Dumba hit on Pavelski

[Teppo]

LOL. So your argument is that it WAS a clean hit but Dumba really MEANT for it to be dirty... My god this thread is now beyond absurd.

Dallas should be awarded the W. I know they didn't actually score in OT, but it wasn't from lack of trying.

And it wasn't a late hit. He checked him less than 1/2 second after he gave up the puck.

NHL Interference Rule Explained (The Ultimate Guide) - Hockey Response

The NHL rule book states that a player may be legally hit immediately after losing possession of the puck, so this is really a discretionary call by the referee. In general, referees usually allow players to be hit up to approximately 1.5 to 2 seconds after losing possession of the puck.

I guess the corollary is that since Suter really did try to break Kaprizov's ribs (twice) but did not succeed, Kaprizov should be taken to a hospital to have his ribs surgically broken to maintain a fair equilibrium.

 

[Parax]

When looking at the outcome of any potential disciplinary action, I wouldn't be appealing to the authority of DOPS ("the league", in this case).

No, "the league" in this case was the head offices in Toronto. They reviewed the hit in game, not only removing the major but the entire penalty for the hit. That's done in Toronto. So in this case the refs, "the league" and the DOPS all agree that you're wrong. But hey, keep going, you're doing great.

 

[bossram]

No, "the league" in this case was the head offices in Toronto. They reviewed the hit in game. That's done in Toronto. So in this case the refs, "the league" and the DOPS all agree that you're wrong. But hey, keep going, you're doing great.

Again, I wouldn't be shouting from the rooftops that the league and DOPS agree with me.

 

[Minnewildsota]

1. Then why do you keep referencing this 1-2 second rationale? Now you pivot to citing the "arm and stick length" reasoning. You're pivoting/moving the goal posts because your original reasoning was wrong.

2. "...at the instant the puck has been released". The instant the puck was released, Dumba had not yet got into his brace position to hit Pavelski.

I'm also not really going to give Dumba the benefit of the doubt here. He has a history of dirty hits. Including an extremely dirty head shot on O'Connor two weeks ago.


Except this same guy, for multiple posts, was citing a 1-2 second rule as coming "from the rulebook", when it wasn't.

Hate to break it to you, homie, but that wasn't me. All I said was the hit occurred within 1 second of Pavelski moving the puck.

 

[B14]

Hard hit, unfortunate result for Pavelski, especially given that he has had concussion issues in the past. I wish all the best for him.

However, I will say that this thread (and many others) is really proof that a 'clean hit' is very subjective. Some say it's a big, clean hit with an unfortunate result, some say it's completely dirty and predatory and should be suspendable and others are in the middle.

That's why I'm not against a guy like Domi coming in to defend his guy when he's down on the ice injured, but I know some people might not like guys fighting after what is looked at as a 'clean hit.' Jumping guys who aren't expecting it is absolutely unnecessary though and tends to be way worse than the hit that is thrown.

 

[Parax]

Again, I wouldn't shouting from the rooftops that the league and DOPS agree with me. The most incompetent organizations in professional sports.

"The guys who run the game, make the rules, and enforce the rules are wrong because I said so based on me"

I hope you realize how bonkers you sound.

 

[bossram]

"The guys who run the game, make the rules, and enforce the rules are wrong because I said so based on me"

I hope you realize how bonkers you sound.

"I agree with every decision made by the NHL and DOPS, no matter what. They could eject a baby from the arena for crying and I would 100% support that. Scott Stevens could decapitate my favourite player and I would ask for his autograph after".

I hope you realize how bonkers you sound.

 

[Breakers]

slow mo it looks like an eternity and a late hit

but I guess every hit looks like that under the slow-mo microscope

 

[Zrhutch]

Hard hit, unfortunate result for Pavelski, especially given that he has had concussion issues in the past. I wish all the best for him.

However, I will say that this thread (and many others) is really proof that a 'clean hit' is very subjective. Some say it's a big, clean hit with an unfortunate result, some say it's completely dirty and predatory and should be suspendable and others are in the middle.

That's why I'm not against a guy like Domi coming in to defend his guy when he's down on the ice injured, but I know some people might not like guys fighting after what is looked at as a 'clean hit.' Jumping guys who aren't expecting it is absolutely unnecessary though and tends to be way worse than the hit that is thrown.

Think what I’m taking from it is a legal hit can also be a dirty and/or predatory hit in rare cases. This seems like one of them. Coming from playing the game, there needed to be retaliation to it due to who got hit and how he got popped, and I’m glad Domi did it.

 

[Teppo]

"I agree with every decision made by the NHL and DOPS, no matter what. They could eject a baby from the arena for crying and I would 100% support that. Scott Stevens could decapitate my favourite player and I would ask for his autograph after".

I hope you realize how bonkers you sound.

Do you think the members that make up the DOPS and the NHL personnel that reviewed the Dumba check on Pav have more knowledge, experience and insight on the legality of these types of plays than you do? I asked that seriously. I know we are all sometimes baffled by some of the rulings and inconsistency that comes from the DOPS but do you really think that bafflement is because they are bad at what they do or the average Joe 6-pack does not understand the game the way they do?

 

[Parax]

"I agree with every decision made by the NHL and DOPS, no matter what. They could eject a baby from the arena for crying and I would 100% support that. Scott Stevens could decapitate my favourite player and I would ask for his autograph after".

I hope you realize how bonkers you sound.

Nice strawman you got there. I never said I agree with every decision. I mean, I do here because the hit was about 1 second earlier than "hits" after pretty much every dump in, this one was just a big hit.

You are advocating that the league is wrong for enforcing their rule book. You are saying it was interference. You are saying the guys who are in charge of everything are wrong and you are right because of your own judgement.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Again, I wouldn't be shouting from the rooftops that the league and DOPS agree with me.

We know you wouldn’t.

 

[bossram]

Do you think the members that make up the DOPS and the NHL personnel that reviewed the Dumba check on Pav have more knowledge, experience and insight on the legality of these types of plays than you do? I asked that seriously. I know we are all sometimes baffled by some of the rulings and inconsistency that comes from the DOPS but do you really think that bafflement is because they are bad at what they do or the average Joe 6-pack does not understand the game the way they do?

1. Yes, I think they are extremely bad at what they do. I don't think their experience or knowledge has led them to making any consistent or good-faith rulings.

2. I don't think this hit is suspendable by the letter of the rules. I think it is a penalty. I have no issue with Parros and Co. not doling out a suspension. I think it's even reasonable to not give the major in this case.

My issue is that just generally saying, "look, the league and DOPS agree, I am right!" is a laughable take. They're idiots. They'll look at two of the exact same plays and give different punishments.

Nice strawman you got there. I never said I agree with every decision. I mean, I do here because the hit was about 1 second earlier than "hits" after pretty much every dump in, this one was just a big hit.

You are advocating that the league is wrong for enforcing their rule book. You are saying it was interference. You are saying the guys who are in charge of everything are wrong and you are right because of your own judgement.

Nice strawman you got there. I never said I disagree with every decision. I mean, I do here, because it was an interference. But I agree with the league and DOPS that nothing beyond that was necessary.

You are advocating the league never is wrong about how they enforce their rule book. You are saying the guys in charge are never wrong and the league is always right.

Sure, I can do it too.

We know you wouldn’t.

Cool.

 

[AKL]

1. Yes, I think they are extremely bad at what they do. I don't think their experience or knowledge has led them to making any consistent or good-faith rulings.

2. I don't think this hit is suspendable by the letter of the rules. I think it is a penalty. I have no issue with Parros and Co. not doling out a suspension.

My issue is that just generally saying, "look, the league and DOPS agree, I am right!" is a laughable take. They're idiots. They'll look at two of the exact same plays and give different punishments.

You've done an excellent job of repeatedly saying that you think the league and DOPS is bad.

I'm still waiting for the explanation of why we should all listen to and agree with you.

 

[Viqsi]

Try actually watching the video. The first thing to that happens on contact is that Pavelski's head snaps back violently, within a single frame. That's clearly where the injury occurred and only happens due to shoulder to head being the initial point of impact.

Speaking as a third party who doesn't give a f*** about either side, you were absolutely correct right up to the bolded. The head smack, from what I've seen, more likely came from the stick, not the shoulder. The shoulder did drive the stick into the head, and maybe the rulebook ought to have a case for situations like that, but there was no shoulder-to-head contact, let alone initial contact.

 

[bossram]

You've done an excellent job of repeatedly saying that you think the league and DOPS is bad.

I'm still waiting for the explanation of why we should all listen to and agree with you.

You've done an excellent job of saying that the league and DOPS are always right.

I'm still waiting for the explanation of why we should all listen and agree with you

 

[wmupreds]

No real benefit? It completely changed the entire tone of the game and is arguably a big reason Minnesota won.

If you think injuring another player is beneficial to the game then IDK what to tell you.

 

[Ezekial]

If a 5 is called on the ice then they have to give him a minor at a minimum for the incident, unless the rule has been changed yet again. Again, it's ironic that the rule was created in the first place because of the 2019 Pavelski hit.

I thought the Dumba hit was late, but not unusually late. Otherwise, he went out of his way to check cleanly. It was hard, no doubt, but clean.

Some people are happy to repeat false information over and over and over after being informed to the contrary multiple times because they think they're right.

This is one of those times.

 

[AKL]

You've done an excellent job of saying that the league and DOPS are always right.

I'm still waiting for the explanation of why we should all listen and agree with you

Swing and a miss.

 

[Ezekial]

That makes WAY more sense

No, it doesn't, because the NHL doesn't allow penalties to be added on those reviews. They can only make the original penalty into a minor or not a penalty at all.

This guy is wrong and keeps repeating it. Even after this was explained he said "nope it was for Domi jumping him"

The NHL logged the penalty as Dumba 2 mins for roughing on Joe Pavelski. That's how it was statistically categorized.

 

[Parax]

Nice strawman you got there. I never said I disagree with every decision. I mean, I do here, because it was an interference. But I agree with the league and DOPS that nothing beyond that was necessary.

This is incredible. It's like you're having a different conversation with yourself in your head. Can you point out where I said you disagree with every decision? Or are we talking about one call where everyone who can have relevant input weighed in and said it's fine, but you said you know better?

 

[Ezekial]

Wild fans are familiar with opponents going after Kaprizov. Logan Stanley from the Jets about a month ago and Ryan Suter last night are just the two latest examples.

This is the cross check Minnesota fans are wailing about?


Good grief.

 

[Minnewildsota]

This is the cross check Minnesota fans are wailing about?


Good grief.

No, that's a different one. There was one in front of the net that I, and most Wild fans, think was worse.

Here it is.

 

[TaLoN]

I love how the whole ESPN crew condemned the hit as predatory. But the refs amazingly made the correct call . Leah Hextall calling it a head shot.
This is what a predatory, blindside, attempt to injure dirty hit looks like.

Not true, their ref for hire called it clean... then the booth guys started changing their tune to agree.

 

[Digitalbooya]

This is the cross check Minnesota fans are wailing about?


Good grief.