Jack Johnson suspended 3 games

[Hocks95*]

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?

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.

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.

no I am not calling out the entire columbus fan base. Perhaps it was in response to one paritcular poster and a couple other ones here, such as "No, this league is ridiculous. Who knows how long Anisimov will be out for a blatant elbow to the head and no punishment given at all. Then Johnson gets three days for what he did ???? Until there is some consistency other than

"if a Jacket does it he gets called and if it is done to a jacket there is no harm", no punishment is deserved. I am really sick of this league's so-called (non)disciplinary system."

I honestly hate seeing the victim argument because members of every fan base use it and then it loses any credibility it had to begin with and it's a weak argument. A lot of CBJ fans do this, boston fans, habs fans, I'll even admit Leafs fans. No disrespect to the CBJ fanbase and that was not my intention and I apologize if that's what you took or understood from my post.

 

[Hocks95*]

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.

fair enough. Though I don't think there have been any blindside hits this year that haven't caused suspension but I could be wrong.

 

[Hocks95*]

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.

fair enough. Though I don't think there have been any blindside hits this year that haven't caused suspension but I could be wrong.

Except for maybe the Kreider one I think the league has done a good job with dirty hits. It would have been nice to not see Brodin turn 180 degrees right into the boards and be a bit more careful though.

I have also noticed players are ok with putting themselves in vulnerable positions like back to the boards (like emelin on the lucic hit) because they expect not to get hit cause they think players will avoid it, I think that's a pretty cheap way of going about it

 

[blahblah]

A thread on the mains would get a larger target audience for your evangelism.

I'll love the defensive pairings tomorrow. It will be awesome!

 

[thebus2288*]

While he has been playing like **** this hit was not illegal. The Gryba hit was SOOO much worse. Look at what Anisimov's helmet does, and look at Tlusty's.

Johnson is skating backwards in front of Tlusty!! How the **** do people consider it a "blindside" hit?!? He didn't swoop in from behind and clip him high. Right before the hit he actually side steps a bit to hit him cleanly in the front. From now on if the guy getting hit isn't making eye contact with the hitter I want suspensions!! Its a hard hit. You could easily consider in "unnecessary". However, unnecessary is not the same as illegal. His feet are clearly on the ice when contact is made. And it shouldn't matter if Johnson's "driving up" into the hit if he doesn't hit him in the head. I'm still in the camp that thinks there was very small contact to Tlusty's head. It looks to me that the only contact that's made, is that his visor is barely brushed as Johnson comes across and hits him on his right shoulder.

Again just watching the helmets is enough to royally piss me off. Gryba comes all the way across Anisimov's body and almost ALL of the force is to the head. That's why his helmet flys off 180 degrees from the direction he's skating.

 

[Socks]

While he has been playing like **** this hit was not illegal. The Gryba hit was SOOO much worse. Look at what Anisimov's helmet does, and look at Tlusty's.

Johnson is skating backwards in front of Tlusty!! How the **** do people consider it a "blindside" hit?!? He didn't swoop in from behind and clip him high. Right before the hit he actually side steps a bit to hit him cleanly in the front. From now on if the guy getting hit isn't making eye contact with the hitter I want suspensions!! Its a hard hit. You could easily consider in "unnecessary". However, unnecessary is not the same as illegal. His feet are clearly on the ice when contact is made. And it shouldn't matter if Johnson's "driving up" into the hit if he doesn't hit him in the head. I'm still in the camp that thinks there was very small contact to Tlusty's head. It looks to me that the only contact that's made, is that his visor is barely brushed as Johnson comes across and hits him on his right shoulder.

Again just watching the helmets is enough to royally piss me off. Gryba comes all the way across Anisimov's body and almost ALL of the force is to the head. That's why his helmet flys off 180 degrees from the direction he's skating.

It's just a good thing it wasn't Wiz. He would've hit Tlusty and then kicked a puppy

 

[Hocks95*]

While he has been playing like **** this hit was not illegal. The Gryba hit was SOOO much worse. Look at what Anisimov's helmet does, and look at Tlusty's.

Johnson is skating backwards in front of Tlusty!! How the **** do people consider it a "blindside" hit?!? He didn't swoop in from behind and clip him high. Right before the hit he actually side steps a bit to hit him cleanly in the front. From now on if the guy getting hit isn't making eye contact with the hitter I want suspensions!! Its a hard hit. You could easily consider in "unnecessary". However, unnecessary is not the same as illegal. His feet are clearly on the ice when contact is made. And it shouldn't matter if Johnson's "driving up" into the hit if he doesn't hit him in the head. I'm still in the camp that thinks there was very small contact to Tlusty's head. It looks to me that the only contact that's made, is that his visor is barely brushed as Johnson comes across and hits him on his right shoulder.

Again just watching the helmets is enough to royally piss me off. Gryba comes all the way across Anisimov's body and almost ALL of the force is to the head. That's why his helmet flys off 180 degrees from the direction he's skating.

A Gryba type hit on Anisimov vs a blindside the blindside will always win when it comes to dirtyness. If you are looking at the helmet and the rate at which it flies off heads to judge how dirty a hit is --yea that's not how it works. Different players put on their helmet with different amount of tightness.

With the gryba hit there were a couple things: It was unclear if the head was the main point of contact, Anisimov had his head down, it wasn't a bindside.

 

[thebus2288*]

It's just a good thing it wasn't Wiz. He would've hit Tlusty and then kicked a puppy

Over the last few years I've become not a fan of Wiz's on-ice play. But I remember his suspension like it was yesterday. Sorry Canada don't wanna sound cliché , but I still think that's probably one of the top 3 worst suspensions they've handed out in recent memory. Like the Johnson hit, there was barely(if any) head contact even made. Wiz was stupid to follow through with his arm so high but Clutterbuck sold that **** 100%.

 

[MoeBartoli]

I have watched this hit on replay again and again and am still perplexed that this drew three games.....open ice, skater with puck, no lead with elbow or missile technique...in fact while JJ 's shoulder did get the head, his hip led as much as his shoulder did. They said he lifted; I think you will find players lift to some degree on most hots. As Blah said, JJ has no history of dirty play which makes the NHL's action more puzzling to me.

 

[JKG08]

3 games seems like a bit much for a guy without a history IMO but people comparing it to the AA hit are just being biased. The AA hit was a good hit and I have no problem with Gryba getting off clean.

The main difference is that with the AA hit, you can see his chest and shoulder pads move before the head moves. Meaning the chest/shoulder area was the main point of contact. With JJ's hit, the guys head was the first thing to move, so it was clearly the principle point of contact.

 

[Crede777]

It doesn't matter which is dirtier.

Hits which contact the head, even if they contact the shoulder first, and result in a concussion, need to be penalized.

Was the head hit? Yes. Was there a concussion? Yes. Boom, automatic suspension.

 

[Nordique]

Over the last few years I've become not a fan of Wiz's on-ice play. But I remember his suspension like it was yesterday. Sorry Canada don't wanna sound cliché , but I still think that's probably one of the top 3 worst suspensions they've handed out in recent memory. Like the Johnson hit, there was barely(if any) head contact even made. Wiz was stupid to follow through with his arm so high but Clutterbuck sold that **** 100%.

No hit on Cal Clutterbuck should be suspendable under any circumstance.

 

[blahblah]

3 games seems like a bit much for a guy without a history IMO but people comparing it to the AA hit are just being biased. The AA hit was a good hit and I have no problem with Gryba getting off clean.

Wasn't clean. Legal (barely) doesn't imply clean. The goal of Gryba's hit was to destroy a vulnerable player. I've seen both hits from multiple angles and I say the difference between them might be about 2 to 3 inches at most. If you look at a couple of angles you can see, on the AA hit, that Gryba's shoulder were parallel to AA's head at the time of impact before he leaves his feet. You can also see him drive up. Of course his head was going to receive contact.

Both hits were very poor decisions. I saw almost zero difference in them.

Our Canadian friend doesn't seem to realize that all broadside means is that an angle in which you can't see the "danger". Gryba knew that AA couldn't see him and he knew there was a reasonable chance of injury if he delivered it. AA's head wasn't just down, it was turned. Gryba came in from an angle and AA had no chance.

I didn't understand the obsession with "blindside". If you look at the video of JJ explaining what the league saw, there was no mention of blindside. There was only one infraction listed.

The league has to start dealing with hits that serve little purpose in hockey and have a high chance of injury. This wasn't AA turning at the last second. Gryba made a decision to play the man, a very vulnerable man. He could have cut the angle and played the puck. Instead he decided to take AA out.

I didn't agree with all of what the league stated in the JJ critique. However, I can live with it. The league is starting to make adjustments to how they give out punishments, I hope they start dealing with hits like Gryba gave. They don't need to exist in hockey.