| Author |
 Topic  |
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
 Posted - 11/05/2010 : 14:08:27
|
I fail to see how hjamarson and thornton each got 2 games, when hjalmarson smashed pomminvilles head against the boards and thornton delivered a blind side hit shoulder to shoulder. there was no contact to the head made in the hit, or doans hit as well
Go OILERS Go!!!
|
Edited by - sahis34 on 11/07/2010 14:36:48
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 14:42:25
|
| there was most definitely contact made to the head on the Thornton hit, re-watch the hit in slowmo - Thornton's shoulder/elbow/arm clearly hits Perron in either the jaw or the side of the head. |
 |
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 15:01:44
|
the shoulder was the initial point of contact
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 16:02:21
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJr33aaE_MM
The only shoulder I see making contact was Thorntons - on Perron's head.
Look at the slowmo that starts about about :53. Thornton's shoulder makes direct contact with the back of Perron's ear, or his lower jaw. There was now shoulder-to-shoulder anywhere, Perron's shoulder was never level with Thornton's.
This is exactly what the NHL is trying to clamp down on, so a suspension is warranted. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 16:19:33
|
Def a shoulder to the head. Also, it's most def because of the size difference and/or the fact Perron had his head down. Either way, it's what the league is trying to take out of the game. Absolutely a suspension (whether it hurts my hockey pool or not ) |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 16:37:50
|
People are missing the point of the rule. It is not always a headshot, it's a blindside hit.
"A lateral, back pressure or blind-side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or is the principal point of contact is not permitted. A violation of the above will result in a minor or major penalty and shall be reviewed for possible supplemental discipline."
The contact does not have to be the head. As long as the ref/ruling body believe the head was the target it's against the rule.
Furthermore, the only way to stop these hits are to punish each and every one of them. |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 16:53:23
|
he hits his neck the hardest, but hits through his shoulder, which is a clean hit, he gets a little of his chin, but not enough to be a major penalty let alone a suspension
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 17:02:52
|
Are you kidding?? Hits the neck???
Wake up.
Here is a link to the video. Watch between the 0:55 to 0:57 mark. If you can not see Thornton's shoulder catching Perron square in the jaw, I would challenge you ability to see.
Seriously, this is the clearest example of a blind side hit to the head this year!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJr33aaE_MM
He hit him the hardest in the neck. That's a good one.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 17:11:23
|
Calm down Beans..... Sahis first says the "shoulder" was the first point of contact, now he/she is claiming that it's the neck. Surely a realization that it was in fact the head/jaw is forthcoming?  |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 17:14:12
|
perron throws his head back, it looks like he maybe hit him with his jaw, BUT perron throws his head back, how could he do this in one motion if thornton drived his shoulder into his head.
I challenge your common sense in regards to physics.
Also, this rule was implemented to get rid of concussions, even if thorton hits his jaw(which he doesn't), a hit to the jaw wouldn't concuss him.
Watch it again, the principal point of contact is right in the neck. thats why perron could come back, it hurtlike hell, but no damage was done.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 17:17:35
|
actually Beans, by the definition you have quoted, it is about hits where the head is a target - either blindside or otherwise, if a player either hits the head, or is targetting the head, then it is a penatly and possibly suspend-able hit. I see nothing about shoulder-on-shoulder hits that one player does not see coming. Or do you equate "blindside" to "headshot"?
Sahis - perhaps you are not watching the video correctly.  For me, there is absolutely no question that the first thing Thornton hit was Perron's head (head, neck, jaw, whatever). There was never a shoulder-on-shoulder hit, anywhere in the sequence, and the angle is very good. Perron's shoulder does hit Thornton underneath his arm as their bodies come together, but Thornton has nothing but head connecting with his shoulder. You can even see Perron's head snap back immediately with the impact. |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 17:23:13
|
He hits him on the neck shoulder and barely his lower jaw, which doesn't seem like a head shot to me
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2010 : 19:33:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by sahis34
He hits him on the neck shoulder and barely his lower jaw, which doesn't seem like a head shot to me
Go OILERS Go!!!
Okay, so now he "barely" hit his lower jaw. Good, good, we're making progress.
I'm not the NHL, but i'm pretty sure they consider anything above the shoulder to be the "head". BTW, are you a doctor? I'd like to know where you get this "a hit to the jaw wouldn't concuss him." theory? |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 00:51:25
|
A hit to the jaw wouldn't displace, or rattle your brain, unless is was hard enough to shatter your teeth, he really gets 10x more neck than jaw though so there's no way he'd be concussed.
I 'm pretty sure thats why the team doctors let him play.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 01:56:46
|
First off its a bad situation normallyy a d man will not give a forward a suicide past like that. (not the d man's fault Thornton stepped out of the box) Second was Thornton not infront of Perron at all times? It's not like he came swooping in from the outside like previous hit, Doan Richards Cook come to mind. Is it really a blindside? ssur Perron doesn't see him coming but he wasn't really looking either. The point i'm trying to make from what i can see Thornton isn't even really skateing that hard to Perron and Perron runs into him. I have a hard time calling this a dirty hit and have a hard time giving Thornton a suspension. If a player isn't looking to me its not really a blindside is it? Maybe i'm just nuts but Thornton was always infront of Perron, where is the blindside?
Pasty |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 09:34:43
|
Firstly, the rule states 'blindside" which is a position that is fluid. As Perron is skating out his zone the closest boards are on this left side. He is looking/facing right waiting for a pass. Thornton is along the boards on the left of Perron meaning he is on the 'blind side' of Perron. Furthermore, Thronton skates along the same path of the centre ice line when Perron is travelling perpendicular to the centre ice line.
Be the definition of the rule, Thorton's actions were a text book example. Blindside, check. Thorton is on Perron's left when Perron is looking/facing right. Lateral, check. Perron is skating down the ice (north/south if you will) and Thorton skates from the boards parralel to the centre ice line (east/west if you will). Head was the principle point of contact, check. Oh, wait. I am wrong on that. Contact was made on Perron's neck and that forced Perron to violently throw his head backward, obviously trying to draw a penalty.
Sometimes I honestly believe some people live in a different world than the rest of us.
You know the sick thing about this too, if Thornton throws a hip check at Perron, no penalty, no suspension, no nothing.
Players have to learn that this is a dangerous hit and some might have to learn the hard way. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 09:52:39
|
One of the few suspensions I totally agree with. For once, Campbell gets it right and gives Thornton a solid penalty (it's not like this is the first time for Big Joe, of course, but people often equate the amount of times you are "caught" with how many times you offended).
For Sahis - tell your theory about a hit jaw/no concussion to a boxer, and let him demostrate for you that you are wrong. Now THAT would be priceless! 
The jaw, because it is in virtually solid contact with the skull, can easily cause a concussion when hit hard. Less likely when hit from the side, yes (and one can dislocate the jaw with a real heavy blow) - and that is why a good boxer throws a straight jab (not a circular roundhouse) - it hits the jaw square from the front,and pushes the skull when hit, where it will impact the skull fully, without being able to displace the jaw as easily. It is physics, as you say.
And it most certainly does jar the brain when hit properly.
I get Pasty's point . . . although I don't necessarily totally agree with it. But it's a dangerous, predatory hit, and it's not a solid hockey play IMHO.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 10:15:55
|
thornton skates from center toward the blue line, that's north south,
also he really just glided in to him, and you could say he had no where else to go. That's at least what thornton says.
The problem is that this is either a major penalty and a suspension, or nothing at all based on unclear criteria
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 12:01:31
|
Thornton skates from centre to the blue line??Are we even talking about the same hit. Seriously, take the time and watch the 2 minute video. Even Thornton himself said he skated two strides out of the penalty box. How is it possible that he came from the blue line to the centre line??
The biggest piece that people are missing is that this is a huge difference to the culture of hockey. In the past, it was always the player getting hit who was responsible. They hitee was the one who had to know what was going on and the hitter could be the reckless one.
Well, with this rule as well as the way it is being interpreted it is the hitter who now has the responsibility. The person getting hit is now the one who can be reckless.
Rightly or wrongly, agree or disagree, that is the way it is. And, by definition of the rule, this Thornton hit was word for word against the 'headshot' rule. Or neck shot, or jaw shot, or what ever other body part above the shoulders you want to call it. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 12:08:40
|
@sahis
Dude, you are just not watching the same video. Beans is correct, Thornton is skating east/west, as soon as he comes out of the penalty box. Look at his position relative to the centre line - a line that runs east/west - he never deviates from hit. He is going absolutely perpendicular to the play. He takes 3 strides out of the box, going due east, and hits Perron as he goes by.
You can even tell by Thornton's body move that he is preparing for the hit as he goes by. The instant before he hits Perron, he leans right into Perron shoulder first, and moves his hips to absorb the hit. |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 17:05:21
|
48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted.
I guess you could call it a blindside, even though peitroangelo gave perron a suicide pass, and thornton had no else to go. If anything it was a northeast southwest hit where perron turned away, where it forced thornton to come from the blindside.
But the head wasn't the principal point of contact, it was the neck/collar bone, and theres no way the head was targeted, in fact thornton tried to avoid his head because he tried to keep his shoulder done.
Also when I say it barely hit his jaw, I mean it hit not even half an inch above his neck.
If this was chara on perron, where it would of been a headshot, he would of had nowhere else to go, Now how is thornton responsible for this "headshot"
Again perron wasn't even hurt(and don't say he could've been), and really the point of this rule was to protect the players
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 17:06:07
|
*down not done
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 17:35:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Firstly, the rule states 'blindside" which is a position that is fluid. As Perron is skating out his zone the closest boards are on this left side. He is looking/facing right waiting for a pass. Thornton is along the boards on the left of Perron meaning he is on the 'blind side' of Perron. Furthermore, Thronton skates along the same path of the centre ice line when Perron is travelling perpendicular to the centre ice line.
Be the definition of the rule, Thorton's actions were a text book example. Blindside, check. Thorton is on Perron's left when Perron is looking/facing right. Lateral, check. Perron is skating down the ice (north/south if you will) and Thorton skates from the boards parralel to the centre ice line (east/west if you will). Head was the principle point of contact, check. Oh, wait. I am wrong on that. Contact was made on Perron's neck and that forced Perron to violently throw his head backward, obviously trying to draw a penalty.
Sometimes I honestly believe some people live in a different world than the rest of us.
You know the sick thing about this too, if Thornton throws a hip check at Perron, no penalty, no suspension, no nothing.
Players have to learn that this is a dangerous hit and some might have to learn the hard way.
I agree with all this beans but i guess it's just me but i mean If Perron is looking ahead of him and skateing with the puck he sees Thornton coming and even if the hit occurs it is not a penalty right? (because its no longer a blindside) Well is it really Thornton's fault Perron is not looking.... i mean i can understand for example how Booth Sexton and Savard couldn't the hits from Richards Doan and Cook coming the hittiner came from behind the play slightly and swooped infront of the victim. In this Case Thornton is well ahead of the play and seemingly just waits for Perron to look up and run into his shoulder? Am i wrong about how i just described this? didn't happen differently? I have only seen the hit once on my Blackberry so maybe i'm completely off. (just moved no internet at home yet, and work doesn't allow youtube) But sure it was a blindside but i have trouble a lot of trouble suspending thornton for this,,, it has a lot of characteristics of the old expression keep your head up kid!
Pasty |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 17:39:35
|
FOR THE FINAL TIME,
IT'S NOT A HEADSHOT, thornton didn't make contact with perron's helmet
yes I suppose it was a blindside
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 18:31:52
|
the hit actually reminded me a lot of the Mitchell-Toews hit last season. It was exactly the same in terms of positions of both players, and that Mitchell had just come out of the box, took 2 steps and drilled Toews as he was rushing up the ice. The only real difference between the two hits is that Mitchell hit shoulder-to-shoulder and no penalty was given
Sahis, if you want to see a great shoulder-to-shoulder hit (for future reference), watch that hit. Thornton's hit was not that. |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 19:55:56
|
You know what Sahis, and please don't take this as a personal attack, but reading this thread, it seems you ignoring facts.
Firstly, and this is your quote: quote:
48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted.
If according to you, Thornton hit Perron's neck, then that is definitely a point of contact that is not allowed(unless you say checks to the neck are a legal point of contact?), therefore can be ruled as an Illegal Check to the Head. Plain and simple. Not acknowledging that the point of contact is the neck, and thus illegal, is paramount to ignorance of the wording of the rule.
Secondly, why are you defending Thornton?(I assume you are doing so in defending his hit as not a headshot) I couldn't care less about hockey "culture" in regards to suicide passes, but are you so callous that you think that it's Perron's fault: he should have not taken the pass, or should have seen Thornton coming?
Beans quoted the rule where it said a "blindside" hit to a "illegal point of contact." Looking at the video, there is no way Thornton could have hit him legally, as he was going E/W, while Perron was going N/S with his back facing Thornton. If Thornton hadn't hit Perron's neck, it would have been his head, or right in the back(also penalties as points of contact are illegal, and from the blindside).
Either way you look at, it, it was a HEADSHOT by the league's definition, not our definition of a head shot, which would be where the head is the one and only principal point of contact.
|
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 21:13:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by polishexpress
You know what Sahis, and please don't take this as a personal attack, but reading this thread, it seems you ignoring facts.
Firstly, and this is your quote: quote:
48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted.
If according to you, Thornton hit Perron's neck, then that is definitely a point of contact that is not allowed(unless you say checks to the neck are a legal point of contact?), therefore can be ruled as an Illegal Check to the Head. Plain and simple. Not acknowledging that the point of contact is the neck, and thus illegal, is paramount to ignorance of the wording of the rule.
Secondly, why are you defending Thornton?(I assume you are doing so in defending his hit as not a headshot) I couldn't care less about hockey "culture" in regards to suicide passes, but are you so callous that you think that it's Perron's fault: he should have not taken the pass, or should have seen Thornton coming?
Beans quoted the rule where it said a "blindside" hit to a "illegal point of contact." Looking at the video, there is no way Thornton could have hit him legally, as he was going E/W, while Perron was going N/S with his back facing Thornton. If Thornton hadn't hit Perron's neck, it would have been his head, or right in the back(also penalties as points of contact are illegal, and from the blindside).
Either way you look at, it, it was a HEADSHOT by the league's definition, not our definition of a head shot, which would be where the head is the one and only principal point of contact.
his Back is not facing Thornton infact his entire body is facing Thornton only his head is turned away from Thornton... the rest i can agree with but in no way is his back facing Thornton unless he is skateing backwards up ice
Pasty |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 21:37:37
|
The neck is not the head, therefore it is not a headshot. The NHL has not stated that a headshot includes the neck, how can they overlook this rule, when they couldn't suspend cooke last year due to a lack of rules.
If this is a penalty it's charging.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 22:22:08
|
sahis, this is not charging. A quick definition of charging:
"Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner."
Note the distance provision - charging is meant to penalize players that take a run at another player. Thornton took pretty much 2 steps, away from the play, and did not charge anyone.
Although not specified in the rules (at least that I could find), a "headshot" seems to be viewed as any hit above the shoulders. This would include the neck and head. Do you think that the neck should somehow be treated differently from the head? What if Thornton's shoulder had gone into Perron's throat and crushed his airtube or larynx? |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 23:54:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by sahis34
FOR THE FINAL TIME,
IT'S NOT A HEADSHOT, thornton didn't make contact with perron's helmet
yes I suppose it was a blindside
Go OILERS Go!!!
Man oh man these forum rules and guidelines i agreed to upon membership really do interfere with what i wanna say at times!!!! 
You seriously must be either watching a different hit or you haven't watched it period!
Pasty, i totally get your point and was wanting to ask the same question as to what would have happened if Perron had not been looking back for a pass and rather was looking forward and saw the hit? I'd agree, it's not Thornton's fault the guy was looking back for a pass!
I dunno, maybe the league needs to do something about guys returning to the ice. The Mitchell on Toews hit last year was very similar to this. That's two major hits, and i'm sure there's other with similarities, in less than two seasons. I guess it falls back to the respect that's always talked about between players?
BTW Pasty, hope the move is going or went well. I can't stand moving. Just went through the same last summer! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 07:16:09
|
Ultimately, this thread has come down to two factors.
The first factor is that the vast majority of people can see this hit for exactly what it is. Blindside, lateral, headshot. I do not believe that a person can be hit in their neck by another person's shoulder. Regardless, the video shows 15 different ways that Thornton’s shoulder strikes Perron square in head. The color change on this jersey from teal to white is right on Perron’s left ear. If one can not see that, well there is nothing more to say on that topic.
However, I will provide yet another video that some will choose to not watch or watch and close their eyes when the hit actual happens or any other plethora of reasons why one can not see the hit for exactly what it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m55RtBUyKcA
Actually, there is one more thing to say. Thornton has no where else to go?? Sure he did. He had the entire ice surface. Furthermore, if he could not 'avoid' the contact, he could have gone low, throwing a hip check rather than a head shot. Or, he could have not braced and lifted his shoulder, rather leaning slightly back and possibly landing on his junk himself but he would have played last night.
The remaining debatable point is Pasty's in that if Perron has his head up does the hit still fall under the rule and the answer is yes. Thornton was travelling east/west when Perron was travelling north/south hence the lateral part of the rule.
People need to accept the culture change the NHL is imposing by this rule in that the person laying the hit is the one solely responsible. Gone are the days where you can blame a player for getting hit when his head is down. The only way to hit a player today with their head down is from in front (either traveling north/south or east/west" and low. Anything else is the responsibility of the hitter.
This is the biggest difference. I don’t necessarily agree with this culture change but this is exactly what the NHL has done with this rule change.
|
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 08:27:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
sahis, this is not charging. A quick definition of charging:
"Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner."
Note the distance provision - charging is meant to penalize players that take a run at another player. Thornton took pretty much 2 steps, away from the play, and did not charge anyone.
Although not specified in the rules (at least that I could find), a "headshot" seems to be viewed as any hit above the shoulders. This would include the neck and head. Do you think that the neck should somehow be treated differently from the head? What if Thornton's shoulder had gone into Perron's throat and crushed his airtube or larynx?
The hit was from the side, and his collarbone was hit a lot harder than his neck(which he hit from the side), and if he didn't charge into, he just ran into him on him way to the bench
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 08:29:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by sahis34
FOR THE FINAL TIME,
IT'S NOT A HEADSHOT, thornton didn't make contact with perron's helmet
yes I suppose it was a blindside
Go OILERS Go!!!
Man oh man these forum rules and guidelines i agreed to upon membership really do interfere with what i wanna say at times!!!!
You seriously must be either watching a different hit or you haven't watched it period!
Pasty, i totally get your point and was wanting to ask the same question as to what would have happened if Perron had not been looking back for a pass and rather was looking forward and saw the hit? I'd agree, it's not Thornton's fault the guy was looking back for a pass!
I dunno, maybe the league needs to do something about guys returning to the ice. The Mitchell on Toews hit last year was very similar to this. That's two major hits, and i'm sure there's other with similarities, in less than two seasons. I guess it falls back to the respect that's always talked about between players?
BTW Pasty, hope the move is going or went well. I can't stand moving. Just went through the same last summer!
The mitchel on toews hit was an example of a CLEAN hit in the video on the headsot rule
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 08:43:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Ultimately, this thread has come down to two factors.
The first factor is that the vast majority of people can see this hit for exactly what it is. Blindside, lateral, headshot. I do not believe that a person can be hit in their neck by another person's shoulder. Regardless, the video shows 15 different ways that Thornton’s shoulder strikes Perron square in head. The color change on this jersey from teal to white is right on Perron’s left ear. If one can not see that, well there is nothing more to say on that topic.
However, I will provide yet another video that some will choose to not watch or watch and close their eyes when the hit actual happens or any other plethora of reasons why one can not see the hit for exactly what it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m55RtBUyKcA
Actually, there is one more thing to say. Thornton has no where else to go?? Sure he did. He had the entire ice surface. Furthermore, if he could not 'avoid' the contact, he could have gone low, throwing a hip check rather than a head shot. Or, he could have not braced and lifted his shoulder, rather leaning slightly back and possibly landing on his junk himself but he would have played last night.
The remaining debatable point is Pasty's in that if Perron has his head up does the hit still fall under the rule and the answer is yes. Thornton was travelling east/west when Perron was travelling north/south hence the lateral part of the rule.
People need to accept the culture change the NHL is imposing by this rule in that the person laying the hit is the one solely responsible. Gone are the days where you can blame a player for getting hit when his head is down. The only way to hit a player today with their head down is from in front (either traveling north/south or east/west" and low. Anything else is the responsibility of the hitter.
This is the biggest difference. I don’t necessarily agree with this culture change but this is exactly what the NHL has done with this rule change.
thornton tried to keep his shoulder down, in case you didn't notice, he's half a foot taller than perron, and made no contact with his helmet even though he scraped the tip of his ear. The only thing he can do is dive, brace for the hit, or swerve around against his momentum all crash to the ice. To the point Thornton went as low he could go, and his intent was clealry to hit him in the shoulder.
After looking at that video, he hits him right above the collar bone, thats not the head
Also blame should be put on perron, if he turns away and forces thornton to came from the blind side.
A side note, I have perron and thornton in my hockey pool
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 08:49:37
|
It's seems like everyone's points are falling on your deaf ears, sahis.
And, as others are mentioning, it comes down to respect.
Thornton didn't have enough respect for his opponent to throw a check or avoid contact in order to prevent potential serious injury to his opponent.(Everyone, even you Sahis, must agree that Perron just as easily could be lying in a hospital bed due to the blindside hit.)
I like what Beans mentioned, if the contact was so unavoidable, then why didn't Thornton throw a hipcheck? I think the hit would be on the highlight reels for a whole different reason then!
Anyway, I'm agreeing to disagree with you Sahis, on this one. |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 08:52:44
|
Furthermore the concept of the bindside is more the concept of players not having the ability to protect himself, Which I think perron did
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 11:04:18
|
sahis, I think you are now arguing for the sake of argument. I have seen you claim the following:
quote:
the shoulder was the initial point of contact
quote:
he hits his neck the hardest, but hits through his shoulder
quote:
perron throws his head back, it looks like he maybe hit him with his jaw
quote:
Watch it again, the principal point of contact is right in the neck
quote:
He hits him on the neck shoulder and barely his lower jaw
quote:
he really gets 10x more neck than jaw though so there's no way he'd be concussed
quote:
But the head wasn't the principal point of contact, it was the neck/collar bone
quote:
The hit was from the side, and his collarbone was hit a lot harder than his neck(which he hit from the side)
quote:
thornton tried to keep his shoulder down, in case you didn't notice, he's half a foot taller than perron, and made no contact with his helmet even though he scraped the tip of his ear
quote:
After looking at that video, he hits him right above the collar bone
So, if I read this correctly, Thornton did the following:
- initiated contact with his shoulder on Perron's shoulder, but is keeping his shoulder down so as not to hit the head.
- Thornton's shoulder then moved up dramatically, and then projected outwards to contact Perron's neck "from the side"
- the shoulder then moved straight down to impact the collarbone, "a lot harder than his neck"
- the shoulder then moved up and out again, to scrape the tip of the ear.
This is quite some shoulder that Thornton is wielding... this sequence and trajectory makes the Kennedy bullet seem positively straight. It is bordering on ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Guest2894
( )
|
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 11:52:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
First off its a bad situation normallyy a d man will not give a forward a suicide past like that. (not the d man's fault Thornton stepped out of the box) Second was Thornton not infront of Perron at all times? It's not like he came swooping in from the outside like previous hit, Doan Richards Cook come to mind. Is it really a blindside? ssur Perron doesn't see him coming but he wasn't really looking either. The point i'm trying to make from what i can see Thornton isn't even really skateing that hard to Perron and Perron runs into him. I have a hard time calling this a dirty hit and have a hard time giving Thornton a suspension. If a player isn't looking to me its not really a blindside is it? Maybe i'm just nuts but Thornton was always infront of Perron, where is the blindside?
Pasty
I agree with you. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 12:00:00
|
It's not bordering on ridiculous, it is ridiculous. Completely.
How many different ways does the video have to show Thornton's shoulder squarely contact Perron's head.
Even Thornton and his agent(being his brother) do not deny the headshot. Their argument is there is nothing Thornton could have done because of his size.
Quoted today in the Edmonton Sun on a statement released by Thornton's Camp, " When Joe asked the league directly, what he could have done differently, they could not clearly explain. I guess being 5-9 was Joe's only solution to avoid the suspension."
Another great discussion happened last night on the CBC hotstove where every person on the panel disagreed with the discipline, however they all agreed it was a headshot.
Frankly, I am done. I am not arguing if it was a head shot or not anymore. 99% of us see it for what it was. If anyone wants to argue the consistancy of the discipline the NHL has laid out, fine. But there is nothing anyone can tell me about this being a 'neck shot' and not a head shot.
Give your neck a shake!
|
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 12:06:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
sahis, I think you are now arguing for the sake of argument. I have seen you claim the following:
quote:
the shoulder was the initial point of contact
quote:
he hits his neck the hardest, but hits through his shoulder
quote:
perron throws his head back, it looks like he maybe hit him with his jaw
quote:
Watch it again, the principal point of contact is right in the neck
quote:
He hits him on the neck shoulder and barely his lower jaw
quote:
he really gets 10x more neck than jaw though so there's no way he'd be concussed
quote:
But the head wasn't the principal point of contact, it was the neck/collar bone
quote:
The hit was from the side, and his collarbone was hit a lot harder than his neck(which he hit from the side)
quote:
thornton tried to keep his shoulder down, in case you didn't notice, he's half a foot taller than perron, and made no contact with his helmet even though he scraped the tip of his ear
quote:
After looking at that video, he hits him right above the collar bone
So, if I read this correctly, Thornton did the following:
- initiated contact with his shoulder on Perron's shoulder, but is keeping his shoulder down so as not to hit the head.
- Thornton's shoulder then moved up dramatically, and then projected outwards to contact Perron's neck "from the side"
- the shoulder then moved straight down to impact the collarbone, "a lot harder than his neck"
- the shoulder then moved up and out again, to scrape the tip of the ear.
This is quite some shoulder that Thornton is wielding... this sequence and trajectory makes the Kennedy bullet seem positively straight. It is bordering on ridiculous.
OK, simple thing... Thornton is taller, it's shoulder on shoulder in the sense that it's the bottom of his shoulder to the top of perrons which is next to the collar bone, There is minimal force to jaw/ear
because perron throws his head back.
He hit the collarbone first with the bottom of the shoulder, then moved his shoulder down at an angle, hitting perrons neck.
The bottom line is we see different things in the video so there is no point arguing, also is seems clear that you don't realize that the neck is not head. Answer me this though: Do you think he hit his head?
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2010 : 12:17:45
|
Whatever, I don't care. This is not Thornton's fault, unarguably.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
What the hell is a headshot? 
