Worst Match penalty/Major ever called (Cizikas NYI)
- Thread starter SI90
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Mar 4, 2004
- 31,021
- 31,789
He swings his stick and barely misses the puck. Again I think it's in that grey area so I can understand someone thinking that doesn't really constitute trying to play the puck. For me, with two players heading into the corner I think he was expecting contact.
Kevin27NYI
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2009
- 20,365
- 6,339
Can someone explain to me why in the NHL you can’t hit anymore and need to play the puck? Why is there any mention of “not making a play for the puck”
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
The part about playing the puck is relevant to Bischel, not to Cizikas. It’s illegal to hit someone who hasn’t touched the puck.
The ref explicitly stated the match penalty was due to an “illegal hit to the head” following the video review.
Kevin27NYI
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2009
- 20,365
- 6,339
It’s there for both players, Cizikas can take the body. If you’re skating straightaway and someone passes it through your feet your allowed to hit the player even if his stick didn’t receive the pass.
doublechili
For all intensive purposes, your nuts
- Apr 11, 2006
- 19,221
- 15,784
Bichsel swings at the puck and misses a split second before Cizikas hits him. You're being unrealistic. Interference is meant for when a guy gets hit a couple of one-thousands after he passes, or when he hasn't played the puck and it's not especially close to him. Your interpretation would basically eliminate body checking in hockey if it were enforced.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
SI90
Registered User
You really wanna do this?
Matt Rempe is 6’8 so it’s more than likely he would have hit Bischel head.
Also, Rempire State building (LOL) has already amassed 2 career suspensions for bad hits and he Only has 40 career games played lol
Cizikas in his 14 year career with almost 900 games played has 1 career suspension.
Reflect on that for a little.
100%. A concussion can be caused by the brain moving around inside the skull, which can happen in all sorts of ways. Does not have to happen by direct contact to the head. That hit was clean.
As a sidenote, kind of sad to see Dumba reduced to being a guy who has to stick up for Bichsel. What happened, Matt?
Acallabeth
Post approved by Ovechkin
I've said it many times: the best position on head hits was when IIHF issued a minor and a 10-minute misconduct for any hit with head contact, a major and a game misconduct for a hit with a head contact that leads to an injury.
It has very little space for a referee bias and has a fine middle ground: we often see that a minor penalty seems unfair for a hit to the head that may lead to long-term neurological damage, but a major is kinda overboard.
It has very little space for a referee bias and has a fine middle ground: we often see that a minor penalty seems unfair for a hit to the head that may lead to long-term neurological damage, but a major is kinda overboard.
HFBS
Noted Troublemaker
- Jan 18, 2015
- 2,198
- 2,260
No need to. It's not Rempe's fault that he's 6'8". Hitting someone in the head and targeting the head are two different things. Will Rempe be an NHL player? Maybe not. But he starts out with 9/10 of a major penalty in referee's heads every game he plays.
For what it's worth, I thought the Cizikas call was a bad call. But the undisputed worst call of all time? That's a joke.
- Aug 12, 2008
- 3,616
- 2,070
looks like the intent was chest but he did get the head so its really not the worst call of all time. If you flipped the players youd have both fan bases arguing the opposite way. I know players are used to how they have grown up playing but imo if they are going into a hit and arent 90% sure they can avoid the head than why do it. I dont believe Cizikas is a dirty player so its just an unfortunate result but it was completely pointless decision too.
Now imagine Cizikas were Tom Wilson..............
Now imagine Cizikas were Tom Wilson..............
We can get into details of rules, but these guys have played their whole lives. And when there's a a free puck, and the paths of two pursuers intersect without either having position on the other, contact is a (unpenalized) reality of the sport. It's even a reality of non-contact sports like basketball and soccer, but it is the norm in contact sports.
I coach youth lacrosse, and one of the most important thing we do is use practice time to help players learn to protect themselves, particularly in these situations because they happen so often. It's actually much easier to teach it to kids in these situations (loose ball/puck) than it is self-protection with the ball (or puck), because some kids get totally single minded/tunnel vision when they have the ball (or puck).
We remind our players constantly, "chill out - they can't score from behind the goal line" for a couple of reasons, and positional awareness and spacing is obviously one reason, but self-protection is the other. Similar reasoning/exhortations apply to sidelines/boards.
It does not surprise me in the least when it's a 6'7" pro who doesn't have the habits/instincts etc. to keep his shoulder closed towards the extended goal line. It is very difficult for someone who is enormous relative to their peers their entire lives to develop the requisite anxiety to protect themselves if they don't come by it naturally. He got hit in the head by a 5'11" player who stayed level through the contact which occurred below the goal line, and came from the expected direction. If a much smaller player lacked such basic habits, they would never get close to playing pro.
There are times when players have no time to protect themselves, or are not in situations where they can know to, or it wouldn't make a difference if they did. This was none of those. This was a routine, 'take an angle towards the puck, don't open your shoulder, brace for contact, and if you get beaten & it rims around the boards, get back into position' situation.
? I don't really get this. There are some points in this area, but I don't think you've made one. Here they are:
(i) defenders interfering to slow down puck pursuers on dump and chase play *is* a matter of self preservation. one of the things people don't like is that refs do not always apply their judgment in this area consistently
(ii) hockey allows too much contact from players who do not have a path to the puck that doesn't go through another player's back. this situation was an intersection, so that doesn't apply. but imo there is way too much contact from behind in hockey and it's only penalized near the boards. (if contact from behind weren't routine, interference with oncoming puck pursuers might not be so necessary)
(iii) it is bizarre to me that hockey allows contact after a puck carrier has shot/passed the puck despite everyone knowing full well that the player delivering the check knows the puck is gone.
but one v one intersections on paths to the loose puck is not a matter of rules, it's a matter of developmental coaches' competence. i know the game is fast, which is why you don't open up your body up ice when you don't know who is coming.
