General Hockey Talk - Injuries, signings, factoids + other news from around the league

No. When the puck is dumped into the corner and the D-man continues to take a half dozen strides to rub the forward out between the center ice line and the blue line it is an interference penalty every time.

“What people are upset in this room is that I guess he drove the elbow through the head with an intent to injure kind of thing,” Cammalleri said. “I don’t think Chara premeditated this, but from experience when a player gets under your skin for whatever reason, you remember it and you notice when he’s out there. You know whom you’re playing against. Especially a divisional opponent because you’re so familiar. You can almost tell by the movements of a player. There’s a lot of tells, from what brand of stick they’re using to how they tape it.”

Weak argument. They seem to be grasping at straws.

I just sat down for lunch and, scrolling through both the CTV and CBC news broadcasts, I see that this story is now 'top story' material. Based on that alone, I'd say a suspension is coming, rightly or wrongly, based purely on the optics.

rooneypoo wrote:I just sat down for lunch and, scrolling through both the CTV and CBC news broadcasts, I see that this story is now 'top story' material. Based on that alone, I'd say a suspension is coming, rightly or wrongly, based purely on the optics.

I'll look forward to reading the reasoning for the suspension when it comes down. Intent to injure? Prove it!

wprager wrote:No. When the puck is dumped into the corner and the D-man continues to take a half dozen strides to rub the forward out between the center ice line and the blue line it is an interference penalty every time.

I'm going to assume you are joking becuase there is no way I would believe you have ever watched a game of hockey in your life if you are not.

rooneypoo wrote:I just sat down for lunch and, scrolling through both the CTV and CBC news broadcasts, I see that this story is now 'top story' material. Based on that alone, I'd say a suspension is coming, rightly or wrongly, based purely on the optics.

Have they ever suspended someone for a hit like this ?

Ryan Smyth's hit didn't warrant one, I think Spezza got hit by Orpik like that a few years ago and nothing.

Mind you no one was hurt.

NHL may just go with precedence like they did with Cooke's hit on Savard, another high profile hit.

SpezDispenser wrote:“What people are upset in this room is that I guess he drove the elbow through the head with an intent to injure kind of thing,” Cammalleri said. “I don’t think Chara premeditated this, but from experience when a player gets under your skin for whatever reason, you remember it and you notice when he’s out there. You know whom you’re playing against. Especially a divisional opponent because you’re so familiar. You can almost tell by the movements of a player. There’s a lot of tells, from what brand of stick they’re using to how they tape it.”

Weak argument. They seem to be grasping at straws.

Of course it's a weak argument. Until the NHL makes things a lot more black and white from calls on the ice to calls off of it, this will continue to happen.

Hoags wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:I just sat down for lunch and, scrolling through both the CTV and CBC news broadcasts, I see that this story is now 'top story' material. Based on that alone, I'd say a suspension is coming, rightly or wrongly, based purely on the optics.

Have they ever suspended someone for a hit like this ?

Ryan Smyth's hit didn't warrant one, I think Spezza got hit by Orpik like that a few years ago and nothing.

Mind you no one was hurt.

NHL may just go with precedence like they did with Cooke's hit on Savard, another high profile hit.

When I see news broadcasters debating this issue, on national news networks, for hours on end, with updates / rehashes every 30 minutes, that changes things for me.

The NHL will take action to save face, from a PR angle. "See? Chara suspended. We take concussions seriously, and we don't condone this stuff, and it's not a regular part of our game. We're good, humane people." Prepare for it.

NEELY wrote:
Of course it's a weak argument. Until the NHL makes things a lot more black and white from calls on the ice to calls off of it, this will continue to happen.

In this specific instance it'll have to be a call to the Bell Centre asking them to fix the partition. I don't know what else they can do, put in a rule that says you may not hit a guy if he's too close to the partition? Things'll get dicey - the NHL has to realize that if they suspend, it opens a pandora's box of issues.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:I just sat down for lunch and, scrolling through both the CTV and CBC news broadcasts, I see that this story is now 'top story' material. Based on that alone, I'd say a suspension is coming, rightly or wrongly, based purely on the optics.

I'll look forward to reading the reasoning for the suspension when it comes down. Intent to injure? Prove it!

That's the flaw. Did he intend to put him in the hospital? Safe to say no. The criteria should be did the player's reckless actions cause an injury? In this case, yes. Did he know what he was doing? Only a fool would say no.

dennycrane wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:I just sat down for lunch and, scrolling through both the CTV and CBC news broadcasts, I see that this story is now 'top story' material. Based on that alone, I'd say a suspension is coming, rightly or wrongly, based purely on the optics.

I'll look forward to reading the reasoning for the suspension when it comes down. Intent to injure? Prove it!

That's the flaw. Did he intend to put him in the hospital? Safe to say no. The criteria should be did the player's reckless actions cause an injury? In this case, yes. Did he know what he was doing? Only a fool would say no.

Absolutley he knew what he was doing. 9 times out of 10 the guy gets up and it's not even a penalty, though. Until there are a clear set of rules both on and off the ice, things are called consistantly, and people and players all know what to expect other than the unexpected, this will continue to happen.

Absolutely no one knows what to do right now because of this.

My Philosophy prof used bodychecking in hockey as an example for arguing intent vs. foreseeing. He argued that the player throwing the check does not intend (hopefully) to cause injury, but realizes injury is a foreseeable consequence. But should he stop checking? He also argued that perhaps some players do intend to injure, whether it be simply to wear down a star player to remove him from the game.

Players assume the risk when they step on the ice and they do at times put themselves in vulnerable positions to sustain injury. I'm pretty sure that a player would get benched for not laying a hit in most situations. The goal is to physically separate puck handler from puck. I think that would be the agreed upon definition. But we see that players take that definition and right to whole new levels. We see players ease up at times and we see players finish their checks considerably late. Where's the line drawn?

This whole Chara incident is going to cause major problems in the NHL. I am on the side that he SHOULD NOT be suspended, supsend the Habs for having their arena built improperly. It was bound to happen, and it did. So whatchya gonna do about it now? Suspend Chara. Sure. Then what happens? What happens to the game? Will hitting be taken out completely? Will they get suspended everytime a guy gets hit in that area? This is going to make heads spin I'm sure. This will probably be another issue added to the list in making sure there is another lockout.

I feel horrible for Max, that really sucks and it was very unlucky for him to have that happen. I hope that his career will bounce back from this and that he heals completely.

No suspension or fine for Chara

Give the NHL credit for making a decision and sticking to it as opposed to bowing to public pressure. Interesting debate.

Dash wrote:No suspension or fine for Chara

Huh. The NHL is going to be beat up in by the non-sports news networks over this one, for sure. They were thumping for their proverbial pound of flesh earlier today, that's for sure.

If Max had not been injured, we would not be talking about this at all.

Good, NHL got it right. It was a hockey play that went wrong. Feel awful for MP but that's the risk you take playing the game of hockey and yes, it is a risk every single night.