Post-Game Talk: Canucks defeat Senators | 4-3 (DeBrusk(2), Blueger, & Sherwood) | CHIEF KIEF

[racerjoe]

face to the bumper.

rule 41.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is imposed under
this rule for an infraction resulting in an injury to the face or head of an
opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed.

https://media.nhl.com/site/asset/public/ext/2023-24/2023-24Rulebook.pdf

The comeback is that he wouldn't give up and he deliberately started a fight after for cruising someone he could take down. He got his team going - he didn't do anything except pick a fight as the classic way to do that. It was the motivation Ottawa needed. The Canucks fell for it. Recall the times Ohlund wouldn't fight Iginla because they didn't want him to get things going. Joshua should have left it alone, but the Canucks were up 4-1. Would Stutzle have crosschecked Hogs into the boards if he had given up or Tkachuk didn't start that?

That not why it’s a major vs a 2 min… that’s why it’s a game misconduct.

I would argue that fight didn’t bring them back in that game at all. I would say the brutal call against Hogs did that where somehow he was given an extra penalty. Not only that but really the sens pp wasn’t looking great until the too missed calls on soucy… then even after that I think they still weren’t really playing well. Myers had a few brain farts, but that’s it.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

Sens are so bad. A lot of talented players, that could do some good elsewhere, but just inept together.

Wasn't remotely concerned missing our 4 best players from last year. Score was flattering to team Green.

 

[LuckyDay]

That not why it’s a major vs a 2 min… that’s why it’s a game misconduct.

I would argue that fight didn’t bring them back in that game at all. I would say the brutal call against Hogs did that where somehow he was given an extra penalty. Not only that but really the sens pp wasn’t looking great until the too missed calls on soucy… then even after that I think they still weren’t really playing well. Myers had a few brain farts, but that’s it.

It was an ugly move by Hughes regardless, cross check to the small of the back. He didn't mean anything by it other than a check - there was no intensity - but it was lazy. I don't expect a suspension especially after Norris came back.

Paragraph two of Boarding 41.1 states

followed by the when to assess a minor and a major

Though it's the Referree's discretion in all cases but
a) the onus is on the player to avoid contact on a defenseless player which Nonnis was and Quinn did not do
b) Nonnis did not appear to deliberately put himself in a vulnerable position
c) The check was avoidable
d) There was a dangerous degree of impact on Nonnis on the boards when his face hit the bumper.
e) The note on 41.3 references 41.5 but 41.2 does not which implies a game misconduct was to be given only if it's a major. The two are related.

 

[Canucker]

It was an ugly move by Hughes regardless, cross check to the small of the back. He didn't mean anything by it other than a check - there was no intensity - but it was lazy. I don't expect a suspension especially after Norris came back.

Paragraph two of Boarding 41.1 states
View attachment 935299
followed by the when to assess a minor and a major
View attachment 935300
Though it's the Referree's discretion in all cases but
a) the onus is on the player to avoid contact on a defenseless player which Nonnis was and Quinn did not do
b) Nonnis did not appear to deliberately put himself in a vulnerable position
c) The check was avoidable
d) There was a dangerous degree of impact on Nonnis on the boards when his face hit the bumper.
e) The note on 41.3 references 41.5 but 41.2 does not which implies a game misconduct was to be given only if it's a major. The two are related.

View attachment 935303

Crosschecks like that happen constantly throughout a game, I wouldn't say it was particularly egregious, it just happened to result in Norris going face first into the boards...penalty? Of course...5 minute major? Probably not the call I would make, but since it caused an "injury" to Norris' face you're leaving it to the discretion of the refs to give a game misconduct, so I can see why they did it...if they felt it was malicious they would have called it a match penalty.

 

[racerjoe]

It was an ugly move by Hughes regardless, cross check to the small of the back. He didn't mean anything by it other than a check - there was no intensity - but it was lazy. I don't expect a suspension especially after Norris came back.

Paragraph two of Boarding 41.1 states
View attachment 935299
followed by the when to assess a minor and a major
View attachment 935300
Though it's the Referree's discretion in all cases but
a) the onus is on the player to avoid contact on a defenseless player which Nonnis was and Quinn did not do
b) Nonnis did not appear to deliberately put himself in a vulnerable position
c) The check was avoidable
d) There was a dangerous degree of impact on Nonnis on the boards when his face hit the bumper.
e) The note on 41.3 references 41.5 but 41.2 does not which implies a game misconduct was to be given only if it's a major. The two are related.

View attachment 935303

You maybe a lawyer but this is still wrong…
It is pretty easy to tell Norris is changing directions, and that is why this hit happens if he maintains he direction it is a simple rub out on the boards. If this was a violent check every single one of these pushes in the small of the back would have to be a 5 min penalty. That is for both your A and B points.
C probably could be the same… a sudden stop and turn put him in danger. Look how hits to the head are looked at. If the offensive player make a sudden move it’s not a suspension.

To make it a 5 min major according to the rules you have referenced here it states it is the degree of violence… the hit is not violent… the result maybe, but not the hit. To bring it to law, it’s why there is different degrees of murder… or in this case manslaughter…. You can’t give a sentence for murder to someone who committed manslaughter…

 

[Hansen]

It was an ugly move by Hughes regardless, cross check to the small of the back. He didn't mean anything by it other than a check - there was no intensity - but it was lazy. I don't expect a suspension especially after Norris came back.

Paragraph two of Boarding 41.1 states
View attachment 935299
followed by the when to assess a minor and a major
View attachment 935300
Though it's the Referree's discretion in all cases but
a) the onus is on the player to avoid contact on a defenseless player which Nonnis was and Quinn did not do
b) Nonnis did not appear to deliberately put himself in a vulnerable position
c) The check was avoidable
d) There was a dangerous degree of impact on Nonnis on the boards when his face hit the bumper.
e) The note on 41.3 references 41.5 but 41.2 does not which implies a game misconduct was to be given only if it's a major. The two are related.

View attachment 935303

Upon review of the rules, they should have thrown Hughes out a second time for Stutzle's hit on Hoglander