NHL: Around the League 52

[BHawk21]

Brother you're arguing that an elbow to the jaw isn't a headshot.

Yes, I saw the penalty.

48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A hit resulting in contact with anopponent’s head where the head was the main point of contact andsuch contact to the head was avoidable is not permitted.In determining whether contact with an opponent's head wasavoidable, the circumstances of the hit including the following shall beconsidered:

(i) Whether the player attempted to hit squarely through theopponent’s body and the head was not "picked" as a result of poortiming, poor angle of approach, or unnecessary extension of thebody upward or outward.

48.2 Minor Penalty – For violation of this rule, a minor penalty shall beassessed.


Theres a sliding scale for these penalties that you dont seem to acknowledge.

It can be a penalty and not be a suspension. They could have missed a major and still not be a suspension.

 

[statswatcher]

Yes, I saw the penalty.

48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A hit resulting in contact with anopponent’s head where the head was the main point of contact andsuch contact to the head was avoidable is not permitted.In determining whether contact with an opponent's head wasavoidable, the circumstances of the hit including the following shall beconsidered:

(i) Whether the player attempted to hit squarely through theopponent’s body and the head was not "picked" as a result of poortiming, poor angle of approach, or unnecessary extension of thebody upward or outward.

48.2 Minor Penalty – For violation of this rule, a minor penalty shall beassessed.


Theres a sliding scale for these penalties that you dont seem to acknowledge.

since we're rules lawyering:

Per Article 18.2 in the CBA between the NHL and the NHLPA:
"... In deciding on Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct, the following factors will be taken into account:
(a) The type of conduct involved: conduct in violation of League Playing Rules, and whether the conduct is intentional or reckless, and involves the use of excessive and unnecessary force. Players are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
(b) Injury to the opposing Player(s) involved in the incident.
(c) The status of the offender and, specifically, whether the Player has a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct. Players who repeatedly violate League Playing Rules will be more severely punished for each new violation.
(d) The situation of the game in which the incident occurred, for example: late in the game, lopsided score, prior events in the game.
(e) Such other factors as may be appropriate in the circumstances."

really the only item here up for serious debate is (a) and that's really only in your mind.

 

[BHawk21]

since we're rules lawyering:

Per Article 18.2 in the CBA between the NHL and the NHLPA:
"... In deciding on Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct, the following factors will be taken into account:
(a) The type of conduct involved: conduct in violation of League Playing Rules, and whether the conduct is intentional or reckless, and involves the use of excessive and unnecessary force. Players are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
(b) Injury to the opposing Player(s) involved in the incident.
(c) The status of the offender and, specifically, whether the Player has a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct. Players who repeatedly violate League Playing Rules will be more severely punished for each new violation.
(d) The situation of the game in which the incident occurred, for example: late in the game, lopsided score, prior events in the game.
(e) Such other factors as may be appropriate in the circumstances."

really the only item here up for serious debate is (a) and that's really only in your mind.

This goes against suspension for the most part.

No History, Game situation clearly doesnt lend itself to retribution of any kind, seems like Barkov is going to play next game.

I think it was reckless more so than intentional. The penalty was called for that.

 

[statswatcher]

This goes against suspension for the most part.

how's that math work?

No History

not strictly true, drai has received supplementary discipline in the past.

Game situation clearly doesnt lend itself to retribution of any kind

prior events in the game; e.g. barkov shutting the oiler's top line down. that in conjunction with the fact that the oilers only had 1 goal in ~110 minutes of play to that point.

seems like Barkov is going to play next game.

doesn't matter, he was injured on the ice and missed the second half of the third period.

I think it was reckless more so than intentional.

doesn't matter, the cba includes both as considerations.

by my count that's more in favor than not.

 

[BHawk21]

He got fined one time. If you want to count that as history your reaching.

Obviously grasping at straws to try to fit your narrative with the game situation. They were down by 1 goal in the offensive zone with 9 min left in the SCF get a clue. You dont even believe this nonsense.

It does matter if hes going to play. Its being reported. I dont know why it should matter but it does.

Yes, they list both as considerations. So they can take either into account before judging the decision. What point does that prove?

Its a penalty not a suspension.

I'm honestly shocked people waste their time arguing with this poster... I haven't done so for years now.

yea you blocked me so long ago.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Should be a suspension, but when has the NHL got anything right in regards to suspensions?

 

[statswatcher]

He got fined one time. If you want to count that as history your reaching.

he wouldn't be judged as a repeat offender because he's never been suspended. still a fact that he has history with DoPS, even if that history is a single fine. it's a red herring anyways, as the criteria here presented are sufficient for but not necessary for supplemental discipline to be meted out.

Obviously grasping at straws to try to fit your narrative with the game situation.

nope, just telling you what happened.

It does matter if hes going to play.

it doesn't matter to the question of whether or not he was injured on the play.

Its being reported.

oh well as long as it's being reported i guess i should believe it is so sight unseen. it's usually a good idea to blindly listen to what towering intellects such as yourself have to say.

Yes, they list both as considerations. So they can take either into account before judging the decision. What point does that prove?

it proves that you hemming and hawing about how it may have been reckless but it wasn't intentional doesn't affect the question of "was this play reckless and/or intentional". it was pointless waffling to distract from the fact that you are conceding to probably the most important point in the whole discussion, topped off by a completely pointless and irrelevant appeal to the call on the ice.

Its a penalty not a suspension.

it is looking like that will be the case, but not by virtue of the facts at hand, but rather because the NHL are a group of incompetent pigs in suits incapable of regulating according to the letter of their own regulations.

 

[BHawk21]

he wouldn't be judged as a repeat offender because he's never been suspended. still a fact that he has history with DoPS, even if that history is a single suspension. it's a red herring anyways, as the criteria here presented are sufficient for but not necessary for supplemental discipline to be meted out.

nope, just telling you what happened.

it doesn't matter to the question of whether or not he was injured on the play.

oh well as long as it's being reported i guess i should believe it is so sight unseen. it's usually a good idea to listen to what towering intellects such as yourself have to say.

it proves that you hemming and hawing about how it may have been reckless but it wasn't intentional doesn't affect the question of "was this play reckless and/or intentional". it was pointless waffling to distract from the fact that you are conceding to probably the most important point in the whole discussion, topped off by a completely pointless and irrelevant appeal to the call on the ice.

it is looking like that will be the case, but not by virtue of the facts at hand, but rather because the NHL are a group of incompetent pigs in suits incapable of regulating according to the letter of their own regulations.

He doesnt have a history of suspension. You can try to wiggle your way around that but he doesnt.

The game was very close and nothing throughout the game caused Draisaitl to retaliate against Barkov.

It does matter that hes not actually injured. Doesnt matter what you think about it its what the NHL thinks about it.

They consider if it was intentional or reckless hit to the head and then consider from there punishment. If it gets to that point. I would imagine they weigh intentional harm on someone a little heavier then reckless for a first time offender but I am not sure.

Its looking like it wont be a suspension because in the SCF that ruling becomes harder to make because the importance. Just like every call throughout the game does. Argue with whoever you want whether it should or not I dont care.

You just dont seem to get that the rules are set up so they can interpret them case to case. A headshot can result in a minor, major, and or suspension. They are going by the letter of their own regulations you just dont like the result and are crying about it.

 

[statswatcher]

He doesnt have a history of suspension.

show me in the relevant part of the cba where it says the words "history of suspension". you will look, and you will find the words "a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct".

The game was very close and nothing throughout the game caused Draisaitl to retaliate against Barkov.

wrong, but i will not waste time describing red to the blind.

It does matter that hes not actually injured.

yeah, that's true. unfortunately, he was injured. whether he plays next game or not does not change this fact.

You just dont seem to get that the rules are set up so they can interpret them case to case. A headshot can result in a minor, major, and or suspension. They are going by the letter of their own regulations you just dont like the result and are crying about it.

no what is happening is you are interpreting the case quite differently from me. i see a frustrated top line player intentionally and violently launching himself elbow first into the jaw of the guy that's kept him off the score sheet all series. doesn't matter if in his heart of hearts he intended to injury the guy. he was pissed off, made a dumb decision, and took the other guy out of the game as a result. stupid silly goon shit and i would be saying the same thing if a panther had done something similarly stupid in a similar situation with similar results.

 

[BHawk21]

show me in the relevant part of the cba where it says the words "history of suspension". you will look, and you will find the words "a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct".

wrong, but i will not waste time describing red to the blind.

yeah, that's true. unfortunately, he was injured. whether he plays next game or not does not change this fact.

no what is happening is you are interpreting the case quite differently from me. i see a frustrated top line player intentionally and violently launching himself elbow first into the jaw of the guy that's kept him off the score sheet all series. doesn't matter if in his heart of hearts he intended to injury the guy. he was pissed off, made a dumb decision, and took the other guy out of the game as a result. stupid silly goon shit and i would be saying the same thing if a panther had done something similarly stupid in a similar situation with similar results.

Im not even going to read because the way you post is very annoying. Please just acknowledge one thing. There can be a hit to the head that is reckless and seemingly hurts the opposing player but only deserves a minor penalty.

 

[statswatcher]

Im not even going to read because the way you post makes me realize i am wrong and have no ground to stand on wah i am a tiny baby man.

ftfy

 

[BHawk21]

ftfy

Its a tough sport you will get used to it.

 

[statswatcher]

Its a tough sport you will get used to it.

this and "keep your head up" are my favorite brain dead thought terminating cliches people drag out for things like this. don't follow up a check with an elbow through the opposing player's scalp. simple as.

 

[BHawk21]

this and "keep your head up" are my favorite brain dead thought terminating cliches people drag out for things like this. don't follow up a check with an elbow through the opposing player's scalp. simple as.

Yes or you will get a penalty.

 

[statswatcher]

Yes or you will get a penalty.

and it should also be a suspension, particularly but not exclusively if the other player is unable to play next game in the stanley cup finals because of it.

 

[BHawk21]

and it should also be a suspension, particularly but not exclusively if the other player is unable to play next game in the stanley cup finals because of it.

you should write a letter to the league.

 

[statswatcher]

you should write a letter to the league.

nah, i think i will just demonstrate why the things you've said here are nonsense point by point instead.

 

[BHawk21]

nah, i think i will just demonstrate why the things you've said here are nonsense point by point instead.

"prior events in the game; e.g. barkov shutting the oiler's top line down. that in conjunction with the fact that the oilers only had 1 goal in ~110 minutes of play to that point."

This ones my favorite.

 

[statswatcher]

"prior events in the game; e.g. barkov shutting the oiler's top line down. that in conjunction with the fact that the oilers only had 1 goal in ~110 minutes of play to that point."

This ones my favorite.

what part of that statement is not objectively true?

 

[BHawk21]

what part of that statement is not objectively true?

Whos the top line? McDavids or Leons? Barkovs been matching McDavid. They were both on the ice 4 on 4 when the oilers scored.

McDavid and Leon play together end of periods after PKs and on the PP/4v4.

You are saying that we know the forearm shiver was intent to injure because Leon didnt like McDavids line being shut down?

Its not more reasonable to think it was just a reckless forecheck at the end of the game. It clearly was a terrible game situation for that. It cost them a chance at coming back.

 

[statswatcher]

Whos the top line? McDavids or Leons? Barkovs been matching McDavid. They were both on the ice 4 on 4 when the oilers scored.

McDavid and Leon play together end of periods after PKs and on the PP/4v4.

You are saying that we know the forearm shiver was intent to injure because Leon didnt like McDavids line being shut down?

so to be clear, nothing you said here contradicted anything i said and it was a major waste of time for you to write it and for me to read it.

 

[Malaka]

https://thehockeynews.com/womens/pwhl/lgbtq-community-and-allies-respond-swiftly-to-minnesotas-selection-of-britta-curl

 

[Paul Allen]

https://thehockeynews.com/womens/pwhl/lgbtq-community-and-allies-respond-swiftly-to-minnesotas-selection-of-britta-curl

Well, that didn’t take long.

 

[Hattrick Kane]

Well, that didn’t take long.

It’s crazy that within a week, two women’s leagues in the PWHL and WNBA, are facing all kinds of controversy and trying to cannibalize themselves while trying to grow these leagues.

I don’t want to say it’s because of women, but like holy shit what are they doing?

 

[Pez68]

It’s crazy that within a week, two women’s leagues in the PWHL and WNBA, are facing all kinds of controversy and trying to cannibalize themselves while trying to grow these leagues.

I don’t want to say it’s because of women, but like holy shit what are they doing?

The problem is that hockey, even women's hockey, is run by dinosaurs. Nobody saw an issue with drafting this bigot because most of these old white men probably don't see anything wrong with her views. On the contrary....

It's honestly amazing to be a transphobe/homophobe as a female hockey player, considering the percentage of them that are homosexual...