Andrew Shaw Disciplinary Hearing (suspended 3 pre-season games)

HOPE

Goal Caufield!
Jun 30, 2011
7,336
5,229
Montreal
Suspended 3 preseason games.

A little too much IMO.

not realy too much tbh... the hit was pretty bad and NHL needs to stop punishing for the result. if hobbs was little smaller in terme of height the hit would have been realy bad. the hit is the same whenever the guy has a concussion or or not, he clearly did this hit because he got tilted and its obvious. these kind of hit needs to stop because they end career and its a question of time before they end life. if it was regular season it would probably be 1-2 match top, but in my opinions these hit deservers more than that.

coming from a habs fan who is a hockey fan before anything else.
 

ThirdManIn

Registered User
Aug 9, 2009
55,115
4,034
A serious question that I've been asking myself a lot over the past 2 years....and again after watching that hit:

Has boarding become a de facto suspension? What I've always had in mind as "boarding" now seems to be the exact definition of an illegal hit.

I haven't read anything about the reasoning behind the suspension, but if it were me making the call it would have been a suspension based not only on the board itself but on the retaliatory nature of the board. If a player is clearly retaliating for what he perceived to be a missed dirty hit (I assume he thought he was the victim of a slewfoot from the earlier entanglement with Beagle) by throwing a dirty hit, not only in response but, worse yet, against a player who wasn't even involved in the perceived dirty play, it's worse. Mix in how Shaw has a history of being an agitator who will throw dirty hits and it's a no-brainer to me.
 

jmart21

MISC!!!
Nov 16, 2009
5,552
0
All Over The Place
I haven't read anything about the reasoning behind the suspension, but if it were me making the call it would have been a suspension based not only on the board itself but on the retaliatory nature of the board. If a player is clearly retaliating for what he perceived to be a missed dirty hit (I assume he thought he was the victim of a slewfoot from the earlier entanglement with Beagle) by throwing a dirty hit, not only in response but, worse yet, against a player who wasn't even involved in the perceived dirty play, it's worse. Mix in how Shaw has a history of being an agitator who will throw dirty hits and it's a no-brainer to me.

I ask the question not only because I've been getting the impression boarding is no longer just something that is dealt with as a sit in the penalty box....but also because the "key points" reasoning from the NHL.com video was, in order:

1. Boarding
2. Shaw's suspenion history
3. No injury


When I look at the hit in real time...without seeing the prior events....it looks like what we used to call a minor penalty for boarding.

Not saying I have a problem with it. Just curious to see if any others have noticed the transformation boarding infractions have seen in the past 2 years. Big change
 

Il Stugotz

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2008
9,072
6,373
44 miles from Chicago
Shaw's hit seemed malicious. Sometimes there's a botched play and a guy goes into the boards hard and it happens. But here Shaw was seeing red and did something dumb. He's gotta be more in control.
 

hototogisu

Poked the bear!!!!!
Jun 30, 2006
41,189
79
Montreal, QC
A serious question that I've been asking myself a lot over the past 2 years....and again after watching that hit:

Has boarding become a de facto suspension? What I've always had in mind as "boarding" now seems to be the exact definition of an illegal hit.

I wouldn't say "de facto" but I think in this case it was pretty predatory and completely uncalled for.

It wasn't one of those plays where Shaw was going in for the puck and the guy turned a bit and whoops, he boarded him. He was mad at the slewfoot and saw a chance to take his anger out on a defenseless player.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,815
16,549
Also why are people equating tripping with boarding?


They're not even close the same. One has a significantly higher risk of injury.

TBH... I think the idea is to equate slewfooting with boarding. And it might be right in some cases (not that one).
 

Skrudland2Lomakin

Registered User
Jan 1, 2011
7,684
5,682
TBH... I think the idea is to equate slewfooting with boarding. And it might be right in some cases (not that one).

I know we like to talk about how dangerous slew footing is, but realistically and statistically there is no way it's in the same stratosphere as boarding.

Nearly every awful hockey story deals with going awkwardly into the boards.
 

DearDiary

🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷
Aug 29, 2010
14,772
11,646
Should have been 10 games, full intent to injure
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad