Austin Watson fires a slapshot at Jeremy Lauzon at the end of the game

[x Tame Impala]

Why are fines so low in general? $2k for this. Should be closer to $20k no?

 

[Siludin]

Why are fines so low in general? $2k for this. Should be closer to $20k no?

Fine amounts are negotiated by the NHLPA

Players can be fined up to 50% of one day's salary, up to a maximum of $10,000.00 for their first offense, and $15,000.00 for any subsequent offenses (the player had been fined in the 12 months before this fine).[1] Coaches, non-playing personnel, and teams are not restricted to such maximums, though they can still be treated as repeat offenders.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

I honestly don't think Watson was aiming to hit Lauzon there, I think he's just an idiot and was just trying to hammer the puck as hard as he could out frustration, More reckless than intentionally dirty in my opinion.

 

[Konnan511]

That was not a hockey play. He was looking straight at Lauzon and fired it into his skates. 100% intent to injure.

I don't think he was attempting to injure him, I think he was just being a dick.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

I don't think he was attempting to injure him, I think he was just being a dick.

Injuries are usually caused by accident or by a player being a dick.

Doing a dick thing does not protect against accusations of intent to injure.

 

[AndreRoy]

Covid champs are showing their dirty tricks again eh? Always dirty when losing.

Fan of a loser team disrespecting the best team of the past decade again, eh? Always jealous when losing.

 

[abax44]

Lightning fan here - there was no reason for him to take that shot and he should be disciplined for it. Stupid play.

What if it was Kucherov?

 

[Avs2022]

That looked 100% on purpose, and I don't for either team. I'm laughing at the folks trying to justify it as an honest mistake.

 

[Five Alarm Fire]

What if it was Kucherov?

Why would that matter?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Even if he didn’t mean to do it, he still did it.

If I’m having a tantrum and throw my stick in the air, and it comes down and hits someone, I deserve to face the same punishment as if I had deliberately thrown it at him.

If I’m pissy about getting knocked down and decide I’m going to rough up the next guy I encounter along the boards, and I accidentally send him head-first and seriously hurt him, I deserve to face the same punishment as if I had deliberately boarded him.

In this case, Watson is taking a purposeless slapshot in the direction of another player at center ice. It doesn’t matter whether it was just frustration, or if he really meant to aim it at the guy. There is no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt for something this stupid when it ends up hurting someone.

 

[AndreRoy]

Even if he didn’t mean to do it, he still did it.

If I’m having a tantrum and throw my stick in the air, and it comes down and hits someone, I deserve to face the same punishment as if I had deliberately thrown it at him.

If I’m pissy about getting knocked down and decide I’m going to rough up the next guy I encounter along the boards, and I accidentally send him head-first and seriously hurt him, I deserve to face the same punishment as if I had deliberately boarded him.

In this case, Watson is taking a purposeless slapshot in the direction of another player at center ice. It doesn’t matter whether it was just frustration, or if he really meant to aim it at the guy. There is no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt for something this stupid when it ends up hurting someone.

The problem with your argument is the actions you’re talking about are not valid hockey plays; shooting the puck toward the opposing net while the clock is running, even if futile given the score and time remaining, is. Was it unnecessary, pointless, and done out of frustration? Sure. But it was perfectly legal and should not have resulted in a fine just because Lauzon was unfortunate enough to be in the way.

 

[Madap]

Tamp trying really hard to stay relevant. Not good at hockey anymore so have to pull dirty s*** like this to get noticed.

 

[AndreRoy]

Tamp trying really hard to stay relevant. Not good at hockey anymore so have to pull dirty s*** like this to get noticed.

Toronto fans are in no position to talk about teams being relevant.

 

[Sheppy]

For those saying "It wasn't intentional"

If you're playing this game, you're up 5-1 and see this happen to your teammate. What would you do? What would your reaction be?

"Ah, no big deal... it was an accident."

?

 

[Madap]

Toronto fans are in no position to talk about teams being relevant.

Well the beauty about Toronto is that we’re always relevant.

Good? No, we suck too. but make no mistake, we’re relevant.

 

[AndreRoy]

For those saying "It wasn't intentional"

If you're playing this game, you're up 5-1 and see this happen to your teammate. What would you do? What would your reaction be?

"Ah, no big deal... it was an accident."

?

All Watson did was shoot the puck while the game was still being played. Was it a pointless and futile effort that would not have changed the outcome even if it had gone in? Of course it was. But everyone who plays hockey knows (or should know) that the game isn’t over until the final horn sounds, and that while it’s being played you assume certain risks; one of those risks is getting hit by a shot. If play had been dead, or if my teammate had been so far away from the goal that Watson would have had to be aiming at him, then sure I’d be pissed. But if my teammate is going to position himself between the puck carrier and the net while the game is being played then he has to be ready for a shot to be taken at any time, and if he gets hit with one then that’s on him. It’s an unfortunate accident - nothing more.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The problem with your argument is the actions you’re talking about are not valid hockey plays; shooting the puck toward the opposing net while the clock is running, even if futile given the score and time remaining, is. Was it unnecessary, pointless, and done out of frustration? Sure. But it was perfectly legal and should not have resulted in a fine just because Lauzon was unfortunate enough to be in the way.

Throwing a hit is also perfectly legal, until you do it in a stupid and reckless way. At which point you own the outcome, regardless of intent.

 

[AndreRoy]

Well the beauty about Toronto is that we’re always relevant.

Good? No, we suck too. but make no mistake, we’re relevant.

If you say so.

 

[Sheppy]

All Watson did was shoot the puck while the game was still being played. Was it a pointless and futile effort that would not have changed the outcome even if it had gone in? Of course it was. But everyone who plays hockey knows (or should know) that the game isn’t over until the final horn sounds, and that while it’s being played you assume certain risks; one of those risks is getting hit by a shot. If play had been dead, or if my teammate had been so far away from the goal that Watson would have had to be aiming at him, then sure I’d be pissed. But if my teammate is going to position himself between the puck carrier and the net while the game is being played then he has to be ready for a shot to be taken at any time, and if he gets hit with one then that’s on him. It’s an unfortunate accident - nothing more.

Ok, so how would you react seeing your teammate on the ice in pain with 1 second left in a game that's completely out of reach?

 

[AndreRoy]

Throwing a hit is also perfectly legal, until you do it in a stupid and reckless way. At which point you own the outcome, regardless of intent.

There are rules against reckless hits that specify what is and isn’t allowed. Show me the rule that says you can’t take a shot while the game is being played.

 

[Coffey]

That looked 100% on purpose, and I don't for either team. I'm laughing at the folks trying to justify it as an honest mistake.

Delusional people. Or just straight up jerks who would do the same.

 

[AndreRoy]

Ok, so how would you react seeing your teammate on the ice in pain with 1 second left in a game that's completely out of reach?

I’d feel bad for the guy, sure. But last second shots happen all the time, in all sports, even in situations where the outcome won’t be changed. Unless there was reason to believe that Watson was aiming for my teammate and not for the net (and in this instance there’s none that any of us are aware of), I would have no cause to be upset with him.

If you think Watson shouldn’t be allowed to take that shot because it won’t change the outcome, then what you’re really arguing for is the implementation of a mercy rule and ending the game early when a certain score differential is reached, either with or without a time component being involved. If that’s what you want then fair enough. But if you think the game should be played until the end then everybody on the ice must be prepared to play it until the end, and that includes protecting themselves in dangerous situations; one of those dangerous situations is when one is positioned between the puck carrier and the net as a shot attempt is always a possibility. Watson was within his right to shoot the puck and Lauzon should have been ready for it.

 

[Coffey]

But last second shots happen all the time

Imagine thinking all situations are the same.
Just imagine.

 

[Sheppy]

I’d feel bad for the guy, sure. But last second shots happen all the time, in all sports, even in situations where the outcome won’t be changed. Unless there was reason to believe that Watson was aiming for my teammate and not for the net (and in this instance there’s none that any of us are aware of), I would have no reason to be upset with him.

So what you're saying... in a nutshell.

- 1 second left in a 5-1 game
- Slapshot clear as day in the direction of Lauzon
- Slapshot hits Lauzon, Lauzon on the ice in pain.
- Player who did this is... *checks notes*... Austin Watson

You're just like "Ah, he shouldn't have been standing there!"

Buddy, let me tell you one thing. I'm glad you aren't my teammate.

Would you have no reaction if your teammate got green lighted with 1 second left on the clock in a game that's out of reach too?

 

[deca guard]

Even if he didn’t mean to do it, he still did it.

If I’m having a tantrum and throw my stick in the air, and it comes down and hits someone, I deserve to face the same punishment as if I had deliberately thrown it at him.

If I’m pissy about getting knocked down and decide I’m going to rough up the next guy I encounter along the boards, and I accidentally send him head-first and seriously hurt him, I deserve to face the same punishment as if I had deliberately boarded him.

In this case, Watson is taking a purposeless slapshot in the direction of another player at center ice. It doesn’t matter whether it was just frustration, or if he really meant to aim it at the guy. There is no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt for something this stupid when it ends up hurting someone.

EXACTLY . nhl is a dangerous enough game to players health as it is without addintional stupid or evil behavior risking players health . but the league continues to refuse heavier fines for stupid or evil plays all at the cost to players health . the people running nhl are washed up and have no business running league any longer . nhl should be controled by a panel of ex players !

if it was a 1 goal game then i see that shot . but at 4-0 its either real dumb or real evil , but either or it costs lauzon and thats all that matters