Results 11 to 20 of 27
-
03-09-2010, 10:37 PM #11Account Suspended
Due To Rules Violations
Ultimate answer is coming from me...Eliminate the instigator penalty... The ballerinas in the league will soon take note of the punishment that will be handed to them if they continue with dirty plays...And the players will police themselves accordingly... The problem with the NHL is the inability to consistently call penalties when needed... So often its the retaliation that gets caught...Eliminate the Instigator penalty and in essence you are protecting the players EVEN MORE... No I'm not saying the NHL should fall back to what it was in the 70's and 80's with the bench clearing brawls I'm saying I don't see a problem if players deem a hit dirty to settle it right there... Each player involved in the fistacuffs gets a 5minute major and THATS IT... If I'm the enforcer on another team and playing the Penguins and Crybaby Crosby is taking hacks all night at my guys (which he does and never gets called for cuz hes like the Jesus of Hockey apparently) Im sending notice on all their players.... if they continue then Im jumping Sidney... and maybe that Rupp Guy too..
-
-
03-09-2010, 10:51 PM #12
Ummm...Tell us how you REALLY feel....
-
03-09-2010, 11:00 PM #13
it won't eliminate head shots. players are bigger, stronger and faster then they were years ago and that's why we are seeing more major injuries.
guys like phaneuf and matt cooke will keep doing what they do even if you negate the instigator rule. they will just run and let the other guys on the team take care of them. the way to make it hurt a player that takes cheap shots is to suspend them for long periods of time that includes playoff games.
i think it was either last year or the year before where pronger kept taking runs at folks and he was suspended twice in the playoffs. that's how you hurt a team and make them think twice about taking runs and trying to injure folks.
cooke should get a 10 game suspension for this hit. he'd lose 1/8 of his salary (hurts cooke) and the pens lose him for the stretch run (hurts team). that will fix the problem w/o resorting to bench clearing brawls.
-
-
03-09-2010, 11:26 PM #14
Good comments/debate guys, keep it coming!
-
03-09-2010, 11:27 PM #15
Not to stir up a hornet's nest, but......
Richards hit on Booth.....if Booth had not started to glide and admire the pass he had just made, he would have seen Richards coming and been ready for the hit.
Cooke on Savard...when Savard was hit, his head had been lowered due to the momentum of just taking a wrist shot toward the goal. If you watch slow mo on this, this is why his head got hit. Not to absolve Cooke totally for this hit, he did stick out the elbow as contact was made, (as most players do when they make contact), maybe even took an extra step or two, but things happen at a very quick pace out there. Quicker than most of us will ever know.
As for Scott Stevens, nearly all of his open ice hits were hard, body-rocking, and dirty, by today's standards. He usually left his feet, which today is considered charging. And Ovechkin is the worst for that today.
Remember when they brought in the hitting from behind rule....everybody started turning their back to a player who was about to hit them, and along the boards too. You can't touch anybody anymore, and that is hurting the game, in my opinion.
I think that the GM's are going to have a really hard time trying to come up with a "what is a what is a what" for these types of hits. It should be interesting to see what comes of all of this.
Okay, let the bashers begin....lolLast edited by bdcsports; 03-09-2010 at 11:29 PM.
-
-
03-09-2010, 11:44 PM #16
definitely won't bash you for that - i just watched melrose talking about it and he was saying that by the current rule the cooke hit was legal. i'm not sure if i agree as i think it was late, but it wasn't super late.
i think there will be plenty of hitting in the NHL if you ban hits to the head. hits to the head are banned in Olympic hockey and that was some great hockey that was also very physical.
and to amend my earlier statement, watching cooke's hit in slow-motion shows it wasn't with an elbow. it was late (not horribly so) and it was from the blind side (which isn't illegal but is dirty w/ intent to injure), but his elbow was down.
i don't see a good reason not to ban hits to the head. if a guy ducks and gets hit in the head, that's different. but there's no good reason to hit a guy in the head. cooke's hit was not necessary in any way.
-
03-10-2010, 01:20 AM #17
I don't disagree with that, but watch again...his head is lower than it normally would be because he had just taken a shot and momentum carried his upper body downward...am I correct on that ? If so, then the fact is it wouldn't have been an "intentional" hit to the head. Again, just my opinion. And I do agree the hit was slightly, but only slightly late, just like the Richards hit.
-
-
03-10-2010, 01:34 AM #18
he may have dipped a little to shoot but the intent to injure comes from the fact that cooke didn't have to hit him there. he was vulnerable (not looking, just shot, puck gone) and he should have let up.
and i know this isn't your argument, but some say that if your head is down and you get run over it's your own fault. in this case, savard should be protected because he just shot. it's not like he was skating up ice with his head down.
-
03-10-2010, 01:47 AM #19
I actually have no argument at all...just wondering how the h e doublehockeysticks the Gm's are gonna figure this out...who do you punish...example..
Richards not punished....Cooke punished - virtually the same hit
I know Cooke has a history, but all the same....
Scenario....winger going down the boards with the puck
Defenseman has him lined up to hit...makes the hit
Winger ducks to avoid hit
Does defenseman have the onus on him to NOT make the hit?
He is already committed...winger puts himself in vulnerable position...
Is this hit an illegal head shot?
Hmmmmmm !!! Lets me think on that one for awhile.
-
03-10-2010, 01:58 AM #20
i think it's going to be about intent. both the cooke hit and the richards hit are very similar but cooke would probably get a longer suspension because he has a history.
i like what melrose said - either you ban all hits to the head or you leave it alone. i think there will be some issues as far as ducking and all of that. probably a combination of vulnerabiltiy of player and intent to injure. a board from behind or a open ice hit with a guy not looking will get more than two guys going into the boards and one hits the other a little high.
as melrose said, there is no rule against a shoulder hit to the head currently. usually the only time you see them is when someone isn't looking or if someone goes headhunting against the boards.
the onus will be on the players to make sure their hits are legal and if a guy is vulnerable they can hold up. most players do, guys like cooke don't.
-
Originally Posted by policeradio556 
