HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Allen could be suspended.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-05-2003, 08:39 AM
  #26
syc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not Europe
Posts: 2,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggest Canuck Fan
Allen is going to get a hearing today for his slash on Zetterberg, and the conjecture is 1 to 2 games.

What bothers me is these slashes are a dime a dozen, and Allen's slash was nothing out of the ordinary.

So you set the precedent that if you call this, then every team can send in tapes and get players suspended left, right and center.
The NHL is always harder on suspentions when a player gets hurt. It's wrong I know but that's what they do.

syc is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 08:43 AM
  #27
incawg
Registered User
 
incawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wazee
That is an absolutely amazing stretch of logic. Let's look at your argument...

1. Zetterberg's leg broke when he was slashed.

2. The slash didn't look too bad to you.

3. Therefore, Zetterberg's leg must have had a partial break before.

You not only twist information to make it fit your hypothesis, you flat make it up. Amazing.
Wow. That sure is an interesting interpretation. And i'm the one that makes up information?

This is all conjecture. There's no facts here, only observations. Option #1 (my "guess") is that Zetterberg already had a partial break because the slash was so weak. Option #2 is that the slash itself caused a partial break which was later worsened (which was my other guess and would be in concordance with the fact that he continued to play on a supposedly broken fibula). The third option is that it was just an incredibly freak injury. In any of these three cases I fail to see why Allen should receive a punishment proportional to the injury considering the act wasn't proportional to the injury.

incawg is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 08:46 AM
  #28
ZombieMatt
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
I don't know, I've seen the slash occur on hi-lites dozens of times now, and it seems suspicious to me that a "slash" (I'm hesitant to use the term because it probably didn't even rank in the top 10 of the hardest slahses that happened during that game) did not seem to be a very hard one at all. I'm sorry, but as wrong as it is, the reality of the matter is that defensive, and forwards alike, do use their stick to a)let other players know they are there b)discourage the other players from staying ther and c)simply be a nuiscance.

If you watch any given game, there are 60 identical incidents to the Allen slash. Hell, watching a Chelios shift gives you two or three examples. The only reason this is a problem is because somehow Zetterberg's leg broke.

I guess the question here is do you penalize a player for doing something that is a common occurence in a game becaue the opposing player got hurt? Slashing may be against the rules, technically, but a slashing penalty is not a frequent penalty considering the frequency that the event happens.

To me this sets a precedant. If the NHL suspends Allen, they are saying that if a player gets hurt, you're going to be suspended, regardless of if it was a malicious play, if a penalty was called or not, or if it was a freak accident, like this way.

I'm not sure I like that precedant.

ZombieMatt is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 08:55 AM
  #29
darth5
Rowsdower!
 
darth5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggest Canuck Fan
I think your calls are just. I have two concerns...

Our rules are based on precedent. If the NHL calls this one, but then denies the next incident of similar type, then they open up a huge can of worms.

second slashing has been in this sport for longer than most who post here have been alive. Now all the sudden the NHL is going to do soething about the so-called harmless slashes?

I respect everyones opinions on this. I will never tell someone else what they should believe, but can't you all see the ramifications?...
I do see the hazards of doing this. I did say there must be CLEAR intent to injure-- and that is always going to have an element of subjectivity. Slashes at a player's stick or the puck wouldn't meet this criteria. I admit I can't quantify how to establish the measuring stick, but as it is, there is NO measuring stick consistently used other than the victim's status, IMHO.

Thanks for respecting divergent views.

darth5 is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 08:57 AM
  #30
Biggest Canuck Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Kelowna, BC
Posts: 10,666
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to Biggest Canuck Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountie
I don't know, I've seen the slash occur on hi-lites dozens of times now, and it seems suspicious to me that a "slash" (I'm hesitant to use the term because it probably didn't even rank in the top 10 of the hardest slahses that happened during that game) did not seem to be a very hard one at all. I'm sorry, but as wrong as it is, the reality of the matter is that defensive, and forwards alike, do use their stick to a)let other players know they are there b)discourage the other players from staying ther and c)simply be a nuiscance.

If you watch any given game, there are 60 identical incidents to the Allen slash. Hell, watching a Chelios shift gives you two or three examples. The only reason this is a problem is because somehow Zetterberg's leg broke.

I guess the question here is do you penalize a player for doing something that is a common occurence in a game becaue the opposing player got hurt? Slashing may be against the rules, technically, but a slashing penalty is not a frequent penalty considering the frequency that the event happens.

To me this sets a precedant. If the NHL suspends Allen, they are saying that if a player gets hurt, you're going to be suspended, regardless of if it was a malicious play, if a penalty was called or not, or if it was a freak accident, like this way.

I'm not sure I like that precedant.
Thank you... I was starting to feel crazy.

Biggest Canuck Fan is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 08:58 AM
  #31
messy_eh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 221
vCash: 500
"Mr. Chelios please meet Mr. Allen". My god Chelios must be eating his words from the summer "i can't wait for Mr. bertuzzi to meet Mr. hatcher". Bryan allen has single handedly cost Detroit both Hatcher and Zetterberg. Both on innocent looking plays. If there was a serious intent to injure than Allen has taking playing possum to a whole new level. Should allen be suspended ,no it was a normal game play he maybe should have got 2 minutes thats it. If Zetterberg hadn't got hurt this wouldn't even have been discussed, there would have been no posts on here saying Allen got away with a viscous slash. the fact that he broke his leg is the only thing that has people upset. Allen will get 1-2 games for the fact that he has taken 2 players out from the one of the leagues Cash cows. but that will be the only reason. S**t happens look at last year and Prongers carreer was almost over from a Al MacInnis flip shot just hit him funny and broke his wrist. Zetterbergs injury was either a fluke injury one of those combinations of a player shifting his weight at the wrong time and getting a "normal" slash at the same time causing some bizzare equation resulting in a break. Or else as posted earlier, Zetterberg may have had a slight fracture earlier enough to cause some discomfort but not enough to raise a flag and the slash just put it over the top. You can say what you will slashes on the legs are afrequent part of the game, Thier is a reason everyone where's shin pads. sometimes the slash is a missed attempt at the puck , and sometimes it's deliberate. But a suspension should only be given on an Obvious intent to injure which is not the case here. If every player got a game for a slash like that there would be no need for farm teams as 8-10 guys would be suspended on a nightly basis. Just chalk this one up to the hockey gods frowning on Detroit. Or maybe it is them Punishing Chelios for trying to start a conflict before a game was even played. who knows....

messy_eh is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 08:58 AM
  #32
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by incawg
But how often is intent to injure clear and well established? It's not easy to get inside a player's head. Anyway, this is certainly one case where it's obvious Allen wasn't trying to injure the player. If he had wanted to do so I think he would have done more than a one handed tap.
I think any slash can be construed as an attempt to injure. What the hell else where you trying to do? Any intential slash should be viewed as an illegal attempt to injure. It may sound harsh but it's one of the few ways to contain those who are stick happy. Can you imagine the number of slashes if every time you are caught, you get a misconduct? Hell, can you imagine the number of slashes if NHL officials were more than just NHL guides on the ice and actually called a penalty ?

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:02 AM
  #33
Biggest Canuck Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Kelowna, BC
Posts: 10,666
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to Biggest Canuck Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
I think any slash can be construed as an attempt to injure. What the hell else where you trying to do? Any intential slash should be viewed as an illegal attempt to injure. It may sound harsh but it's one of the few ways to contain those who are stick happy. Can you imagine the number of slashes if every time you are caught, you get a misconduct? Hell, can you imagine the number of slashes if NHL officials were more than just NHL guides on the ice and actually called a penalty ?
I know what your saying, and habsolutley said it best. Call the penalties, because after continually calling this, the players will listen, and skate more. Suspensions mask the issues. Penalties are called to prevent the issue from happening again and again.

Biggest Canuck Fan is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:03 AM
  #34
Evilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 28,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnrocketman
Couple of observations.
1. What difference does it make what style a player is-- whether he is a grinder, sniper, high skill, etc. is irrelevant to whether a slash with intent to injure occurred. THAT is what I think is ruining the NHL-- inconsistent officiating, letting some more established player get away with diving, cross-checking, etc. as opposed to calling infractions consistently regardless of who the player is.
2. Anybody that thinks a suspension would encourage clubs to send more game tapes protesting calls is nuts. They all do it quite frequently enough without encouragement.
3. When intent to injure is completely clear and well established, a player should be suspended for the entire length of the injured player's absence PLUS additional games. That would keep players from malicious misuse of their sticks, etc.
4. Officials need to be penalized also if they clearly witnessed the incident in question and did not call a penalty.

I fully expect to be flamed. Those are my opinions on how to handle the situations, however unlikely they are in the real world.
Good post.

Evilo is online now  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:04 AM
  #35
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 15,764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
I think any slash can be construed as an attempt to injure. What the hell else where you trying to do? Any intential slash should be viewed as an illegal attempt to injure. It may sound harsh but it's one of the few ways to contain those who are stick happy. Can you imagine the number of slashes if every time you are caught, you get a misconduct? Hell, can you imagine the number of slashes if NHL officials were more than just NHL guides on the ice and actually called a penalty ?
By this logic, every body-check can also be construed as an attempt to injure. There certainly is a difference between a shot across the legs and something malicious a la Suter-on-Kariya, or McSorley-on-Brashear.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:04 AM
  #36
Marconius
Registered User
 
Marconius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,519
vCash: 500
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Biggest Canuck Fan
Are you proud of team Canada's win in 1972 over team USSR?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Great question.
Don't use all your brain cells on one post
I think BCF has a point. Most Candians are extremely proud of that series, its part of what defines our culture (For better or worse) and that was series filled with weapons/sketchy hits & tactics/intent to injure.
Most Canadians simply write this off as good, old-school, Canadian hockey, the way it was meant ot be played and are proud our boys were such warriors.
Its an interesting thing to ponder....

Marconius is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:04 AM
  #37
wazee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by incawg
Wow. That sure is an interesting interpretation. And i'm the one that makes up information?

This is all conjecture. There's no facts here, only observations. Option #1 (my "guess") is that Zetterberg already had a partial break because the slash was so weak. Option #2 is that the slash itself caused a partial break which was later worsened (which was my other guess and would be in concordance with the fact that he continued to play on a supposedly broken fibula). The third option is that it was just an incredibly freak injury. In any of these three cases I fail to see why Allen should receive a punishment proportional to the injury considering the act wasn't proportional to the injury.
You are basing your arguments on the premise that Allen's slash was not the cause of Zetterberg's broken leg. You have absolutely nothing on which to base that claim.

You claim there are no facts here? There are facts. You are just choosing to ignore them because they do not fit the picture you want to draw.

The facts are that Zetterberg was playing good hockey before he was slashed by Allen and, although he tried to play after being slashed, he was unable to continue.

The evidence that Zetterberg had a partially broken leg before the Allen slash exists only in your imagination.

Do you believe that all players who have ever had a bone broken by a slash had a partial break before the slash? Or is this just a special circumstance because the slasher plays for your favorite team?

wazee is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:08 AM
  #38
wazee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
By this logic, every body-check can also be construed as an attempt to injure. There certainly is a difference between a shot across the legs and something malicious a la Suter-on-Kariya, or McSorley-on-Brashear.
There is a big difference. Checking is legal under the rule. Slashing is not.

wazee is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:09 AM
  #39
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
By this logic, every body-check can also be construed as an attempt to injure. There certainly is a difference between a shot across the legs and something malicious a la Suter-on-Kariya, or McSorley-on-Brashear.
You are catching on. That's why I said an 'illegal attempt to injure'. Most open ice hits are legal (to some degree). Thus, my logic holds tight. Certainly, there are levels of severity when it comes to intent to injure. But you're kidding yourself if you don't think slashes are, in a lot (if not all) of cases, attempted to inflict pain. Like I said, if the NHL officials were more than just trailguides on this path that we call an NHL season, something would be done about it.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:10 AM
  #40
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,041
vCash: 500
Some of you Allen apoligists are funny... He slashed him and he broke (maybe a better word is fractured) his leg.. Freak injury or not, soft bones or not, Allen slashed him and broke his leg. End of story. Saying that slashing is a common occurence and that other people do it too doesn't make it right or even justify it. This is why players get broken wrists, hands, arms and now legs. I doubt everyone was trying to seriously injure someone (though im sure some were) either, but yet it happened and someone got hurt.

Oh and this comment..

Quote:
This is all conjecture. There's no facts here, only observations. Option #1 (my "guess") is that Zetterberg already had a partial break because the slash was so weak. Option #2 is that the slash itself caused a partial break which was later worsened (which was my other guess and would be in concordance with the fact that he continued to play on a supposedly broken fibula). The third option is that it was just an incredibly freak injury. In any of these three cases I fail to see why Allen should receive a punishment proportional to the injury considering the act wasn't proportional to the injury.
1.you don't know how "weak" the slash was.. it may have "looked" weak to you, but I would assume it would hurt nonetheless

2.this doesnt matter if he played on a broken leg and it got worse, he probably didnt know it was actually broken until later. Bobby Baun actually skated and scored on a broken leg, so this is possible. Point is he still broke it, even if it was just a little bit.

3.this doesnt matter either, freak injury or not, you slash and you hurt someone. you should be suspended.

shakes is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:15 AM
  #41
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marconius
I think BCF has a point. Most Candians are extremely proud of that series, its part of what defines our culture (For better or worse) and that was series filled with weapons/sketchy hits & tactics/intent to injure.
Most Canadians simply write this off as good, old-school, Canadian hockey, the way it was meant ot be played and are proud our boys were such warriors.
Its an interesting thing to ponder....
An opinion south of your border: it was hockey at its very best.

Reading some of the posts here and the threads started daily about "this hit" or "that slash" or "this missed call" , one suspects that a viewing of that great '72 series would cause some here to keel over in horror.

To which I ask: Croquet anyone?

Trottier is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:15 AM
  #42
incawg
Registered User
 
incawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wazee
The facts are that Zetterberg was playing good hockey before he was slashed by Allen and, although he tried to play after being slashed, he was unable to continue.


The above is a shift chart from NHL.com. The red highlighted area is where the slash occurred. Note that Zetterberg played two entire shifts after his fibula was supposedly totally broken. That last shift was one of his longest of the games. Considering the weakness of the slash, is it completely inconceivable that the injury was aggravated before and/or after the slash? I'm not saying that's definitely the case. But it is a reasonable possibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wazee
The evidence that Zetterberg had a partially broken leg before the Allen slash exists only in your imagination.
Sigh. Read my post before responding. It's conjecture. It's a hypothesis. Just like there's no definitive proof that the "slash" was the sole cause of the break there's no definitive proof that the leg was partially broken before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wazee
Do you believe that all players who have ever had a bone broken by a slash had a partial break before the slash? Or is this just a special circumstance because the slasher plays for your favorite team?
How you can claim that this is a normal or representative slashing case is beyond me. Have you even seen the slash? And to answer your question: yes I would question whether the slash was the sole cause of a broken fibula with any player that taps another on the leg (with one hand on the stick I might add) when the guy with a broken leg continues to play.

The point is the only reason that allen is being considered for suspension is because Hank is injured. The argument is that the punishment should be proportional to the result of the crime. The problem is that it's not unreasonable that the result of crime may have a lot to do with factors other than the slash.

incawg is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:18 AM
  #43
kira
Registered User
 
kira's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: www.datsyuk13.com
Country: Ireland
Posts: 15,694
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to kira Send a message via Yahoo to kira
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes
Some of you Allen apoligists are funny... He slashed him and he broke (maybe a better word is fractured) his leg.. Freak injury or not, soft bones or not, Allen slashed him and broke his leg. End of story. Saying that slashing is a common occurence and that other people do it too doesn't make it right or even justify it. This is why players get broken wrists, hands, arms and now legs. I doubt everyone was trying to seriously injure someone (though im sure some were) either, but yet it happened and someone got hurt.

Oh and this comment..



1.you don't know how "weak" the slash was.. it may have "looked" weak to you, but I would assume it would hurt nonetheless

2.this doesnt matter if he played on a broken leg and it got worse, he probably didnt know it was actually broken until later. Bobby Baun actually skated and scored on a broken leg, so this is possible. Point is he still broke it, even if it was just a little bit.

3.this doesnt matter either, freak injury or not, you slash and you hurt someone. you should be suspended.

Thank you.

I saw the slash...it may have looked innocent enough to you all, but there was absolutely no call for it.

kira is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:20 AM
  #44
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cookeville TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,802
vCash: 500
All I can think to say is......

WHAT A FREAKING JOKE!

I think the league needs to take a look at why the play in question was not called a penalty to begin with....rather than to suspend a player for what they consistently allow every night.

Enoch is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:22 AM
  #45
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by incawg


The above is a shift chart from NHL.com. The red highlighted area is where the slash occurred. Note that Zetterberg played two entire shifts after his fibula was supposedly totally broken. That last shift was one of his longest of the games. Considering the weakness of the slash, is it completely inconceivable that the injury was aggravated before and/or after the slash? I'm not saying that's definitely the case. But it is a reasonable possibility.
Again.. Bobby Baun

shakes is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:22 AM
  #46
ZombieMatt
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes
Some of you Allen apoligists are funny... He slashed him and he broke (maybe a better word is fractured) his leg.. Freak injury or not, soft bones or not, Allen slashed him and broke his leg. End of story. Saying that slashing is a common occurence and that other people do it too doesn't make it right or even justify it. This is why players get broken wrists, hands, arms and now legs. I doubt everyone was trying to seriously injure someone (though im sure some were) either, but yet it happened and someone got hurt.

Oh and this comment..



1.you don't know how "weak" the slash was.. it may have "looked" weak to you, but I would assume it would hurt nonetheless

2.this doesnt matter if he played on a broken leg and it got worse, he probably didnt know it was actually broken until later. Bobby Baun actually skated and scored on a broken leg, so this is possible. Point is he still broke it, even if it was just a little bit.

3.this doesnt matter either, freak injury or not, you slash and you hurt someone. you should be suspended.
See, I disagree with you.

You have to admit that this was a freak accident. I'm confident that in any given game you'll probably see a slash a minute. Tihs time, one of those 60 slashes, somebody happened to get a broken leg.

A slash is against the rules, yes, but each and every NHL team has probably at least 4 defenders whose sole purpose on the ice is to make the forwards on the opposing team's life miserable. Against the rules or not, like it or not, some slashing is a part of that.

By NOT calling a penalty each time it happens, or even most of the time, the NHL has determined that slashing is a part of the game unless it is particurly vicious or malicious.

If you suspend Allen now you are deciding, like I said earlier, that it will be a precedant that when a freak accident happens, you're going to punish the guy who did whatever. I don't care what team a guy plays on, or what type of player he is, but to get suspended for a "routine" slash is not something I want to see in the NHL. Not only that, but it's a bold move by the NHL to determine what is, and what isn't, going to be acceptable.

The NHL will have to determine whether or not this suspension (still not given) was handed out on the basis of that Zet got injured (which is dangerous and opens up a whole new set of problems) or because it was a slash (which means each team will dress 0 defenceman every game for teh rest of time because EVERY NHL d-man slashse someone in a game).

I do not like the route that suspending Allen takes the NHL down, but maybe that's just me.

ZombieMatt is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:25 AM
  #47
Kukla
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: motown
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=incawg]

The above is a shift chart from NHL.com. The red highlighted area is where the slash occurred. Note that Zetterberg played two entire shifts after his fibula was supposedly totally broken. That last shift was one of his longest of the games. Considering the weakness of the slash, is it completely inconceivable that the injury was aggravated before and/or after the slash? I'm not saying that's definitely the case. But it is a reasonable possibility.



The bone that is broken is a non-weight bearing bone. Heck, Bob Baun scored the SCF game winning goal in OT with a broken leg so players can skate with it until the adrenalin stops flowing.

Van Hellemond was on Wings TV broadcast last night and said it should have been a penalty, refs missed it.

Kukla is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:30 AM
  #48
incawg
Registered User
 
incawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,009
vCash: 500
Bobby Baum is an exceptional case but it does show that it's possible. There's also countless cases, however, of players not being able to play on broken fibuals. It's conceivable that Hank continued to play on a totally broken bone, but it's also conceivable that the injury was worsened either before or after the slash.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkwjr
Van Hellemond was on Wings TV broadcast last night and said it should have been a penalty, refs missed it.
The refs also missed 5 of chelios' slashes. The point is that a dozens of these things go uncalled per game. You want to know how to stop people from slashing? Start calling penalties. Suspending a guy who gets injured on a weak slash isn't going to stop people from slashing. How often to freak injuries like that occur? 1 out of every 1000 comparable slashes? If you're an NHL player, the threat of getting suspending once every 1000+ slashes is not going to stop you. What will is if you know you'll get 2 minutes in the box everytime you slash.

incawg is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:33 AM
  #49
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountie
See, I disagree with you.

You have to admit that this was a freak accident. I'm confident that in any given game you'll probably see a slash a minute. Tihs time, one of those 60 slashes, somebody happened to get a broken leg.

A slash is against the rules, yes, but each and every NHL team has probably at least 4 defenders whose sole purpose on the ice is to make the forwards on the opposing team's life miserable. Against the rules or not, like it or not, some slashing is a part of that.

By NOT calling a penalty each time it happens, or even most of the time, the NHL has determined that slashing is a part of the game unless it is particurly vicious or malicious.

If you suspend Allen now you are deciding, like I said earlier, that it will be a precedant that when a freak accident happens, you're going to punish the guy who did whatever. I don't care what team a guy plays on, or what type of player he is, but to get suspended for a "routine" slash is not something I want to see in the NHL. Not only that, but it's a bold move by the NHL to determine what is, and what isn't, going to be acceptable.

The NHL will have to determine whether or not this suspension (still not given) was handed out on the basis of that Zet got injured (which is dangerous and opens up a whole new set of problems) or because it was a slash (which means each team will dress 0 defenceman every game for teh rest of time because EVERY NHL d-man slashse someone in a game).

I do not like the route that suspending Allen takes the NHL down, but maybe that's just me.

I watched the Leaf game last night, and at one point Sundin stripped the puck of Tarnstrom and was going in on a breakaway. Tarnstrom, racing to catch up with Sundin, gave this vicious two handed slash, just below one of Sundin's gloves. He didn't hurt Sundin or even break his stick.

1. Slashes can be deceiving
2. If he had have got Sundin on the wrist, hand or arm (which he was very close to doing), Sundin's would have had a broken bone of some sort.

Now, no penalty was called on this play, but was that because the ref wanted to "let the players decide the outcome of the game" or because Sundin wasn't hurt? Probably the latter and if this is the case the NHL already does punish people based on the outcome of an accident or injury. (also see, the penalty for cutting someone with a high stick as opposed to not). Why not try to protect the leagues talent a little better?

shakes is offline  
Old
11-05-2003, 09:37 AM
  #50
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsolution
Not really. The slash on Kharlamov was just classless.

Hockey is the only sport where you have a weapon in your hands and where you are not punished when you use it. I think it's stupid.
Don't forget Ultimate Knife-Football (with Chainsaws).

Honestly, I saw the replay. I think the question you've gotta ask was:

A) Was it malicious
B) Was there intent to injure
C) Was it anything out of the ordinary

I think the answers to all 3 are 'No'. If Zetterberg wasn't injured by it, there wouldn't be anything said about a slash like this.

Mizral is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:22 AM.

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.