Canucks @ Leafs - Nov. 5th, 7:00pm - CBC, Fan 590

[TML fan]

Not illegal, but I wouldn't call it clean.

Charging is absolutely against the rules.

Yeah fair enough. I meant the blindside part.

 

[Bullfrog]

I'm pretty ok with how it all went down, the penalty, no suspension. Yeah I wouldn't want to see one of our guys get rocked like that but this isn't a no contact sport.

That's exactly where I am. A 5-minute major penalty was issued, which is an admission is was a dirty hit. The punishment was appropriate. I'd be pissed if it was one of our guys, but I'd live with the penalty.

 

[Bullfrog]

I don't think it was charging either, even though he got called for it.  The charging rule is incredibly vague, though.

It's a tricky one. I'm OK with the penalty call. One on side he didn't leave his feet and he didn't stride into the hit; he just glided. The charging aspect I think is that he glided so far into the hit.

 

[Coco-puffs]

I don't think it was charging either, even though he got called for it.  The charging rule is incredibly vague, though.

It's a tricky one. I'm OK with the penalty call. One on side he didn't leave his feet and he didn't stride into the hit; he just glided. The charging aspect I think is that he glided so far into the hit.

Gliding into a hit isn't in itself the issue... its the speed that he was going that made it charging.  Whether he glided or took strides, hitting someone violently (but still legal in terms of shoulder-to-shoulder) from the blindside going at that speed is going to get a reaction from the opposite team and most likely the refs.  I'm ok with the 5 min charging call, as he absolutely flew into him with reckless abandon.  But without the head being the principal point of contact, no suspension is warranted.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

The scariest thought to come out of this game is that Prust might get a contract before December 3rd. :'(

 

[TBLeafer]

I'm happy as a leafs fan, but if this was the same play, say, Burrows on say, Matthews, and there was zero games, I'd be losing my @#it.

That's basically where I'm at. I think a couple games was warranted here. Felt like a predatory hit to me, and, if it happened to a player on the Leafs, we'd all be calling for that player's head.

Doesn't mean we'd get it though.

Remember Ovechkin? That was WAY worse and he got off scott free.

 

[Kin]

Gliding into a hit isn't in itself the issue... its the speed that he was going that made it charging.  Whether he glided or took strides, hitting someone violently (but still legal in terms of shoulder-to-shoulder) from the blindside going at that speed is going to get a reaction from the opposite team and most likely the refs.  I'm ok with the 5 min charging call, as he absolutely flew into him with reckless abandon.  But without the head being the principal point of contact, no suspension is warranted.

That's more or less how I saw the play. The issue isn't leaving the feet, it's the distance/speed + it being a blindside hit. That Sedin didn't get seriously hurt on the play seems more like good luck rather than any actual design on Kadri's part.

As to the issue of suspension, I think that's a hit the League should want to get rid of for being as dangerous as it is so were it my league I'd probably attach a suspension to it.

 

[TBLeafer]

That's more or less how I saw the play. The issue isn't leaving the feet, it's the distance/speed + it being a blindside hit. That Sedin didn't get seriously hurt on the play seems more like good luck rather than any actual design on Kadri's part.

As to the issue of suspension, I think that's a hit the League should want to get rid of for being as dangerous as it is so were it my league I'd probably attach a suspension to it.

It was proposed and shot down.  Apparently the league doesn't want to remove all hockey from hockey just yet.

 

[Kin]

It was proposed and shot down.

Right, I disagree with the league on this one. I can see how you missed that. 

 

[TBLeafer]

It was proposed and shot down.

Right, I disagree with the league on this one. I can see how you missed that.

Sure, if you want the NHL to become more and more soccer-like.

 

[Kin]

Sure, if you want the NHL to become more and more soccer-like.

With regards to the number of players concussed, I sure would.

 

[TBLeafer]

Sure, if you want the NHL to become more and more soccer-like.

With regards to the number of players concussed, I sure would.

Or just be aware of the risks involved in the sport you signed up for.

NFL and CFL has its share of concussions, too.

Replace helmets with flags for good, eh?

 

[Kin]

Or just be aware of the risks involved in the sport you signed up for.

I didn't sign up for any sport. My interest is as a fan. My interest is in having players at the top of the sport healthy and playing. I also have a humanitarian interest in not seeing players who played, who I grew to like as a fan, suffer the effects of brain damage later in life and the tragedies it can result in. While those risks can't be eliminated entirely, they can be mitigated and all of us as fans will have a line we want to see drawn as to what is or isn't an acceptable level of danger for these players.

I disagree with where the NHL has set the line here. You will, unfortunately, have to again learn to live with disagreement.

 

[Bill_Berg]

A related article, or part of it is related. The first half talks about the 10-0 Habs loss, can't talk enough about that! Ever!

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/goes-brown-weekend-wrap-nhl-ban-blindside-hits/

I think it's a good plan to remove this kind of hitting from the game. The NFL already has rules protecting defenseless receivers. A similar rule would be appropriate in the NHL. 

 

[TBLeafer]

IMO, there's a fine line between humanitarianism and over-regulating and restricting that sport as a fan or otherwise.

Personal awareness and accountability needs to remain a thing in hockey.  For the good of the sport.  As does a good, bone crushing body check as long as it isn't a hit from behind, to the head or done with malicious intent to injure.

Chin straps need to functional, though. And East West blind sides deserve to stay legal. The onus on the puck carrier to be aware and keep your head up still needs to be a thing.  That is hockey, unless you're in Atom of below.

Being able to deke end to end with your head down, completely unaware of your surroundings without potential consequence has no business in competitive hockey at a high level. 

 

[hockeyfan1]

My issue with the hit was the vulnerability of the player. He was in the middle of taking a shot. There was no way he could protect himself. The fact that it was charging and a blindside is why I thought it was dirty. Kadri knew what he was doing.

Not illegal, but I wouldn't call it clean.

No charging hit is clean, no matter how it's done.  The fact that Kadri avoided hitting him blindsidedly on the head, but rather the shoulder, is why this is deemed a dirty but 'clean' hit.

The fact that it was a Sedin may have added fuel to the fire.  Really though, it could have been any player and the description of Kadri's actions would have been the same.

The vulnerability of the player can be taken into question since the intent was to stop him in his tracks.  Whether that was worth a suspension or not, that was up for interpretation (by the league).  Obviously, as per rules, since the head wasn't hit though it was a blindside, it was theoretically a charging infraction and ut was left at that.

 

[Kin]

Just about every change in the interest in safety has been met with the wailing and gnashing of teeth that assured us that if we don't keep helmetless players or no instigating penalty or goons on every shift that hockey as we know it will descend into some proto-European shinny league that doesn't meet some moronic requisite level of machismo.

Yawn.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

We are in such a weird time in hockey, it's like we haven't yet reconciled the eyeball test and the numbers.

You have a fan base where half the people are talking about hope and the other half talking about what can be quantified and there is a real disconnect between the two.

I hope there is a middle ground and if not, at the very least people can recognize when they are involved in a debate with someone who in large part, views the game differently than them and in turn agree to disagree.

One thing the people on the "eyeball" side need to concede though is that you can't argue  that your perception is more or less accurate than the raw data, over time stats don't really lie.

 

[Kin]

Steven Jay Gould liked to say that Religion and Science applied to "Non-Overlapping Magisteria". They were answering different questions. The what and the why.

I think the middle ground is recognizing that some discussions are fact-based and some aren't. Not all of them have to be. But what you hope for and what you think should be different things.

 

[TBLeafer]

Yeah, well at some point a line needs to be drawn when it comes to impeding a team's defensive options in full contact hockey and it appears that it has.