the skater's momentum is going in a different direction from the hit. He can still keep his feet moving, and his body upright. Marchand's low bridges that bother me have been against guys coming pretty much straight into the hit. That means their momentum is likely to carry them over the top, while their legs are stopped by the hit. Hence Salo looking like a panel out of Calvin and Hobbes. I think Marchand was actually in the box before he hit the ice.

Look at the hit on Lucic last year in the playoffs-- good non-call, hip check coming side to side. A lot of Marchand's hits fall into this same category. Others are him ducking a hit to get around a guy, which would put him on the right side of the law here too. I think if he gets a clear ruling on why some of the low bridges are called and others aren't, he'll remove the illegal hits from his game. Unless maybe Subban's involved. Pretty sure all bets are off then. Am I missing something in the rule book? The rules are the rules, and the code's the code. Right now I see these plays as something Marchand should be having to drop gloves about, but I don't see where it's actually illegal. Can we even have an adult conversation on this at this point, or is it just going to become a "Bruins/Rangers are dirty", "Canucks/Habs are **ssies" shouting match?

nycpunk1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 12:57 PM
  #2
SerenityRick
Registered User
 
SerenityRick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Country: United States
Posts: 14,011
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SerenityRick
Simple. Get rid of the instigator. If the players feel that kind of hit is dirty, let them settle it by pummeling Marshy.

I don't think that the league needs to alter the rules for it.

As of right now it's tough for teams, especially for the Bruins who play a bang bang type of style, to know what's allowed and what isn't. You have to over think everything now because what was a clean check last game, might be a misconduct this game. What was a good stick check last game, was a slash this game..
And not to get off topic but I think this is a big reason as to why the Bruins started to lose their identity. It's not a coincedence that once they started getting suspended and just plain ol' robbed by calls on the ice that they started having terrible results.

Also refs need.. NEED to stop calling penalties based on the aftermath of a hit or incident. The worst was last night when the crowd blew up when Cole tripped over his own skates with NO BRUIN near him and the ref from center ice called a trip. It's like "Oh crap I missed what happened but something obviously happened because the crowd is mad! *whistle*"

anyway... in short, nothing should be changed. If it's a clip, penalize him.. but you better make damn sure it's a clip. Refs only called that on Marchand because whatshisface stayed down on the ice like he was shot. Man up.

SerenityRick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:13 PM
  #3
11MilesPerJohan
@BeingAHumanBean
 
11MilesPerJohan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: McLean Hospital
Country: United States
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
To me the clipping definition in the rule book does clearly state when a hip check would become illegal:


44.1 Clipping - Clipping is the act of throwing the body, from any direction, across or below the knees of an opponent.
A player may not deliver a check in a “clipping” manner, nor lower his own body position to deliver a check on or below an opponent’s knees.
An illegal “low hit” is a check that is delivered by a player or goalkeeper who may or may not have both skates on the ice, with his sole intent to check the opponent in the area of his knees. A player may not lower his body position to deliver a check to an opponent’s knees.

It clearly states that it is the area targeted by the hip check, in this case the knees, that makes it illegal. It has nothing to do with whether or not someone is coming north-south as opposed to east-west, or whether or not it is along the boards or in the open ice.

On the Salo hit, Marchand definitely lowers his body with the "intent to check the opponent in the area of his knees." Now Salo is so damn lanky that it is still debatable whether or not that check was actually below his knees, but the intent, I would have to admit, was there.

Last night, not only did Marchand not make contact at or below the knees, I actually think he tried to slow himself up a bit and avoid the contact...I don't think the intent was there. It was a hip to hip check. If anything, Emelin aided the hit a bit by leaving his feet, and I think the "injury" may have occured when, upon landing on the ice after leaving his feet, Emelin's blade got stuck in the ice and it wrenched his knee a bit. It really wasn't because of direct contact with Marchand's body.

11MilesPerJohan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:25 PM
  #4
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,373
vCash: 500
The squeaky wheel gets the grease and unfortunaltely for the Bruins, the 2 squeakiest wheels in the league are the 2 teams who hate them the most.

Burrows can bite Bergeron's finger and Rome delivers a late hit to the ehad that knocks Horton out of the playoffs yet thee vancouver fans will tell you it is the Bruins who are dirty. Never mind the fact that those same canucks delivered at least 3 hits to the head in game 7 of the finals.

The NBC announcers didn't even mention those hits except for to say that Higgins accidentally jumped up in the air and hit Chara with a flying elbow to the head. The Canadien broadcast did bring up those hits and show several replays of them.



As far as the canadiens, does anyone here remember Patrick Roy breaking Rick Middletons hand with a slash after he scored a goal? It was seconds after the goal and Middleton went around the net and put his hand on the crossbar and Roy slammed his stick down so hard on Middleton's hand that he broke it.

Of course we also have the infamous maurice Richard who made headlines with his stick swinging and nearly killing someone.

More recently we have steve Begin breaking Savards back with a crosscheck, we also had francis bouillon come out of the penalty box and elbow Aaron Ward in the head behind the play and putting him out with a concussion.

It doesn't matter that those teams have done things even worse than what they always accuse the Bruins of doing, they complain, call 911, have "sportswriters" who make Jack Edwards look like he is impartial. The League gets tired of listening to them complain and does things to shut them up.

I hate it and I hate that the Bruins now seem to be trying to adjust their game to rules made up to make the Bruins physical game less effective.

Does anyone here have any doudt that if the game with Philly, the Bruins were the ones who delivered 3 high hits, there would have been at least one suspension?

I don't want the Flyers players suspended for those hits and I don't want the league to treat the Bruins any different than they treat vancouver or montreal, but they do and it is bull****.

I hate the stupid diving and turtling type of game that those teams seem to always try to employ. Diving should be taken out of the game at any cost, There are rules in place that allow a player to be suspended for diving, I just don't think they have ever used it.

I just had to get that off of my chest.

nmbr_24 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:36 PM
  #5
ThomasJ13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gg4167 View Post
To me the clipping definition in the rule book does clearly state when a hip check would become illegal:


44.1 Clipping - Clipping is the act of throwing the body, from any direction, across or below the knees of an opponent.
A player may not deliver a check in a “clipping” manner, nor lower his own body position to deliver a check on or below an opponent’s knees.
An illegal “low hit” is a check that is delivered by a player or goalkeeper who may or may not have both skates on the ice, with his sole intent to check the opponent in the area of his knees. A player may not lower his body position to deliver a check to an opponent’s knees.

It clearly states that it is the area targeted by the hip check, in this case the knees, that makes it illegal. It has nothing to do with whether or not someone is coming north-south as opposed to east-west, or whether or not it is along the boards or in the open ice.

On the Salo hit, Marchand definitely lowers his body with the "intent to check the opponent in the area of his knees." Now Salo is so damn lanky that it is still debatable whether or not that check was actually below his knees, but the intent, I would have to admit, was there.

Last night, not only did Marchand not make contact at or below the knees, I actually think he tried to slow himself up a bit and avoid the contact...I don't think the intent was there. It was a hip to hip check. If anything, Emelin aided the hit a bit by leaving his feet, and I think the "injury" may have occured when, upon landing on the ice after leaving his feet, Emelin's blade got stuck in the ice and it wrenched his knee a bit. It really wasn't because of direct contact with Marchand's body.
This. Watch Shanahan's video from the Marchand Salo incident - he makes a big deal out of the fact that it was at or below the knees. And last night's was not. End of story. Marchand knows the boundaries, Shanahan knows the boundaries, everybody's happy (except bitter, bitter Canuck fans).

ThomasJ13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:44 PM
  #6
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gg4167 View Post
To me the clipping definition in the rule book does clearly state when a hip check would become illegal:


44.1 Clipping - Clipping is the act of throwing the body, from any direction, across or below the knees of an opponent.
A player may not deliver a check in a “clipping” manner, nor lower his own body position to deliver a check on or below an opponent’s knees.
An illegal “low hit” is a check that is delivered by a player or goalkeeper who may or may not have both skates on the ice, with his sole intent to check the opponent in the area of his knees. A player may not lower his body position to deliver a check to an opponent’s knees...
Keep it simple:

44.1 Clipping - Players who are 5'9" or shorter may not hip check an opponent.

misterjaggers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:56 PM
  #7
nycpunk1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Medford, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Judging by intent is always going to be problematic in this type of play. It's not like spearing. How it looks depends ona lot of variables: the relative heights of the players, angle, reactions from the hit player, etc.

I think my way is much clearer about what ACTIONS are allowed/not allowed. Otherwise we're left with "intent", which leads to a lot more reputation calls. Eventually you end up with the NBA-- foul a star, get hammered; fouled by a star, you still get hammered.

I have no problem with a ban on the type of hit I described, and I don't really see why it should be kept in the game. Maybe you can change my mind, but I don't see you changing the league's. But if the league's gonna call it, they need to explain it. Especially if one way of calling it is with suspensions and the other is barely a penalty. If players are going to play on the edge, they need to know where that edge is.

nycpunk1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 02:05 PM
  #8
nycpunk1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Medford, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasJ13 View Post
This. Watch Shanahan's video from the Marchand Salo incident - he makes a big deal out of the fact that it was at or below the knees. And last night's was not. End of story. Marchand knows the boundaries, Shanahan knows the boundaries, everybody's happy (except bitter, bitter Canuck fans).
But the point of contact WASN'T at or below the knees. It was just above the knee. If it's going to be a case of calling clips at or below the knee, fine. We just need to get the refs up to speed. But I don't think that's what's happening. I think they're looking at these low bridges as a class unto themselves and then CALLING them clips because that's the closest penalty they have available.

I don't really care if they take these hits out of the game, as long as they are crystal clear about it so we don't see any old hip check being called just because it's Marchand or Lucic on a Sedin, for example. I'm also trying to figure out why I'm not a huge fan of some of these hits, but LOVE other ones.

nycpunk1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 02:36 PM
  #9
panny2727
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 850
vCash: 500
the clipping rules seems to be read as the person delivering the check. Marchand does it to avoid getting killed. I don't like Marchand ducking.... but if everyone knows that he does it....why do guys continually run him like a safety. Not so smart for the guy who is lining him up for an open ice hit imo.

all these rules are stupid. guys are getting hurt because they forgot how to be smart and protect themselves. They just wait for the referee to protect them. This has been the trend in the last ten years. If we keep adding rules the game is going to be called women's hockey.
Stop ****ing with my game!!!!!
LET THEM PLAY!!! LET THEM PLAY!!!!

panny2727 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 02:41 PM
  #10
westernhome
Registered User
 
westernhome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by panny2727 View Post
the clipping rules seems to be read as the person delivering the check. Marchand does it to avoid getting killed. I don't like Marchand ducking.... but if everyone knows that he does it....why do guys continually run him like a safety. Not so smart for the guy who is lining him up for an open ice hit imo.

all these rules are stupid. guys are getting hurt because they forgot how to be smart and protect themselves. They just wait for the referee to protect them. This has been the trend in the last ten years. If we keep adding rules the game is going to be called women's hockey.
Stop ****ing with my game!!!!!
LET THEM PLAY!!! LET THEM PLAY!!!!
exactly, there is nothing at all wrong with either of Marchand's so-called "clipping" this year, the league and the whiners are ruining the game of hockey

westernhome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 02:54 PM
  #11
stick9
Registered User
 
stick9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 9,941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SerenityRick View Post
Simple. Get rid of the instigator. If the players feel that kind of hit is dirty, let them settle it by pummeling Marshy.
Let me ask you something Rick, do you honestly believe that would stop Marchand from ever doing it again....I don't.

Getting rid of the instigator will help keep honest players honest. It won't do anything to deter those who play on that fine line.

It's like locking you car doors, all it does is keep honest people honest.

stick9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:02 PM
  #12
ssault
SW BROONS
 
ssault's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Central Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 2,464
vCash: 500
Based on what Shanahan said when explaining the non-suspension, something will change about these types of hit.

NHLShanahan: Like all penalties on the ice, not all "clips" rise to the level of supplemental discipline. This check by Marchand was delivered to the upper thigh/hip and not the knee area. We don't like it, but not SD.

ssault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:03 PM
  #13
ThomasJ13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycpunk1 View Post
But the point of contact WASN'T at or below the knees. It was just above the knee. If it's going to be a case of calling clips at or below the knee, fine. We just need to get the refs up to speed. But I don't think that's what's happening. I think they're looking at these low bridges as a class unto themselves and then CALLING them clips because that's the closest penalty they have available.

I don't really care if they take these hits out of the game, as long as they are crystal clear about it so we don't see any old hip check being called just because it's Marchand or Lucic on a Sedin, for example. I'm also trying to figure out why I'm not a huge fan of some of these hits, but LOVE other ones.
You can't expect the refs to get the minutia of every infraction right. There is a relatively clear definition of tripping, and yet you see effed up tripping calls all the time. There is a relatively clear definition of interference, and you see what we saw last night. It happens, and it has nothing to do with the rule not being clear, or the refs not being up to speed, and everything to do with speed and split second decisions by humans.

Now where you don't want any ambiguity is when Shanahan and his Zapruder video analysis takes over. He has the benefit of frame-by-frame analysis of where contact was made. And from what I can tell on that front, he deemed Marchand's Salo hit to be "at or below the knee" and he deemed last night's to not be. You can quibble with those assessments of where the principle point of contact was, but again, that has nothing to do with the clarity of the rule for this kind of infraction.

The rule is clear, sometimes refs miss things, and sometimes Shanahan makes a judgement regarding the principle point of contact that others might disagree with....but the rule is clear.

ThomasJ13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:12 PM
  #14
westernhome
Registered User
 
westernhome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssault View Post
Based on what Shanahan said when explaining the non-suspension, something will change about these types of hit.

NHLShanahan: Like all penalties on the ice, not all "clips" rise to the level of supplemental discipline. This check by Marchand was delivered to the upper thigh/hip and not the knee area. We don't like it, but not SD.
is that an actual quote?? if so, then Shanahan is a bigger joke than I thought, so they don't like a hip check? we are in good hands with the nhl brass now

westernhome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:18 PM
  #15
ssault
SW BROONS
 
ssault's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Central Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 2,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssault View Post
Based on what Shanahan said when explaining the non-suspension, something will change about these types of hit.

NHLShanahan: Like all penalties on the ice, not all "clips" rise to the level of supplemental discipline. This check by Marchand was delivered to the upper thigh/hip and not the knee area. We don't like it, but not SD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westernhome View Post
is that an actual quote?? if so, then Shanahan is a bigger joke than I thought, so they don't like a hip check? we are in good hands with the nhl brass now
It's straight from his Twitter. By his wording it's not a clipping, but he says he doesn't like it. Sounds like a rule change coming.

ssault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:19 PM
  #16
ThomasJ13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssault View Post
Based on what Shanahan said when explaining the non-suspension, something will change about these types of hit.

NHLShanahan: Like all penalties on the ice, not all "clips" rise to the level of supplemental discipline. This check by Marchand was delivered to the upper thigh/hip and not the knee area. We don't like it, but not SD.
Yeah, they may try to change the "at or below the knee" to something like "in the vicinity of the knee".....which would be a travesty, because then the rule does become ambiguous and prone to inconsistent enforcement and confusion.

ThomasJ13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:31 PM
  #17
stick9
Registered User
 
stick9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 9,941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssault View Post
It's straight from his Twitter. By his wording it's not a clipping, but he says he doesn't like it. Sounds like a rule change coming.
Shanny doesn't make the rules, he just enforces them. I'm sure they ask his opinion since he's the one reviewing tape, but i doubt it's his call and his call alone.

stick9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:35 PM
  #18
ssault
SW BROONS
 
ssault's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Central Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 2,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick9 View Post
Shanny doesn't make the rules, he just enforces them. I'm sure they ask his opinion since he's the one reviewing tape, but i doubt it's his call and his call alone.
But coming from the Department of Player Safety, they would probably not have too much trouble convincing the BoG's to make the wording more vague so they could suspend players "in the name of safety"

ssault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:38 PM
  #19
stick9
Registered User
 
stick9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 9,941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssault View Post
But coming from the Department of Player Safety, they would probably not have too much trouble convincing the BoG's to make the wording more vague so they could suspend players "in the name of safety"
The suspensions are getting crazy, I'm sure the owners and GM's think that as well. They don't want their players hurt, but they also don't want their guys in the pressbox for 3 games when there is no injury on the play.

stick9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:42 PM
  #20
ssault
SW BROONS
 
ssault's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Central Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 2,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick9 View Post
The suspensions are getting crazy, I'm sure the owners and GM's think that as well. They don't want their players hurt, but they also don't want their guys in the pressbox for 3 games when there is no injury on the play.
I really hope they see it that way too, but everything has just been so Nerf'd recently. The example, of course, will be the glassman Salo and his concussion and "WHAT IF THAT HAD HAPPENED TO *insert player currently being marketed by the NHL* ?!?!"

ssault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 03:43 PM
  #21
29dryden29
Registered User
 
29dryden29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,681
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycpunk1 View Post
If it's their guy, it's the most dastardly clip ever seen in the game of hockey. If it's your guy, "What, hip checks are illegal now?" Obviously I'm referring to what has become seen, like it or not, as Brad Marchand's signature move. The low bridge or submarine, or whatever you want to call it. Here's how it generally plays out for me:

First response -- "That's a dirty play. He needs to get that *** out of his game. WTF is he thinking?" The referees call it clipping. Then I see the replay, and it's pretty clear that it's not a clip. No knee contact, or even attempt at knee contact. He's going low, but the point of contact is always right at the thighs. Clearly he's practiced this. A lot. Hmm. Does Marchand have a little brother...?

How does the NHL, which has specifically told Marchand that this kind of move is legal, then gone on to suspend him for it, come up with a clear rationale for which of these are legal and which are dirty? If it's all left to an obscenity type rule (I know it when I see it), calls are going to be wildly inconsistent.

I think they need to call it a hip check, but clarify when a hip check is legal. To me, the classic hip check is when a defender finishes his check by closing off a route by the boards. Puck carrier tries to get through, he gets crunched between a hip and the boards. All you have to do to avoid this kind of hip check is (a) skate faster, or (b) go around by getting inside. Good luck with (b) if it's Chara.

The difference with a few of Marchand's hits this year is the direction of the hit. Hip checks move perpendicular to the skater-- you're going North-South, I hit you East-West, or pretty close to it. The hit obviously comes in a lot lower than a shoulder check, but all the skater's momentum is going in a different direction from the hit. He can still keep his feet moving, and his body upright. Marchand's low bridges that bother me have been against guys coming pretty much straight into the hit. That means their momentum is likely to carry them over the top, while their legs are stopped by the hit. Hence Salo looking like a panel out of Calvin and Hobbes. I think Marchand was actually in the box before he hit the ice.

Look at the hit on Lucic last year in the playoffs-- good non-call, hip check coming side to side. A lot of Marchand's hits fall into this same category. Others are him ducking a hit to get around a guy, which would put him on the right side of the law here too. I think if he gets a clear ruling on why some of the low bridges are called and others aren't, he'll remove the illegal hits from his game. Unless maybe Subban's involved. Pretty sure all bets are off then. Am I missing something in the rule book? The rules are the rules, and the code's the code. Right now I see these plays as something Marchand should be having to drop gloves about, but I don't see where it's actually illegal. Can we even have an adult conversation on this at this point, or is it just going to become a "Bruins/Rangers are dirty", "Canucks/Habs are **ssies" shouting match?
There does seem to be too much grey area on these calls. I love a great hipcheck. Guy coming along the boards and the D man puts him hard into the boards with the hip sometimes he goes up and over sometimes he doesn't. Some are not so good the problem I had on the Salo his was Marchand turned and looked to be going almost head forst into Salo. It is tough and I wouldn't want to have to be the on ice official left with trying to decipher which is which anymore.

29dryden29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:34 AM
  #22
KrejciMVP
Registered User
 
KrejciMVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Clipping to an extent should be legal

KrejciMVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:58 AM
  #23
jerrywally23*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 534
vCash: 500
If he goes below the hips then it should be called clipping.

jerrywally23* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:01 AM
  #24
Kaoz
Ima Krejciist.
 
Kaoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssault View Post
Based on what Shanahan said when explaining the non-suspension, something will change about these types of hit.

NHLShanahan: Like all penalties on the ice, not all "clips" rise to the level of supplemental discipline. This check by Marchand was delivered to the upper thigh/hip and not the knee area. We don't like it, but not SD.
Wait, Shanahan doesn't like that type of hit? Oreally. Seemed pretty willing to defend it here.



Last edited by Kaoz: 02-17-2012 at 09:07 AM.
Kaoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 10:52 AM
  #25
doakacola*
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by westernhome View Post
exactly, there is nothing at all wrong with either of Marchand's so-called "clipping" this year, the league and the whiners are ruining the game of hockey
This 100%. IMO you should never be penalized for making yourself smaller when an opposing player IS ENTERING YOUR SPACE as Marchand did with Salo. TS for Salo or anyone else. Its insane to believe that you have a responsibility to make yourself a bigger target to be hit.

In football when a WR is jumping up for a pass, the DB has all the right to submarine a player on a tackle. How ludicrous would it be for the NFL to instittute a rule banning submarine hits on tackles? The NFL would be scoffed at.

Either BAN ALL HITS BELOW THE WASTE, or penalize no one for Marchand type hits with Yemelin or Salo. One or the other, this intent crap is total BS.

doakacola* 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 07:18 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.