The 2010-2011 Suspension Thread

[hamstercaster 2]

My main beef with this type of hit is that like the Scott Stevens, the Matt Cooke, Mike Richards hits and the like is that you have players that to me at least, seem like they are waiting for a guy to be in a vulnerable position to throw a big hit. They are waiting for players that have their head down, looking elsewhere whatever the reason might be and just come in and destroy the guy. In the instance, arguably or not, Stajan is skating in mid ice with two guys playing D and backing up. These should be the two most important players for Stajan to worry about. He looks to his left, passes the puck and whamo, he gets destroyed. He doesn't even have time to turn his head back to the "middle" that he's being hit. He has no way of protecting himself whatsoever. You may say that a player should be aware of his surroundings at all time but is it really possible to be? It's not like Stajan admired his pass for 2 seconds. It took a fraction of a second after the pass for Staal to destroy him. When you are two on two, you usually worry about the two players that you are facing with your linemate and at the very least, expecting someone to come up from behind and steal the puck from you. Should you worry about someone coming from the blindside to knock you down? Perhaps but it's not always possible IMO. I think that the onus should fall on the hitter rather the the hitted as in this instance Staal saw a player in a vulnerable position and just went for the big hit which was rather unnecessary. He could just have skated and stayed with Stajan and he would have taken him out of the play as effectively. Instead he chose to take Stajan out of the game.

[WSjo22 1]

  On 11/23/2010 at 5:30 PM, hamstercaster said:

My main beef with this type of hit is that like the Scott Stevens, the Matt Cooke, Mike Richards hits and the like is that you have players that to me at least, seem like they are waiting for a guy to be in a vulnerable position to throw a big hit. They are waiting for players that have their head down, looking elsewhere whatever the reason might be and just come in and destroy the guy. In the instance, arguably or not, Stajan is skating in mid ice with two guys playing D and backing up. These should be the two most important players for Stajan to worry about. He looks to his left, passes the puck and whamo, he gets destroyed. He doesn't even have time to turn his head back to the "middle" that he's being hit. He has no way of protecting himself whatsoever. You may say that a player should be aware of his surroundings at all time but is it really possible to be? It's not like Stajan admired his pass for 2 seconds. It took a fraction of a second after the pass for Staal to destroy him. When you are two on two, you usually worry about the two players that you are facing with your linemate and at the very least, expecting someone to come up from behind and steal the puck from you. Should you worry about someone coming from the blindside to knock you down? Perhaps but it's not always possible IMO. I think that the onus should fall on the hitter rather the the hitted as in this instance Staal saw a player in a vulnerable position and just went for the big hit which was rather unnecessary. He could just have skated and stayed with Stajan and he would have taken him out of the play as effectively. Instead he chose to take Stajan out of the game.

Read more  

What if Staal does what you say and doesn't play the body and Stajan gets to the net and scores off a pass. Why should Staal risk giving up a goal because Stajan "couldn't protect himself"... This hit is nothing like the ones you refer too, he was in the middle of the ice and lost track of a defenseman that was in front of him.

[Habs21 0]

Well either way, it was deemed a legal hit according to the tsn website...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=342508

[Chadd 916]

  On 11/23/2010 at 5:47 PM, WSjo22 said:

What if Staal does what you say and doesn't play the body and Stajan gets to the net and scores off a pass. Why should Staal risk giving up a goal because Stajan "couldn't protect himself"... This hit is nothing like the ones you refer too, he was in the middle of the ice and lost track of a defenseman that was in front of him.

Read more  

The hit itself was clean and legal, no doubt about that. The issue I have is that it was so long after the puck was gone. Obviously that isn't a problem for the NHL, but how many of these hits are one, two or three seconds after the puck is gone? Like when a defensemen makes an outlet pass and you hear a "thump" after the forward collects the pass at the red line. It seems that the length of time you can hit a guy after he passes the puck gets longer and longer every year.

[WSjo22 1]

  On 11/23/2010 at 7:16 PM, Chadd said:

The hit itself was clean and legal, no doubt about that. The issue I have is that it was so long after the puck was gone. Obviously that isn't a problem for the NHL, but how many of these hits are one, two or three seconds after the puck is gone? Like when a defensemen makes an outlet pass and you hear a "thump" after the forward collects the pass at the red line. It seems that the length of time you can hit a guy after he passes the puck gets longer and longer every year.

Read more  

Valid point which I didn't even acknowledge when watching the video. What is the actual by the book rule for that? Why hasn't the league tried to enforce it more? If you look at the hits that have been the center of rule 48 how many of them have been considered late?

[Chadd 916]

  On 11/23/2010 at 8:05 PM, WSjo22 said:

If you look at the hits that have been the center of rule 48 how many of them have been considered late?

Read more  

According to the NHL, none of them

  On 11/23/2010 at 8:05 PM, WSjo22 said:

Why hasn't the league tried to enforce it more?

Read more  

Colin Campbell doesn't like the new standards and will do anything to allow as much physical play as possible. It all started before him, and that was thanks to Brian Burke and his preference for that style as well.

[camhockey16 5]

the other thing that annoys me is how easily most nhl players helmets can be knocked off which just adds to the problem.

[BenderHockey 127]

  On 11/23/2010 at 6:09 PM, Habs21 said:

Well either way, it was deemed a legal hit according to the tsn website...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=342508

Read more  

The TSN website said Staal hit Stajan's head. It looked to me like he caught far shoulder as Chippa said. Are they just trying to stir the pot here? What would be the motive for mis-reporting?

EDIT: spelling

[hamstercaster 2]

If you look at the video at the 54 second mark I believe (watched it yesterday), it's really hard to tell if he does or does not hit the head. To me it looks as if he hits the head which leads Stajan's head to go sideways and ultimatly lose his helmet. But I wear glasses and who knows, I may be up for a new prescription lol

[MattyBoy 1]

  On 11/24/2010 at 3:08 PM, hamstercaster said:

If you look at the video at the 54 second mark I believe (watched it yesterday), it's really hard to tell if he does or does not hit the head. To me it looks as if he hits the head which leads Stajan's head to go sideways and ultimatly lose his helmet. But I wear glasses and who knows, I may be up for a new prescription lol

Read more  

Watch the video again, to me it looks like he catches all shoulder and that's how his head snaps forward... if he hit his head it would've snapped backward.

[hamstercaster 2]

  On 11/24/2010 at 3:52 PM, MattyBoy said:

Watch the video again, to me it looks like he catches all shoulder and that's how his head snaps forward... if he hit his head it would've snapped backward.

Read more  

I've watched and rewatched it, paused it and I don't think it's as clear cut as you seem to think it is. Staal is coming from the side so Stajan's head would not necessarily go backwards

[zachary 2]

So I don't know how you guys were taught to play the defensive side of hockey but I know I learned that when a player has his head down to hit em. Head down or lookin the other way that is your own fault. You should know where the opposition is at all times when you posses the puck. Legitimate hit.

[BenderHockey 127]

  On 11/24/2010 at 4:06 PM, hamstercaster said:

I've watched and rewatched it, paused it and I don't think it's as clear cut as you seem to think it is. Staal is coming from the side so Stajan's head would not necessarily go backwards

Read more  

That screen capture is misleading. It is from after Staal hit his shoulder and Stajans head had already snapped forward.

[trevor13478 1]

  On 11/23/2010 at 7:16 PM, Chadd said:

The hit itself was clean and legal, no doubt about that. The issue I have is that it was so long after the puck was gone. Obviously that isn't a problem for the NHL, but how many of these hits are one, two or three seconds after the puck is gone? Like when a defensemen makes an outlet pass and you hear a "thump" after the forward collects the pass at the red line. It seems that the length of time you can hit a guy after he passes the puck gets longer and longer every year.

Read more  

i'm not a ref but I always thought the rule was up to three seconds after the puck is gone is fair game for a hit?

[mug25 2]

clean hit. keep the head up. end of story.

[Chadd 916]

  On 11/25/2010 at 4:00 AM, trevor13478 said:

i'm not a ref but I always thought the rule was up to three seconds after the puck is gone is fair game for a hit?

Read more  

The rule does not give a time frame, only that you are fair game if you are in possession of the puck. That means, until the next player catches the pass.

[burrn 0]

Well in this case, Staal did hit him before "the next player caught the puck".

And to me it doesn't seem like even 1 second after Stajan passed the puck, it was more like 0.2 or 0.3 seconds.

On the slowmo replay where it's slowed down and you already know whats going to happen, it does seem a long time, but it isn't. That's one thing that bugs me with these video reviews. Same with the "distinct kicking motion" thing, everything will look like a distinct kicking motion in slowmo.

Unless it's the case where the guy that "kicked" the puck didn't even know where the puck was.

Back to the Staal hit, I personally think it should be completely legal. Let's say he hit Stajan 0.3 seconds after he released the puck. Now, was it possible for Staal to decide to not hit him at exactly the moment he releases the puck? No way, and if that was demanded of every NHL player, well good news for Datsyuk. He would be able to deke the shit out of every man in the building. And that is exactly the reason you should play the body and not the puck.

0.1 to 0.2 seconds after the release of the puck, maybe yes, he could've made the decision, but that would't leave much time for evasion. Even if he did avoid the hit, the only thing he could've done to do so with the trajectory he was taking would be to put on the brakes and/or stop, which would've left Stajan wide open in the slot. Then, the hit stat wouldn't be the only thing at stake.

And I'm not saying this because I'm a Rangers fan or anything, either.

  On 11/23/2010 at 5:30 PM, hamstercaster said:

In the instance, arguably or not, Stajan is skating in mid ice with two guys playing D and backing up. These should be the two most important players for Stajan to worry about. He looks to his left, passes the puck and whamo, he gets destroyed. He doesn't even have time to turn his head back to the "middle" that he's being hit. He has no way of protecting himself whatsoever. You may say that a player should be aware of his surroundings at all time but is it really possible to be? It's not like Stajan admired his pass for 2 seconds. It took a fraction of a second after the pass for Staal to destroy him. When you are two on two, you usually worry about the two players that you are facing with your linemate and at the very least, expecting someone to come up from behind and steal the puck from you. Should you worry about someone coming from the blindside to knock you down? Perhaps but it's not always possible IMO. I think that the onus should fall on the hitter rather the the hitted as in this instance Staal saw a player in a vulnerable position and just went for the big hit which was rather unnecessary. He could just have skated and stayed with Stajan and he would have taken him out of the play as effectively. Instead he chose to take Stajan out of the game.

Read more  

Staal was one of the two.

[Buzz_LightBeer 974]

No suspension, hit was from the front, MAYBE Staals arm got some face, but he's got 3" on Stajan who was bent over skating at the time. Staal didnt follow through with an elbow, didnt leave his feet, and simply caught Stajan admiring a pass. If Staal lets him skate free, he goes 3v2 right to the front of the net. Keep your eyes up and strap your helmet on properly.

[Luminati 0]

That definately wasn't shot to the head. If he even caught Stajan face was on the follow through and rule states "lateral, back-pressure or blindside hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact." neither was the case and you can't call it blindside hit since Stajan was facing Staal. IMHO it was pretty much same thing as

the other day. Just gotta keep your head up, especially when entering dirty areas. The only thing that might be illegal about this hit is that Staal wanting to throw as big hit as possible seemed to leave his feet. Then again, it was nothing like this one:

and no one was penalized or fined. I always thought these types of hits were illegal. On the other hand though, the only player fined for it I can recall was Ovechkin.

[adam14 182]

I almost think Bourque should get a game or 2 for his spear against the kings last night.

[EBondo 233]

Jody Shelley. Thoughts on games? Because I think this without a doubt is dirty, and suspendable.

Mute if you don't want to listen to Edwards.

[lampliter87 8]

Definitely dirty, no question. Didn't entirely mind Edwards' call, fairly mild and accurate.

[Steve_v3 289]

  On 12/12/2010 at 9:58 PM, EBondo said:

Jody Shelley. Thoughts on games? Because I think this without a doubt is dirty, and suspendable.

Mute if you don't want to listen to Edwards.

Read more  

It was dirty for sure. The next period Andy Brickley said after talking to some people who follow the Flyers said Shelly isn't that type of player. That may be true but he gave him a push in the low back & Mcquaid wasn't even playing the puck.

As for Edwards I wish there was a button on my remote that could mute just his voice.

He has to be one of the most annoying announcers in the league.

[Habs21 0]

Ugh, I forgot to mute the volume. Definitely one of the top 3 most annoying announcers in the league.

I would say 4-5 games just because it was so retarded. Why the hell would you even do that? That could've been a broken neck right there. Ridiculous.

[EBondo 233]

  On 12/13/2010 at 1:14 AM, SfDz5_20_07 said:

It was dirty for sure. The next period Andy Brickley said after talking to some people who follow the Flyers said Shelly isn't that type of player. That may be true but he gave him a push in the low back & Mcquaid wasn't even playing the puck.

Read more  

Doesn't seem like he is that type of player from what I've experienced of him so far. He knows the line and rarely crosses it, but I agree on the stupidity that Habs21 talked about. I don't care if you're trying to get past him or not, it's just unnecessary. I feel Shelley is worthless though. I would much rather have Carbomb on the ice, at least he has some sort of a skillset. I don't know how many games he's going to get, but anything to get him off the ice.

Regarding the hit also, Macquaid came back later in the game. They always seem to factor that into the decision.