Carson Soucy to have a hearing for Cross-check to Connor McDavid - suspended 1 game (MOD WARNING IN OP)

[Leonardo87]

MOD NOTE:

If you can't post in here without constantly trying to troll each other, you won't be posting in here. Consider this the one and only warning you'll get.

Click to read more...

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Now the real battle begins - in the coaching press conferences.



I don't think it's that surprising. He still took a cross-check to the face after the end of the game. It's a mitigating factor for the punishment though.

i just view it as bad timing,

 

[Phrasing]

Hyman high cross check eh? Bet you NHL will say they didn’t see it.

 

[Brock Boeser Laser Show]

So Hyman connected with a cross-check right after to Z's face that needed stitches... will he get suspended too?

Absolutely should be if Soucy is suspended

 

[theguardianII]

Further from the truth for the best defenceman on the ice this series

Not close. Hughes is a shadow of himself. Actually he could hide the shadow of most of these players.

Hey, just because Soucy is getting a hearing does it automatically mean he gets a suspension Or is it that IF they do give one there is a limit to the number of games?

After acknowledging Zadorov's complicity in the play how can they give Soucy full responsibility? If Soucy hits his chest then no penalty right?

And that McD heard the whistle and took his frustration out on Soucy AFTER the end of the game, he could have broke Soucy's hand AFTER the game ended.

 

[NyQuil]

i just view it as bad timing,

So do I, but I'd say it happens for a lot of offences. It's a chaotic mess out there.

Whenever you commit an infraction, there's always the possibility that, for whatever reason, the consequence is more serious than your original intent.

 

[rea]

Let the Canucks lose their cool even after winning the game. That kind of fragility usually sorts itself out, i.e. losing Games 4-6 and being ousted.

So what exactly are you trying to defend? Your own fan base are the ones complaining about the non presence of your own team in trying to help him. Like if you have your own agenda to try and prove yourself right based on your logic, ok cool you win. But yea I'll let my Neanderthal team act like Neanderthals, and let your fanbase complain about it and why their team isn't acting like Neanderthals too.

Fragility can be defined in many ways, whether it's lack of discipline, or lack of courage to fight back. I know if I was on a side, I know which side I'd rather have backing me.

As for winning or losing, hopefully it's my team, but I'm not so daft to try and throw presumptions one way or the other. See you game 4

 

[Three On Zero]

Because sticking to their same play from Game 3 will see them absolutely molly-whopped.

It didn’t in game 3 so why would it going forward?

High danger chances were 7-6 5on5, Vancouver played just fine last night. SoG just show a desperate team that was throwing low danger chances on net

 

[NotASheep]

5k fine

 

[MikeyMike01]

Any suspension here would be ludicrous

 

[WaitingForThatCab]

I don't think he meant to get McDavid right in the jaw, very unfortunate timing with Zadorov coming in for the high-low, though. Probably merits a max fine.

 

[Drytoast]

Should be a suspension, 1-2 games worth.
"I'm sorry I didn't mean to" is not a valid excuse.

I mean wasn't the standard set with Rielly?

5 games.

 

[DFAC]

So Hyman connected with a cross-check right after to Z's face that needed stitches... will he get suspended too?

Nah that's just a good old hockey play. Just like the Hoglander spear

 

[NyQuil]

I think the range I'm comfortable with (as a bit of an outsider) is a heavy fine to a 1 game suspension.

It doesn't warrant nothing at all, and 2 games it too punitive as well I think, particularly in the playoffs.

I mean wasn't the standard set with Rielly?

5 games.

The standard for hitting guys in the back of the head after they score a goal?

How is that relevant here?

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

Whatever the ruling is on either both Soucy & Hyman should face the same imo.

 

[Bizzare]

I think the range I'm comfortable with (as a bit of an outsider) is a heavy fine to a 1 game suspension.

It doesn't warrant nothing at all, and 2 games it too punitive as well I think, particularly in the playoffs.



The standard for hitting guys in the back of the head after they score a goal?

How is that relevant here?

Heavy fine… so like 5k?

 

[Bobby9]

After the incident

 

[Drytoast]

I think the range I'm comfortable with (as a bit of an outsider) is a heavy fine to a 1 game suspension.

It doesn't warrant nothing at all, and 2 games it too punitive as well I think, particularly in the playoffs.



The standard for hitting guys in the back of the head after they score a goal?

How is that relevant here?

crosscheck's to the head after a goal? ya...that's the same.

 

[NyQuil]

Heavy fine… so like 5k?

Well the maximum is $10K I think for someone without a previous offence in the last 12 months.

 

[Phrasing]

Whatever the ruling is on either both Soucy & Hyman should face the same imo.

Except Hyman doesn’t have a hearing because his wasn’t to a star player.

 

[NyQuil]

crosscheck's to the head after a goal? ya...that's the same.

How is cross-checking a guy skating away after they score the same as cross-checking a guy after they slash you with their stick?

Not to mention, Rielly was aiming for the head area while Soucy clearly wasn't, because McDavid was at about half his height after Zadorov hit him from behind.

It's a terrible equivalence and everyone knows it.

 

[Three On Zero]

Whatever the ruling is on either both Soucy & Hyman should face the same imo.

Hyman’s was far more malicious, he was intentionally going for head

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I mean wasn't the standard set with Rielly?

5 games.

Sometimes I wonder if you’re just being purposefully obtuse.

 

[Sol]

Any suspension here would be ludicrous

touching McBaby is a federal crime.

 

[God]

Hyman’s was far more malicious, he was intentionally going for head

his dad probably paid the DOPS to look the other way

 

[theguardianII]

So do I, but I'd say it happens for a lot of offences. It's a chaotic mess out there.

Whenever you commit an infraction, there's always the possibility that, for whatever reason, the consequence is more serious than your original intent.

McD breaks Soucy's hand out of frustration? That kind of more serious?

So what exactly are you trying to defend? Your own fan base are the ones complaining about the non presence of your own team in trying to help him. Like if you have your own agenda to try and prove yourself right based on your logic, ok cool you win. But yea I'll let my Neanderthal team act like Neanderthals, and let your fanbase complain about it and why their team isn't acting like Neanderthals too.

Fragility can be defined in many ways, whether it's lack of discipline, or lack of courage to fight back. I know if I was on a side, I know which side I'd rather have backing me.

As for winning or losing, hopefully it's my team, but I'm not so daft to try and throw presumptions one way or the other. See you game 4

Tarzans vs Janes. Too many Janes on that team.

Hey maybe the Oilers should start playing like they have their 3rd string goalie in net, maybe they will be better at keeping the puck out.
They can't score, by direct shot, more than 3 goals against the Canucks without Cole putting a couple in the net by accident. So maybe try harder to keep the puck out.

Fragility mentally as well. Doubt they will win. The Canucks had a decade of waiting for the other shoe to drop.

The Oilers are charging the net more and more, eventually it will result in a penalty.