Serious question pertaining to the Laine hit/injury

Status
Not open for further replies.

amnesiac

Space Oddity
Jul 10, 2010
14,473
8,457
Montreal
serious question, as Ive heard different answers over the past few days....

whose "job" is it to move their left leg in this situation? The puck carrier or the defender?

Laine's coming in wide-legged, and Pare is defending wide-legged.



1727802357748.png



(FWIW Im acutally thinking its Laine's job since hes coming at Pare, and splitting between 2 Dmen)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Neil Racki

FriendlyGhost92

Registered User
Jun 22, 2023
4,132
4,940
thats what Ive been saying


pretty much.... so

whats everyone else's opinion?

FWIW, I also don't have a problem with WiFi beating the shit out of him for it... Just dunno that I'm down with the chase down and sucker punch to the back of the head.

Generally I'm OK with making a guy fight for injuring a star. The recent one I can think of that I hated though was when Perry concussed Tavares. The whole incident happened because Tavares fell in front of Perry and Perry wasn't even looking when he kneed Tavares in the head. It 100% wasn't intentional and was clearly an accident with 0 intent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amnesiac

Three On Zero

HF Designated Parking Instructor
Sponsor
Oct 9, 2012
32,726
31,660
To me it’s 50/50, Laine tries to go through with a wide stance and Pare sticks out his left knee when he looks like he’s going to get beaten.
 

FMichael

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
5,969
6,149
Wisconsin
To me that's a play that happens so fast that I don't think you can find anybody at fault for it.

It's hockey and shit happens sometimes.
This...It's a contact sport and sometimes there's injuries.

To me it’s 50/50, Laine tries to go through with a wide stance and Pare sticks out his left knee when he looks like he’s going to get beaten.
:huh:
 

eojsmada

Registered User
Oct 23, 2022
934
1,125
The impetus is on the defender is to take the body (torso). My issue with Pare's play is that he's not in Laine's lane and takes a flexed-knee stance, rather than realize he was beaten and made no discernable effort to take the body.

This is basically a "skill" issue. Pare doesn't have the ability to defend the play at high speed and simply "braces" himself instead, which creates the knee-on-knee. It's only an unavoidable situation because the defender is incapable of defending the play properly and does the one thing you shouldn't in flexing his knee towards the offensive player. It's only a bad hit by Pare because he's not able to play at high speed.
 

Frank Drebin

Likes are suspended, sorry for inconvenience
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2004
35,602
23,323
Edmonton
The impetus is on the defender is to take the body (torso). My issue with Pare's play is that he's not in Laine's lane and takes a flexed-knee stance, rather than realize he was beaten and made no discernable effort to take the body.

This is basically a "skill" issue. Pare doesn't have the ability to defend the play at high speed and simply "braces" himself instead, which creates the knee-on-knee. It's only an unavoidable situation because the defender is incapable of defending the play properly and does the one thing you shouldn't in flexing his knee towards the offensive player. It's only a bad hit by Pare because he's not able to play at high speed.
Pilon being a pilon
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs and Gustave

A1LeafNation

Good, is simply not good enough!
Oct 17, 2010
27,819
17,972
Both.

It would have been acceptable to give Pare a suspension. This kid is an AHLer and it looked instinctive. But consequences have actions. Not sure why he wasn't suspended tbh.

What isn't acceptable is punches to the back of his head.

This league does shit all because we are the dummies who keep watching it and no one pushes them to change or to deter this shit.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: The Gr8 Dane

The Gr8 Dane

L'harceleur
Jan 19, 2018
13,604
27,022
Montréal
50/50

Both.

It would have been acceptable to give Pare a suspension. This kid is an AHLer and it looked instinctive. But consequences have actions. Not sure why he wasn't suspended tbh.

What isn't acceptable is punches to the back of his head.

This league does shit all because we are the dummies who keep watching it and no one pushes them to change or to deter this shit.
1967 , starts with you my friend , be the change you want in the world :)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: A1LeafNation

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,841
4,558
I think it's 60% on Pare since he seems to have made the correction in an attempt to catch a piece of Laine and prevent him from just skating by. It's 40% on Laine to protect himself in this situation by not skating with his legs so far apart while splitting the defense.
 

miscs75

Registered User
Jul 2, 2014
6,528
6,106
Does anyone have an angle of this hit that shows if Laine was/wasn’t looking at the puck the whole time? From this one, it looks like he’s got no awareness of his surroundings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AvroArrow

On The Prowl

Registered User
Mar 13, 2024
240
411
The impetus is on the defender is to take the body (torso). My issue with Pare's play is that he's not in Laine's lane and takes a flexed-knee stance, rather than realize he was beaten and made no discernable effort to take the body.

This is basically a "skill" issue. Pare doesn't have the ability to defend the play at high speed and simply "braces" himself instead, which creates the knee-on-knee. It's only an unavoidable situation because the defender is incapable of defending the play properly and does the one thing you shouldn't in flexing his knee towards the offensive player. It's only a bad hit by Pare because he's not able to play at high speed.
I agree, he probably panicked and froze. Wouldn't be surprised if he closed his eyes even.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eojsmada

banks

Only got 3 of 16.
Aug 29, 2019
3,855
5,673
Part of the problem is that to push yourself to the right (out of the way) means pushing off with your left leg, which extends it. You can't just bring your left leg in while moving without tipping over. You get to a point where neither guy can avoid the hit.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
86,665
144,156
Bojangles Parking Lot
Strictly speaking, the onus is on the defender not to strike the puck carrier’s leg, as that is a tripping penalty.

Now… there’s also an element of discretion about how well established the defender is. As a puck carrier, you can’t just throw yourself over a defender and expect to get a call. This was a play that really pushes the limits of how much space a puck carrier is “owed” when moving past the defender.

In this case, if you want to call it something strictly by the book, it’s a tripping penalty. So that answers the question — onus is on the defender.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad