Quinn Hughes 5 min major for hit on Josh Norris

hatterson

Registered User
Apr 12, 2010
36,625
14,148
North Tonawanda, NY
Rule 41.3 for a major boarding call says see rule 41.5 at the end of it.
41.5 is clear , player is out of game if injury to face.
Yes. It says see 41.5 because in certain circumstances where 41.3 is applied, there is also a required extra penalty, but that doesn’t remove the discretion from 41.2 vs 41.3

This is most easily noted by the existence of a match penalty for boarding that doesn’t make any reference to injury and is based on attempt to injure.

If a major was *required* for a head/face injury, then it would necessarily mean that a referee couldn’t instead apply a match penalty but would be forced to give out the lesser penalty of major+game instead of the more severe penalty of match, which is obviously ridiculous.

By rule, assessing a boarding penalty is a potentially three step process.

Step 1 - Was there a deliberate attempt to injure the other player? If yes, match penalty.
Step 2 - If no deliberate attempt to injure, was “the degree of violence of the impact with the boards” worthy of a minor penalty or a major penalty? If minor, issue 2 minute minor regardless of any potential injury.
Step 3 - If major, was there an injury to the head or face? If yes, also apply a game misconduct. If no, only a 5 minute major.

Now, as I said, in practice referees almost always default step 2 to being “was there an injury?” Instead of a subjective analysis of the degree of violence of the impact, but the rules do not require them to do that.
 

NailsHoglander

Registered User
Feb 20, 2024
505
690
Had no choice, if an injury (ie cut and stitches in this case) from boarding, it’s a major and a game.
See rule 41.5 I think

Even though it’s been said a dozen times or more in thread. Apparently no one is reading.

Makes sense if the league were run by AI bots but humans have the ability to use a thing called discretion
 

Golden_Jet

Registered User
Sep 21, 2005
26,351
13,659
Yes. It says see 41.5 because in certain circumstances where 41.3 is applied, there is also a required extra penalty, but that doesn’t remove the discretion from 41.2 vs 41.3

This is most easily noted by the existence of a match penalty for boarding that doesn’t make any reference to injury and is based on attempt to injure.

If a major was *required* for a head/face injury, then it would necessarily mean that a referee couldn’t instead apply a match penalty but would be forced to give out the lesser penalty of major+game instead of the more severe penalty of match, which is obviously ridiculous.

By rule, assessing a boarding penalty is a potentially three step process.

Step 1 - Was there a deliberate attempt to injure the other player? If yes, match penalty.
Step 2 - If no deliberate attempt to injure, was “the degree of violence of the impact with the boards” worthy of a minor penalty or a major penalty? If minor, issue 2 minute minor regardless of any potential injury.
Step 3 - If major, was there an injury to the head or face? If yes, also apply a game misconduct. If no, only a 5 minute major.

Now, as I said, in practice referees almost always default step 2 to being “was there an injury?” Instead of a subjective analysis of the degree of violence of the impact, but the rules do not require them to do that.
Now you’re getting it step 3 takes precedence over anything on a boarding call. Refs got it right by the rule book.

Step 2 you made up , if minor regardless of injury.


41.2 cannot be applied here

41.5 is the play, the refs had no choice. If you want the rule changed, say so, but that’s the rule.
The 5 and game with a facial injury was called by the book.

Cheers we’re done, your struggling with the rule book.
 

hatterson

Registered User
Apr 12, 2010
36,625
14,148
North Tonawanda, NY
Now you’re getting it step 3 takes precedence over anything on a boarding call. Refs got it right by the rule book.

Step 2 you made up , if minor regardless of injury.


41.2 cannot be applied here

41.5 is the play, the refs had no choice. If you want the rule changed, say so, but that’s the rule.
The 5 and game with a facial injury was called by the book.

Cheers we’re done, your struggling with the rule book.
It's actually impressive to watch someone be this determined to be objectively wrong about what a rulebook says. Cheers.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Golden_Jet

Heldig

Registered User
Apr 12, 2002
17,695
11,390
BC
It looks like Elliote doesn't know the rules. My understanding of the rule is that it says if a major is imposed and there's an injury, it's an automatic game misconduct.

They could have rescinded the original penalty to a minor.
While Norris maybe went down easily it was a shove in the back that caused him to go face first into the dasher board and get injured.

Seems to me it was the correct call.

Now, if there was disciplinary action as well, that would be a bad call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Filthy Dangles

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad