HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Raffi Torres Suspended 4 Games

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-06-2011, 03:37 PM
  #26
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
I'm still a bit foggy on these rules, it's pretty clear that wasn't a blind-side hit to the head...even though the primary contact is shoulder-to-head is it still apply under those rules if the player initiating the contact comes from the front?
I think if the hit-ee is in a vulnerable position where he can't defend himself and the head will take the full impact of the hit they want the hitter to take responsibility and pull up. Even though Eberle should be protecting himself that doesn't mean the onus is off Torres to make sure he's not going to potentially injure someone in a vulnerabe position.

There's just too much potential for a head injury on that play and the league wants the players to take it upon themselves to help protect one another and show some respect for their peers. Considering what we're starting to learn about the longterm effects of head injuries I think it's the only logical course of action.

Unfortunately this will probably really hurt Torres' physical game come playoff time. IIRC he didn't throw another devastating hit for a very long time following the Michalek hit. That's too bad as he was just starting to ramp up his physicality.

Drop the Sopel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:38 PM
  #27
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 500
If an Edmonton player made that exact same hit to Daniel Sedin, we'd all be screaming bloody murder.

I've given up on predicting what Colin Campbell might do in any given situation, but I'll be shocked if Torres isn't suspended for at least one game, and I think two is more likely. I could envision as many as three games.

It's far from the worst hit we'll ever see, but the League is trying to crack down on hits to the head. The problem for Torres is that Eberle's head is the principal point of contact, and you could argue that he actually targets the head.

A year ago, we're not having this discussion. Unfortunately for Torres, the goal posts have shifted a little.

Alan Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:38 PM
  #28
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,366
vCash: 500
This league really is becoming complete ********. Clifford's hit on Tanev was way more dangerous, irresponsible and outside the frame of the play.

Bobby Lou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:39 PM
  #29
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
I think if the hit-ee is in a vulnerable position where he can't defend himself and the head will take the full impact of the hit they want the hitter to take responsibility and pull up.
You mean?:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
If an Edmonton player made that exact same hit to Daniel Sedin, we'd all be screaming bloody murder.
Same game as above clip. Doughty tried to nail Daniel (re: goal he scored).

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:45 PM
  #30
cc
Registered User
 
cc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,099
vCash: 500
it wasn't an elbow and it wasn't a true blind side hit as he came right him. It was a headshot but headshots are initself not illegal.

torres received a major for interference.

it would be unbelievable if he received a suspension for the hit.

cc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:46 PM
  #31
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
You mean?:




Same game as above clip. Doughty tried to nail Daniel (re: goal he scored).
That could have been a suspension as well but the circumstances are quite a bit different. Tanev looked like he was going to take the puck behind the net but reversed at the last moment and Clifford wasn't going to stop his forward momentum with the speed at which both players were going after the puck. IMO that's more unavoidable than the Torres hit. Especially for a guy like Clifford who is mentally slow at the best of times...

Drop the Sopel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:46 PM
  #32
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Same game as above clip. Doughty tried to nail Daniel (re: goal he scored).
They should just call it a blanket 'hit to the head' rule because that's certainly how it's being interpreted (seems to have nothing to do with blind-siding anyone). Apparently Doughty can blind-side Daniel at his leisure, and Clifford can basically attempt to murder Chris Tanev.

Bobby Lou is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:49 PM
  #33
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
You mean?:




Same game as above clip. Doughty tried to nail Daniel (re: goal he scored).
I don't like that hit but Tanev has to accept some of the blame for allowing himself to get in a position where he can get nailed like that. He clearly looked over his shoulder before he went into the boards with Clifford and still turned into the hit. Clifford could have softened up knowing how they were going in but he didn't and hit Tanev square in the numbers. Personally I'm glad he never got a suspension for that hit...both players need to be smarter in that situation.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:52 PM
  #34
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc View Post
it wasn't an elbow and it wasn't a true blind side hit as he came right him. It was a headshot but headshots are initself not illegal.

torres received a major for interference.

it would be unbelievable if he received a suspension for the hit.
He actually got a major for elbowing....surprise, surprise. His elbow was attached to his hip until after he followed through. But thats NHL reffing for you.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 03:55 PM
  #35
FiveAndGame
Registered User
 
FiveAndGame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
That could have been a suspension as well but the circumstances are quite a bit different. Tanev looked like he was going to take the puck behind the net but reversed at the last moment and Clifford wasn't going to stop his forward momentum with the speed at which both players were going after the puck. IMO that's more unavoidable than the Torres hit. Especially for a guy like Clifford who is mentally slow at the best of times...
Yes but Torres wasn't going to stop his forward momentum with the speed at which both players were going after the puck.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a one game suspension and a nice fine.
The league is ridiculous, how about they make a single sound-minded judgement about a play and then stick with it. Absolutely ********.

FiveAndGame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:02 PM
  #36
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveAndGame View Post
Yes but Torres wasn't going to stop his forward momentum with the speed at which both players were going after the puck.
Torres wasn't going forward when he hit Eberle - Torres veered hard left in an attempt to murder the kid... It's no coincidence Torres had his gloves off before Eberle hit the ice - he knew what he was doing and wanted to inflict damage.

If Raffi Torres displays that type of judgement in close playoff games we're in serious trouble. I know Torres never managed to get his grade 10 but that was stupidity at it's finest.

Hopefully Torres can be a physical presence come playoff time but within the rules. Unfortunately this could really muzzle his feisty side.

Drop the Sopel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:04 PM
  #37
Trends Analyst
Squirrel!
 
Trends Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc View Post
it wasn't an elbow and it wasn't a true blind side hit as he came right him. It was a headshot but headshots are initself not illegal.
Yes, according to Rule 48 they are.

A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted.

Trends Analyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:06 PM
  #38
Trends Analyst
Squirrel!
 
Trends Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,613
vCash: 500

Trends Analyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:08 PM
  #39
FiveAndGame
Registered User
 
FiveAndGame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Torres wasn't going forward when he hit Eberle - Torres veered hard left in an attempt to murder the kid... It's no coincidence Torres had his gloves off before Eberle hit the ice - he knew what he was doing and wanted to inflict damage.

If Raffi Torres displays that type of judgement in close playoff games we're in serious trouble. I know Torres never managed to get his grade 10 but that was stupidity at it's finest.

Hopefully Torres can be a physical presence come playoff time but within the rules. Unfortunately this could really muzzle his feisty side.
He dropped the gloves because that is the inevitable outcome of these situation. He was doing what third line grinders are supposed to do, trying to spark the team through terrible reffing and a bad game with some really good physical hockey.

FiveAndGame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:11 PM
  #40
Pump n Dump
Registered User
 
Pump n Dump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Light Mosquito View Post
Yes, according to Rule 48 they are.

A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted.
If that is the only rule on the matter, then you just made cc's point.

Pump n Dump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:12 PM
  #41
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveAndGame View Post
He dropped the gloves because that is the inevitable outcome of these situation. He was doing what third line grinders are supposed to do, trying to spark the team through terrible reffing and a bad game with some really good physical hockey.


He's 'supposed' to let up on a hit when the opposing player is in a vulnerable position and the principle point of contact will be the head.

If Eberle doesn't get up from that hit, say goodbye to Torres for the entire 1st round. Raffi got lucky.

Drop the Sopel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:15 PM
  #42
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,376
vCash: 500
I hope he gets a 2 game suspension..... so he's well rested for the playoffs.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:15 PM
  #43
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
He's 'supposed' to let up on a hit when the opposing player is in a vulnerable position and the principle point of contact will be the head.

If Eberle doesn't get up from that hit, say goodbye to Torres for the entire 1st round. Raffi got lucky.
This would only be a logically sound position if the NHL enforced any sort of consistent regulation on hits like this. As was demonstrated earlier in the thread, these kind of hits are fairly routine in the NHL and are rarely penalized -- and if they are, it's usually two minutes for interference. There was no elbow on the play. The only difference here is that the Oilers have a whiny, pathetic executive crying in the media

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:16 PM
  #44
Trends Analyst
Squirrel!
 
Trends Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fifty Fifty View Post
If that is the only rule on the matter, then you just made cc's point.
Unfortunately it is not.

If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion

Trends Analyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:18 PM
  #45
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,550
vCash: 500
Also, the Doughty hit was worse in my opinion. He didn't hit Daniel Sedin in the head, but he blindsided him and clearly left his feet to try to injure him in a vulnerable position, but the NHL didn't review it and the referees on the ice didn't determine it warranted a penalty.

Clearly not as dangerous as Alex Burrows vicious crosscheck last night that helped earn the Canucks a 4 minute 5 on 3

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:18 PM
  #46
Trends Analyst
Squirrel!
 
Trends Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fifty Fifty View Post
If that is the only rule on the matter, then you just made cc's point.
I fail to see how your are missing the wording of the rule though. If the principal point of contact is the head (which it was) then the hit is illegal.

"....principal point of contact is not permitted." is the last line in the rule, principal point of contact being the head.

Trends Analyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:19 PM
  #47
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Light Mosquito View Post
Yes, according to Rule 48 they are.

A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted.
umm you just proved what cc was said. The blindside hit where the head is targetted/primary point of contact is illegal.

A headshot in and of itself is not illegal according to the rule book. The rule is not a Blindside hit OR hit to the head but rather a blindside hit AND hit to the head. It's not either-or it's both. This hit was not lateral (i.e. from the blindside. Eberle saw him and knew he was there). note: the and/or applies to the sentence fragment defining the targeting of the head or actually amking contact...taking into account intent but a possible miss (like Heatley on Ott). That and/or does not apply in a blindside hit OR head shot type of manner as if they are two potentially different things.

Of course the league the past 12 months is in the mode of making stuff up as they go along....as is their right.

tantalum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:20 PM
  #48
Trends Analyst
Squirrel!
 
Trends Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tantalum View Post
umm you just proved what cc was said. The blindside hit where the head is targetted/primary point of contact is illegal.

A headshot in and of itself is not illegal according to the rule book. The rule is not a Blindside hit OR hit to the head but rather a blindside hit AND hit to the head. It's not either-or it's both.

Of course the league the past 12 months is in the mode of making stuff up as they go along....as is their right.
It clearly says "lateral or blindside" and then again "and/or" in the rule does it not?

Trends Analyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:21 PM
  #49
Anderson55
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
Thats your opinion. Yeah he was vulnerable, yeah he was hit in the head...he wasn't blindsided, he wasn't elbowed and his head was lowered...Eberle knew he could get hit and he still lunged to play the puck, Torres chose not to and played the man. Don't purposely put yourself in vulnerable positions when you know you can get hit, and then not expect to get hammered. Hockey 101.
Thank you, lost in all this is the players getting hit flat out protecting themselves. This hit to me was no more suspendable than Bertuzzi's last week. It would have been impossible for Torres to hit Eberle anywhere else, if this is an illegal hit than take hitting out of hockey already and they can play like 8 year old houseleague kids.

Anderson55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-06-2011, 04:23 PM
  #50
Shorthander
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
If Mitchell made that hit today, he'd likely be looking at a suspension. At minimum, there would be some discussion about it. I think the Torres hit is a more blatant hit to the head.
What the hell? Why would Mitchell get suspended? That was a perfectly clean hit with zero room for debate on the matter.

This hysteria surrounding every hit is getting ridiculous

Shorthander 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 08:33 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.