SabresMojo Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fjJ2JAqDo8 I've been reading Tweets from NHL analysts/writers/etc that the NHL WILL NOT have a hearing or discipline for this hit... Did the NHL do the right thing? Todd got a game misconduct and the Blackhawks had a 5min PP. Ryan Johnson did return to the game after passing the concussion tests. What will it take (if they should have a hearing) to make the league realize that these are serious situations.
Stoner Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 That is brutal. Extreme charge. Extreme elbow -- why else come in sideways? Intent is there. Listen to the dinosaur Ed(bo)zo about the victim being low, a version of the ridiculous "head down" meme. Not really low. Doesn't matter anyway. Eh, it's not like Bertuzzi has any real history.
JujuFish Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Looks to me like he was going for his shoulder but his arm slid up and got him in the head, but I don't see an elbow to the head and his head didn't slam the ice. For an average skater, I don't see that as being suspension-worthy. Now, given Bertuzzi's history (ahem...Moore), I would think any hit to the head would be worthy of suspension, accidental or not, injury or not.
Sabre Dance Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 This is one of those plays that, depending on the angle viewed and the viewer's mood could be a dirty hit or just a bigger player catching an opponent in a bad position. I am all for removing head shots and I think this hit still deserved a penalty, maybe even the match penalty. Viewed enough times, Bertuzzi's elbow actually appears to go over Johnson's shoulder. I think Johnson was shaken up more by the suddenness of the hit... But, as was said, Bertuzzi has a history and it was a shot aimed at the head. Five and a game maybe was probably the right call within the new parameters for head shots. Also, I think the no suspension call is also correct. But that's just me...
nucci Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fjJ2JAqDo8 I've been reading Tweets from NHL analysts/writers/etc that the NHL WILL NOT have a hearing or discipline for this hit... Did the NHL do the right thing? Todd got a game misconduct and the Blackhawks had a 5min PP. Ryan Johnson did return to the game after passing the concussion tests. What will it take (if they should have a hearing) to make the league realize that these are serious situations. He received a 5, 10 and game misconduct. Isn't that automatic hearing/suspension?
Robviously Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Eh, it's not like Bertuzzi has any real history. You can't suspend a stand-up guy like Todd Bertuzzi. He's barely ever been in trouble. That's just part of the game. Sometimes stuff happens. <_<
Taro T Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 That is brutal. Extreme charge. Extreme elbow -- why else come in sideways? Intent is there. Listen to the dinosaur Ed(bo)zo about the victim being low, a version of the ridiculous "head down" meme. Not really low. Doesn't matter anyway. Eh, it's not like Bertuzzi has any real history. PA, it pains me to say this as I don't think Bertuzzi should be in the league after the Moore 'incident,' but I don't think the hit was suspendable. He was gliding by the time he was lining up Johnson, so it wasn't a charge. I think the call was correct; he appeared to try to go in with the shoulder but caught him w/ the elbow. The combination of the speed he'd already garnered combined w/ the elbow following through catching Johnson in the mug was worth a major; but, again, I don't think it was suspendable. If there is no hearing (phone or in person) I will not be happy because the league SHOULD follow it's procedures. (If the hearing isn't automatic after the latest protocol revision, then my bad.) Johnson didn't have his head down and he did have the puck when the motion of the hit was initiated. Had Johnson had his head down, he would have been Umbergered. So, remember kiddies, ALWAYS keep your head up on the ice. And he wasn't particularily low, he was playing the puck and did it pretty much text book. As to why Bert went in sideways, I'd say it was to lead with the shoulder and have his full mass behind the hit. If he was moving squarely forward and got the elbow into him, THEN it would have been suspendable as the elbow would have had to leave the framework of his body and would almost definitely have been the lead of the elbow making contact w/ the head.
Stoner Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 PA, it pains me to say this as I don't think Bertuzzi should be in the league after the Moore 'incident,' but I don't think the hit was suspendable. He was gliding by the time he was lining up Johnson, so it wasn't a charge. I've never heard gliding into a player negates charging. It's certainly not what the rulebook says ("distance traveled"), and I know you're a rule book guy! :rolleyes:
SabresMojo Posted March 29, 2011 Author Report Posted March 29, 2011 He received a 5, 10 and game misconduct. Isn't that automatic hearing/suspension? I thought it was the same way... Guess it isnt now.. If there is no hearing (phone or in person) I will not be happy because the league SHOULD follow it's procedures. (If the hearing isn't automatic after the latest protocol revision, then my bad.) Johnson didn't have his head down and he did have the puck when the motion of the hit was initiated. Had Johnson had his head down, he would have been Umbergered. So, remember kiddies, ALWAYS keep your head up on the ice. And he wasn't particularily low, he was playing the puck and did it pretty much text book. Already been confirmed that there wont be a hearing.
wjag Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I think the new formula goes like this: 1. Was Crosby hit? Yes. Immediate suspension. No, See 2. 2. Was it an original six team? Yes, move along no suspension required. No, See 3. 3. Was it Cooke? Yes. Immediate suspension. No, See 4. 4. Suspension.
Taro T Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I've never heard gliding into a player negates charging. It's certainly not what the rulebook says ("distance traveled"), and I know you're a rule book guy! :rolleyes: Does it negate it based on the way the rule is written? I'll answer with a Qualified No. (If a player is gliding, the 'violently' portion of the check oftentimes isn't there. Without the 'violently' there is no concern over distance travelled.) Does it negate it based on the way the rule is enforced? Typically Yes. Watching the hit, I do not expect a penalty would have been called had the elbow not come up. Again, I think the call was correct.
X. Benedict Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 PA, it pains me to say this as I don't think Bertuzzi should be in the league after the Moore 'incident,' but I don't think the hit was suspendable. He was gliding by the time he was lining up Johnson, so it wasn't a charge. I think the call was correct; he appeared to try to go in with the shoulder but caught him w/ the elbow. The combination of the speed he'd already garnered combined w/ the elbow following through catching Johnson in the mug was worth a major; but, again, I don't think it was suspendable. If there is no hearing (phone or in person) I will not be happy because the league SHOULD follow it's procedures. (If the hearing isn't automatic after the latest protocol revision, then my bad.) Johnson didn't have his head down and he did have the puck when the motion of the hit was initiated. Had Johnson had his head down, he would have been Umbergered. So, remember kiddies, ALWAYS keep your head up on the ice. And he wasn't particularily low, he was playing the puck and did it pretty much text book. As to why Bert went in sideways, I'd say it was to lead with the shoulder and have his full mass behind the hit. If he was moving squarely forward and got the elbow into him, THEN it would have been suspendable as the elbow would have had to leave the framework of his body and would almost definitely have been the lead of the elbow making contact w/ the head. Completely agree here. Johnson isn't the type of player you hit to send a message either. This was the right call. There was no intent. 5 minute major is the right call. That's it.
Buffalo Wings Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I've been reading Tweets from NHL analysts/writers/etc that the NHL WILL NOT have a hearing or discipline for this hit... Did the NHL do the right thing? Todd got a game misconduct and the Blackhawks had a 5min PP. Ryan Johnson did return to the game after passing the concussion tests. What will it take (if they should have a hearing) to make the league realize that these are serious situations. I realize hitting is part of the game, but this is turning into what the NFL has been dealing with. The hitters are doing it wrong and they should be penalized. Like James Harrison leading with his helmet (aka, spearing), Bertuzzi leaned in with his elbow. Had he went for Johnson with his chest and check him legally, we wouldn't be discussing this right now. This hit and what Chara did to Max Pacioretty are punishable offenses. Had they done their hits cleanly, there would be no talk of hearings or suspensions.
Weave Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 What I don't like about the hit is that Bertuzzi came in with his elbow up and out. He didn't connect with the elbow but it was up, and that sez "intent" to me.
SabresMojo Posted March 29, 2011 Author Report Posted March 29, 2011 Completely agree here. Johnson isn't the type of player you hit to send a message either. This was the right call. There was no intent. 5 minute major is the right call. That's it. I understand that Johnson isn't the player that you hit to send a message. But still the fact in the matter of the elbow to the head (or intent to the head) is what should be looked at. Despite Johnson not being a top line, 30 and 30 player, the fact that he is still a player in the NHL should be the point being made. I realize hitting is part of the game, but this is turning into what the NFL has been dealing with. The hitters are doing it wrong and they should be penalized. Like James Harrison leading with his helmet (aka, spearing), Bertuzzi leaned in with his elbow. Had he went for Johnson with his chest and check him legally, we wouldn't be discussing this right now. This hit and what Chara did to Max Pacioretty are punishable offenses. Had they done their hits cleanly, there would be no talk of hearings or suspensions. Exactly what the NFL has been dealing with; but I do like the NFL fining for everything that they consider a headshot. Not "well this happened or that happened". If the head was a target, then it was a fine. Harrison could be a spokesman for the NFL and NHL on headshots looking at his massive fine amount. What I don't like about the hit is that Bertuzzi came in with his elbow up and out. He didn't connect with the elbow but it was up, and that sez "intent" to me. I agree about the elbow up and out to be intent. As for the league seeing that? Who knows...
korab rules Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 It looks like Bertuzzi intended to give him a hip check along the boards, and Johnson saw him coming, started to move away from the boards, and caught Bertuzzi's elbow instead. I see no intent here whatsoever. If it was a high stick, it would be a two minute penalty only. Five and game is overkill. Looked at it again - as Bertuzzi came in, Johnson still had his head low, under the level of Bertuzzi's elbow - the elbow may have been up in an attempt NOT to hit Johnson with it. Johnson straightened up at the last second, which made his head the same level as Bertuzzi's elbow. What Bert did to Moore was horrible, but he has been a princess over the last couple years. If you suspend guys for hits like this then prepare for two hand touch hockey.
shrader Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 It looks like Bertuzzi intended to give him a hip check along the boards, and Johnson saw him coming, started to move away from the boards, and caught Bertuzzi's elbow instead. I see no intent here whatsoever. If it was a high stick, it would be a two minute penalty only. Five and game is overkill. Looked at it again - as Bertuzzi came in, Johnson still had his head low, under the level of Bertuzzi's elbow. Johnson straightened up at the last second, which made his head the same level as Bertuzzi's elbow. What Bert did to Moore was horrible, but he has been a princess over the last couple years. If you suspend guys for hits like this then prepare for two hand touch hockey. This sounds about right to me. Burtuzzi put himself in a position to cover as much ground as possible, body along the boards and arm out to prevent Johnson from cutting back inside. I don't see intent to go after his head there.
SabresMojo Posted March 29, 2011 Author Report Posted March 29, 2011 It looks like Bertuzzi intended to give him a hip check along the boards, and Johnson saw him coming, started to move away from the boards, and caught Bertuzzi's elbow instead. I see no intent here whatsoever. If it was a high stick, it would be a two minute penalty only. Five and game is overkill.Looked at it again - as Bertuzzi came in, Johnson still had his head low, under the level of Bertuzzi's elbow - the elbow may have been up in an attempt NOT to hit Johnson with it. Johnson straightened up at the last second, which made his head the same level as Bertuzzi's elbow.What Bert did to Moore was horrible, but he has been a princess over the last couple years. If you suspend guys for hits like this then prepare for two hand touch hockey. This sounds about right to me. Burtuzzi put himself in a position to cover as much ground as possible, body along the boards and arm out to prevent Johnson from cutting back inside. I don't see intent to go after his head there. I respect the idea of no intent; nor do I FULLY believe intent (even though I did say the elbow up for intent earlier above). As mentioned also about the NFL, despite the intent not being there, the NFL still fined for those hits... Just a thought to be discussed...do you fine for all headshots to eliminate having headshots?
shrader Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I respect the idea of no intent; nor do I FULLY believe intent (even though I did say the elbow up for intent earlier above). As mentioned also about the NFL, despite the intent not being there, the NFL still fined for those hits... Just a thought to be discussed...do you fine for all headshots to eliminate having headshots? I'm not sure how you can say those human missile upward hits didn't have intent, but anyway... They don't necessarily have to fine all head shots. The first step has to be actually making it illegal and enforcing it by calling penalties. Until they get to that point, there can't be any discussion of fines.
IKnowPhysics Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I think the new formula goes like this: I'm sure most of you have seen this: http://thehockeyzone.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/nhl-suspension-chart3.gif
X. Benedict Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 This sounds about right to me. Burtuzzi put himself in a position to cover as much ground as possible, body along the boards and arm out to prevent Johnson from cutting back inside. I don't see intent to go after his head there. The elbow came out for sure. But the only reason to come in backwards like that with the elbows out is to try to pin the check and skate out of it without turning. Johnson's head was low. Betruzzi is still responsible, however. 5 minute major and an ejection covers it. I may be in the minority, but Betruzzi has to live with that one egregiously dirty play (Moore), and is not a dirty player.
wonderbread Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 The elbow came out for sure. But the only reason to come in backwards like that with the elbows out is to try to pin the check and skate out of it without turning. Johnson's head was low. Betruzzi is still responsible, however. 5 minute major and an ejection covers it. I may be in the minority, but Betruzzi has to live with that one egregiously dirty play (Moore), and is not a dirty player. Bert only has one other suspension in his career other than the Moore incident and that was for coming over the boards during a fight. You have to look at the individual play not the player in this situation. I think the punishment fit the crime.
SwampD Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 It looks like Bertuzzi intended to give him a hip check along the boards, and Johnson saw him coming, started to move away from the boards, and caught Bertuzzi's elbow instead. I see no intent here whatsoever. If it was a high stick, it would be a two minute penalty only. Five and game is overkill. Looked at it again - as Bertuzzi came in, Johnson still had his head low, under the level of Bertuzzi's elbow - the elbow may have been up in an attempt NOT to hit Johnson with it. Johnson straightened up at the last second, which made his head the same level as Bertuzzi's elbow. What Bert did to Moore was horrible, but he has been a princess over the last couple years. If you suspend guys for hits like this then prepare for two hand touch hockey. I actually think that by his arm coming up, Bert saved that guy from a much more devastating hit. It looked like he saw that he was about to hit him full on and realized he was going right for his head, and tried to pull out of it.
Stoner Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I actually think that by his arm coming up, Bert saved that guy from a much more devastating hit. It looked like he saw that he was about to hit him full on and realized he was going right for his head, and tried to pull out of it. Oh lord.
X. Benedict Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Oh lord. Have you ever seen a forward try to hurt somebody going into a corner ass-first before? I haven't.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.