Thornton ejected in his return to Boston

[Cheechoo 0]

Joe Thornton was ejected about 5 minutes into the Sharks' game against the Bruins for a supposed check from behind. Replays showed clearly that it was a shoulder-to-shoulder hit. It should not even have been a penalty, let alone a game misconduct. I have often defended refs for missing calls, but making up bogus calls just stinks. So much for the hype about his return to Boston.

[jason37 2]

Weak call

[Adam91 0]

Too bad for him and the Sharks. I think the guy would've had a huge game. He still managed to put up an assist in only a few shifts.

[Cheechoo 0]

Too bad for him and the Sharks. I think the guy would've had a huge game. He still managed to put up an assist in only a few shifts.

That was Scott Thornton who assisted on the first goal, not Joe.

[hurricane 0]

BAD CALL!!!!REFS ARE KILLING THE GAME!!!--GUYS ARE GOING TO BE AFRAID TO HIT.

[pldhockey4 0]

TERRIBLE CALL

why didnt they review it?

is that legal? i mean they review goals..

[Eazy_b97 1]

can't review penalties.

[hurricane 0]

can't review penalties.

You would'nt want accountability! theres no place for it in the workplace why Hockey! :lol: :lol:

[donkey87 0]

Bad call, but fortunately SJ won. Not sure what the ref was thinking. It's hockey and it's a contact sport, and that was some good contact.

[pldhockey4 0]

i just saw the replay on espn and the guy thornton hit didnt even think he should of gotten ejected for it.

[donkey87 0]

Perhaps the ref might consider the use of corrective lenses? The one complaint that I have about the "new" NHL is the lack of hitting. Player are not hitting because they are afraid to take penalties. If the refs want to call something, there is a lot of other stuff they can look at.

[Cheechoo 0]

Here's the refs explanation:

"From my view, where I'm standing on the ice, to me it's a direct hit from behind. The player that got hit is defenseless. Under the rule book, I really have no choice but to give five and a game misconduct.''

What I don't understand is how soemone can hurt his shoulder if he got hit from behind. Hal Gill was in obvious discomfort and was holding his right shoulder. That's because Thornton hit him on left shoulder and the right shoulder went into the boards, so there's no way it could have been from behind.

[chippa13 1844]

When I first saw the hit at full speed I knew it would be a penalty. It looked a lot worse live than in the replays. I wasn't expecting Joe to get the gate. The penalty should have been boarding and a minor.

[chippa13 1844]

Here's the refs explanation:

"From my view, where I'm standing on the ice, to me it's a direct hit from behind. The player that got hit is defenseless. Under the rule book, I really have no choice but to give five and a game misconduct.''

What I don't understand is how soemone can hurt his shoulder if he got hit from behind. Hal Gill was in obvious discomfort and was holding his right shoulder. That's because Thornton hit him on left shoulder and the right shoulder went into the boards, so there's no way it could have been from behind.

Gill actually suffered a pinched nerve in his neck. But why let facts get in the way of a good whining session. Also, it is very easy to hurt your shoulder on a hit from behind since most guys will try to brace themselves for the impact of heading into the boards.

[Chadd 916]

As a ref, you call what it looks like. It may have looked like a hit from behind from his angle. I am surprised by the fact he had the balls to make that type of call on a star player.

[chippa13 1844]

As a ref, you call what it looks like. It may have looked like a hit from behind from his angle. I am surprised by the fact he had the balls to make that type of call on a star player.

Exactly. Plus, he has to make the call on the spot. He can't stop and think about it for 5 minutes before making the call.

[crutesie 0]

As a ref, you call what it looks like. It may have looked like a hit from behind from his angle. I am surprised by the fact he had the balls to make that type of call on a star player.

Exactly. Plus, he has to make the call on the spot. He can't stop and think about it for 5 minutes before making the call.

And he doesnt have action replays.

[sdh 0]

Here's the refs explanation:

"From my view, where I'm standing on the ice, to me it's a direct hit from behind. The player that got hit is defenseless. Under the rule book, I really have no choice but to give five and a game misconduct.''

What I don't understand is how soemone can hurt his shoulder if he got hit from behind. Hal Gill was in obvious discomfort and was holding his right shoulder. That's because Thornton hit him on left shoulder and the right shoulder went into the boards, so there's no way it could have been from behind.

wasn't there a second boarding call later in the game? if so, why didn't that one have a game misconduct?

I've seen more blatant (and dangerous) boarding penalties that didn't result in game miconducts.

it was a strange call.

[Eazy_b97 1]

There was one on the Leaf game that same night which threw Colaiacovo into the boards and took him out for the rest of the period. Cola was a foot away from the boards skating to the puck when he was hit from the side and went down very dangerously into the boards. That was only a 2 minute minor as well. There doesn't seem to be alot of consistancy among referees.

[chippa13 1844]

Here's the refs explanation:

"From my view, where I'm standing on the ice, to me it's a direct hit from behind. The player that got hit is defenseless. Under the rule book, I really have no choice but to give five and a game misconduct.''

What I don't understand is how soemone can hurt his shoulder if he got hit from behind.  Hal Gill was in obvious discomfort and was holding his right shoulder.  That's because Thornton hit him on left shoulder and the right shoulder went into the boards, so there's no way it could have been from behind.

wasn't there a second boarding call later in the game? if so, why didn't that one have a game misconduct?

I've seen more blatant (and dangerous) boarding penalties that didn't result in game miconducts.

it was a strange call.

The penalty called on Thornton was "Checking from Behind" and not "Boarding". There is a difference between these two calls. You can get a Boarding penalty even with a clean check since the penalty is propelling an opposing player violently into the boards.

Per the NHL rulebook: 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.

This is Checking from behind: Any player who cross-checks, pushes or charges from behind an opponent who is unable to defend himself, shall be assessed a major and a game misconduct. This penalty applies anywhere on the playing surface.

[donkey87 0]

I've seen more blatant (and dangerous) boarding penalties that didn't result in game miconducts.

it was a strange call.

If a player is injured due to the hit and the ref calls a penalty, the rules require that a game misconduct be given. If the player is not injured than it is just a 2 or 5 min. penalty depending on the degree of violence.