Player Discussion Charlie McAvoy V signs 3 year $4.9m extension

Status
Not open for further replies.

LSCII

Cup driven
Mar 1, 2002
50,512
22,019
Central MA
I disagree.
They can't just disregard hits and penalize others.

So you're suggesting that any time a call is blown, the team on the wrong end gets a freebie? Yeah, not happening. The call on McAvoy and the blown call on the Backes elbowing have literally nothing to do with each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charliesangel

KrazyLegs

Registered Dude
Jun 12, 2011
5,711
3,510
Westminster, MA
So you're suggesting that any time a call is blown, the team on the wrong end gets a freebie? Yeah, not happening. The call on McAvoy and the blown call on the Backes elbowing have literally nothing to do with each other.
So you're saying they don't have benchmarks or standards for dispensing punishments? I disagree.
 

PatriceBergeronFan

Registered User
Jul 15, 2011
59,679
37,298
USA
By the letter of the law, yes they did.

And all 4 got together to make sure they were in agreement and that they made the right call.

Part of the reason he may only get one game is the officials report. And it'll probably say there was nothing that happened earlier in the game that they could call it a predatory retaliation hit.

Honestly, I think this one could go either way, and I am usually pretty close in my assessments of these things. They are going to also have to take into account Chara's involvement. Anderson's head was down because at one point Chara had his stick between Anderson's legs and put the puck there. He isn't like a player admiring his own pass and gets clocked. He's actually trying to find the puck. So was he suppose to "give up on the puck to watch for a possible hit'?

How does that make a difference? McAvoy doesn't control where Anderson's head goes regardless of why it was there.
 

LSCII

Cup driven
Mar 1, 2002
50,512
22,019
Central MA
So you're saying they don't have benchmarks or standards for dispensing punishments? I disagree.

Not at all. I'm simply saying that because they blew the call on the elbow to Backes, it does not give McAvoy a free pass to throw a clear cut head shot. People here seem to lack the ability to accept that McAvoy's hit was bad, and rather than just accept it and move on, they continually keep pointing out the elbow on Backes that wasn't called. They have zero to do with each other. Just like DOPS and logic when doling out punishments.
 

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
Not at all. I'm simply saying that because they blew the call on the elbow to Backes, it does not give McAvoy a free pass to throw a clear cut head shot. People here seem to lack the ability to accept that McAvoy's hit was bad, and rather than just accept it and move on, they continually keep pointing out the elbow on Backes that wasn't called. They have zero to do with each other. Just like DOPS and logic when doling out punishments.
Again I think you’re making this hit out to be worse than it was. He tried to bury him, no question. But aren’t “predatory” hits one where the guy intends to do harm or injure? Why tuck your elbow and run the risk that the only way you hurt him is if he puts his head down? If you want to hurt him, like a “predator”, get the elbow or stick up!

I agree some people here are being biased suggesting this was nothing, but the other end of the spectrum is wrong too, IMO. This just the type of hit that can result in suspension if the guy lowers his head at the wrong time. And he did. If the league wants to punish that, fine by me. Just do it fairly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sarge88

Scruffy

Registered User
Jun 18, 2009
9,387
7,241
Bawstin
LMAO this is dumb. Guy headshots Backes and nothing. "Mistake" elbow...............but this SMH

Anderson kept playing

They were laughing in the handshake line
This. There's so much bias against Boston because we continually beat and eliminate the Canadian teams so they try to stick it to us.
 

JRull86

Registered User
Jan 28, 2009
27,488
15,108
South Shore
Eh no issue here.

Clearly wasn't malicious, but still clocked him.

They'll be fine.

The overarching problem is the inconsistency of DoPS in general and what they look at. Thought Kukans elbow to the face of Backes should've been a game after the fact.

I don't want to hear people saying that "oh because XYZ was worse, McAvoy shouldn't get anything!!" Aka Jack Edwards on Twitter. That's a stupid argument and not how it works.
 

Midship

Registered User
Jan 7, 2016
2,955
2,231
One game for that hit is a f***ing joke, I'm sorry. Zero history, stayed on his skates, incidental contact to the head, player was uninjured and didn't miss a single shift. This is the NHL trying to help out the Canes/extend the series as BOS is the heavy favorite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YukonCornelius

Drivebytrucker

Registered User
Jan 8, 2011
1,226
4,315
One game for that hit is a ****ing joke, I'm sorry. Zero history, stayed on his skates, incidental contact to the head, player was uninjured and didn't miss a single shift. This is the NHL trying to help out the Canes/extend the series as BOS is the heavy favorite.

LOL, this is the hot take of all hot takes on HFBoard :D
 

Alicat

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 26, 2005
87,813
97,752
Boston
Eh no issue here.

Clearly wasn't malicious, but still clocked him.

They'll be fine.

The overarching problem is the inconsistency of DoPS in general and what they look at. Thought Kukans elbow to the face of Backes should've been a game after the fact.

I don't want to hear people saying that "oh because XYZ was worse, McAvoy shouldn't get anything!!" Aka Jack Edwards on Twitter. That's a stupid argument and not how it works.
This is where I’m at.

The level of inconsistency from the DOPS is alarming
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad