Posted:
#26
Quote Originally Posted by Polar_Bear:
Thanks for the great post Valdy. Some great points you make and I appreciate your view on the incident and can understand where you're coming from. My biggest issue with it is that we have to follow the rulebook in these situations or what good is it? I think when we get into mind reading then we start getting into some wide open and dangerous ground, because no man can actually get into another's head. I get the catching the jaw as the hit followed through part, however the initial contact was the shoulder and that is supposed to be what is looked at and considered in the situation for the most part.
Thanks for the great post Valdy. Some great points you make and I appreciate your view on the incident and can understand where you're coming from. My biggest issue with it is that we have to follow the rulebook in these situations or what good is it? I think when we get into mind reading then we start getting into some wide open and dangerous ground, because no man can actually get into another's head. I get the catching the jaw as the hit followed through part, however the initial contact was the shoulder and that is supposed to be what is looked at and considered in the situation for the most part.
The Spezza hit last night is a terrific example of why this is upsetting to me. That hit on Spezza last night was much more punishable than both the Torres hit and the Gryba hit in the Montreal/Ottawa series yet not even a 2 minute minor. If Spezza flops to the ice last night and fakes injury getting helped off the ice do they call a penalty and is there a suspension today? I would hope so because there was much more contact to the head/face in the Spezza hit last night than either one of those other hits. The elbow of the Penguins player was held up high and it drove right into the face of Spezza with serious impact, snapping Spezzas head right back with force. How that is not a direct blow to the head is beyond me. Which is kind of what led to me post this thread. It just seems to me like the league more and more just calls what they see fit, when they see fit, regardless of the printed rules and regulations of the league. I respect the fact the other players were injured but Eller was injured when his face hit the ice not from the hit imo, but I was ok with the 1 game suspension and maybe even a game for Torres just because of his history, but to affect the outcome of an entire series is completely overboard for what I personally saw as a good hit.
Excellent points again. My personal view is that the rule book is strictly a guide for on ice officials to interpret at the time of the incident , who is involved and yes did injury occur on that type of play. SD-Jones writes the " clean hit " could of been worse. I can only comment on what happened and not speculate. That is when we get into what another mans intent is or isn't . The off ice upper echelon seem to run with the "magic 8 ball " reasons and length of suspension to deal with the incidents as they occur and way to send a message during the current season.Torres plays on the edge , he put himself in that position . I would still like to think that had , more contact with the shoulder or body and less head would move Shanahan to no or greatly reduced suspension . Torres HAS to know hitting that high on the body and with speed could lead to what happened especially when he is a marked man. Any player has to be cognizant of their speed the vulnerability of the player when they make the decision to make contact.
I can't agree more with you Polar Bear on the Spezza hit , I thought wow , that was a little high. To Spezza's credit he got up a tad slow but said today no worse for wear he said he got caught reaching ( was it Adams that made the hit) the player finished his check to hurt. Spezza is obviously not fuelling any fire but I thought this check needs to be reviewed . Does GM Murray send to the league for review and then puts his team into a position that the next on ice stripes use phantom calls to use as pay back for questioning their judgement in a previous contest?
0
I will let this go, I understand I have different take on this and no reason to bring it up again. Not sure why I gots to be so agruementative.
Hot Forum Topics
