EP40 Charging Penalty

[Avsfan1921]

Maybe I’ve missed it as I haven’t followed the other thread. Does anyone have any examples of jumping on a reverse hit being called a charging penalty?

I don’t know of any other examples such as this to be honest, I’m going with how I interpret the rule.

Nope, of course just this one.

This is a very unusual play. He is clearly off the ice when contact is made. Like unquestionably. You don’t think he was attempting to hit the oncoming player I presume, what was he doing?

 

[bambamcam4ever]

"...as a result of distance traveled..."

Why are so many people ignoring the second paragraph?

Because people either lack reading comprehension or defer to authority figures, in this case the stripes

I don’t know of any other examples such as this to be honest, I’m going with how I interpret the rule.

This is a very unusual play. He is clearly off the ice when contact is made. Like unquestionably. You don’t think he was attempting to hit the oncoming player I presume, what was he doing?

The problem is you are interpreting it wrong, and keep doubling down

 

[Rowlet]

I'm going with Canuck fan - no penalty because I based on what I've seen, I don't think charging or interference is right.

Not sure what it would be, but I'm not opposed to a penalty there in general.

 

[JAK]

To me, it's becoming even more weird how much Avsfan1921 cares about this being the right call.

Were you working in Rogers Arena on the ice last night?

 

[Bizzare]

I don’t know of any other examples such as this to be honest, I’m going with how I interpret the rule.

This is a very unusual play. He is clearly off the ice when contact is made. Like unquestionably. You don’t think he was attempting to hit the oncoming player I presume, what was he doing?

100% agreed he’s off the ice, he’s trying to reduce the impact and his likely hood of getting hurt during the hit that Foegele initiates.

 

[Avsfan1921]

So then a hit where a defender jumps along the boards before being hit meets your criteria no?

Yes.. he is safer when jumping … you’re not arguing that are you?

….. you’re missing the “ATTEMPTING A HIT” portion of the post. Again. For the 1000 and first time. A defender jumping along the boards is not attempting to hit, unless it is a reverse hit, they are trying to get out of the way. That is the difference.

 

[RobsonStreet]

I don’t know of any other examples such as this to be honest, I’m going with how I interpret the rule.

This is a very unusual play. He is clearly off the ice when contact is made. Like unquestionably. You don’t think he was attempting to hit the oncoming player I presume, what was he doing?

And that’s fine I suppose, but it’s weird that in decades of hockey (where presumably people have left their feet on reverse hits), no one I’ve encountered can remember a penalty like this being called.

 

[Avsfan1921]

To me, it's becoming even more weird how much Avsfan1921 cares about this being the right call.

Were you working in Rogers Arena on the ice last night?

Nope, I like to debate.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

People always say that there's no way a league could get away with rigging games.

Well we have 6/16 "neutral" fans in favor of an undisputably incorrect call. Doesn't seem so far-fetched to me.

 

[Avsfan1921]

And that’s fine I suppose, but it’s weird that in decades of hockey (where presumably people have left their feet on reverse hits), no one I’ve encountered can remember a penalty like this being called.

But when you read the rule, can you see how it could be a penalty? That’s really all that matters.

 

[Bizzare]

But when you read the rule, can you see how it could be a penalty? That’s really all that matters.

According to how you’re interpreting the rule every hit where a player skates is a penalty.

 

[JAK]

….. you’re missing the “ATTEMPTING A HIT” portion of the post. Again. For the 1000 and first time. A defender jumping along the boards is not attempting to hit, unless it is a reverse hit, they are trying to get out of the way. That is the difference.

Pettersson didn't jump INTO the hit. The jump was straight vertical.

Has Pettersson jumped INTO the hit, I think most fans could accept that there could be a penalty, especially if elbow comes up into the Bure "mother of all elbows" category.

There was no intent to hit, not a direction, not a shoulder, the man simply didn't want to get run over.

 

[Catamo]

Anyone who is claiming this was charging is only reading the first half of the definition. By that definition , all contact is charging.

 

[JKG33]

Ignoring the obvious that you can't charge someone when you're standing still and they're charging you... it's also EP40. Dude wouldn't hit a mosquito that bit him on the cheek

 

[Avsfan1921]

According to how you’re interpreting the rule every hit where a player skates is a penalty.

No, it’s not. “PRIOR TO INITIATING A HIT, AND LEAVING THE ICE PRIOR TO THE CONTACT”

For the 1000 and 2nd time.

 

[JAK]

But when you read the rule, can you see how it could be a penalty? That’s really all that matters.

The rule also says helmets needs to have the chin strap properly strapped at all times.

Never seen a referee enforce that.

No, its not.

The skate is not on ice, the skate technically is on water.

 

[Avsfan1921]

The rule also says helmets needs to have the chin strap properly strapped at all times.

Never seen a referee enforce that.



The skate is not on ice, the skate technically is on water.

In that case, don't get mad when they do, it’s an enforceable rule.

 

[RobsonStreet]

But when you read the rule, can you see how it could be a penalty? That’s really all that matters.

Sure, though it’s written in a way that allows for interpretation. We’ve seen the ways the rule has been interpreted prior to last night, making that call unprecedented.

 

[Bizzare]

No, it’s not. “PRIOR TO INITIATING A HIT, AND LEAVING THE ICE PRIOR TO THE CONTACT”

For the 1000 and 2nd time.

“According to Rule 42 of the NHL Rulebook, a charging penalty can be assessed as a minor or major penalty and shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.”

Any of these 3 things no? A player who
Skates, Jumps into Or Charges …. An opponent.

 

[matsqq]

"Jumps into" - is jumps into jump straight up in the space here he already stands ?

I think he owns the space where he stands and should not be obliged to give that space up to anyone that charges towards him.

In that case we would have a very different game of hockey than we have right now.

One could argue that it is up to him if he wants to keep his balance by taking the impact of the collision in whatever way he sees fit .

Never saw the actual situation :
It's not like this was reviewed over and over before the refs made the call ? It was an in game decision that could have been wrong ?

 

[Avsfan1921]

Sure, though it’s written in a way that allows for interpretation. We’ve seen the ways the rule has been interpreted prior to last night, making that call unprecedented.

We’ve seen many many hits called over the years where a player gets the call for leaving their feet to hit. That’s why it’s not super surprising to me. It’s only unprecedented in this instance because it’s a reverse hit.

“According to Rule 42 of the NHL Rulebook, a charging penalty can be assessed as a minor or major penalty and shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.”

Any of these 3 things no? A player who
Skates, Jumps into Or Charges …. An opponent.

Take it how you want to, I’m explaining my viewpoint not yours.

 

[Bizzare]

We’ve seen many many hits called over the years where a player gets the call for leaving their feet to hit. That’s why it’s not super surprising to me. It’s only unprecedented in this instance because it’s a reverse hit.


Take it how you want to, I’m explaining my viewpoint not yours.

But can’t you see how it could be interpreted that way? So next time the Avs play and every single one of their hits is a penalty don’t get upset!

 

[Avsfan1921]

But can’t you see how it could be interpreted that way? So next time the Avs play and every single one of their hits is a penalty don’t get upset!

I asked you earlier, why do think this is not a penalty?

 

[Bizzare]

I asked you earlier, why do think this is not a penalty?

I already told you I explained it and you didn’t go back to read it.

EP is standing still, and has the puck. He has no obligation to move, as he owns the space. Foegele moves towards him, EP40 jumps to reduce contact by Foegele who hits him.

Edit: EP40 is the one being hit, Foegele is initiating contact.

 

[JAK]

I find it fascinating that no one has voted as Oilers fan yet.