HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Notices

Kaberle out cold

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-03-2007, 02:35 PM
  #51
fake british accent
Registered User
 
fake british accent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chsb View Post
Sorry people!

But....the hit was late, at least 3 seconds after he got rid of the puck,
I counted 2 Mississippi's.

fake british accent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 02:39 PM
  #52
milk
Registered User
 
milk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: back to Vancouver
Country: Japan
Posts: 4,124
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to milk
well it looks like a 3 game suspension for Janssen.
link

milk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 02:47 PM
  #53
Sandmachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Boston
Country: Scotland
Posts: 605
vCash: 500
Has there been any comments made by Jannsen after this? Looking at the video, he sort of seems embarassed or ashamed when he's standing there. I don't think Jannsen intended for it to be that ugly of a hit, but that doesn't absolve him of anything really.

Jannsen's role is to hit people, obviously, any chance he gets. I'm guessing he saw Kaberle with the puck, and decided he was an appropriate target, even after he passed the puck away. People can argue about what makes a hit late or not, but I think what Cam didn't consider was Kaberle's vulnerability as far as lack of balance and proximity to the boards. But, in Cam's defense, it's all happening pretty fast. And, it's hard to determine sometimes how strong someone is on their skates at a certain time, and what the effect will be when you hit them.

Sandmachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 02:47 PM
  #54
DOGSTARMAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandmachine View Post
Has there been any comments made by Jannsen after this? Looking at the video, he sort of seems embarassed or ashamed when he's standing there. I don't think Jannsen intended for it to be that ugly of a hit, but that doesn't absolve him of anything really.

Jannsen's role is to hit people, obviously, any chance he gets. I'm guessing he saw Kaberle with the puck, and decided he was an appropriate target, even after he passed the puck away. People can argue about what makes a hit late or not, but I think what Cam didn't consider was Kaberle's vulnerability as far as lack of balance and proximity to the boards. But, in Cam's defense, it's all happening pretty fast. And, it's hard to determine sometimes how strong someone is on their skates at a certain time, and what the effect will be when you hit them.
Yes, he was quoted in the paper as saying he was just doing his job. Said you hate to see it, but that's his job to finish checks.

DOGSTARMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 02:52 PM
  #55
disfigured
Registered User
 
disfigured's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lowell MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,274
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to disfigured Send a message via AIM to disfigured Send a message via MSN to disfigured Send a message via Yahoo to disfigured
At any given time no matter what the rules are a player can head-hunt any other player.The actual hit may even be executed in a legal fashion. The structure of the movement on the ice that allows for beautiful plays also allows for this type of hit.

The only way to avoid this is not admire your pass and protect yourself at all times.

There's no way to prevent this with rules, in fact more rules and more suspensions only give the illusion to some players that this isn't going to happen.

When you stop at a 4 way light and it turns green do you not look both ways? Of course you look both ways , you at least glance and make sure everyone else is obeying the rules.

The hit was clean, there were not too many strides, he didn't leave his feet and it was shoulder contact with only some slight follow through. It was however interference.

If Kaberle had realized he was playing in the NHL, and not the soccer mom PTA league the NHL is becoming it wouldn't have resulted in this outcome. About all that would have happen was him being knocked off balance and maybe got the wind knocked out of him when he hit the boards. He probably would have drawn an interference call.

A few seconds sooner, it's NHL hockey, that's the litmus test. If that hit was was 1.5 seconds sooner we'd say Kaberle was being careless and nonchalant.

The only thing close that could be applied is the "intent to injure" rule, but because it's a match penalty and another infraction (one of 17) has to exist in order to do so, the ref(s) cannot call it.

I don't know if this is advisable even if a previous infraction was not a prerequisite. Each hit would have to be interpreted as to whether there was "intent to injure". Essentially a good powerful hit can injure and be within the confines of the rules. Taking away strategy and the game, the hit itself (any hit), is essentially an attempt to injure a player. It's the rules that constrain players ability to inflict damage on each hit (for the most part).To make a hit within the confines of the rules, and injure some one is rare, but it does happen.

Maybe interference should be added to that list. That way a late hit that falls under interference could also be matched with an "intent to injure".

If you tried to add additional rules to the point where this didn't happen you'd entirely change the structure of how movement is allowed on the ice. What that change would cause in other areas would be unknown, it could actually stifle offense as well as physical play.

I suppose a coach/GM/Owner could submit any evidence that a hit (on that wasn't dealt with at the time), was "intent to injure". Now you talking police and lawyers if it was outside the realm of the game.

That would open the flood gates. Personally I felt the stick injury to Savard during the last Toronto game by Kilger could fall under that category. Kilger let his stick fly knowing Savard was back there.

Eric Lindros was notorious for this type of thing when he got sick of being knocked silly, because of his propensity for being concussed from a hit.

The only way to stop this type of thing is not try and change the NHL for the masses. It's impossible, and the attempt to do so is quickly becoming a failed experiment , proving you can't tinker with anything as anomalous as a league like the NHL, with out creating totally unpredictable results.

disfigured is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 02:53 PM
  #56
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Eye View Post
Yes, he was quoted in the paper as saying he was just doing his job. Said you hate to see it, but that's his job to finish checks.
Memo to NHL players: If you're on the ice against Janssens, be prepared to be hit a minimum of 5 seconds after releasing a pass.

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:14 PM
  #57
drubaca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Hamilton, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to drubaca Send a message via AIM to drubaca Send a message via MSN to drubaca
I don't see how anybody can call that an illegal hit

At full speed, not slow motion like the idiots on the Leafs feed, I counted 1 one thousand, 2 one thous... bang = legal

I've watched it on a big screen & watched the replay over & over on youtube. There is no way Janssen left his feet or got his elbow up. The only thing he did, which is debateable wether or not it's dirty, is crouch & lunge into the hit, forcing his shoulder into his head.

If Cam Janssen is on the ice, keep your head on a swivel & don't admire your pass to you're defensive partner. Watch this replay for the NJ announcers POV

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgDUNn8q4qo

drubaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:17 PM
  #58
Rookie Chargers
Registered User
 
Rookie Chargers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Azores
Posts: 7,751
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Rookie Chargers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cids View Post
The fact that NJ coach benched Cam Janssens for the remainder of the game, shows that it was a dirty play. Cam didn't get a single second of ice time after this hit, which happened very early in the second period. It was a very late hit, he left his feet, and it looked like he got the elbow up. Kaberle is one of the best puck moving defenseman in the leauge and its a shame that a goon with NO talent can run rampant like this and take such liberties. I actually liked Cam before this hit, but now think he is nothing more than a dick.
It is called letting the situation difuse itself over time. Claude is one smart coach. Too bad for the Habs they didn't see that.

Rookie Chargers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:20 PM
  #59
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Which part of the boarding rule don't you folks who call it a legal hit understand?

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:28 PM
  #60
disfigured
Registered User
 
disfigured's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lowell MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,274
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to disfigured Send a message via AIM to disfigured Send a message via MSN to disfigured Send a message via Yahoo to disfigured
It might not even be interference either. I only suggested that it may be, depending on the referee.

It's an unfortunate chain of events that lead to Kaberle's injury. But a chain of events started by him thinking it was a pond skate and not the NHL.

Technically it could fall under boarding because he did end up impacting the boards. But this type of hit that far from the boards, and without the player facing the boards, although that is not a prerequisite for the rule anymore, is not the situation where it's usually called.

It was closer to interference then boarding.

disfigured is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:35 PM
  #61
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
This play is a classic definition of boarding.

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:36 PM
  #62
drubaca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Hamilton, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to drubaca Send a message via AIM to drubaca Send a message via MSN to drubaca
Quote:
Originally Posted by chippa13 View Post
Which part of the boarding rule don't you folks who call it a legal hit understand?
Please, the boarding rule was put in place to protect players who are within 3 feet of the boards & holding the puck. And ususally facing the boards. If your going to call boarding based on the description in the NHL rule book, you may as well eliminate hitting from the NHL altogether.

A minor or major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards.

Hmmm, that describes about 50% of the hits in the NHL.

That rule is way to general & is impossible to be called the way it is defined

drubaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:36 PM
  #63
Rookie Chargers
Registered User
 
Rookie Chargers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Azores
Posts: 7,751
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Rookie Chargers
Quote:
Originally Posted by chippa13 View Post
Which part of the boarding rule don't you folks who call it a legal hit understand?
A minor or major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards.
(NOTE) Any unnecessary contact with a player playing the puck on an obvious "icing" or "off-side" play which results in that player being knocked into 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".

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.
Any player who incurs a total of two (2) game misconducts for Boarding under Rule 44 (b), in either Regular Season or Playoffs, 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.

This one?

Rookie Chargers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:38 PM
  #64
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drubaca View Post
Please, the boarding rule was put in place to protect players who are within 3 feet of the boards & holding the puck. And ususally facing the boards. If your going to call boarding based on the description in the NHL rule book, you may as well eliminate hitting from the NHL altogether.

A minor or major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards.

Hmmm, that describes about 50% of the hits in the NHL.

That rule is way to general & is impossible to be called the way it is defined
You're joking, right? How exactly does one call the rules of the NHL rulebook, merely as suggestions? Kind of like the old joke, Stop signs with white borders are optional.

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:39 PM
  #65
disfigured
Registered User
 
disfigured's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lowell MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,274
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to disfigured Send a message via AIM to disfigured Send a message via MSN to disfigured Send a message via Yahoo to disfigured
This hit doesn't fall under the spirit of which that rule was created.

People make violent contact with the boards all the time , and it's up the discretion of the referre whether the intent to cause that violent impact was present.

If you want to send some one violently crashing into the boards you don't check them 10 feet away from them. Hence the intention is not there in this hit.

disfigured is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:39 PM
  #66
Neely08
Registered User
 
Neely08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: North of Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 17,159
vCash: 500
I'm starting to think this is a symptom or bi-product of the new NHL. It just seems so many guys are getting nailed when they don't expect to be, and thus sustain all kinds of damage.

How did Kaberle not see him coming? If you look at it, though he's driving his legs upward to deliver the hit, he doesn't leave his feet. I can't tell if it's an elbow or shoulder, but Kaberle's head went into the boards hard.

Tired of seeing this, and afraid they'll try and implement some stupid rule about hitting.

Neely08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:42 PM
  #67
erfus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chippa13 View Post
Which part of the boarding rule don't you folks who call it a legal hit understand?
http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule44.html
Quote:
A minor or major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards.
Pretty gray, isn't it? It looked like boarding to me.

http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule67.html
Quote:
(NOTE 2) Possession of the Puck:
The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession. The player deemed in possession of the puck may be checked legally, provided the check is rendered immediately following his loss of possession.
That's not as gray. It looked like interference to me.

Above all, there was just no need for it. Players just don't care about what they do to each other these days. (Insert Andy Brickley "respect" rant here) The three game suspension, at a minimum, seems appropriate here.

erfus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:42 PM
  #68
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disfigured View Post
This hit doesn't fall under the spirit of which that rule was created.

People make violent contact with the boards all the time , and it's up the discretion of the referre whether the intent to cause that violent impact was present.

If you want to send some one violently crashing into the boards you don't check them 10 feet away from them. Hence the intention is not there in this hit.
They were more like 5-6 feet from the boards, however, and intent has nothing to do with the rule. It isn't what you intend to do, it is what you do.

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:45 PM
  #69
Jonathan17
Trollface!
 
Jonathan17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Oakville
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chippa13 View Post
Which part of the boarding rule don't you folks who call it a legal hit understand?
Which part of the boarding or charging rule is clear enough that it could not apply any time to just about any hit? What kind of hit does not result in an opponent being "thrown violently in the boards"?

I would argue that Kaberle put himself in the danger area near the boards by drifting backwards, which is a mitigating factor in the boarding rule. It was late and dirty, so you can apply either rule to it but more likely charging because of the distance covered. He did "violently check an opponent."

Jonathan17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:53 PM
  #70
Aardvark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 29
vCash: 500
If you watch the clip that starts at 3:49 of this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0J3TGyNUgE

...there is no denying that Janssen's skates come fully off the ice.

I clocked it with my stopwatch a few times, and it's exactly 1.2 seconds between the puck leaving Kaberle's stick and Janssen hitting him. And even though 1.2 seconds doesn't sound like a long time, all you have to do is watch the video to see that the only thing Janssen could have possibly accomplished with that hit was to injure Kaberle.

Aardvark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:53 PM
  #71
disfigured
Registered User
 
disfigured's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lowell MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,274
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to disfigured Send a message via AIM to disfigured Send a message via MSN to disfigured Send a message via Yahoo to disfigured
Charging has the grayist areas of all the rules.

One of the two parts don't even apply to this hit, he didn't leave his feet to make the hit. Usually both have to be present before charging is called.

A very long skating distance, and leaving ones feet to make the check.

1.5 seconds sooner and away from the boards so Kaberle doesn't hit them, and none of the attempted bending of rules to fit this hit apply.

That's a good indication that calling this boarding or charging are not very accurate.

If anything it's interference and Kaberle looking at his pass, making for something that quickly becomes very violent.

Suspending some one for this hit, would only make players think they continue not paying attention and might result in worse, more violent hits.

disfigured is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:56 PM
  #72
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Had the referees been paying attention, boarding certainly applies. Kaberle's crash into the boards is the very definition of being propelled violently. The suspension only confirms that the officials on the ice missed the call.

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:56 PM
  #73
disfigured
Registered User
 
disfigured's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lowell MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,274
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to disfigured Send a message via AIM to disfigured Send a message via MSN to disfigured Send a message via Yahoo to disfigured
He doesn't leave the ice. He uses leg strength and extension to execute the hit but his skates don't leave the ice.

disfigured is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 03:57 PM
  #74
chippa13*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disfigured View Post
He doesn't leave the ice. He uses leg strength and extension to execute the hit but his skates don't leave the ice.
This hit definitely wasn't charging, he never left the ice and he glided across the ice until he took the stride for the hit.

chippa13* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2007, 04:08 PM
  #75
drubaca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Hamilton, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to drubaca Send a message via AIM to drubaca Send a message via MSN to drubaca
[QUOTE=drubaca;8352898 at the discretion of the Referee[/QUOTE]

This is the part of the rule that makes it ridiculous. This referee obviosly didn't think it was boarding. Would any other ref in the NHL? I would say no, because it is not in the spirit in which the rule was originally intended.

Like I said, atleast 50% if the hits along the boards in the NHL would be penalties as described by that rule. And this hit wasn't even along the boards.

Since the NHL is reacting to the fact that Kaberle got a head injury on the play, they'll suspend Janssen. If Kaberle managed to skate away after shaking it off, they wouldn't even look at the hit. The NHL rules committee is a joke.

drubaca 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 06:11 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.