Hearing for Torres on Stoll hit (Thurs 9am PT, NYC; w/DW); out for rest of WCSF

[Alwalys]

I agree that the degree of this infraction was less, but it was of the same type that landed Torres in trouble in the past. I do think type will trump degree in the eyes of the NHL. As I said above, it might be wise to look at Simon for instructive hints.

I disagree that this was the same type. He was suspended for deliberate headshots. This was not a deliberate headshot.

His method of hitting has changed quite a bit after last season, he keeps his elbows SUPER low when he hits, they are nearly at waist level in the Stoll hit. I think it's crystal clear he was going for a hard shoulder-on-shoulder but Stoll pulled back a little bit causing it to glance and putting Torres in front of Stoll, who was skating forward and as a result he struck Torres' back/helmet with his frontmost point (upper body).

I really truly believe, as no raffi apologist, that this is borderline a penalty at all. And from that standpoint, to suspend him at all is a travesty.

i can't believe there is just the one shot of the hit. i'd like to see it from a different angle.

but from the only angle available, it did not look like a head hit. should to shoulder, didn't leave his skates, and it wasn't even a charge to begin with.

this is so stupid. i understand he has a reputation, but where do you draw the line? do we have to swallow him being called offside when he isn't just because he has a rep? and with the technology we have today there is no reason we shouldn't be able to view this from multiple angles, determine if the head was hit, and make a decision quickly. this thing seriously can't get resolved until tomorrow? what a joke.

Two angles

http://mayorsmanor.com/2013/05/vide...hit-on-jarret-stoll-in-game-1-sharks-at-kings

 

[VanIslander]

Kerry Fraser was right: the principle point of contact was the head, it was from a bad angle, a player was hurt on the play and the offender has a history of infractions, all considerations in determining a suspension.

I hope it's 1 game, think 2 is fair though. If he gets more than 3 I will be pissed because of the speed and intent looks like he was trying to make a regular check, not intending anything vicious.

[Mod]

 

[Gilligans Island]

The other was for stomping Jaarko Ruttu.

Absolutely BS if Torres gets 30 games. This incident is in no way comparable to stomping on a player.

 

[SJeasy]

What are your opinions on the hit, Easy? Let's say it wasn't Torres but Couture who made the hit. Is it suspension worthy?

Taken from a league point of view. Marginally suspension worthy. If McGinn does it, suspension. If Couture does it, at most a fine. Kind of the unwritten Pronger rule and related to the player's star power. I don't like Mike Richards because he has had several suspension worthy hits (Booth was the most prominent) and got off on star power.

If I were deciding on the merits of the hit itself without regard to star power or suspension history, 5 reg season games or 2 playoff games. Generally, I am a tough judge. I have seen worse like the Richards/Booth hit which was purely malicious. I really don't like headshots and don't buy the tedious dissection of principal point of contact. If it was close, the hitter should absolutely have got lower to insure that it wasn't close.

Cooke history:

2/21/04 2 games
1/17/09 2 games
12/4/09 2 games
2/9/11 4 games
3/21/11 rest of season (10 games reg season plus 7 playoff games)

Mike Richards - no suspension history

 

[Alwalys]

Kerry Fraser was right: the principle point of contact was the head, it was from a bad angle, a player was hurt on the play and the offender has a history of infractions, all considerations in determining a suspension.

I hope it's 1 game, think 2 is fair though. If he gets more than 3 I will be pissed because of the speed and intent looks like he was trying to make a regular check, not intending anything vicious.

[Mod]

Except for one thing -- the rules say the head must be targeted, and even Fraser says it was not.

If it was close, the hitter should absolutely have got lower to insure that it wasn't close.

What part of him would you say he should have gotten lower? I don't see anything else he could have done to minimize this hit other than not take it. He kept his arms low, targeted the shoulder, and Stoll's head hit his back/back of his head. That tells me he was plenty low.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Absolutely BS if Torres gets 30 games. This incident is in no way comparable to stomping on a player.

Thats why its crazy when people think Torres is one of the biggest goons ever. Hes a big hitter and has crossed the line but hes never stomped or swung his stick at an opponents head or called a fellow player a racial slur. Chris Simon has done this..hes the definition of a goon.

 

[rangerssharks414]

Kerry Fraser was right: the principle point of contact was the head, it was from a bad angle, a player was hurt on the play and the offender has a history of infractions, all considerations in determining a suspension.

I hope it's 1 game, think 2 is fair though. If he gets more than 3 I will be pissed because of the speed and intent looks like he was trying to make a regular check, not intending anything vicious.

[Mod]

If he is suspended, I highly doubt that it's only for a game or two, unfortunately.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Taken from a league point of view. Marginally suspension worthy. If McGinn does it, suspension. If Couture does it, at most a fine. Kind of the unwritten Pronger rule and related to the player's star power. I don't like Mike Richards because he has had several suspension worthy hits (Booth was the most prominent) and got off on star power.

If I were deciding on the merits of the hit itself without regard to star power or suspension history, 5 reg season games or 2 playoff games. Generally, I am a tough judge. I have seen worse like the Richards/Booth hit which was purely malicious. I really don't like headshots and don't buy the tedious dissection of principal point of contact. If it was close, the hitter should absolutely have got lower to insure that it wasn't close.

Cooke history:

2/21/04 2 games
1/17/09 2 games
12/4/09 2 games
2/9/11 4 games
3/21/11 rest of season (10 games reg season plus 7 playoff games)

Mike Richards - no suspension history

Ovechkin is another one who has gotten off light. He destroyed Gonchar's knee, broke Campbell's collarbone with a hit from behind etc.

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

So i won't comment on the incident until i see what the league does.

I will say that injuries/players being out of the line up for some/any reason are why a team needs depth. Hope we have enough up front with Havlat out already..

 

[SJeasy]

I disagree that this was the same type. He was suspended for deliberate headshots. This was not a deliberate headshot.

His method of hitting has changed quite a bit after last season, he keeps his elbows SUPER low when he hits, they are nearly at waist level in the Stoll hit. I think it's crystal clear he was going for a hard shoulder-on-shoulder but Stoll pulled back a little bit causing it to glance and putting Torres in front of Stoll, who was skating forward and as a result he struck Torres' back/helmet with his frontmost point (upper body).

I do think he has become more careful, but elbows down isn't the benchmark anymore. Shoulder to head is in fact more potentially injurious than elbow to head because of the added weight in the momentum equation. My issue is that he must absolutely make sure to keep his shoulders lower. I do think he has been more careful in this regard, but I don't think the league will see it that way. I don't like to base my opinion of the league on wishful thinking when many things point to them throwing the book at him.

 

[SJeasy]

Except for one thing -- the rules say the head must be targeted, and even Fraser says it was not.



What part of him would you say he should have gotten lower? I don't see anything else he could have done to minimize this hit other than not take it. He kept his arms low, targeted the shoulder, and Stoll's head hit his back/back of his head. That tells me he was plenty low.

Bend at the waist to get lower. Hit through, not up. The argument goes to style of hitting and is best exemplified in football by comparing Jack Tatum and Ronnie Lott, both heavy hitters. Tatum was a headshot artist.

 

[Winky]

The major problems I have is lack of consistency with penalties and suspensions. I think there needs to be clear, set criteria for punishment. For instance, first time a hit is delivered that impacts another player's head at all gets 1 game. Second time, 3 games. Third time, 5 games. Then 15 or 20 game suspensions after that. Something like this. If the head is affected, then you go to this scale and consider the player's history. No preferential treatment because of name.

Make a definitive scale, even make it harsh if you want (I don't care). But lack of consistency and lack of clarity in the rulings is a joke.

Also, enough with penalizing/punishing the result ... I think punishments should be focused on the play itself since we cannot penalize intent. I think Brown should have been suspending last series for attempting the head and knee. It's blatant, it's intentional and it shouldn't get a free pass.

NHL becoming BSL

 

[thirtysix*]

Puts a bad taste in my mouth that they're requiring him to fly there and have a "hearing" over a shoulder to shoulder hit. Seriously, is someone just power tripping over there?

 

[cholewhat]

NHL becoming BSL

Kind of like the NFL became the No Fun League, the NHL is becoming the No Hits League.

 

[NWShark*]

Kerry Fraser was right: the principle point of contact was the head, it was from a bad angle, a player was hurt on the play and the offender has a history of infractions, all considerations in determining a suspension.

I hope it's 1 game, think 2 is fair though. If he gets more than 3 I will be pissed because of the speed and intent looks like he was trying to make a regular check, not intending anything vicious.

[Mod]

********. I have to see a single replay that shows the hit was the head. Every replay shows shoulder to shoulder contact first.

 

[AgentCooper]

Two angles

http://mayorsmanor.com/2013/05/vide...hit-on-jarret-stoll-in-game-1-sharks-at-kings

So am I blind, or does the end of the second video show a clear shoulder to the chest?

 

[Alwalys]

Bend at the waist to get lower. Hit through, not up. The argument goes to style of hitting and is best exemplified in football by comparing Jack Tatum and Ronnie Lott, both heavy hitters. Tatum was a headshot artist.

He bends his knees and bends his waist as much as it prudent in that situation, bending it more would put him launching head-first at Stoll which is silly. He hits pretty damn level considering, this is hardly an upward hit by any stretch. We've seen what real upwards hits look like and any honest look at this one shows it's not.

And then, again, we have the end result of Stoll's head running into Torres' back. That is plain and simply unfortunately incidental contact, no one headshots people with their back.

 

[Led Zappa]

jason demers ‏@jasondemers5 2m

Behind our boy 13 today 100 percent!...#torresingtothatcall #atticaattica

 

[Hatrick Marleau]

I'm behind Raffi 100% too.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Did Shanahan hit himself in the head with Nils Ekman's stick again or is he just naturally stupid? Or both?

 

[Hatrick Marleau]

Two angles

http://mayorsmanor.com/2013/05/vide...hit-on-jarret-stoll-in-game-1-sharks-at-kings

That 2nd angle shows that he gets him in the shoulder first. Stoll put himself in that position to get hit though. He changes position before the hit.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Free Raffi!

 

[Eighth Fret]

jason demers ‏@jasondemers5 2m

Behind our boy 13 today 100 percent!...#torresingtothatcall #atticaattica

Daddy made a funny.

 

[JoeThorntonsRooster]

Free Raffi! We love you bro!

 

[luongo321]

Someone just compared this to the Cooke hit on Savard in the main thread.

ffs, FREE RAFFI