| Author |
 Topic  |
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
 Posted - 03/10/2011 : 18:44:11
|
Im looking at the play thinking, why Chara didnt deliver a hit to this kid before he chipped the puckdown the ice? Why didnt he mangle him then? Right before he angled him in to the turnbuckle he coulda flat out bowled him over in a real vicious and legal check. After the puck was chipped ahead both were jockeying for position and Chara basically says this is my lane and throws him toward the danger area. Horrible outcome. Horrible.
Is it dirty? Looked dirty in the aftermath. I dont know if Chara forseen the results of his actions there, and after seeing the result of this hit, I would definatley lay up when coming into this area of the ice, big guy or not. I'd be ok with a 1 game or 2 game suspension. I'd be happier with a fix to the structure to remove the danger zone, so this doesnt happen again. |
Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 03/10/2011 18:44:53 |
 |
|
|
shellac
Top Prospect
30 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 19:14:20
|
Hey isn't this alot like the hit Smyth took that ended his 08 season with the Avs?
Sure looks familiar, and I don't remember there being such a big deal made about it, other than it was unfortunate
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPphB84zMCM&feature=related |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 19:34:49
|
Ok, so here is something I have just had a chance to do and that is watch the video over and over. Here is something that no one has made the comment on. Help me through the logic.
Paciorretty chips the puck forward at what appears to be 20.6ish mark remaining in the period. At that time, Chara is also chipping at the puck. Paciorretty is heading 'north/south' with Chara traveling mostly East/West and reaching for the puck. Chara appears to be starting to cut back towards his end at that time.
At the 19.7 seconds remaining in the period mark, Chara has made the decision to hit Max P as he is pushing him into the boards at the Boston bench, less than a second after the puck has left Max P's stick. Chara and Max P are literally 1/2 between the blue and red lines at that time.
At 19.5 seconds, Max P makes contact with the stanchion.
So, in less than one second, Max P goes from chipping the puck to making contact with the Stanchion. Charra goes from also trying to chip to the puck to hitting Max P into the boards.
All of that in less in 0.9 of a second.
I don't know about you, but I can barely blink in that period of time let alone make a decision to let up on a hit and slow my momentum. I couldn't do that walking, how could someone do that on skates that is 6'9" and 260 lbs???
That being said, Chara absolutely, without question, continued the hit and pushed Max P into the Stantion and I have no doubt in my mind he was trying to run him into the 'turnbuckle'. It he doesn't do that extra push with his gloves into Max P, maybe he doesn't get hurt.
Here is my final verdict. Dangerous?? Yes. Intent to run the guy into the turnbuckle? Yes. Could have the hit been avoided completely?? No. Would the hit and injury potentially be lessened by Chara not doing the extra 'push' of Max P into the stanchion. Absolutely.
If I am Gary Bettman is give 4ish games. It did derserve a suspension, completely based on Chara's extra push with his gloves. That didn't need to happen but the hit still would have occured.
Here is the video I used. The more I watch this the more I see this as still a dangerous decision. The hit I don't think could have been avoided completely but the extra shove that Chara does he is completely culpable in. Here is the video I looked at. I did not use the slow-mo portion. If you use non-slow motion portion at the begining you can use the game clock as the measure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jimZ1tSdPY0 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 19:39:46
|
Leigh - point well taken. You are right . . . not ALWAYS is a man, or should a man, be judged by his actions at one moment.
Fair enough.
'cept in my point of view, Chara has gotten away without suspension many times before. Always with the height/big man defence.
Late hit on Grabovski, drives him in the boards to hurt him (look familiar?):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZXGJYz8GMo
Chara tries drilling Mietinen in the same area Pacioretty got smoked in, except he's just a wee bit off to get a major injury:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wyiTcrh2y4
There are others that I can't find on you tube but vaguely remember, and it's late and I gotta get to bed.
But yeah, I am not too fond of Chara being called an angel with no record . . . like another great defenceman with skill (Pronger), many many free passes have been given here.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 19:50:38
|
Slozo, thanks for the vids. Brings a different perspective into the situation. I am wondering if Pronger gets more heat as a dirty player because he comes across as a d-bag in the media and Chara is the ever quite gentle giant in the media??
Personally, I see the Grabovski hit as very dirty and potentially suspendable. I see the Mietinen his as clean and nasty, but not dirty. |
|
|
|
WhiteBread9
Top Prospect
Canada
6 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 21:24:11
|
| Yeah I agree with Beans here, Miettinen hit is downright nasty, but still clean. The Grabovski hit is definitely suspendable in my mind. That is downright dirty. Ive always seen Chara as someone who lead with his hands on most of his hits. Someone needs to step up and teach Chara some respect. I'm down for a Chara vs Boogard tilly |
|
|
|
Guest7742
( )
|
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 21:45:03
|
| know what kinda rhymes with stanchion? ... the word suspension. |
|
|
|
Guest4271
( )
|
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 22:15:32
|
I know the guy got hurt, and that's the bad part, but I didn't think it was a bad play. You see 20 interference calls every night, the exact same play in another area of the rink and it is 2 min. and done. There is a slight push, intent to injure ....NO, I'm a Bruins fan, don't like the injury, but Steckel got off easier in the media, and he took out the best player in the game..........but you don't see him in Washington no more do you????
The police involvment, is the biggest crock of crap I have ever heard of, Montreal media is clearly the joke of Canadian hockey, and the worst fans......in house clearly proven over and over. What's going to happen when Boston comes back to play? Chara is going to get booed, maybe stuff thown on the ice, and as for the earlier mentioning of a 5 minute major for interference, and the exact same hit never suspendable........then why would it be suspendable now, cause Chara is a beast in size, Paciorretty is not a small man, I could see the debate if the other player was Gionta or Gomez, someone on the tiny side
Also everyone says that Chara should have stopped in 0.9 seconds, why didn't Paciorrety put the brakes on and stop, he knows where the stanchions are also, but I don't think its a head shot, no intent |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 22:36:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4271
I know the guy got hurt, and that's the bad part, but I didn't think it was a bad play. You see 20 interference calls every night, the exact same play in another area of the rink and it is 2 min. and done. There is a slight push, intent to injure ....NO, I'm a Bruins fan, don't like the injury, but Steckel got off easier in the media, and he took out the best player in the game..........but you don't see him in Washington no more do you????
The police involvment, is the biggest crock of crap I have ever heard of, Montreal media is clearly the joke of Canadian hockey, and the worst fans......in house clearly proven over and over. What's going to happen when Boston comes back to play? Chara is going to get booed, maybe stuff thown on the ice, and as for the earlier mentioning of a 5 minute major for interference, and the exact same hit never suspendable........then why would it be suspendable now, cause Chara is a beast in size, Paciorretty is not a small man, I could see the debate if the other player was Gionta or Gomez, someone on the tiny side
Also everyone says that Chara should have stopped in 0.9 seconds, why didn't Paciorrety put the brakes on and stop, he knows where the stanchions are also, but I don't think its a head shot, no intent
Are you freakin' kidding??? So, what you're saying is, if it were a smaller player (Gomez/Gionta), then it's suspendable? Or did i read that wrong? That's ridiculous. How does Pacioretty's size determine whether it's illegal/suspendable? 
Also, why should it be up to Pacioretty to stop? It's an interference call, was he supposed to know that he was going to get hit late? 
Beans...i agree, the hit on Grabo was bad, but the Miettinen one was just plain nasty, but legal. Didn't really even make it as far as the "stanchion" AND he was going east / west vs Miettinen's north / south! Good hard clean check from what i saw!
As far as the times you gave in the Chara / Patch hit, i see where you're going with it, but watching it, regardless of time, did it not seem like the hit was late? It didn't look to me like your classic "finishing your check" type hit, but maybe that's just the result of it clouding my opinion. I can't simply say, Chara had time to make the decision to not hit Patch as that's the case in pretty much every instance of "finishing your check" is it not?
This one is really tough. Intent is impossible to prove, but imo it was a reckless play that resulted in a serious head shot.
I maintain, 3-5 games would have been good with me. |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2011 : 22:48:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by shellac
Hey isn't this alot like the hit Smyth took that ended his 08 season with the Avs?
Sure looks familiar, and I don't remember there being such a big deal made about it, other than it was unfortunate
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPphB84zMCM&feature=related
Smyth has the puck on his stick there is 30 feet seperating Pacioretty from the puck... thats the big deal
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 08:00:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
[
Beans...i agree, the hit on Grabo was bad, but the Miettinen one was just plain nasty, but legal. Didn't really even make it as far as the "stanchion" AND he was going east / west vs Miettinen's north / south! Good hard clean check from what i saw!
As far as the times you gave in the Chara / Patch hit, i see where you're going with it, but watching it, regardless of time, did it not seem like the hit was late? It didn't look to me like your classic "finishing your check" type hit, but maybe that's just the result of it clouding my opinion. I can't simply say, Chara had time to make the decision to not hit Patch as that's the case in pretty much every instance of "finishing your check" is it not?
This one is really tough. Intent is impossible to prove, but imo it was a reckless play that resulted in a serious head shot.
I maintain, 3-5 games would have been good with me.
No, I actually don't see it as a late hit at all. You see that 10 times a game when a defensemen clears the puck and you can often give it a 2-3 Mississippi's before the forward on the forecheck 'finishes' his check.
As I stated, from the time Max P chips the puck until the time he is making contact with the stanchion is less than a second. Not a late hit in my opinion and nothing could have stopped some kind of hit from happening at that point.
But Chara did not need to 'push' Max P into the turnbuckle. That is the part that easily could have been avoided and should have been suspended upon. |
|
|
|
shellac
Top Prospect
30 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 09:45:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
quote:
Originally posted by shellac
Hey isn't this alot like the hit Smyth took that ended his 08 season with the Avs?
Sure looks familiar, and I don't remember there being such a big deal made about it, other than it was unfortunate
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPphB84zMCM&feature=related
Smyth has the puck on his stick there is 30 feet seperating Pacioretty from the puck... thats the big deal
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
Sorry, "Big Deal" probably was not the proper choice of words.
I understand that it was a late hit.....Interference...etc....and I totally understand the severity of the injury....
I just think the NHL's focus should be more on what they can do to these areas on the boards to make them safer....if that is at all possible.
And if I see one more news cast or posting comparing this "Accident" to the McSorley or Bertuzzi incident, I'm gonna puke.....Not even the same category of situation.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 10:02:11
|
I get that the puck was gone and I get that it was at the other blue line when the actual hit occurs, but has everyone forgotten how fast the puck can move??
As I said now 3 times that I don't believe anyone can argue, it was less than 1 second from the time Paciorretty chipped the puck ahead with his stick to time he made contact with the glass.
Less than 1 second. |
|
|
|
spade632
Rookie
Canada
247 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 10:07:22
|
Joe thornton and Hank Sedin give their takes:
From here : http://www.vancouversun.com/news/stars+Henrik+Sedin+Thornton+into+Zdeno+Chara+decision+Bruins/4419822/story.html
Thornton:
quote:
“It’s just something with Boston,” Thornton said. “It just seems like they have a horseshoe. We’ve seen the [Milan] Lucic cross-check to the head [of Dominic Moore] earlier, and there’s no disciplinary thing.
“It’s just something about Boston and the disciplinary [process] is on their side. I’m not sure why that is. I’m not assuming that Colin’s kid is on the team and that’s why, but it’s really bizarre.”
Sedin:
quote:
“What are you doing to do the next time Trevor Gillies comes down and runs a guy into the thing? You can't give him anything. And you tell the guys [Chara] has no history, so the next time he does it he still has no history because he didn't get suspended. I don't see the reasoning behind it. Give him at least something to show that's not acceptable.”
“I'll tell you this: if you say that you don't know where things are around the ice, I think you're not telling the truth,” Sedin said. “You play the game for 20 years, you know it's there. It's gotten to the point, you have to suspend guys if you hit the head. You have to do it even if guys say they didn't mean to do it or it's an accident. You have to start somewhere.
“I don't think players know where the limit is. That's the bottom line.”
|
Edited by - spade632 on 03/11/2011 10:10:01 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 10:20:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by shellac
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
quote:
Originally posted by shellac
Hey isn't this alot like the hit Smyth took that ended his 08 season with the Avs?
Sure looks familiar, and I don't remember there being such a big deal made about it, other than it was unfortunate
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPphB84zMCM&feature=related
Smyth has the puck on his stick there is 30 feet seperating Pacioretty from the puck... thats the big deal
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
Sorry, "Big Deal" probably was not the proper choice of words.
I understand that it was a late hit.....Interference...etc....and I totally understand the severity of the injury....
I just think the NHL's focus should be more on what they can do to these areas on the boards to make them safer....if that is at all possible.
And if I see one more news cast or posting comparing this "Accident" to the McSorley or Bertuzzi incident, I'm gonna puke.....Not even the same category of situation.
If "big deal" wasn't a good choice of words, neither is "accident". It was a purposeful check against the boards, and if we cannot determine that it was on purpose to be delivered at the stanchion, we certainly cannot determine whether it WASN'T on purpose either. That is a fine point that some people are missing.
Either way, just like reckless driving doesn't mean to cause serious injury but sometimes does (and often doesn't), reckless checks like this are just that - reckless.
And Shellac - not saying that the stanchion shouldn't be changed - it should, but . . . blaming this injury on a post is not really the point, is it?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 10:31:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I get that the puck was gone and I get that it was at the other blue line when the actual hit occurs, but has everyone forgotten how fast the puck can move??
As I said now 3 times that I don't believe anyone can argue, it was less than 1 second from the time Paciorretty chipped the puck ahead with his stick to time he made contact with the glass.
Less than 1 second.
Beans, i had trouble determining exact times when i watched as it goes pretty quick, but whether it's one second, less than one second or slightly more than one second doesn't really matter in the context. I don't know what the rule is on late hits, and i agree that looking at a time of approx 1 sec doesn't seem to be late, but looking at the video it does seem late. Maybe it's because it appears more to be interference than actually finishing his check? What's the difference. When a dman plays the puck and a forward finishes his check a sec or 2 later, it seems that's normal. But when you look at this, although Pacioretty chipped the puck past him, he never really appears to have what you'd call "possesion" of it.
I dunno, i'm not trying to argue really, i'm just saying, there's something about this hit that makes it more than simply finishing your check. In my mind, it's certainly "reckless".
I'm also hearing more and more players agree with what Henrik Sedin said about them knowing exactly where they are at all times after playing the game all their lives!
|
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 11:13:16
|
If you look at this logically and remove emotion, Chara didn't break any rules that would merit a suspension. The precedent had been set dozens of times in the past with stanchion hits and those never resulted in disciplinary action. So you can't make one up for him now. That is why he was not suspended. Disgusted or not you need to be consistent and the NHL was consistent in this case. But it doesn't always have to be that way; look at the work they are doing with Headshots. Definitely progress there.
To me the answer for this is fairly simple:
1) you now create a rule pertaining to hits into the stanchion
2) you angle the stanchion so impacts are less dangerous
3) you make soft outer-shelled shoulder pads mandatory
The first rule now gives you proper authority to hand out suspensions moving forward. The second rule minimizes future injuries. And the 3rd change is more for shoulder hits to the head but also reduces injuries.
You may not eliminate every injury surrounding the stanchion but you'd dramatically reduce them (a rare occurence anyway) And this would mean that the NHL now has some governing regulation to draw upon when disciplining (which will also act as a deterent) The cost to the NHL would be relatively minimal and the savings would be priceless of course. |
|
|
|
shellac
Top Prospect
30 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 11:35:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
quote:
Originally posted by shellac
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
quote:
Originally posted by shellac
Hey isn't this alot like the hit Smyth took that ended his 08 season with the Avs?
Sure looks familiar, and I don't remember there being such a big deal made about it, other than it was unfortunate
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPphB84zMCM&feature=related
Smyth has the puck on his stick there is 30 feet seperating Pacioretty from the puck... thats the big deal
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
Sorry, "Big Deal" probably was not the proper choice of words.
I understand that it was a late hit.....Interference...etc....and I totally understand the severity of the injury....
I just think the NHL's focus should be more on what they can do to these areas on the boards to make them safer....if that is at all possible.
And if I see one more news cast or posting comparing this "Accident" to the McSorley or Bertuzzi incident, I'm gonna puke.....Not even the same category of situation.
If "big deal" wasn't a good choice of words, neither is "accident". It was a purposeful check against the boards, and if we cannot determine that it was on purpose to be delivered at the stanchion, we certainly cannot determine whether it WASN'T on purpose either. That is a fine point that some people are missing.
Either way, just like reckless driving doesn't mean to cause serious injury but sometimes does (and often doesn't), reckless checks like this are just that - reckless.
And Shellac - not saying that the stanchion shouldn't be changed - it should, but . . . blaming this injury on a post is not really the point, is it?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I highly doubt that Chara (in a split-second) thought "Stanchion ....Patch.....rub him out.....i've been waiting for this!" and did it...thats BS
It was kind of reckless only because the hit was slightly late, but the play truly was not that reckless, it was a check/rubout that happens every night in every rink, but as per the law of percentages it happened in that one really dangerous spot. If it happened anywhere else on the ice the result would have not been so brutal....so I believe that the area of the boards where this took place has a lot to do with what happened. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 11:57:27
|
Alex, I think the one thing we can agree on is the recklessness of this hit. I don't personally believe that the hit could have been completely avoided and I don't see a hit being late in less than a second. But Chara's push of Max P is the reckless part. It would have be a devistating hit regardless, but that push made it worse than it should have been.
And to Slozo, I agree 100%. The stanchion does not make this hit dangerous, Chara's push of Max P makes it dangerous. However, knowing there is a risk there, the NHL/NHLPA should do something to that area of the ice and have something good come from this bad situation. Even in times where the hit is not reckless, there is still the potential of someone to strike that are of the boards. Be it by a hit or losing control on their skates or whatever.
|
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 12:27:08
|
Intresting Article on TSN about bettman receiving a 5 year extension back in November that wasnt announced publicly until now, turns out that the head of the Board of Governors is Bostons Owner, he is responsible for hiring the Commisionaire and negotiating his contract, that contract is 7.2 million a year with that type of salary you would figure it was Glen Sather handing out the contracts. So not only does Colin Campbell have a son on the Bruins but the Owner is determining Bettmans wage. im sure these factors didnt play a part in Chara's hearing
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=357561 |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 13:13:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803
Intresting Article on TSN about bettman receiving a 5 year extension back in November that wasnt announced publicly until now, turns out that the head of the Board of Governors is Bostons Owner, he is responsible for hiring the Commisionaire and negotiating his contract, that contract is 7.2 million a year with that type of salary you would figure it was Glen Sather handing out the contracts. So not only does Colin Campbell have a son on the Bruins but the Owner is determining Bettmans wage. im sure these factors didnt play a part in Chara's hearing
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=357561
Just heard this on the radio as i was eating lunch. When i heard he was making 7.2 per year, i threw up in my mouth, thus ruining my lunch. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 13:19:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803
Intresting Article on TSN about bettman receiving a 5 year extension back in November that wasnt announced publicly until now, turns out that the head of the Board of Governors is Bostons Owner, he is responsible for hiring the Commisionaire and negotiating his contract, that contract is 7.2 million a year with that type of salary you would figure it was Glen Sather handing out the contracts. So not only does Colin Campbell have a son on the Bruins but the Owner is determining Bettmans wage. im sure these factors didnt play a part in Chara's hearing
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=357561
Watch it guest, you'll quickly have Bettman defenders shouting "concpiracy theorist!!!" at you for point out obvious collusion, obvious and well proven already (see: the emails from Campbell) unprofessional and biased behaviour, and obvious hidden interests that have nothing to do with the safety of the players and good of the league.
We need pitchforks!
I'm overstating here, but really, it is indeed a bush league when Bettman takes the stance he does after Air Canada's statement, after Mario's outburst, after Crosby's injury and comments, and now key players (Sedin, Thornton) have come out with damning remarks against the league for discipline on Chara, if not the whole system.
It really is the beginning of a full on revolt against the league management . . . and I think it just went up a notch or two:
I heard rumours that Crosby's family is having an intervention with him, to convince him to retire . . . for health reasons.
ahem.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 13:45:52
|
I don't think that Campbell should be involved in discipline when he has a son playing for the NHL.
However, as one of those apparent Bettman supporters(which couldn't be further from the truth) understand is it all of the owners in the NHL who control the BOG, not just one. There has to be a person(s) responsible for dealing with the commish and his salary and what ever else. If not Boston, it's gonna be the owner of another team. If the deal was negotiated by the owner of the Leafs or Canucks there would certainly be someone that would then find some kind of conspiracy with that too.
By the way, the poster failed to mention it was a 9 member committee of owners that unanimously approved the extension. Even if Jacobs pushed for it, 8 other owners all agreed.
Finally, if the deal was done in the November and it's a 5 year extension, how does that have any impact on a ruling today?? If I have a 5 year contract and I rule against my boss and get fired, I get 5 years of pay for not working. Or, I work for someone else and collect by $35ish million for getting fired from the NHL.
I fail to see how a deal signed in November has relevance in March. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 03/11/2011 13:48:35 |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 13:55:26
|
| Bettman speaks! always thought mr bean looks a little like bettman myself. Ya 8 others voted but theres 30 teams in the league shouldnt there of been 30 members voting on his extension? and howcome the public doesnt hear about any of this until months later. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 13:57:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803
Bettman speaks! always thought mr bean looks a little like bettman myself. Ya 8 others voted but theres 30 teams in the league shouldnt there of been 30 members voting on his extension? and howcome the public doesnt hear about any of this until months later.
Umm, maybe because the BOG has other things to do than to get 30 people together to make every single decision. It's not like that is an uncommon business practice.
Finally, what does the public have the right to know for?? Is the NHL a publically traded company that requires full disclosure to all of their activities?? Nope. Not at all. |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 14:14:32
|
| You would think if there was one decision the 30 members should sit down and talk about it would be who runs the show? and in the end its the public us fans buying the merchandise and filling the arenas so ya i think id like to know whats going on with the buisness im supporting. I guess your just gettin use to backing up losers (edmonton, bettman, daly etc..) eh beans ;) |
|
|
|
Guest2753
( )
|
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 15:10:51
|
| That therory doesn't explain why Mat Cooke got nothing for probably ending the Bruins best player's career. Marc Savard is/was a much better player than Max Pacioretty. You would think that if Jacobs had any influence, Mat Cooke would never have played again that year. |
|
|
|
admin
Forum Admin
Canada
2341 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 15:23:36
|
| Let's keep this on track folks. Pacioretty and Chara hit please. Where relevant feel free to bring in Bettman etc. but keep it fully relevant. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 15:53:28
|
Oh Boy!
Of all the hockey stories to set off a revolution, why would it be the one that was, albeit arguably, an unfortunate result from an otherwise run of the mill interference call?
Rhetoric of sponsorship scandal, criminal charges, collusion and worse from the league administration, and even our glorious politicos, getting their sound bytes in.
NUCKIN FUTS!!!
As much as I agree, that it's a circumstance that didn't have to and shouldn't have happened, it's not the worst thing hockey has ever seen by a mile.
To the Air Canadas, Prime Minister Harpers, outraged man on the street, calling for jail time, I simply say, Get a grip.
This is a game that allows players to punch each other in the face with naught more than a 5 minute rest as deterrent. This is a game that preaches physicality and reveres the toughness of it's players.
It has many foibles and needs constant monitoring to continually try and improve the safety factors involved, but it it what it is, and until this incident apparently, it was acceptable as it is.
Where were all the pundits screaming about the dangers of the stanchions before this? They have been this way since a rink had anything more than open boards. I'm not even sure they had padding until the 70s or so, I remember the chain link and metal poles sans padding.
Indeed, now is the time to make the changes to these things that increase the safety for the players, maybe this should serve as the catalyst for many changes.
I'm just not sure FrankenChara should be chased from the village while it happens.
Bettman? yeah go ahead, he should be chased out, not because of this, but because like Alex says, him making that much is kinda nauseating.  |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 16:18:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2753
That therory doesn't explain why Mat Cooke got nothing for probably ending the Bruins best player's career. Marc Savard is/was a much better player than Max Pacioretty. You would think that if Jacobs had any influence, Mat Cooke would never have played again that year.
Yes well one year ago Mr Campbell who hands out the majority of the punishment in the nhl had a personal issue with mr Savard, Remember that email scandal that had him in hot water? if not heres a link
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Have-Savard-emails-exposed-NHL-s-Colin-Campbell-;_ylt=Ah3FEAPeZGFsbXADiiND3.ZShgM6?urn=nhl-285531
Now that his Son is a Bruin and Savard is possibly finished his career in the NHL im sure mr Campbell will look harder into any future cheapshots his sons team receives. Bettman and his group of minions also had not received their contract renewal at that time so things have definetly changed in the last year. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2011 : 17:53:49
|
Campbell reportedly has nothing to do with any discipline involving the Bruins because of the conflict of interest involving his son. Any Bruins discipline is handled by Mike Murphy, NHL Sr. VP of Hockey Operations.
FER, well said as always. All this outside involvment does not change anything that happened and frankly does nothing and may force a knee-jerk reaction. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2011 : 00:29:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Campbell reportedly has nothing to do with any discipline involving the Bruins because of the conflict of interest involving his son. Any Bruins discipline is handled by Mike Murphy, NHL Sr. VP of Hockey Operations.
Beans, not trying to argue or start something as this is totally aside from everything we've been "discussing", but is it just me, or do you get the feeling that regardless of what the NHL says about Murphy ruling on this, that Campbell has "some say" in matters such as this one? |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2011 : 01:59:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I get that the puck was gone and I get that it was at the other blue line when the actual hit occurs, but has everyone forgotten how fast the puck can move??
As I said now 3 times that I don't believe anyone can argue, it was less than 1 second from the time Paciorretty chipped the puck ahead with his stick to time he made contact with the glass.
Less than 1 second.
The puck is chipped before Chara even starts the hit, he knows the puck isn't there he clearly wanted to hit Pacioretty ,, and i'm not one to say Chara did it on purpose and i think it's ridiculous that some morons in this city see it fitting to call the police non stop about the hit wanting them to arrest Chara even worse that a Frecnh broadcaster on a local radio station has encouraged people to call the police about the incident and even rally infront of the hospital (which the idiots ended up doing and blocking the emergency entrance) All this is insane it is exactly what it is fact for fact.. The Puck is gone, Chara commits interference, Pacioretty hits the `turnbuckle` Broken neck and concusion occurs. Due to the injury the refs amde the right call interference and a game misconduct, Mostly to tty and keep control of the rest of the game. I think we all agree with this there is no argument here am i right? now as much as i think Chara did not mean to injure Pacioretty i am sure as sure can be he wanted to hurt him. (what i mean by hurt is make him pay along the boards hard. no injury him permantly) but the NHL cannot suspend Chara because they can`t look into what Chara wanted to do only he knows that ,, the facts are as stated above and the facts do not warrant suspension as groosome of an event as it was,..
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
|
|
|
Guest3374
( )
|
Posted - 03/12/2011 : 09:59:49
|
| god. habs fans calling the cops...im sorry but if you are a cop calling hab fan you really need to get a life... |
|
|
|
Guest3374
( )
|
Posted - 03/12/2011 : 10:06:50
|
| and thousands of calls to your police station making the cops unable to do some real police work... reminds me of you all trashing your downtown area after WINNING a playoff series... a bit much, no? |
|
|
|
Guest2185
( )
|
Posted - 03/13/2011 : 12:26:08
|
I watched Chara fight alot in JR ... and alot against big ol' Parker Big GL wont stand a chance ... .. he is too old and slow .. ...
at anyrate ...
Mark my words ... within 2 years there will be glass all the way around the rink ... only way off the bench is out the door ...
|
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 12:28:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2185
I watched Chara fight alot in JR ... and alot against big ol' Parker Big GL wont stand a chance ... .. he is too old and slow .. ...
at anyrate ...
Mark my words ... within 2 years there will be glass all the way around the rink ... only way off the bench is out the door ...
consider those words marked!, wont happen, sanctions will be modified, Don cherry had a decent idea to make them on a 45 Degree angle |
|
|
|
Guest4746
( )
|
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 14:41:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Couple of things:
1) The point behind Chara's size and physicality has zero to do with this hit. What it has to do with is in the measure of discipline. Agree or disagree, that was my point. I never said this hit was impacted in any way by Chara's size.
2) Let me give you another example. Kurtis Foster is skating against an opponent towards an iced puck. Torrey Mitchell runs him into the boards (when no one had the puck) and it resulted in a broken leg and Foster missing over a year of hockey.
ILLEGAL PLAY. ILLEGAL PLAY. ILLEGAL PLAY.
RESULTS IN VERY, VERY SERIOUS INJURY.
3) Let me give you another example. Brian Berard is skating towards Marian Hossa as Hossa begins to take a slapshot. The follow-through of the shot strikes Berard in the eye and he loses much of his sight in indirectly results in the end of his playing career.
ILLEGAL PLAY. ILLEGAL PLAY. ILLEGAL PLAY.
RESULTS IN VERY, VERY SERIOUS INJURY.
Finally, just because someone disagree's with your opinion does not make the opinion ludicrous. It appears that my point my garbage is being misinterpreted. I never condoned Chara's actions. I said very clearly that I would have been fine with a suspension. It absolutely was dangerous and reckless and it could have been avoided. However, there is nothing against the rules and presedent has been established regarding hits into the stanchion. You want to argue something, argue the rule that does not exist, because that is really the point at hand. Unless you are saying this hit is perfectly fine if Pacioretty has the puck??? IF you are saying this hit is unacceptable regardless of the puck being there or not, then the argument is the lack of the rule. Suspending Chara does not change the fact that players can hit other players into that area of the ice does it?? It just says do it but don't hurt anyone. Isn't that the ultimate problem in the first place??? That being the message the NHL is sending.
A follow through on a shot is not an illegal play! |
|
|
|
tbar
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
376 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 14:48:04
|
OK I have read most of this topic. I have seen the hit a couple of times and all I have to say is no suspension is dead wrong!
Not one person has mentioned this from what I have read but in case you did not know any infraction resulting in injury can be called a 5 minute major at the refs discretion.
Now if the Ref's who were on the ice made the correct call (and they did) the NHL pretty much slapped the officials in the face by not giving a couple game suspension.
If I remember correctly Ovechkin got suspended last year and the play was a 2 minute penalty that caused an injury, The NHL came out and said any penalty resulting in injury is a suspendable offence......WTF is this then?
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 15:05:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by tbar
OK I have read most of this topic. I have seen the hit a couple of times and all I have to say is no suspension is dead wrong!
Not one person has mentioned this from what I have read but in case you did not know any infraction resulting in injury can be called a 5 minute major at the refs discretion.
Now if the Ref's who were on the ice made the correct call (and they did) the NHL pretty much slapped the officials in the face by not giving a couple game suspension.
If I remember correctly Ovechkin got suspended last year and the play was a 2 minute penalty that caused an injury, The NHL came out and said any penalty resulting in injury is a suspendable offence......WTF is this then?
Tbar.....read what i bolded above. Now, with what you said in bold, it doesn't say is "a suspendable offense". It says a 5 min major can be called. Does EVERY 5 min major get a subsequential suspension?
The Ovechkin one was prob the one that the refs were wrong on. That's prob why they suspended him later (the league).
Don't get me wrong, i agree Chara got off on something he should prob have gotten a handful of games for. Just mentioning that what you're saying isn't necessarily bang on. The refs got the call right, and for whatever reason, the league didn't give a suspension. This to me does not imply that the refs ruled wrongly on it so personally i don't think the league is throwing them under the bus by any means. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Chara "headshot" to Paciorretty.... 
