HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Around the League XXVII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-09-2011, 02:55 PM
  #51
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
I think you're 90% correct, but I also think Chara knew where he was on the ice and drove him into the stanchion a more physically than most players do.
I'm sure a lot of people 'think' that, but there is absolutely no one who knows for sure except Chara, and he went on record as saying it was a complete accident; the unfortunate, and total fluke outcome of a physical play.

Without some sort of 'Inception-style' espionage you really can't prove it's anything but the way Chara explains it.

Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
03-09-2011, 02:55 PM
  #52
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smileyface View Post
I don't agree with that decision. They should have given him at least a couple of games because the hit was unnecessary and reckless.
Why was the hit unnecessary? Pacioretty attempted to 'chip and chase' past Chara. I don't think I've seen many players successfully do this at any area of the ice against Chara.

Any good defender will rub a player out after attempting a 'chip and chase'. Chara did it hard and mean, technically not against NHL rules.

If the fans and media think the outcome of this particular hit was horrific, then they should be wondering why, when these hits happen on a near yearly basis, has a solution not been found regarding the stanchions? Why are stanchions still, to a great degree, unpadded?
If the hit was reckless, why is there no rule against hitting players in certain area's of the ice? A better solution for those worried would be to create semi circles around the stanchions where players can't hit. This would at least give a visual for players so they can recognize danger zones.

LostMyGlasses* is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 02:57 PM
  #53
Connecticut
Registered User
 
Connecticut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,773
vCash: 500
If Chara is the victim of Montreal retribution then the NHL will take some heat for this. My personal opinion is that if you cause an injury in the course of committing an otherwise clean hit, you're off the hook, but Chara was clearly committing interference and as such could easily have been suspended a handful of games, 3-4 would have been my call. We demand that players are responsible for their sticks and call them for accidental high sticks, I don't think this is extraordinarily different.

Connecticut is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:03 PM
  #54
xtr3m
Registered User
 
xtr3m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connecticut View Post
If Chara is the victim of Montreal retribution then the NHL will take some heat for this.
Another point. Though, I don't think anything will happen specifically to Chara. What Habs, or any other team for that matter, can do to him? Montreal will be finishing their checks, that's for sure.

Quote:
@MikeColligan
Part of Murphy's reasoning is that the 6-foot-9 Chara did not leave his feet to make the hit?

xtr3m is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:09 PM
  #55
Balls Mahoney
The Tryamkin Era!!!
 
Balls Mahoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: +7 495 695-37-76
Country: United States
Posts: 11,701
vCash: 500
at the Habs fans.

Balls Mahoney is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:14 PM
  #56
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Why was the hit unnecessary? Pacioretty attempted to 'chip and chase' past Chara. I don't think I've seen many players successfully do this at any area of the ice against Chara.

Any good defender will rub a player out after attempting a 'chip and chase'. Chara did it hard and mean, technically not against NHL rules.If the fans and media think the outcome of this particular hit was horrific, then they should be wondering why, when these hits happen on a near yearly basis, has a solution not been found regarding the stanchions? Why are stanchions still, to a great degree, unpadded?
If the hit was reckless, why is there no rule against hitting players in certain area's of the ice? A better solution for those worried would be to create semi circles around the stanchions where players can't hit. This would at least give a visual for players so they can recognize danger zones.
What do you mean "it's not against the rules"? It's textbook interference. The puck was nowhere near either of them and Chara was going to get beat so he got his pound of flesh from Pacioretty. I don't think he wanted that outcome but its clear he wanted to mash him. I don't think it deserved a lengthy suspension but he probably should have gotten a game or two, it was unnecessary.

Canucker is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:15 PM
  #57
Balls Mahoney
The Tryamkin Era!!!
 
Balls Mahoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: +7 495 695-37-76
Country: United States
Posts: 11,701
vCash: 500
So it's borderline two minute penalty then.

Balls Mahoney is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:17 PM
  #58
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
I'm sure a lot of people 'think' that, but there is absolutely no one who knows for sure except Chara, and he went on record as saying it was a complete accident; the unfortunate, and total fluke outcome of a physical play.

Without some sort of 'Inception-style' espionage you really can't prove it's anything but the way Chara explains it.
Total fluke outcome of a dangerous and illegal hit.

I'm not arguing they should suspend him for 10 games, but your interpretation is unnecessarily antiseptic. A "physical play"?

In the far, far other end of the spectrum, we don't know what Claude Lemieux was thinking when he hit Kris Draper. Unfortunate outcome of a physical play?

If Kesler went out tomorrow and just crushed Logan Couture with an absolutely "legal hit" where he didn't jump, but just crushed him, ruptured his spleen and broke five ribs, and did it with a "clean" hit with the caveat that Couture didn't have the puck, would that just be an unfortunate outcome of a physical play? In my mind, the NHL should look at a play and see if it's a legal hit. If it's not, and it results in something like this, then it should be punishable. If the provable intent isn't there, it should be 2-4 games.

I thought the Ladd interference hit/crosscheck on Kesler two years ago was similarly reckless with less severe results, but the NHL only really cares about these issues when it becomes necessarily from a PR perspective.

Proto is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:18 PM
  #59
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balls Mahoney View Post
So it's borderline two minute penalty then.

Canucker is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:22 PM
  #60
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
What do you mean "it's not against the rules"? It's textbook interference.
I meant its not against the rules to finish your check after a 'chip and chase' in a 'hard and mean' fashion.

It was borderline interference. That kind of hit happens in almost every game. Heck, Ballard and Hamhuis have thrown hip checks after 'chip and chases' that we've cheered.

Chara was given a hefty penalty for interference.
Quote:
The puck was nowhere near either of them and Chara was going to get beat so he got his pound of flesh from Pacioretty.
The puck had, a split second earlier, been chipped passed Chara.

Chara was going to finish that hit. In fact, I can't recall many instances where Chara has simply let a guy past him after a 'chip and chase'.

Most good defenders will tie that guy up. The best defensive defenders will take him out along the boards.
Quote:
I don't think he wanted that outcome but its clear he wanted to mash him.
I think its very clear he wanted to mash him. Like I said earlier, what do you think the leaders and coaching staff talk about before games against Montreal?


Quote:
I don't think it deserved a lengthy suspension but he probably should have gotten a game or two, it was unnecessary.
I think perhaps a game, tops. But in the end I think this was a hockey play. Chara took him out rough, and its unfortunate it happened in that area of the ice.

LostMyGlasses* is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:25 PM
  #61
smileyface
Registered User
 
smileyface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Why was the hit unnecessary? Pacioretty attempted to 'chip and chase' past Chara. I don't think I've seen many players successfully do this at any area of the ice against Chara.

Any good defender will rub a player out after attempting a 'chip and chase'. Chara did it hard and mean, technically not against NHL rules.

If the fans and media think the outcome of this particular hit was horrific, then they should be wondering why, when these hits happen on a near yearly basis, has a solution not been found regarding the stanchions? Why are stanchions still, to a great degree, unpadded?
If the hit was reckless, why is there no rule against hitting players in certain area's of the ice? A better solution for those worried would be to create semi circles around the stanchions where players can't hit. This would at least give a visual for players so they can recognize danger zones.
Pacioretty chips the puck ahead past Chara. Instead of going after the puck, Chara decides to rub him out on the board. I know he's supposed to finish his check but the puck was long gone and he interfered. There was even another Bruin defender farther into their zone so if he got beat it wasn't a breakaway for Pacioretty. That's why I think it's unnecessary.

smileyface is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:29 PM
  #62
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smileyface View Post
Pacioretty chips the puck ahead past Chara. Instead of going after the puck, Chara decides to rub him out on the board. I know he's supposed to finish his check but the puck was long gone and he interfered. There was even another Bruin defender farther into their zone so if he got beat it wasn't a breakaway for Pacioretty. That's why I think it's unnecessary.
This is pretty much 'as coached' for defensemen; it's how you deal with chip and chase plays...assuming you're close enough to eliminate the gap. That interference penalty is taken all the time.

Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:38 PM
  #63
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,911
vCash: 500
The Chara hit - a hockey play with an unfortunate injury. As Chara said:
"It's just one of those things…like glass extensions, doors, even hockey nets are part of the game and obviously players run into them.

"It's just very, very unfortunate that a player got hurt."
Mike Murphy's decsion:
"After a thorough review of the video I can find no basis to impose supplemental discipline. This hit resulted from a play that evolved and then happened very quickly -- with both players skating in the same direction and with Chara attempting to angle his opponent into the boards. I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent, left his feet or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous.

"This was a hockey play that resulted in an injury because of the player colliding with the stanchion and then the ice surface. In reviewing this play, I also took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career."
No need for supplementary discipline.

Wetcoaster is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:41 PM
  #64
smileyface
Registered User
 
smileyface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
This is pretty much 'as coached' for defensemen; it's how you deal with chip and chase plays...assuming you're close enough to eliminate the gap. That interference penalty is taken all the time.
I know it is. I'm just saying that as the hitter the onus is on him to realize when to let up on a hit. That area by the benches is dangerous because of stanchions and doors. Now I know the game happens at such high speed that maybe by the time he saw the stanchion it was too late. Accidental or not I believe he should have gotten at least a couple of games.

smileyface is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 03:58 PM
  #65
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,372
vCash: 500
Tanner Glass:

"I thought it was a dirty play. I thought he knew exactly what he was doing."

"If you polled 700 NHL players, 680 would say he knows exactly what he's doing and knows the turnbuckle is there."

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:00 PM
  #66
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit View Post
Tanner Glass:

"I thought it was a dirty play. I thought he knew exactly what he was doing."

"If you polled 700 NHL players, 680 would say he knows exactly what he's doing and knows the turnbuckle is there."
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
From Botchford:

Tanner glass on chara: 680 out 700 players would know exactly where they are on the ice

Glass on chara: "I thought it was a dirty play. I thought he knew exactly what he was doing."
Ding ding ding. And even if he didn't, it's still an illegal and reckless hit. The NHL just doesn't have the stones the NFL does when it comes to taking action to change the culture of the sport.

Wouldn't surprise me at all to see the headshot enforcement go the way of the "crackdown on obstruction". Big deal for a few years, then slowly fading into obscurity.

Proto is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:00 PM
  #67
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit View Post
Tanner Glass:

"I thought it was a dirty play. I thought he knew exactly what he was doing."

"If you polled 700 NHL players, 680 would say he knows exactly what he's doing and knows the turnbuckle is there."
Yeah but what would Glass know about tough hockey, right?

VanEric is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:01 PM
  #68
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanEric View Post
Yeah but what would Glass know about tough hockey, right?
As long as Pac learned his lesson about skating up the boards and trying to make a skill play around a defender.

Proto is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:06 PM
  #69
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,372
vCash: 500
I wonder where all this "the injury shouldn't matter!!!!1" talk was last year when Ovechkin was getting suspended last season.

Oh wait, the League addressed that:

"And so I think he has to be responsible in how he takes a [Brian] Campbell in, and what kind of position the other player's in. And he had moved the puck already, Campbell. Look, if there's no injury on the play, we probably, we don't do anything, but that's part of the supplemental discipline process. If you cause a player to be injured, then you have to be responsible for the play that you're involved in, if there's any carelessness or recklessness in it."

-Colin Campbell, May 2010

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:10 PM
  #70
xtr3m
Registered User
 
xtr3m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,220
vCash: 500
**** Campbell, seriously.

Even though "supposedly" he's not involved with decisions when it comes to Bruins. The man is a crook.

xtr3m is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:23 PM
  #71
Amused To Death
Registered User
 
Amused To Death's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Victoria
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 1,282
vCash: 1335
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanEric View Post
Yeah but what would Glass know about tough hockey, right?
That's a Boggle Challenge proclamation if I ever heard one

Amused To Death is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:30 PM
  #72
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,035
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
I do detest Colon Campbell for many reasons, but I thought they made the right decision. It was a smart hockey play at a bad spot on the ice. The ice surface may be too small for 5 on 5 at an NHL level.

International ice is something I'd like to see translated to the NHL game.

And I do hope Pacioretty make a full recovery.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:30 PM
  #73
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit View Post
Tanner Glass:

"I thought it was a dirty play. I thought he knew exactly what he was doing."

"If you polled 700 NHL players, 680 would say he knows exactly what he's doing and knows the turnbuckle is there."
Ya, but even then the opinion means jack and ****, and jack left town. Unless Chara comes out and admits he attempted to kill the guy you're out of luck.

Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:38 PM
  #74
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
Ya, but even then the opinion means jack and ****, and jack left town. Unless Chara comes out and admits he attempted to kill the guy you're out of luck.
That's not true at all. The Campbell quote that BES posted suggest that the league can also find intent if someone is reckless as to the consequences of their actions. If nearly every NHL player would have known that the turnbuckle was there, then Chara clearly acted recklessly on that play that resulted in a serious injury.

pitseleh is offline  
Old
03-09-2011, 04:42 PM
  #75
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
That's not true at all. The Campbell quote that BES posted suggest that the league can also find intent if someone is reckless as to the consequences of their actions. If nearly every NHL player would have known that the turnbuckle was there, then Chara clearly acted recklessly on that play that resulted in a serious injury.
There was no intent here according to the league; the ruling already happened. Wet posted the details earlier...as I said it's impossible to define intent in this situation. You may have a different opinion, but like I said, these opinions don't matter.

Even the Ovechkin hit on Campbell, the situation which most people stating this side of things seem to be referencing, the intent was much clearer.

Bobby Lou is online now  
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 11:10 AM.

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.