Jagr probably OK

[jepjepjoo]

Read the rules. The skates of the hitter doesn't need to leave the ice. They can, but they don't have to.

As for boarding, if you can find the chapter in the rules that says what you just said, I would be delighted.

So you can't understand anything? If the hitter's skates leave the ice it's automatically charging... thats what i meant. I did NOT say they HAVE TO leave the ice

 

[Korkki]

I say again: both Jagrs skates leaves the ice on the impact. How is that not "thrown"? He leaves the ground. Look up "throw" in an english dictionary.

Holy s..t, the ref of that game was really bad. There should've been at least 3 times more penalties and game misconducts if your "throwing" rules are effective.

The hit was not dirty, not at all. If Jagr would used a real helmet and had been in a better position (he was too deeply down) he wouldn't been hurt at all. The hockey is going to a wrong way if the opponent's best players are untouchables...

EDIT: "Keep your head up" is teached in minors in Finland. Probably not in Czech Rep? Or did Jagr forget that rule for a while?

 

[Chimpradamus]

So you can't understand anything? If the hitter's skates leave the ice it's automatically charging... thats what i meant. I did NOT say they HAVE TO leave the ice

Write what you mean then.

FFS if both of Ruutu's skates woulda left the ice it would have been charging tho

You are implying it would only have been a charging penalty if Ruutu's skates would have left the ice. How can you otherwise interpret your "FFS" and "tho" = though?

 

[Chimpradamus]

Holy s..t, the ref of that game was really bad. There should've been at least 3 times more penalties and game misconducts if your "throwing" rules are effective.

The hit was not dirty, not at all. If Jagr would used a real helmet and had been in a better position (he was too deeply down) he wouldn't been hurt at all. The hockey is going to a wrong way if the opponent's best players are untouchables...

EDIT: "Keep your head up" is teached in minors in Finland. Probably not in Czech Rep? Or did Jagr forget that rule for a while?

It's the attacker who has the responsibility to use his judgement of the force in his attack. He came in as a third man and saw that the opponent had his entire focus on the struggle for the puck along the boards with another Finnish player. He saw that his opponent was almost entirely defenseless (as ANY player struggling for the puck in one of those digging situations along the boards would be) and layed in a boarding.

 

[Bubba64]

I have to change my avatar .... someone is missing there ... YAP f.... b..... Ruutu

 

[Pepper]

The Swedish translation educating Swedish refs about boarding is "violent tackle against the boards." This is the equivalent of "charging", which is a violent tackle taking place anywhere on the ice.

No offense but it's painfully obvious that you don't know crap about hockey or it's rules.

All I can say really, either your hockey knowledge is horribly wrong and/or your swedish to english translation sucks big time.

Hint: go and read the hockey rulebook about boarding few more times. You'll be surprised.

 

[Korkki]

It's the attacker who has the responsibility to use his judgement of the force in his attack. He came in as a third man and saw that the opponent had his entire focus on the struggle for the puck along the boards with another Finnish player. He saw that his opponent was almost entirely defenseless (as ANY player struggling for the puck in one of those digging situations along the boards would be) and layed in a boarding.

Check the video of the incident. Ruutu headed to a normal tackle of a player beside the boards. However, in a fraction of a second Jagr puts his head down. It was too late for a tackler to do anything, unless the tackler is a superman who could stop instant or fly over the player beside the boards... This was a sad thing, but nothing wrong from Ruutu's side. And I am sure that if the tackled player would have been any other and using sufficient equipment this discussion won't even exist...

 

[Crosbyfan]

I'm not a Jagr fan. I think he's a very talented floater.

Ruutu should be gone from the tournament. What he did was either intentional or with total disregard for his opponent.

Definitely intentional if he is smart enough to have realized what would happen.

 

[Jovial]

Check the video of the incident. Ruutu headed to a normal tackle of a player beside the boards. However, in a fraction of a second Jagr puts his head down. It was too late for a tackler to do anything, unless the tackler is a superman who could stop instant or fly over the player beside the boards... This was a sad thing, but nothing wrong from Ruutu's side. And I am sure that if the tackled player would have been any other and using sufficient equipment this discussion won't even exist...

That's my view on it too, it's just sad that Jagr changed position right before the hit, because otherwise it would have been a normal hit.

 

[Korkki]

Ruutu should be gone from the tournament. What he did was either intentional or with total disregard for his opponent.

What a pity that ringette is not an olympic sport. It would suit for you. There aren't any tackles so it would be suitable for any whiners here. Ruutu's tackle was a legal one, sorry that Jagr got hurt but it is not only Jarkko's fault.

 

[Jovial]

Definitely intentional if he is smart enough to have realized what would happen.

How would he have guessed that in a fraction of second Jagr would change position and put himself in a dangerous situation?

 

[Chimpradamus]

No offense but it's painfully obvious that you don't know crap about hockey or it's rules.

All I can say really, either your hockey knowledge is horribly wrong and/or your swedish to english translation sucks big time.

Hint: go and read the hockey rulebook about boarding few more times. You'll be surprised.

I have. Please give me the information regarding the importance of that the player who is hit must stand a distance away from the boards for the hitter to be called for boarding. I would be delighted and admit I am wrong then.

I have given this challenge to 20 other people, no one has been able to do this so far.

edit: Err.. I meant boarding of course. Sorry.

 

[Crosbyfan]

How would he have guessed that in a fraction of second Jagr would change position and put himself in a dangerous situation?

The same way he guessed that he should keep powering him into the boards head first.

 

[Pepper]

I have. Please give me the information regarding the importance of that the player who is hit must stand a distance away from the boards for the hitter to be called for boarding. I would be delighted and admit I am wrong then.

I have given this challenge to 20 other people, no one has been able to do this so far.

You haven't been paying attention. THROWN in to boards implies that the target must be AWAY from the boards. Jagr was not, he was almost touching the boards at the time of the hit, thus he was not THROWN in to the boards.

Learn the game.

 

[edd1e]

i dont know how this has anything to do with these whining swedes, or are you just picking for a fight?

 

[Chimpradamus]

You haven't been paying attention. THROWN in to boards implies that the target must be AWAY from the boards. Jagr was not, he was almost touching the boards at the time of the hit, thus he was not THROWN in to the boards.

Learn the game.

Implies? If the rules means something, they WRITE it. It's the basics of laws. You don't imply anything in rules. The Czech player wasn't smothered up against the boards before the hit, his body was a few inches away from it. But the distance doesn't matter as far as the result is he's violently smacked against the boards.

From Wikipedia: "Boarding in ice hockey is a penalty called when an offending player violently pushes an opposing player into the boards of the hockey rink. The boarding call is usually a major penalty due to the likelihood of injury sustained by the player who was boarded. However if no injury is sustained a minor penalty will be called."

INTO the boards. While Wikipedia isn't the truth of the day, it sure is better info than trying to interpret rules from a vague word like the bible.

If you're right, Sweden has educated their refs the wrong way for over 10 years and no one has reacted. I also guess a player has to break his neck for real before you call it a boarding.

 

[JussiM]

The same way he guessed that he should keep powering him into the boards head first.

Had Jagr not changed his position (and put his head down), he wouldn't have gone head first.

 

[arrbez]

post vodka syndrome?

I wish.

Tequila is a cruel, cruel mistress.

 

[Crosbyfan]

What a pity that ringette is not an olympic sport. It would suit for you. There aren't any tackles so it would be suitable for any whiners here.Ruutu's tackle was a legal one, sorry that Jagr got hurt but it is not only Jarkko's fault.

Korkki, if that happened to Saku, if he was the one blind sided headlong into the boards would you feel the same way? Obviously it was not legal unless you want to change the rules.

If I did that to you in ringette, I doubt you would be happy. (or maybe you would be ready for it, not trusting your opponent and playing like a coward at all times)

 

[Korkki]

Korkki, if that happened to Saku, if he was the one blind sided headlong into the boards would you feel the same way? Obviously it was not legal unless you want to change the rules.

If Saku gets hurt after a legal hit like Jagr, then he gets. Life is cruel. And that is just a game.

 

[Pepper]

Implies? If the rules means something, they WRITE it. It's the basics of laws. You don't imply anything in rules. The Czech player wasn't smothered up against the boards before the hit, his body was a few inches away from it. But the distance doesn't matter as far as the result is he's violently smacked against the boards.

From Wikipedia: "Boarding in ice hockey is a penalty called when an offending player violently pushes an opposing player into the boards of the hockey rink. The boarding call is usually a major penalty due to the likelihood of injury sustained by the player who was boarded. However if no injury is sustained a minor penalty will be called."

INTO the boards. While Wikipedia isn't the truth of the day, it sure is better info than trying to interpret rules from a vague word like the bible.

If you're right, Sweden has educated their refs the wrong way for over 10 years and no one has reacted. I also guess a player has to break his neck for real before you call it a boarding.

You're not getting it!! Jagr was on the boards AT THE TIME OF THE HIT, he wasn't THROWN in to the boards because he was there already!

I don't really care how Sweden teaches it referees, when the player is couple of inches away from the boards and gets hit it's *NOT* boarding.

 

[Crosbyfan]

You're not getting it!! Jagr was on the boards AT THE TIME OF THE HIT, he wasn't THROWN in to the boards because he was there already!

I don't really care how Sweden teaches it referees, when the player is couple of inches away from the boards and gets hit it's *NOT* boarding.

unless it is obviously dangerous. Nothing in the rule mentions inches or feet.

 

[Tonzan]

Implies? If the rules means something, they WRITE it. It's the basics of laws. You don't imply anything in rules.

I´ve been following this debate and I´d like to tell you that the length of "the great book of hockey rules" would be millions of pages if every single variation of events were discribed there

That is why we do have to argue about things in courts even though we have laws. Same thing with hockey. (As we can see)

Ta det lugnt!

 

[Pepper]

unless it is obviously dangerous. Nothing in the rule mentions inches or feet.

If the hit is technically clean, it's legal. There's no such thing as 'obviously dangerous' part in it.

 

[RuuhkaTukka]

Glad to hear that Jagr is already skating!


It would have been bad for ice hockey and this tournament to lose a player of his caliber.

GO JAGR GO!