Supplemental Discipline 2016-2017

[chippa13 1844]

1 minute ago, Stewie said:

He's essentially admitting guilt in this case. No need for an in person hearing, he will likely just accept what is given to him. As for the actual action, I feel like he meant to go accross the body and like his shot aim for much of the last two seasons, missed. Not sure how he pulled that off, maybe off balance. That said, he still hit a guy in the face with a stick. Based on a lack of history and serious injury I think he will get 6 games, but probably deserves more. 

He knew exactly where he was aiming and his balance was just fine.

[IPv6Freely 2092]

Only 6 games. Way too few. 

[IPv6Freely 2092]

Vermette gets the 10 game automatic suspension for abuse of official. He's likely going to appeal, and likely going to lose. There's just no excuse for the incident. The fact that he stood there for a few seconds before acting tells me he had plenty of time to think about what he was about to do. 

I don't care if it is "just a tap" as some people are suggesting. That doesn't somehow make it legal. You just don't touch the officials.

Anything less than the 10 games will (and should) cause the NHLOA to lose their shit. 

[adam14 182]

I can't believe nyquist only got 6 games.

[Jamarquan 201]

On February 16, 2017 at 6:40 PM, IPv6Freely said:

Vermette gets the 10 game automatic suspension for abuse of official. He's likely going to appeal, and likely going to lose. There's just no excuse for the incident. The fact that he stood there for a few seconds before acting tells me he had plenty of time to think about what he was about to do. 

I don't care if it is "just a tap" as some people are suggesting. That doesn't somehow make it legal. You just don't touch the officials.

Anything less than the 10 games will (and should) cause the NHLOA to lose their shit. 

A podcast I listen to was talking about this, and referenced David Clarkson jumping the bench. Did he really do anything? No. Did he break a rule where the punishment is ten games? Yes. Done. 

 

They also talked about Nyquist. 6 games is a joke, he could have made Spurgeon into Bryan Berard. Doesn't matter if the guy who gets shot is okay, you still shot him. 

[IPv6Freely 2092]

Roman Polak suspended 2 games.

I'm honestly a bit surprised as I didn't think this even warranted a major (whereas the hit on Bergeron should have been 5 instead of 2, and this one wasn't nearly as bad). The injury came from him hitting his head on the ice, not from the hit. I don't think the hit was dirty as there was not any sort of jumping or arms extended/up or anything like that. It was just unfortunate that he turned the way he did (to push the puck backwards) just before he got crunched. 

 

 

[marka 526]

Howdy,

Ristonainen out for 3 games for the hit on Guentzel.

 

Really didn't like the way it looked when he tried to get up.

Mark

[IPv6Freely 2092]

24 minutes ago, marka said:

Howdy,

Ristonainen out for 3 games for the hit on Guentzel.

 

Really didn't like the way it looked when he tried to get up.

Mark

That's an EASY interference call. However, I don't know previous history but on a clean record I think 3 is excessive. 

[icewalker_bg 126]

Very excessive. Nothing more than interference here. Its a tiny nhl player hitting a wall, thats all it is. 

[IPv6Freely 2092]

1 minute ago, icewalker_bg said:

Very excessive. Nothing more than interference here. Its a tiny nhl player hitting a wall, thats all it is. 

Really starting to wonder if the injury is becoming more and more important in the suspension criteria. 

[Kgbeast 195]

5 hours ago, IPv6Freely said:

Roman Polak suspended 2 games.

I'm honestly a bit surprised as I didn't think this even warranted a major (whereas the hit on Bergeron should have been 5 instead of 2, and this one wasn't nearly as bad). The injury came from him hitting his head on the ice, not from the hit. I don't think the hit was dirty as there was not any sort of jumping or arms extended/up or anything like that. It was just unfortunate that he turned the way he did (to push the puck backwards) just before he got crunched. 

 

 

If you look at the angle from behind the glass, it looks like Polak pushed him in the glass face first. Bjorkstrand appears to be out cold when he hit the ice. You can see he is a jello at that point. He had a puck so I think the hit was ok, but it was in the head, so the part is not cool.

[IPv6Freely 2092]

7 minutes ago, Kgbeast said:

If you look at the angle from behind the glass, it looks like Polak pushed him in the glass face first. Bjorkstrand appears to be out cold when he hit the ice. You can see he is a jello at that point. He had a puck so I think the hit was ok, but it was in the head, so the part is not cool.

It wasn't in the head at all. At least, Polak didn't touch his head at all. I've no doubt his head hit the glass, though. 

[flip12 714]

On 3/23/2017 at 6:40 PM, IPv6Freely said:

Roman Polak suspended 2 games.

I'm honestly a bit surprised as I didn't think this even warranted a major (whereas the hit on Bergeron should have been 5 instead of 2, and this one wasn't nearly as bad). The injury came from him hitting his head on the ice, not from the hit. I don't think the hit was dirty as there was not any sort of jumping or arms extended/up or anything like that. It was just unfortunate that he turned the way he did (to push the puck backwards) just before he got crunched.  

 

As Polak was assessed a major boarding penalty, it appears the refs on the ice interpreted the turn as less an unfortunate decision and rather as a natural play to which Polak failed to appropriately adjust his physical defense strategy.

The language on boarding distinctly anticipates the necessity of making such judgment calls.

"41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule."

From my personal perspective, there was time to minimize the resulting impact between Bjorkstrand and the boards and Polak should have pinned Bjorkstrand rather than following through a full body check focused on his numbers. Anytime there's a check through the numbers on the back of a jersey, right next to the boards, then boarding judgment logic has to come into play. I know you're saying you don't agree with the judgment of the refs and that their opinion on the play seemed to be influenced by Bjorkstrand being injured, but they're supposed to consider the Bjorkstrand's-fault case and they came down on the other side.

[UCMnumber8 32]

Ovechkin hit on Werenski The DPS said they're looking into the hit from last night's game, as it looks like Ovi left his feet. It didn't necessarily look like charging, as he just coasted into the hit. Thoughts?

[IPv6Freely 2092]

Hit looks 100% fine to me. Doesn't look like he left his feet at all, didn't take multiple strides into him, and ran shoulder to shoulder. I don't see anything worth a penalty let alone supplemental discipline. 

[chippa13 1844]

Jumping into an opponent is in the first sentence of the charging rule.

[IPv6Freely 2092]

1 minute ago, chippa13 said:

Jumping into an opponent is in the first sentence of the charging rule.

Which he didn't do. 

[chippa13 1844]

The original poster said it looked like he left his feet but that it didn't look like charging. I was simply letting him know the rule. The highlight posted doesn't give a great look.

[UCMnumber8 32]

Yeah, that was my bad; the video wasn't the best angle. There's a link to a GIF on Twitter I found of an alternate angle of the hit. https://twitter.com/1stOhioBattery/status/848731314836705281 

I understand the charging rule, just not necessarily in this context. The rule defines charging "as a result of a distance traveled," and I think that's where I'm lost. Would Ovechkin gliding to the corner into the check be considered a distance traveled enough to warrant charging, even if no strides were taken? As for his feet leaving the ice, is it possible his left skate was lifted to avoid injury, and the right skate was up briefly from the momentum of the hit? One last thought I had was the fact Werenski left the game with an injury, would that factor into a possible suspension?

I don't think he'll draw a suspension, but he doesn't necessarily have the clean record either (3 suspensions over his career for illegal hits: knee to knee, boarding, and charging.) 

 

[IPv6Freely 2092]

9 minutes ago, UCMnumber8 said:

Yeah, that was my bad; the video wasn't the best angle. There's a link to a GIF on Twitter I found of an alternate angle of the hit. https://twitter.com/1stOhioBattery/status/848731314836705281 

I understand the charging rule, just not necessarily in this context. The rule defines charging "as a result of a distance traveled," and I think that's where I'm lost. Would Ovechkin gliding to the corner into the check be considered a distance traveled enough to warrant charging, even if no strides were taken? As for his feet leaving the ice, is it possible his left skate was lifted to avoid injury, and the right skate was up briefly from the momentum of the hit? One last thought I had was the fact Werenski left the game with an injury, would that factor into a possible suspension?

I don't think he'll draw a suspension, but he doesn't necessarily have the clean record either (3 suspensions over his career for illegal hits: knee to knee, boarding, and charging.) 

 

The part most people fail to understand is that his skates coming off the ice is perfectly fine. The "leaving his feet" (what a silly phrase when you think about it) part is only if he actually jumps forcefully into the hit. Ovechkin does not jump. 

As for your second question: "Werenski left the game with an injury, would that factor into a possible suspension?" the answer is no. The play has to be illegal for a suspension to apply, regardless of injury. 

[IPv6Freely 2092]

49 minutes ago, UCMnumber8 said:

Yeah, that was my bad; the video wasn't the best angle. There's a link to a GIF on Twitter I found of an alternate angle of the hit. https://twitter.com/1stOhioBattery/status/848731314836705281 

I understand the charging rule, just not necessarily in this context. The rule defines charging "as a result of a distance traveled," and I think that's where I'm lost. Would Ovechkin gliding to the corner into the check be considered a distance traveled enough to warrant charging, even if no strides were taken? As for his feet leaving the ice, is it possible his left skate was lifted to avoid injury, and the right skate was up briefly from the momentum of the hit? One last thought I had was the fact Werenski left the game with an injury, would that factor into a possible suspension?

I don't think he'll draw a suspension, but he doesn't necessarily have the clean record either (3 suspensions over his career for illegal hits: knee to knee, boarding, and charging.) 

 

Found the video I was looking for:

https://www.nhl.com/video/what-is-charging/t-277350912/c-49890503 

 

[Kgbeast 195]

10 hours ago, UCMnumber8 said:

Ovechkin hit on Werenski The DPS said they're looking into the hit from last night's game, as it looks like Ovi left his feet. It didn't necessarily look like charging, as he just coasted into the hit. Thoughts?

I thought it was just a hard hit. Torts said it was just a hit as well after the game. It is unfortunate that Z got caught by this in the way that it caused him an injury (listed as day to day with shoulder injury). IMO, Ove should be left alone here.

[chippa13 1844]

Marchand got 2 games for his spear.

[Monty22 832]

41 minutes ago, chippa13 said:

Marchand got 2 games for his spear.

No surprise based on history and infraction.  I thought he had turned a corner this year, but not so much. 

[chippa13 1844]

2 minutes ago, Monty22 said:

No surprise based on history and infraction.  I thought he had turned a corner this year, but not so much. 

I guess he didn't want 40.