McMann game misconduct for hit on Mintyukov

[winnipegger]

Onus is on player playing the puck to protect himself here. Getting hit after a dump in happens almost every shift. Looked like he was admiring his dump in a bit too much and didn't anticipate contact.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

So very clearly boarding to anyone who knows what boarding is (or to anyone who doesn't watch hockey through massive leaf blinders)

 

[Leaf Fans]

So very clearly boarding to anyone who knows what boarding is (or to anyone who doesn't watch hockey through massive leaf blinders)

It was boarding. It shouldn't have been a 5 minute penalty though to as you put it anyone who knows what boarding is (or to anyone who doesn't watch hockey through massive leaf blinders or any other blinders).

 

[WhatTheDuck]

It was boarding. It shouldn't have been a 5 minute penalty though to as you put it anyone who knows what boarding is (or to anyone who doesn't watch hockey through massive leaf blinders or any other blinders).

I can agree it was pretty borderline for a major. But those stating it was perfectly clean or shoulder or to shoulder are clueless. It was textbook boarding, and by the time McMann actually made contact it was more like shoulder to back of rib cage. He intended to throw a shoulder to shoulder hit, nothing malicious about the attempt.

 

[MCR74]

Matthews got hit on the numbers and went head-first into the boards yesterday - no call.

This was a shoulder on shoulder hit and it's 5+game.


f***ing league is pathetic.

Surely the refs, competent as they are, must've missed the Matthews hit.

 

[Drytoast]

This is stupid. Do players not know how to take hits anymore? Or to not watch their passes? What the hell has happened to hockey?

 

[ijuka]

Can see boarding but that should have been a nothing play. I think Mintyukov should have been more aware of his surroundings.

 

[190Octane]

In this thread, a lot of people who don’t understand what boarding is or why a 5 minute major and a game misconduct are called.

Let’s have a look at the checklist…
-Shooting the puck in and off-balance so defenseless? Check.
-Hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously? Check.
-Injury to the face or head? Yep, he had to get stitches because he hit his face on the dasher.

This is a textbook 5 minute major and game misconduct. If the referee thought he was trying to injure with the hit, then it would’ve been a match penalty. Had there been no injury it probably would’ve just been 2 minutes.

For everyone saying it’s shoulder to shoulder therefore it’s clean… if it was at open ice I would 100% agree that the hit would’ve been fine. They didn’t call charging or roughing, they called boarding because the hit resulted in a player going face first into the boards. The hitter is responsible for not throwing a hit that sends someone into the boards dangerously.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

All right calls, except the ten min misconduct on Lybushkin. Wtf was that for? He already got a 5+2?

For being the instigator.

It’s always called that way.

 

[Mez]

2 min for boarding...and even thats questionable.

 

[Dr Pepper]

2 min for boarding...and even thats questionable.

How?

Rule was posted only a few posts above yours.

Shoulder to shoulder hit, on an off-balance player that sent him crashing into the boards.

That's boarding.

Same exact hit, at center ice? Probably not even a penalty.

Where McMann chose to make the hit? Obvious penalty, and an easy call for the refs to make.

 

[LivingRentFree]

This being a 5 minute major is why the league is completely broken. No consistency, no accountability. Refs will go home with a pat on the back after a horrendous call.

 

[Auston Marlander]

So very clearly boarding to anyone who knows what boarding is (or to anyone who doesn't watch hockey through massive leaf blinders)

Agreed, 2 minutes for boarding is what it was.

In this thread, a lot of people who don’t understand what boarding is or why a 5 minute major and a game misconduct are called.

Let’s have a look at the checklist…
-Shooting the puck in and off-balance so defenseless? Check.
-Hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously? Check.
-Injury to the face or head? Yep, he had to get stitches because he hit his face on the dasher.

This is a textbook 5 minute major and game misconduct. If the referee thought he was trying to injure with the hit, then it would’ve been a match penalty. Had there been no injury it probably would’ve just been 2 minutes.

For everyone saying it’s shoulder to shoulder therefore it’s clean… if it was at open ice I would 100% agree that the hit would’ve been fine. They didn’t call charging or roughing, they called boarding because the hit resulted in a player going face first into the boards. The hitter is responsible for not throwing a hit that sends someone into the boards dangerously.

View attachment 795643

Well we are about to see a lot more players gone for 5 and a game. I look forward to seeing this on a near daily basis, and in some cases multiple times per game. I am a big fan of NHL ref consistency, it makes it easy for fans and players to know what's legal and what isn't.

 

[Edgelord]

How?

Rule was posted only a few posts above yours.

Shoulder to shoulder hit, on an off-balance player that sent him crashing into the boards.

That's boarding.

Same exact hit, at center ice? Probably not even a penalty.

Where McMann chose to make the hit? Obvious penalty, and an easy call for the refs to make.

I don't see that, from what I saw everything about the hit was good. McCann isn't responsible if the player he hit can't take the hit.
Cuz if its a case of location then why are any hits allowed in that 5 feet from the boards zone?

 

[ohcomeonref]

Agreed, 2 minutes for boarding is what it was.



Well we are about to see a lot more players gone for 5 and a game. I look forward to seeing this on a near daily basis, and in some cases multiple times per game. I am a big fan of NHL ref consistency, it makes it easy for fans and players to know what's legal and what isn't.

Dangerous hits like this don't happen nearly as often as you're implying.

 

[Dr Pepper]

I don't see that, from what I saw everything about the hit was good. McCann isn't responsible if the player he hit can't take the hit.
Cuz if its a case of location then why are any hits allowed in that 5 feet from the boards zone?

Because there's a difference between stapling a player to the boards on a forecheck, and sending a player crashing into the boards from a distance?

 

[Edgelord]

Because there's a difference between stapling a player to the boards on a forecheck, and sending a player crashing into the boards from a distance?

But in many of those cases, its the player being hit that turns or something else that leads to them flying into the boards.
So why not just have a no hitting zone?
IMO the legality of a hit should NEVER be determined by how the player takes the hit.

 

[Dr Pepper]

But in many of those cases, its the player being hit that turns or something else that leads to them flying into the boards.
So why not just have a no hitting zone?

I suppose you could say that's exactly why he got the gate for boarding.

Hit in the "no hitting zone" which led to Minty going flying into the boards.

It wasn't necessarily a predatory hit or anything, McMann just finishing his check on a player trying to dump the puck in, but because the impact/result was in a tough spot the refs had to call it.

 

[lwvs84]

It ended up being a 3 min power play (not sure when they call instigator since I don't think it's been called when other teams start the fight with a Ducks player this season) and Lybushkin getting a 10 min misconduct. Considering the Ducks power play and defense, that's a good trade for Toronto since they only lost a 4th liner? Plus there were plenty of makeup calls/non-calls to "balance" it out in Toronto's favor.

 

[Edgelord]

I suppose you could say that's exactly why he got the gate for boarding.

Hit in the "no hitting zone" which led to Minty going flying into the boards.

It wasn't necessarily a predatory hit or anything, McMann just finishing his check on a player trying to dump the puck in, but because the impact/result was in a tough spot the refs had to call it.

I do understand the risk, we have both seen a ton of nasty injuries from similar hits but my issue is we could see 2 identical plays, 1 where the player looses balance and crashes face 1st into the boards and 1 where the player keeps balance and does the gloves to glass then body to boards move to absorb it. If scenario A is a penalty then IMO scenario B should be as well.

 

[Dr Pepper]

I do understand the risk, we have both seen a ton of nasty injuries from similar hits but my issue is we could see 2 identical plays, 1 where the player looses balance and crashes face 1st into the boards and 1 where the player keeps balance and does the gloves to glass then body to boards move to absorb it. If scenario A is a penalty then IMO scenario B should be as well.

There could just as easily have been no call at all on the play, as I've seen worse go uncalled in years past.

Hard to know what you're getting, from NHL refs these days.

At least the 5+game is as far as the league is taking it and we're not talking about an additional fine or suspension handed down by the clowns at NHL HQ.

 

[Neil Racki]

These dump in plays are always a race to a spot on the ice

D man needs to get there to dump in clean
Forward needs to get there so D man knows he will get plastered if he tried to dump it in

Does "defenseless position" protection include when the player puts themselves in a defenseless position?

This race to the red line happens a lot, Sometimes the D man knows he will get hit and bails on it. Sometimes the forward is a sec late and decides not to cream the D man. Sometimes the D man gets creamed.

We cheer our D guys when they sacrifice their body to make the dump when they know they are going to get plastered.

 

[Edgelord]

There could just as easily have been no call at all on the play, as I've seen worse go uncalled in years past.

Hard to know what you're getting, from NHL refs these days.

At least the 5+game is as far as the league is taking it and we're not talking about an additional fine or suspension handed down by the clowns at NHL HQ.

couldn't agree more brother!!!
Like with Cousins, that hit where the player was on their knees along the boards was BRUTAL!!! and nothing, so Zucker had to act.
IMO Cousins hit was worse.

 

[TGWL]

It's very boderline. I think I view this more as a 2 minute penalty if you want to lean on the other side of the borderline hit. The hit itself wasn't much, but the player is off balance as you can see his skate turning away after firing the puck. I don't view this an any intent to hurt Mintyukov, but bad timing based on positioning and where the play was taking place.

You're not defenseless because you take yourself off balance from dumping the puck in. The NHL allows you to get rocked against the boards, but should you be a foot or so away where you go down into the boards, it's now viewed differently and violent. (No, I don't want to see players get hit and fall into the boards, but the league allows such late hits against the boards on players who already made the play.). As much as this is on the players, I think the rules need to be a little more black and white for them. I don't think we'll see the day where the respect and awareness offsets these things from happening.

If this was a minor call, I don't think we even have a thread here. But the flip side is you potentially have a team looking for payback.

 

[ShootIt]

I dunno. Good hit, meh location.

To me, should of been a 2 minute call.