Post-Game Talk: Lower cased

[Larrybiv]

Letter of the rule, doesn't actually matter where he hit him. The key wording is "defenseless" opponent


41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

Thanks for that, and if I am being honest......he really did seem to be defenseless. Prob should have been a penalty, Laf needs to have better discretion.

 

[LOFIN]

Letter of the rule, doesn't actually matter where he hit him. The key wording is "defenseless" opponent


41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

The thing is, refs very rarely call hits like that as boarding in the NHL, even if that's the letter of the law. In international hockey that's boarding every single time. In the NHL, you can throw plenty of hits on the "open ice" that cause opponents to collide dangerously with the boards. They usually just call the ones that are like 1-2 feet away.

Should it have been a penalty? Probably yes. Are those usually called in the NHL? Nah, not really.

 

[Sayba]

what did he do as I didnt see the game

He played great, physical and stood up to Tom Wilson at the end of the game.

 

[jniklast]

Letter of the rule, doesn't actually matter where he hit him. The key wording is "defenseless" opponent


41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

Yeah on the Laf play I can see the argument for a penalty. I don't think it was a definitive penalty, but these do get called sometimes.

The Rempe play on the third goal however is never a penalty. Yes, by the letter of the rule you could probably argue for interference, but that really is never called like this. And for good reason, because otherwise there'd be a penalty every other minute.

 

[romba]

Here's my take on the Laf hit. When I saw it in real time I was questioning how the heck he delivered so much force in that situation. I went back and slowed it down and realized why.

Laf went in for the hit to dislodge the puck from an upright player who would have likely withstood most of the hit. Here he had him lined up, within the opponents frame of view.

However a split second after, the player lost a bit of control of the puck and tried to reach for it, bending over, not knowing Laf had lined him up for a hit. This put him in a more vulnerable spot when the hit connected:

It's similar to when a player turns at the last second to face the boards which is deemed an acceptable hit by NHL standards.

Unlike Rempe's first hit ejection against the Devils where the player was already somewhat engaged with a Ranger and was low and reaching for the puck well before Rempe made contact giving Matt time to ease up, here I feel it was a last second move, jmo of course

 

[bhamill]

Letter of the rule, doesn't actually matter where he hit him. The key wording is "defenseless" opponent


41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

The player was NOT defenseless though. Laf hit a guy straight from the side, in the shoulder, who was carrying the puck and who braced for the hit. Not Laf’s fault the guy is a weakling. It was a perfectly good hockey play.

 

[ncdoc]

Were Kenny and Joe doing the game on radio or different channel. Heard them on a replay. I would have loved that yesterday.

 

[noncents]

Were Kenny and Joe doing the game on radio or different channel. Heard them on a replay. I would have loved that yesterday.

msg

 

[will1066]

Were Kenny and Joe doing the game on radio or different channel. Heard them on a replay. I would have loved that yesterday.

Kenny filled in for Sam, who missed the game because of his granddaughter's bat mitzvah.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Iorio put himself in a vulnerable position on that Laf hit.

Laf did everything right and it was a great play, which pretty much won the game the Rangers imo.

It just was an unfortunate bang bang play resulting in Iorio losing control going into the boards in a prone position.

Iorio didnt practice and he's day to day, so its nothing long term thankfully.

 

[Levitate]

The player was NOT defenseless though. Laf hit a guy straight from the side, in the shoulder, who was carrying the puck and who braced for the hit. Not Laf’s fault the guy is a weakling. It was a perfectly good hockey play.

yeah it's just...not a penalty. it's an unfortunate situation, but he came in on a guy and hit him from the side.

I first thought the guy was trying to duck the hit a bit but yeah probably was reaching for the puck while trying to brace himself for contact a bit and it just doens't work that way.

It's all bang bang at the time, someone in Lafs position doesn't ahve time to realize at the last second "oh no I can't hit this guy", he's thinking "I'm taking this guy off the puck and moving it to my teammate"

e: such a weird play but I can't see any penalty in it

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

If they called that boarding I wouldn’t have batted an eye.

That said it was a borderline minor at most. Lots of those were missed (and a few called) yesterday afternoon.

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

I noticed Trouba wasn't backing up as much or kneeling. I find it hard to believe a guy gets smart all of a sudden or stupid after 8 years in the league. I'm convinced his unorthodox method of D these past few months is an attempt to cover for some injury. He's dealing with something. They sat him for 3 weeks or so to see if the rest would help. Brought him back and found that it's still a problem. Then and only then did they move him to the 3rd pair. My guess is that right after the season ends, he goes under the knife. Just my guess

Good LTIR him until the playoffs next year and pull a Vegas and go out and sign someone

 

[thesnake]

He had the puck on his stick. He has to keep his feet. Any injury is on him. This is in no way a penalty, and I can't even understand how its up for discussion... what is Laf supposed to do here, just let him pass? Insane... this play happens dozens a time every game, this guy just didn't keep his feet and happened to get hurt. Tough luck for him, but come on...

 

[will1066]

 

[RangerLifer]

In playoffs salaries mean nothing. He is much better than what a lot of teams have on their 3rd pair, and hes always been a good penalty killer. Personally I think after he made the comments about how he was "hurting the team" he and Lavi spoke and agreed on a demotion for the greater good. Good move by the captain and coach because Schneider, Miller, Gus and Trouba have all been better for it, imo.

Say what you want about Trouba, but that right there is the heart of a Captain! I gotta respect that.

yeah it's just...not a penalty. it's an unfortunate situation, but he came in on a guy and hit him from the side.

I first thought the guy was trying to duck the hit a bit but yeah probably was reaching for the puck while trying to brace himself for contact a bit and it just doens't work that way.

It's all bang bang at the time, someone in Lafs position doesn't ahve time to realize at the last second "oh no I can't hit this guy", he's thinking "I'm taking this guy off the puck and moving it to my teammate"

e: such a weird play but I can't see any penalty in it

In that video I see Nicky Fotiu behind the glass as the guy is falling!

 

[KevinFinnerty]

Georgie7

 

[UnSandvich]

The thing is, refs very rarely call hits like that as boarding in the NHL, even if that's the letter of the law. In international hockey that's boarding every single time. In the NHL, you can throw plenty of hits on the "open ice" that cause opponents to collide dangerously with the boards. They usually just call the ones that are like 1-2 feet away.

Should it have been a penalty? Probably yes. Are those usually called in the NHL? Nah, not really.

The player was NOT defenseless though. Laf hit a guy straight from the side, in the shoulder, who was carrying the puck and who braced for the hit. Not Laf’s fault the guy is a weakling. It was a perfectly good hockey play.

Yeah on the Laf play I can see the argument for a penalty. I don't think it was a definitive penalty, but these do get called sometimes.

The Rempe play on the third goal however is never a penalty. Yes, by the letter of the rule you could probably argue for interference, but that really is never called like this. And for good reason, because otherwise there'd be a penalty every other minute.

To be clear, I was just clarifying how the rule was specifically worded (shoulder to shoulder has no bearing on the call on its own), not saying whether it should or shouldn't have been a penalty

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Wow. I didn't realize that Matt Rempe nearly "killed" a Cap last night.

I've never heard of this gigantic p***y who fell like a ton of bricks until now. What a f***ing loser, lol.

The player was NOT defenseless though. Laf hit a guy straight from the side, in the shoulder, who was carrying the puck and who braced for the hit. Not Laf’s fault the guy is a weakling. It was a perfectly good hockey play.

Correct.

To be clear, I was just clarifying how the rule was specifically worded (shoulder to shoulder has no bearing on the call on its own), not saying whether it should or shouldn't have been a penalty

Also correct. Good clarification.

 

[Machinehead]

Look at Kreider's reaction to his goal.

That's beautiful. That's everything.

 

[jay from jersey]

I agree that the line was great, not only Kakko. The trio worked the forecheck really well. Cuylle took a penalty but otherwise was stout and in the Caps' faces.

He was robbed by Lindgren too on a beauty of a feed by Fox.
Honestly, Cuylle doesn’t look like a rookie out there. I’m interested to see where he tops out in terms of potential.
He’s got a really bright future ahead.

Rangers as a whole, Laf/cuylle/schneider/rempe/edstrom/berard/othmann/sykora/chmlear etc all these guys play with edge despite some being smaller in stature and have talent.
I’m happy because playing with emotion/finishing check/mixing it up in general just gets the whole team playing better.

 

[TominNC]

Look at Kreider's reaction to his goal.

That's beautiful. That's everything.

A great Ranger

 

[will1066]

Wrong thread

 

[Peltz]

A great Ranger

I've seen enough. I'm 100% on board with retiring his number at some point in the future.

He shows up in every post season, and had his best years after signing his current contract.

 

[Peltz]

Updated my avatar for a period-accurate depiction of ongoing events.