GDT: carrag

[Blueline Bomber]

Well we certainly wouldn’t be whining about their player not answering the bell because I’m not sure we have anyone who’d have gone after them for it…

Literally a few posts back, we have a tweet about them running from Svech. And we'd probably have a bunch of posts wondering why we grabbed Bunting/Lemeiux if dirty players can injure Slavin like that.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Gonna be unpopular, but I'd say both sides have been annoying. Rangers fans turning incidental contact into a premeditated attack, and Canes fans acting like what Trouba or Lavi or even the Rangers fanbase is saying is so out of line, like we wouldn't be doing something similar if Slavin was hurt on a similar play.

A few might have. I think most wouldn't have, because it was so cut and dried. Interference? Sure, maybe. Attempt to injure, or even particularly dangerous? Not if Fox just plows into Aho, which probably gets him the call.

 

[To Be Determined]

I absolutely think Aho stuck his leg out in an attempt to...

This is the take i don't get. You "think" aho stuck his leg out, yet there is very clear video evidence he didn't. Like, at all. And this you isn't specific to bleedgreen - but the plural 'you' group i've seen putting the blame on aho for sticking out his leg.

Now, if you think aho felt like he was going to lose fox so he attempted to position himself to sort of chip him off stride with the body, i get it. But once fox went spazmodic, aho just braces for the contact. Fox put himself in a bad position in an attempt to shed aho / get open. It sucks for fox and the rangers.

 

[Derailed75]

This is the take i don't get. You "think" aho stuck his leg out, yet there is very clear video evidence he didn't. Like, at all. And this you isn't specific to bleedgreen - but the plural 'you' group i've seen putting the blame on aho for sticking out his leg.

Now, if you think aho felt like he was going to lose fox so he attempted to position himself to sort of chip him off stride with the body, i get it. But once fox went spazmodic, aho just braces for the contact. Fox put himself in a bad position in an attempt to shed aho / get open. It sucks for fox and the rangers.

Yup Aho didn't change direction or his posture in the least 100% on Fox

 

[bleedgreen]

This is the take i don't get. You "think" aho stuck his leg out, yet there is very clear video evidence he didn't. Like, at all. And this you isn't specific to bleedgreen - but the plural 'you' group i've seen putting the blame on aho for sticking out his leg.

Now, if you think aho felt like he was going to lose fox so he attempted to position himself to sort of chip him off stride with the body, i get it. But once fox went spazmodic, aho just braces for the contact. Fox put himself in a bad position in an attempt to shed aho / get open. It sucks for fox and the rangers.

I see Aho clearly leaning to his right. It’s a bad look for innocence. We’re all “thinking” when we look at this. Two people can look at the same thing and see it different. I don’t agree you have clear evidence he didn’t.

 

[Svechhammer]

Literally a few posts back, we have a tweet about them running from Svech. And we'd probably have a bunch of posts wondering why we grabbed Bunting/Lemeiux if dirty players can injure Slavin like that.

Ok to be fair I posted that in direct reply to all the tough guy bravado from Trouba, Lavi and the Rags fans today saying Aho was a coward for not fighting as of he has some moral obligation. Just funny they were thumping their chests about it while at the same time watching Laf tuck tail and run to the bench the second that Svech tried to get involved.

 

[To Be Determined]

I see Aho clearly leaning to his right. It’s a bad look for innocence. We’re all “thinking” when we look at this. Two people can look at the same thing and see it different. I don’t agree you have clear evidence he didn’t.

Fair enough. I'm not going to sit here and tell you what you see.

I juat really, really don't understand how you see that.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I see Aho clearly leaning to his right.

The knees are 100% square to the shoulders. Did he shift his weight anticipating contact? Maybe. Is it interference? Maybe. Is it kneeing? No it's isn't, not by a mile, and that's the only thing that really matters. Again, contact like this happens multiple times a game at every level, mostly without being penalized.

 

[AD Skinner]

A split second of thinking “I’ll make contact with this guy” is way different than a split second of thinking “i want to injure this guy”

 

[bleedgreen]

The knees are 100% square to the shoulders. Did he shift his weight anticipating contact? Maybe. Is it interference? Maybe. Is it kneeing? No it's isn't, not by a mile, and that's the only thing that really matters. Again, contact like this happens multiple times a game at every level, mostly without being penalized.

I didn’t call it kneeing. I’m saying he made an effort to make contact. He’s not innocent. He had a bit of a wider stance after he chose to go north right at Fox. Fox isn’t available to be hit, he’s moved the puck and is charging down the middle hoping for a give and go. Take intent out of it and it’s standard interference or tripping of the mildly intentional but mostly accidental variety. He impeded a player trying to take offensive ice. You can say it happened too quick to be intentional, maybe that’s true. That’s never mattered for interference or tripping in a situation like this.

When you watch the replay and see him lean into his right side and put his weight and strength there as he makes contact that becomes easy to identify as a “leg out” with intent situation to the masses which can be truly unfair in terms of gauging intent. That’s when you can really only watch it at real speed - which would make you doubt he had time to think about it or have any true intent to injure. I don’t believe he did in any way. He reacted, a good player he’s very competitive with was about to skip past him for a scoring chance and he instinctively leaned into him to make sure he got a piece of him.

Which always makes it interesting for discipline, because it’s easy for me to think if you make a commitment to make contact you should be held responsible for the consequences even if there was no intent to injure - it’s just a smaller discipline compared to someone who clearly went out of their way to achieve that contact. That’s just me though, not the league.

It should’ve been a penalty all day to me. Take out all the drama and intent arguments about it and it’s pretty easy. A player who had open ice for a scoring chance was interfered with and wasn’t allowed the ice by another player. That gets called all the time even if it’s accidental. Even if you’re 100% convinced Aho was in wrong place at the wrong time and did virtually nothing while Fox intentionally charged him and flopped himself on the ice trying to draw the call…..the call would be given way more times than not.

It was an easy interference call to make.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I didn’t call it kneeing. I’m saying he made an effort to make contact. He’s not innocent.

1. He is conclusively innocent of kneeing, which is the only accusation that merits defending, because it is from that accusation that all the nonsense stems.

2. Man is fallen, and none of us are, uh, "innocent".

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I didn’t call it kneeing. I’m saying he made an effort to make contact.

Ok, can't resist pointing this out here.

To be fair, what you said initially a few posts ago was: "I absolutely think Aho stuck his leg out in an attempt to catch some part of Fox"

That literally is part of the definition of Kneeing in the NHL rulebook, where it states leading with the knee or "extending his leg outwards to make contact with his opponent."

So you can't really be saying you think he stuck his leg out in an effort to make contact (like you did in your first post) and then say you didn't call it kneeing (which you did in this post).

 

[bleedgreen]

1. He is conclusively innocent of kneeing, which is the only accusation that merits defending, because it is from that accusation that all the nonsense stems.

2. Man is fallen, and none of us are, uh, "innocent".

Ive seen people actually blaming Fox. If that’s the kind of reasoning going around I think it’s worth saying that Aho deserves to be recognized as a willing participant who did in fact play a role here.

I don’t see how you can call a knee on knee collision where Aho leans into it as “conclusively innocent” of kneeing. I don’t think he went after his knee. I don’t think he intended to hurt him. It wouldn’t have surprised me at all if they called it kneeing, because it’s a knee on knee collision where the “offending” player leans onto his leg/knee that’s in question. Then makes contact with that leg into the other players knee.

I’m on Aho’s side here but I’m not seeing some of our sides positions.

 

[bleedgreen]

Ok, can't resist pointing this out here.

To be fair, what you said initially a few posts ago was: "I absolutely think Aho stuck his leg out in an attempt to catch some part of Fox"

That literally is part of the definition of Kneeing in the NHL rulebook, where it states leading with the knee or "extending his leg outwards to make contact with his opponent."

So you can't really be saying you think he stuck his leg out in an effort to make contact (like you did in your first post) and then say you didn't call it kneeing (which you did in this post).

You wouldn’t be being you without asking that question!

Sticking out your leg isn’t auto “kneeing” to me. To me it’s more of the extending/flexing the knee contact which Aho doesn’t - he keeps his leg locked. Sticking your leg out can be kneeing though. The leagues primary view goes in the direction of the knee flex but adds the caveat of “extending the leg” to give themselves some leeway in case someone makes an exaggerated motion that isn’t a knee flex specifically but still is an attempt to go for a knee. Some guys just throw the leg out as an instinct to catch something on someone who’s beating them to a spot. I do think Aho leaned into that leg, while having a curiously wide stance that's typically involved when you’re trying to get a piece and it’s also that stance that gets you into trouble with knee on knee collisions.

I just don’t know how you can say it’s conclusive he didn’t knee him. It’s a pretty huge gray area and they went knee on knee. Of course a ref could see that as kneeing.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I don’t see how you can call a knee on knee collision where Aho leans into it as “conclusively innocent” of kneeing

(Note) Kneeing is the act of a player leading with or extending their knee outwards for the purpose of making contact, or attempting to do so, with the opponent.

Kneeing

www.usahockeyrulebook.com

Aho didn't do that. He did not lead with the knee or extend it outwards. The knees are perfectly square with the shoulders. Case closed.

Again: interference is not kneeing.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Aho's posture can be explained by the anticipation of contact. Fox doesn't take a straight line to the net. Be it his edge work and/or not seeing Aho (or initially expecting contact himself), he dips into Aho's lane and then bails out at the last moment.

 

[bleedgreen]

(Note) Kneeing is the act of a player leading with or extending their knee outwards for the purpose of making contact, or attempting to do so, with the opponent.

Kneeing

www.usahockeyrulebook.com

Aho didn't do that. He did not lead with the knee or extend it outwards. The knees are perfectly square with the shoulders. Case closed.

USA hockey rules? At least BBA used the NHL.

It’s a knee on knee collision with the offending player having a wide stance and leaning into the knee in question. There’s nothing case closed about that. You sometimes talk this way (“case closed”) and I usually don’t bother with it but I’m not a Rangers fan talking smack to you on the main board so you can spare me the high and mighty hammer stroke.

Aho is sneaky dirty. We should all know this by now. He’s a gnat, a pest, he rarely has zero intent. He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar here in terms of the masses who are to some small level right, though he’s just innocent enough to avoid the leagues reprimand. The refs got it wrong in terms of it not being a minor imo but I wouldn’t expect the league to step in here at all as the intent really isn’t there for that sort of thing. Rangers fans are right to be upset, you yourself would be vocal if this went the other way. You know this. It won’t be punished and by the letter if the law you can see it that way, though it’s pretty obvious you can see it another way.

I’ve said I think it’s interference more than anything else in case you’re going to come at me like I’m making the argument that I think it’s kneeing. I’m not. I’m just disagreeing with the conclusiveness against kneeing, especially in the moment on the ice or inside a quick review on the ice if they had called a major.

 

[bleedgreen]

Aho's posture can be explained by the anticipation of contact. Fox doesn't take a straight line to the net. Be it his edge work and/or not seeing Aho (or initially expecting contact himself), he dips into Aho's lane and then bails out at the last moment.

This is important, especially with viewing intent. Fox isn’t sure which way to go around him so he leans one way then goes the other. It’s all so fast it’s impossible imo to say Aho had any intent. Aho’s leaning is reactionary imo. It looks bad in slo mo though which is why people are accusing him of intent.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

You wouldn’t be being you without asking that question!

And you wouldn't be you without taking a contrary position so you can act like a voice of reason.

Sticking out your leg isn’t auto “kneeing” to me. To me it’s more of the extending/flexing the knee contact which Aho doesn’t - he keeps his leg locked. Sticking your leg out can be kneeing though. The leagues primary view goes in the direction of the knee flex but adds the caveat of “extending the leg” to give themselves some leeway in case someone makes an exaggerated motion that isn’t a knee flex specifically but still is an attempt to go for a knee. Some guys just throw the leg out as an instinct to catch something on someone who’s beating them to a spot. I do think Aho leaned into that leg, while having a curiously wide stance that's typically involved when you’re trying to get a piece and it’s also that stance that gets you into trouble with knee on knee collisions.

I just don’t know how you can say it’s conclusive he didn’t knee him. It’s a pretty huge gray area and they went knee on knee. Of course a ref could see that as kneeing.

So Aho:
1) Didn't stick his leg out (watching the slow mo and screen shots).
2) Didn't do the "extending / flexing the knee - he keeps his leg locked" (your own words above).

So if both by the NHL rulebook and by your own view of what kneeing is, Aho didn't do it, why are we having this discussion on kneeing?

I'm fine with the argument that Aho should have had an interference penalty.

 

[bleedgreen]

And you wouldn't be you without taking a contrary position so you can act like a voice of reason.



So Aho:
1) Didn't stick his leg out (watching the slow mo and screen shots).
2) Didn't do the "extending / flexing the knee - he keeps his leg locked" (your own words above).

So if both by the NHL rulebook and by your own view of what kneeing is, Aho didn't do it, why are we having this discussion on kneeing?

I'm fine with the argument that Aho should have had an interference penalty.

Because he’s being accused of kneeing by many people, so it’s part of the topic. I think the knee angle came out of Hank’s comments more than mine but Im dizzy at this point so I don’t mind if it’s my fault. Like I added to the end of one of those posts I wouldn’t have been surprised if the refs called it kneeing on the spot, or even called kneeing after watching the replay if they had called the major with intent of watching the video. Your language usage is what they would’ve used to not suspend him.

And I’m nothing if not the voice of reason at all times. Everyone knows this.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Because he’s being accused of kneeing by many people, so it’s part of the topic. I think the knee angle came out of Hank’s comments more than mine but Im dizzy at this point so I don’t mind if it’s my fault. Like I added to the end of one of those posts I wouldn’t have surprised if the refs called it kneeing on the spot, or even called kneeing after watching the replay if they had called the major with intent of watching the video. Your language usage is what they would’ve used to not suspend him.

Fair enough. On the spot refs often get it wrong because things happen so fast. Not blaming them because the game is so fast and there's so much to watch. I would venture a guess that neither ref was even looking directly at Aho and Fox when the play was going on so they'd have to react to the aftermath and not the play itself. I could understand a kneeing minor called by them because of the aftermath. We see that often with refs.

If they had called a major, I think a slow-mo video replay review, the refs would not have called it kneeing because of what was clearly shown here and the NHL rules. No extension of the leg, no extending/flexing of the knee, Fox changing directions and leaving his leg extended. Interference? Maybe but not kneeing.

And I’m nothing if not the voice of reason in my mind at all times. Everyone knows this.

Fixed it for ya!

 

[bleedgreen]

Fair enough. On the spot refs often get it wrong because things happen so fast. Not blaming them because the game is so fast and there's so much to watch. I would venture a guess that neither ref was even looking directly at Aho and Fox when the play was going on so they'd have to react to the aftermath and not the play itself. I could understand a kneeing minor called by them because of the aftermath. We see that often with refs.

If they had called a major, I think a slow-mo video replay review, the refs would not have called it kneeing because of what was clearly shown here and the NHL rules. No extension of the leg, no extending/flexing of the knee, Fox changing directions and leaving his leg extended. Interference? Maybe but not kneeing.

Fixed it for ya!

You and your passive aggressive emojis aren’t having your way with me today. Im going to go enjoy a beautiful day while you hide in a dark basement somewhere pondering fancy stats and “rule books”.

Ps…of course….

You have to remember that refs are former players who have their own views on things, and many of them are newer/younger these days. The rule book is written to cya as much as possible in as many situations as possible, and isn’t always as intuitive as you’d like as well as not matching up with a players views on penalties. And it changes sometimes year to year. Refs have to unlearn what they know as players to call the rules perfectly by the books. This is why I think they could watch the replay and still find kneeing a possibility, and why the league would correct it later on with no further discipline. I think this happens more than we realize. Refs even when watching the replay are on the clock and want to get going even while thinking they want to take the time get it right. I could see them seeing him lean into it and still wanting to call it kneeing. The league then explaining no suspension because of the wording, the refs getting the educational chat later on and everyone just moves on. That lean that Aho did in lower levels of hockey over the last 20-30 years for a long time when penalties were called on instinct more than perfect honoring of what’s written in the rule book was more than enough to be considered kneeing. I think at some point in the NHL it would’ve been considered kneeing. Obviously in the mind of some of the public it’s still viewed that way. That’s why it’s hard to look at what’s written right now and hold it up as holy gospel on what kneeing is. That’s also why I phrase it as “what kneeing is to me”.

Now onto my day!

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

You and your passive aggressive emojis aren’t having your way with me today. Im going to go enjoy a beautiful day while you hide in a dark basement somewhere pondering fancy stats and “rule books”.


View attachment 762831

Actually, I'm checking HF in between glue-ups in the wood shop today. I may or may not be sniffing too many fumes, although the garage door is open on this beautiful day.

My home is also on a slab, so no basement for me! ha!

 

[WreckingCrew]

My final say is this: If their fans can argue Troubas hit on Jarvy wasn't predatory and was clean because it straddled the line of "legal", then they have 0% argument that this was anything other than unfortunate incidental contact. Especially since the refs didn't call anything, and the league didn't review it (since that's their standard). Period. Full stop.

 

[Svechhammer]

My final say is this: If their fans can argue Troubas hit on Jarvy wasn't predatory and was clean because it straddled the line of "legal", then they have 0% argument that this was anything other than unfortunate incidental contact. Especially since the refs didn't call anything, and the league didn't review it (since that's their standard). Period. Full stop.

Lol man they don't understand nuance. They're all on their board clamoring for Trouba to intentionally injure Aho the next time they play as 'Bronx Justice' and shit like that. They're so off the deep end it's not even funny.

Well, I take that back, it is funny