Whitecloud hit on Knies | Knies did not return to the game.

[The Hanging Jowl]

Here are the 2 differences that made one a suspension and other a legal hit....
1. North/South vs blindside
2. Heavy body contact vs head picked

I accept these arguments as logical. My retorts:

Point 1. A vulnerable player is a vulnerable player. The league has been very clear it's illegal to target a player in a vulnerable position, specifically when head contact is involved. The onus is on the hitter to avoid this.

Point 2: Good point. I guess the question would be, did Reaves mean to pick the head clean? ./shrug, dunno. But regardless, the league has also been very consistent they care far more about outcome than intent. I don't agree with that to be honest but it's their world.

 

[Score08]

Dirty af hit

 

[All Mod Cons]

maybe for omar fans, otherwise it's biased and a loose reading of the rules to "fit" it in as a bad hit. "look at his hip" is just grasping at straws.

knies paid the price for gaining the red line and whitecloud threw a good, strong hit. sucks when a player gets injured, but this isn't a targeting the head situation.

Why is it biased? Who is the gentleman?

 

[Nostradumbass]

"Hey! Thats an illegal check to the head! Suspend him for 5 games!"
- when its your guy getting hit

"Legal, check went through chest and the head contact was unavoidable, suck it up buttercup."
- same person but when its not one of their guys



It sucks

Flip those two paragraphs and you are describing a decent chunk of Leafs fans from the Reaves thread vs. here.

 

[22Brad Park]

KARMA BABY ...It was ok when Pacioretty did it to Peeke though right.

 

[All Mod Cons]

KARMA BABY ...It was ok when Pacioretty did it to Peeke though right.

I don't think Bruins fans thought it was. Or the other fanbases.

 

[izlez]

Not going to read through 13 pages, but I continues to be mindblown that people refuse to understand the rules. His feet at first glance look like they left the ice. Turns out they didn't until after contact. The head contact is not an issue on this hit

 

[Mogo]

 

[Deviled]

This is incorrect.



This play led to a fine. For Tommy Tremble, the Panthers' TE. By the rules, you cannot lower your head going into a collision as an NFL player.

I also don't like the comparison between football hitting and hockey hitting in general. For running backs in particular, the goal of any (legal) tackle is getting the guy to the ground. IMO, the only comparable objective in football is when you try to separate a player from a ball when he's in the process of catching a pass. There, they have reduced the number of hits to the head, which is good, but so has the NHL.

Well thats on me for not being politically correct.

In football, there is no illegal position for a player when receiving a hit; you are correct in that lowering the crown of the helmet is illegal when engaging an incoming hit

I only make this distinction because in hockey, 95% of hits to the head are on players who are receiving hits, not engaging an incoming hit

With that distinction made, do you feel any differently about hockey players having their head down? Going forward in a world where CTE and head trauma are notable and studied, should we consider avenues around this?

And just to make my opinion on the matter known (and this pains me to say) - id sooner remove body checking than continue to allow head trauma run rampant. Though I seriously doubt it ever gets to this point; top 1% of athletes are more capable than most of us know

 

[22Brad Park]

I don't think Bruins fans thought it was. Or the other fanbases.

Yea well I never saw former coache's on tv talking about it like Bruce Boudreau was last night..But here it is both feet in air.It put Peeke out 3 weeks.

 

[BlueOil]

Why is it biased? Who is the gentleman?

no clue who the guy is, but he's clearly not very good at evaluating these situations. his primary focus is how much knies' head snaps and the height of whitecloud's hip in a frame by frame comparison. the video shows clearly the head wasn't the point of contact and that he didn't leave his feet to make the hit. you'd think a dude with a channel dedicated to these situations would be better at reviewing criteria instead of just adding his own...

 

[All Mod Cons]

Yea well I never saw former coache's on tv talking about it like Bruce Boudreau was ..But here it is both feet in air.It put Peeke out 3 weeks.View attachment 933580

It's a tricky one isn't it. In this thread we have 31 fanbases saying it's OK, and Leafs fans saying it's not.

I'd imagine in that thread it was the total opposite.

I think it just goes to show, there isn't an unbiased viewpoint with regards to the Leafs in the hockey world.

Makes you wonder which side the NHL is on.

 

[Romang67]

Well thats on me for not being politically correct.

In football, there is no illegal position for a player when receiving a hit; you are correct in that lowering the crown of the helmet is illegal when engaging an incoming hit

I only make this distinction because in hockey, 95% of hits to the head are on players who are receiving hits, not engaging an incoming hit

With that distinction made, do you feel any differently about hockey players having their head down? Going forward in a world where CTE and head trauma are notable and studied, should we consider avenues around this?

And just to make my opinion on the matter known (and this pains me to say) - id sooner remove body checking than continue to allow head trauma run rampant. Though I seriously doubt it ever gets to this point; top 1% of athletes are more capable than most of us know

Me personally? I'm not sure where I stand in the discussion about essentially removing north-south hits for the purpose of reducing head trauma in hockey. On the one hand, I'm in favor of removing fighting for that reason. On the other hand, I think hitting in hockey, both for the purpose of dislodging the player from the puck, and for the reason of wearing your opponents down, has always been much more central to the game than fighting ever was.

Again, I don't like the NFL comparison, because the objective of hits are very different. Also, many of the hits that they removed in the NFL by putting more onus on the hitting players were already egregious acts of violence that wasn't allowed in hockey.

 

[All Mod Cons]

no clue who the guy is, but he's clearly not very good at evaluating these situations. his primary focus is how much knies' head snaps and the height of whitecloud's hip in a frame by frame comparison. the video shows clearly the head wasn't the point of contact and that he didn't leave his feet to make the hit. you'd think a dude with a channel dedicated to these situations would be better at reviewing criteria instead of just adding his own...

It's just you said it was biased. I thought that meant you knew the guy and what his biases were.

Turns out you didn't.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

I honestly can't believe people think this and the Reaves hit are even remotely similar, usually when a player gets hit straight on there will be head contact this is unavoidable as many have pointed out the natural stance for skating forward is leaning forward making your head almost impossible to miss. When Knies receives this hit, his body goes straight backwards.
When a player "picks" the head the player receiving the hit will usually spin, this is because the principle point of contact is the head causing the player to spin away. Nurse spins away, because his head is the main point of contact, Knies falls backwards because his center mass is the main point of contact.

This hit is a lot more like the Trouba hit on Meier in the playoffs a couple years ago, which was also legal by the rulebook.

 

[22Brad Park]

It's a tricky one isn't it. In this thread we have 31 fanbases saying it's OK, and Leafs fans saying it's not.

I'd imagine in that thread it was the total opposite.

I think it just goes to show, there isn't an unbiased viewpoint with regards to the Leafs in the hockey world.

Makes you wonder which side the NHL is on.

The hit by Whitecloud he pushed up through leaving his feet for sure.All I am saying is Leaf fans got some karma because they mostly were saying the hit on Peeke was ok the night it happened.Anyways, I don't like players getting injured ,just saying it's some karma.I agree with your post it's the truth.

 

[Romang67]

Why is it biased? Who is the gentleman?

I don't think it's biased. I think it's a bad video because what's discussed in the video is not based on the letter of the rule, and the video isn't long enough to determine whether all factors that would influence whether it's an illegal hit are there. There are three factors that determines whether this play is allowed.

1. Did Knies have a posture that makes head contact unavoidable? Arguably.
2. Did Knies make a sudden move to drastically alter his head position? No.
3. Did Whitecloud extend upward unnecessarily to make contact with the head?

In that two minute video, they really only discuss #1. They discuss whether Whitecloud extends, which he does, but does not discuss whether it's an unnecessary extension upward. Driving upward through a hit is not in of itself illegal.

 

[Deviled]

Me personally? I'm not sure where I stand in the discussion about essentially removing north-south hits for the purpose of reducing head trauma in hockey. On the one hand, I'm in favor of removing fighting for that reason. On the other hand, I think hitting in hockey, both for the purpose of dislodging the player from the puck, and for the reason of wearing your opponents down, has always been much more central to the game than fighting ever was.

Again, I don't like the NFL comparison, because the objective of hits are very different. Also, many of the hits that they removed in the NFL by putting more onus on the hitting players were already egregious acts of violence that wasn't allowed in hockey.

Fair enough then, cant much argue with playing it safe. I too tend to do the same in most conversations.

I could be completely wrong but I do feel there are ways to hit a player with their head down; as well as having the head down is a disadvantage to the offensive player, in the first place

Even if contact is avoided on most players with their head down.. that doesnt mean a free zone entry or successful play is made

Personally, I feel the 'keep your head up' comments are, almost always, inadvertent ways of not wanting to remove big and powerful body checks. Which I dont want to either.. but as for player safety, I think the rules need to change to reflect this.

And if the rules do change, the players will adapt. They are much, much better at doing so than 99% of us can understand or will ever give them credit for. They know their bodies far more than we ever will

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

I accept these arguments as logical. My retorts:

Point 1. A vulnerable player is a vulnerable player. The league has been very clear it's illegal to target a player in a vulnerable position, specifically when head contact is involved. The onus is on the hitter to avoid this.

Point 2: Good point. I guess the question would be, did Reaves mean to pick the head clean? ./shrug, dunno. But regardless, the league has also been very consistent they care far more about outcome than intent. I don't agree with that to be honest but it's their world.

Point 1 is not a point. Players are not inelligible to be hit head on north-south because of their own error/positioning. Otherwise it turns into NFL with quarterbacks.

 

[Dreakmur]

I accept these arguments as logical. My retorts:

Point 1. A vulnerable player is a vulnerable player. The league has been very clear it's illegal to target a player in a vulnerable position, specifically when head contact is involved. The onus is on the hitter to avoid this.

Point 2: Good point. I guess the question would be, did Reaves mean to pick the head clean? ./shrug, dunno. But regardless, the league has also been very consistent they care far more about outcome than intent. I don't agree with that to be honest but it's their world.

1. I guess it depends what is the definition of vulnerable? It can't be any time a player isn't ready to be hit - that would make a huge percentage of hits illegal. I think it applies more to what a player should be ready for. Should Knies expect to be hit in this situation? The obvious answer is yes, so I have a hard time thinking he is "vulnerable" there.

2. Reaves hit like 90% head and 10% body.... and that 10% might be generous. I don't think it was malicious, but it was textbook illegal head contact.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Here is how I would summarize the hit.

-Incidental head contact, but it wasn't 'picked' or the main point of contact, the sternum was.

-There is a good amount of upward launch on the hit but feet were on the ice at time of contact. So kind of borderline in that regard.

-Factoring in other context, Knies puting himself in a vulernable position, and being prime target to be checked, i.e trying to carry the puck across the red line and dman just stepping up to make a play, doesn't make it very predatory or an unnecessary hut. Like this wasn't finishing a check on someone beind the play or taking a run. Like with Tanner Jeannot or Ryan Reaves.

2 minutes would have sufficed as well, but it's closer to nothing than 5 and a game.

 

[Golden_Jet]

no clue who the guy is, but he's clearly not very good at evaluating these situations. his primary focus is how much knies' head snaps and the height of whitecloud's hip in a frame by frame comparison. the video shows clearly the head wasn't the point of contact and that he didn't leave his feet to make the hit. you'd think a dude with a channel dedicated to these situations would be better at reviewing criteria instead of just adding his own...

Omar is a huge leafs fan,

 

[ThrowDemTongs]

Another day on Law & Order: HFboards.

It is what it is. Hate to see Knies get hurt but he'll bounce back. He's a beast.

 

[iCanada]

That's explicitly stated as not a mitigating factor for rule 48.

View attachment 933574

Idk, I feel like the rule is broadly misunderstood. Basically the rule book says you can't only hit the head, but if you hit the head incidentally, or if they were in a different position and that would mean you it's ok.

48.1(ii) applies here; "Whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position by assuming a posture that made head contact on an otherwise full body check unavoidable."

Whitecloud approached from the front square - if knies' head isn't down he gets hit square in the chest, so it's a legal check. Compare that to the Reaves hit on Nurse - if Nurse's head was up, Reaves doesn't hit Nurse square in the body, he literally whiffs and hits air, so it's not a legal check.

Not sure if I necessarily agree with that, but the league has been relatively consistent with that standard to be honest. If the force is vectored through the center of mass, it's ok.

 

[Deviled]

1. I guess it depends what is the definition of vulnerable? It can't be any time a player isn't ready to be hit - that would make a huge percentage of hits illegal. I think it applies more to what a player should be ready for. Should Knies expect to be hit in this situation? The obvious answer is yes, so I have a hard time thinking he is "vulnerable" there.

2. Reaves hit like 90% head and 10% body.... and that 10% might be generous. I don't think it was malicious, but it was textbook illegal head contact.

While I agree that a player should expect to be hit in most situations on the ice, how they ate hit is what matters

Hypothetical: In a world going forward where any head contact (by the player, not by force) is made, and a penalty is assessed, players will adapt. In this example Whitecloud could have caught the player on his side versus hitting them in the chest

This is not to insinuate hits to the chest are made illegal, but instead to show that hits on players with their head down are possible; just less powerful and more tactical

It would take time for players to adjust to such a world but weve seen them do so in many other ways; just look to the 90s and earlier and the level of hits and head contact has already dropped, severely

I have faith the league and its players will figure this delicate situation out without removing any or all types or bodychecking