Jack Johnson suspended 3 games

[heretik27]

I dunno, just looks to me like when he went to hit the guy he clipped him high because he's a big player himself. What do you want these guys to do? Shrink 6 inches every time they throw a check?

Btw, the primary point of contact looks to be tlusty's right shoulder, not the head.

 

[major major]

Could JJ have still decked Tlusty without hitting him in the head? Yes? Suspension. Done. Good call by the league.

 

[Socks]

I'm fine with the suspension. I just expect to see the same response to this type of hit in the future. No more spinning the wheel of justice bs.

 

[Dednimnepo]

If you listen to the NHLDPS' explanation, and you'll know that they went out of their way to explain that everything about the check was legal, except Johnson's "unnecessarily elevating himself", thus hitting Tlusty mainly in the head. That, and the fact that Tlusty was hurt and didn't return, was the justification for the suspension.

That's how I see it. It's Johnson's jumping into him at the last second that deserves the suspension. If JJ just skates through him penalty maybe but no suspension.


As far as the Anisimov hit goes, doesn't Anisimov get hit like that about once a season?

 

[Nanabijou]

So if Wiz and Murray aren't back by Friday then D looks like:

Tyutin-Savard
Erixon-Prout
St. Denis- ???

Remember training camp when the consensus on here was that the CBJ had too many defensemen and needed to trade one? Good times.

 

[db2011]

I'm fine with the suspension. Guy was doing nothing to help the team anyway. And it was a dirty hit that should be punished.

 

[CBJx614]

I'm fine with the suspension. Guy was doing nothing to help the team anyway. And it was a dirty hit that should be punished.

And centers. Now we're overloaded on wings with no defenseman or centers

 

[Mayor Bee]

I dunno, just looks to me like when he went to hit the guy he clipped him high because he's a big player himself. What do you want these guys to do? Shrink 6 inches every time they throw a check?

Johnson's not that big of a guy. Sure, he looks like he could slot in on an NFL team, but he's not tall by any stretch.

 

[CBJfan4evr]

selective/subjective enforcement. #inconsistency

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

he's not tall by any stretch.

 

[cslebn]

I'm fine with the suspension. I just expect to see the same response to this type of hit in the future. No more spinning the wheel of justice bs.

This a million times over. Just be consistent. Especially since this is a single office not 30 different refs in 15 different games.

 

[Jackets Fan]

...And yet the Gryba hit that Anisimov is still recovering from doesn't even warrant a fine. Okay NHL, sure...

Officiating, and what's considered suspendable by the NHLPA is not consistent at all. This league is a freaking joke.

 

[Hocks95*]

honestly I realize I might catch some flack for this but it's getting a little cliche seeing every frekn fanbase complain about how the league is against them or have their number.

Or how when their team loses the game to completely blame it on the refs. If the refs and league are against every single team in the league then what every fanbase says simply becomes false because it's not possible anymore.

Given that I think the league should adopt some consistency. This was a pretty dirty hit though regardless and deserved some punishment.

The Anisimov hit was unfortunate but definitely not blind side and it was debatable whether the head was even the principle point of contact. That hit was the FURTHEST thing from a blindside hit and it wasn't clear if the head was the principle point of contact. The fact that Anisimov had his head down didn't exactly help either.

 

[Ar-too]

I get where you're coming from Hocks.

What I would argue is that given what we've learned about concussions and just how bad they are for long term mental health over the last handful of years, there's no justification for the kind of hit Anisimov took, head down or not. It might, technically, be legal, whereas Johnson's hit might, technically, be illegal, according to the rules as they are.

Whatever distinction exists in the rules as they are when judging the legality of those hits should be extinguished. In both cases, the hitter can see that the player they're about to hit is vulnerable and that the hit is somewhat likely to result in an injury. My argument isn't that there shouldn't be hitting in hockey. There shouldn't be that kind of hitting in hockey. The difference between the hits is so small as to be irrelevant when judging whether they are "safe".

 

[Kev22]

3 games for a 2 minute penalty. Gryba on the Anisimov hit got 5 and a gamer if I'm not mistaken, then no further discipline. I know the hits aren't the same, but why the disparity in on-ice penalties vs. further disciplinary action. To me, if a violation is serious enough to warrant a 5 and a game, means a suspension is warranted.

If Johnson's hit is worthy of a three game suspension (which I'm indifferent), where's the focus on the refs that only called a two minute penalty. Certainly gives the impression that the on-ice officiating didn't think it was that serious of a play. The same goes for calls for boarding/charging/checking from behind. To me, if you're going to call "check to the head" it should be an automatic game misconduct as they are trying to eliminate that kind of hit from the game. Consistency of the rules and on-ice officials needs to be the primary concern.

Between injuries and this suspension, this is a ****storm or Arniel proportions.

 

[cbjfaninmo]

I am ok with the suspension, but consistency from the league is a real issue.

 

[blahblah]

3 games for a 2 minute penalty. Gryba on the Anisimov hit got 5 and a gamer if I'm not mistaken, then no further discipline.

I sure don't think that Jack is a repeat offender unless it was in an alternate universe. Not sure why 3 games was warranted. It's certainly a departure from the way that suspensions were handed out in the past.

 

[Hocks95*]

I sure don't think that Jack is a repeat offender unless it was in an alternate universe. Not sure why 3 games was warranted. It's certainly a departure from the way that suspensions were handed out in the past.

because blindside hits are one of the worst. Your coming in with your big heavy shoulder and hitting a guy at a very fast speed hitting his head and bending it in a direction it shouldn't be bent. Anisimov hit though unfortunate, the angle of approach was what it should be in hockey and it was unclear whether he meant to hit the head in the first place from what we could see.

Trust me, at 5'11 182 I used to often be a victim of big hits and I've faced both a couple times. The blindside one is way worse even if the Anisimov type hit the guy straight up elbows you in the face intentionally (which gryba didn't). It's simple science

 

[blahblah]

because blindside hits are one of the worst. Your coming in with your big heavy shoulder and hitting a guy at a very fast speed hitting his head and bending it in a direction it shouldn't be bent.

Mmm... hmm... I'm not going to bother to critique that mess you posted. Thanks, bye.

 

[Hocks95*]

Mmm... hmm... I'm not going to bother to critique that mess you posted. Thanks, bye.

ok it was a nice discussion. Very good comeback, obviously nothing better to say. Just blame the league for being biased rather than seeing things as they are. Right..... One hit is clearly dirtier than the other. Not every fan base can claim the league is against them cause if it were true it wouldn't be, as it's not technically possible to be against everyone. But keep using that excuse...wonder if you've ever been blindsided....

 

[cslebn]

ok it was a nice discussion. Very good comeback, obviously nothing better to say. Just blame the league for being biased rather than seeing things as they are. Right..... One hit is clearly dirtier than the other. Not every fan base can claim the league is against them cause if it were true it wouldn't be, as it's not technically possible to be against everyone. But keep using that excuse...wonder if you've ever been blindsided....

Most aren't blaming the league for a bias. Just asking for consistency. I've seen other teams play in games with blatant head shots that should be suspensions but aren't. A lot of the enforcement has become baffling.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

ok it was a nice discussion. Very good comeback, obviously nothing better to say. Just blame the league for being biased rather than seeing things as they are. Right..... One hit is clearly dirtier than the other. Not every fan base can claim the league is against them cause if it were true it wouldn't be, as it's not technically possible to be against everyone. But keep using that excuse...wonder if you've ever been blindsided....

You're spot on in your assessment of the increased seriousness of the "across" hit versus the "square-up" hit.

But you're off in claiming this thread is full of folks playing the victim card. The claim isn't bias, it's inconsistency.

 

[Dednimnepo]

honestly I realize I might catch some flack for this but it's getting a little cliche seeing every frekn fanbase complain about how the league is against them or have their number.
Or how when their team loses the game to completely blame it on the refs. If the refs and league are against every single team in the league then what every fanbase says simply becomes false because it's not possible anymore.

This is a strawman, unless you can point to where the CBJ fanbase stated the league was out to get them or to "completely blame" the loss on the refs. Also, if your concern is with "every frekn fanbase" shouldn't this post be posted on the mains?

Given that I think the league should adopt some consistency. This was a pretty dirty hit though regardless and deserved some punishment.

You seem to be in agreement with the consensus of posters before you post, which is:
- In the specific case of the JJ hit it should be punished.
- The league needs consistency.

The Anisimov hit was unfortunate but definitely not blind side and it was debatable whether the head was even the principle point of contact. That hit was the FURTHEST thing from a blindside hit and it wasn't clear if the head was the principle point of contact. The fact that Anisimov had his head down didn't exactly help either.

A reasonable description of the hit on Anisimov, but noticeably without a stated opinion about the outcome or league response.

I believe if you left off the first few sentences with the insult to the entire CBJ fanbase your post has greater merit.

 

[Nordique]

Gryba

Its ******** imo.

 

[blahblah]

ok it was a nice discussion. Very good comeback, obviously nothing better to say.

This is why I don't want to discuss it with you. It makes no difference what I say I'll have to listen to your lectures. I wasn't comparing the hits; yet you seem to be trying to get me to.

I'll just say that I don't agree with a lot of what you said. I've heard what you've had to say and I don't find it interesting or compelling. I don't find your overconfidence interesting or compelling either. To be honest, I have no idea why you are here. I don't come to your teams boards to discuss a player that received a suspension. It's just looks like stirring the pot. I doubt anyone here is interested in a league wide discussion on this. We're in a tough stretch and we were victims of the idiotic suspension on Wiz some time back. In other words, we have a chip on our shoulders. Your best bet is to just move on or discuss our team on a less dramatic topic.

So I ask you to not respond to me. I said all I wanted to say on this issue. History has always been a consideration. I didn't see head hunting by JJ. If you want to discuss the hit on AA, there is a thread for it. I would recommend everyone in here use it.

As far as trusting you, please. I've seen I think two posts from you. There is nothing in there to trust.

I've seen hits far worse than that get nothing. I'm not saying that it wasn't an illegal or dangerous hit. I can tell you, however, that JJ didn't intend to get the head and he certainly wasn't trying to hurt anyone. He has no history of this in the past and it should have been a consideration. The player wasn't injured, the officials didn't think it warranted 5 minutes (something that has been used in the past as a consideration). Frankly I don't see how anything beyond a game is warranted. If he did it again as a repeat offender, that looks like 5 games to me.

I've seen what you think so I have NO INTEREST in your rebuttal. Don't bother. You won't get a reply.

Thanks,