GDT: Game 41 - Bruins @ Avalanche - Halfway - 8PM

[Foppa2118]

Once upon a time hitting someone in the head wasn't called, either. Didn't mean it wasn't in the rulebook, but it did mean it was stupid to not call it.

I honestly don't understand the appeal of crosschecking and how anyone can actually be for it. There's nothing "warrior like" about using your stick as a weapon. Learn proper body positioning, defend the puck and outplay the opposition instead of resorting to lazily crosschecking because you struggle to defend without that crutch.

Cross checking and hits to the head aren't comparable though. You don't get CTE, depression, vision problems, dizziness, and increased risk of suicide later in life from cross checks.

Unless you're playing against whoever on the Kings ruptured Forsberg's spleen, then maybe haha.

Here's the appeal of cross checks dahrougem. Would you consider this play last night by Cale on Kane a lazy defensive play that should be penalized? To me this is a good hard hockey play that you should have to fight through to score, and rightly went unpenalized.

And just to state again, I think EJ's cross checks were a bad penalty because he should have known they'd be called.

 

[dahrougem2]

Cross checking and hits to the head aren't comparable though. You don't get CTE, depression, vision problems, dizziness, and increased risk of suicide later in life from cross checks.

Unless you're playing against whoever on the Kings ruptured Forsberg's spleen, then maybe haha.

Here's the appeal of cross checks dahrougem. Would you consider this play last night by Cale on Kane a lazy defensive play that should be penalized? To me this is a good hard hockey play that you should have to fight through to score, and rightly went unpenalized.

And just to state again, I think EJ's cross checks were a bad penalty because he should have known they'd be called.

Yes, I do think that's a lazy play by Makar. He got beat cleanly by Kane and had to resort to crosschecking him in order to recover. If that was me where the referee was, my arm would have shot up.

I don't like rewarding defenders for losing positioning like that. Cale should be defending better than that and not needing to rely on a desperation crosscheck.

 

[Foppa2118]

Yes, I do think that's a lazy play by Makar. He got beat cleanly by Kane and had to resort to crosschecking him in order to recover. If that was me where the referee was, my arm would have shot up.

I don't like rewarding defenders for losing positioning like that. Cale should be defending better than that and not needing to rely on a desperation crosscheck.

Fair enough, but I just couldn't disagree more. That's a good hockey battle and indicative of Cale's competitiveness against a great player. Not a lazy play IMO.

Goals per game in the NHL right now is higher than it's ever been since right after the lockout in 2005-06 and before that 95-96. We don't need to take away good defensive plays like this to benefit forwards and make it easier for them to generate scoring chances.

 

[MaKarter]

Yes, I do think that's a lazy play by Makar.

You see a lazy play.

I see one of the only people in the last 10 years that can square up Patrick Kane while protecting his defensive lane.

 

[dahrougem2]

You see a lazy play.

I see one of the only people in the last 10 years that can square up Patrick Kane while protecting his defensive lane.

Go watch any clip of Connor McDavid coming down the ice with speed and see how the defensemen that "stop him" are defending him. Just because they hook/hold/cross check does that make them capable of squaring up to Connor McDavid while protecting the defensive lane? Or does it mean a referee simply didn't feel like calling a penalty on the play?

I tend to lean towards the latter.

 

[MaKarter]

Go watch any clip of Connor McDavid coming down the ice with speed and see how the defensemen that "stop him" are defending him. Just because they hook/hold/cross check does that make them capable of squaring up to Connor McDavid while protecting the defensive lane? Or does it mean a referee simply didn't feel like calling a penalty on the play?

I tend to lean towards the latter.

If I were to watch a clip of Connor McDavid coming down the ice with speed and being held/hooked/cross checked while the defender was out of position then I would expect a call.

In the Cale clip he is able to maintain his inside leverage on Kane or "not get beat inside" and also not allow Kane to beat him to the outside.
In fact, Cale kept such good spacing that he had enough force to knock Kane on his ass when he attempted to spin.

No one knocks Patrick Kane on his ass, that's why it's a good hockey play.

 

[katfude]

That Makar clip is not really what most people are talking about when it comes to cross-checking. EJ quintuple-whammying Douchebag McCoward or Mikko busting sticks across people's backs is what most of us are actually concerned about.

 

[rmthomson21]

That Makar clip is not really what most people are talking about when it comes to cross-checking. EJ quintuple-whammying Douchebag McCoward or Mikko busting sticks across people's backs is what most of us are actually concerned about.

Agreed, is there anything in the rule that actually makes cross-checking about using the stick as a 'weapon,' per se? Looking at the Makar replay, if he had no stick, I'd expect the same outcome (on the hit, not the whole play). For EJ on the other hand, he was clearly just using his stick to try to annoy/do damage.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Cross checking and hits to the head aren't comparable though. You don't get CTE, depression, vision problems, dizziness, and increased risk of suicide later in life from cross checks.

Unless you're playing against whoever on the Kings ruptured Forsberg's spleen, then maybe haha.

Here's the appeal of cross checks dahrougem. Would you consider this play last night by Cale on Kane a lazy defensive play that should be penalized? To me this is a good hard hockey play that you should have to fight through to score, and rightly went unpenalized.

And just to state again, I think EJ's cross checks were a bad penalty because he should have known they'd be called.

That's a way different scenario than what the NHL has been trying to crack down on.

 

[AllAboutAvs]

And in Makar' case it looks like he is using his left fist more than his stick to push him down. At the risk of sounding a homer I don't see a problem with that play. EJ on the other hand deserved the penalty AND being benched.

 

[Pokecheque]

There’s a reason cross checking is being addressed. Lots of careers have been affected due to back issues as the result of taking punishment over the years.

And really, they’re not clamping down on it entirely. EJ was given one freebie and he kept on going, enormously dumb move on his part. He deserved the benching.

 

[dahrougem2]

If I were to watch a clip of Connor McDavid coming down the ice with speed and being held/hooked/cross checked while the defender was out of position then I would expect a call.

In the Cale clip he is able to maintain his inside leverage on Kane or "not get beat inside" and also not allow Kane to beat him to the outside.
In fact, Cale kept such good spacing that he had enough force to knock Kane on his ass when he attempted to spin.

No one knocks Patrick Kane on his ass, that's why it's a good hockey play.

Out of position or not, a cross check is a cross check. Makar got beat by a spinorama and had to resort to crosschecking Kane. There should have been a penalty called.

 

[Pokecheque]

The refs appear to be trying to draw a line between a shove and an actual cross check. To me it looks more like Makar is using his glove more than the shaft of his stick. If anything I’d like a player to not have two hands on his stick so as not to give even the appearance of a cross check.

And before anyone says anything, Adam Foote was masterful at this. He’d use his big frame and shove guys to the ice right as they crossed the blue line with only one hand on the stick.

 

[Foppberg]

Yes, I do think that's a lazy play by Makar. He got beat cleanly by Kane and had to resort to crosschecking him in order to recover. If that was me where the referee was, my arm would have shot up.

I don't like rewarding defenders for losing positioning like that. Cale should be defending better than that and not needing to rely on a desperation crosscheck.

Good thing you're not a referee then. You'd be hated league wide

 

[dahrougem2]

Good thing you're not a referee then. You'd be hated league wide

I just think for far too long the NHL has allowed defenders to get away with clear penalties because "MOAR HOCKEY TUFFNESS" and that whole mythical aura around hockey.

Ask any offensive player if they want penalties to be called more regularly. It'd almost unanimously be a resounding yes. Defenders shouldn't have the ability to "cheat" while playing defense, yet far too often they're allowed to because referees don't call things by the book.

 

[AllAboutAvs]

I just think for far too long the NHL has allowed defenders to get away with clear penalties because "MOAR HOCKEY TUFFNESS" and that whole mythical aura around hockey.

Ask any offensive player if they want penalties to be called more regularly. It'd almost unanimously be a resounding yes. Defenders shouldn't have the ability to "cheat" while playing defense, yet far too often they're allowed to because referees don't call things by the book.

I don't think that is necessarily true. I think they care a lot more about the calls being consistent versus being called more regularly.