Kronwalls hit on Kucherov MOD WARNING IN OP (Kronwall suspended for Game 7) - Part II

[RussianGuyovich]

That's not how no prior history works. He hasn't gotten punished by the NHL for it, so he has no prior history. I know it hurts the hell out of the argument for the suspension/a longer suspension, but it is an objective fact that he has no prior history.

you are correct, and i understand that, but it also does not mean that he wasn't verbally warned behind closed doors and told that he is on a short leash.

seeing as how incredulous this makes everyone, i see this as a viable answer to the "why now?" question on this suspension.

 

[DonskoiDonscored]

Don't build up momentum? He's making a hit, wearing skates, on ice. By definition building forward momentum is necessary.

Jump up to hit him? At least one skate was on the ice when contact was made.

"Start" to extend the elbow?

I sometimes wonder if half the posters on here actually watch hockey beyond a few games a year for their home team.

You know what I mean by building up momentum, skating toward him while building up speed (I believe DoPS called it charging) isn't necessary to make a hit.

Ok, let's not lie. Look at the DoPS video, both feet where off the ice. Only argument to make there is that the tip of the skate is on the ice.

Oh and I watch a lot of hockey. Step out of your GDT or into the prospects forum if you want to talk more hockey.

 

[illpucks]

That is bull****. He hasn't been punished for the hits before. You can't use that fact in determining punishment. Or at least you shouldn't.

Each hit should be a separate incident, unless you've actually been penalized for it. Your take on this tells me everything I need to know about your opinion on it.

 

[johan f]

Imagine how easy it would be for players if they could play frame by frame just as NHL scrutinize the play. It's very easy to pick apart every single fragment of the motion in the aftermath. In high speed I am sure Kronwall intended to lay out a good hit and did not plan all things you try to accuse him for.

 

[14ari13]

This is a great graphic... It shows Kronwall BEFORE contact is made, and shows Callahan and Garrison AFTER contact is made.


and enough with the "No prior history" angle. Kronwall has gotten away with this crap for so long, it's like he had naked photos of someone. If the league had taken action on him at some point in the last decade, maybe he wouldn't be so willing to continue with these reckless hits and not having to sit out a game 7.

You and many others use the arguement:
2+2=4
Which is correct.
But the whole picture is more like:
2+2-2+2+2-3+4+3-2=8

So no, you do not see the whole picture of the case, you see just the very small fragment of the whole picture.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Announcers talking about it in a pre-game means nothing about a DoPS review of a play. Objectively speaking by their own rules, he should have no prior history.

This is not evidence of prior history when it comes to punishment. If they used this as prior history to back up their suspension call, they did Kronwall wrong.

 

[johan f]

What history? Kronwall has not been suspended before.

 

[Mattilaus]

Imagine how easy it would be for players if they could play frame by frame just as NHL scrutinize the play. It's very easy to pick apart every single fragment of the motion in the aftermath. In high speed I am sure Kronwall intended to lay out a good hit and did not plan all things you try to accuse him for.

Should we stop calling high sticks? I am sure most people don't intend to clip other players with high sticks but they get punished if they do. Intent has nothing to do with it. It was a suspendable hit by a player who has a rep for toeing that line.

 

[Burke the Legend]

So it's Kronwall's responsibility to make sure the opponent isn't distracted before hitting him? Maybe the player should have his head up and know who is on the ice.

Should he also only shoot when the goalie is not screened?

Give me a break.

OK smart guy, why don't you go look up the NHL boarding rule, because the responsibility does lie with the hitter to not follow through when he has lined up a "defenceless" (the word is specifically mentioned in the rule) target.

Now that boarding rule doesn't apply to this, kind of a loophole, because it was open ice and not on the boards, but probably expect charging to be amended to cover this more clearly, because the NHL clearly agrees that attempting to kill anyone who has their head down is not hockey. Head down is not a greenlight to destroy a guy, ESPECIALLY when you're aiming high and get the head, the upwards trajectory of Kronwall is always there.

 

[14ari13]

Should we stop calling high sticks? I am sure most people don't intend to clip other players with high sticks but they get punished if they do. Intent has nothing to do with it. It was a suspendable hit by a player who has a rep for toeing that line.

Do you see a single fan at the game or in front of the tv enjoying high stick? Right, none.

Do you see fans jumping out of their seats after a great hit? Do I have to answer this for you too?

You can't see the difference between a grea hockey hit and high sticks.
Enjoy the hockey you watch.

Great hockey hits makes this game great and then you come with your high sticks.

Bravoooooooo

 

[illpucks]

Announcers talking about it in a pre-game means nothing about a DoPS review of a play. Objectively speaking by their own rules, he should have no prior history.

This is not evidence of prior history when it comes to punishment. If they used this as prior history to back up their suspension call, they did Kronwall wrong.

Just because the league turns a blind eye, doesn't mean that the hit wasn't dirty. Weber's hit on your team's star player was dirty. But by your words, that was a perfectly clean hit, and absolutely nothing wrong with it because the league took no action.

 

[14ari13]

Kronwall's hit was... Stupid.
He went in wrecklessly and the suspension is something you can understand.

But Palat's hit was basically the exact same thing, if not worse - just not as "camera friendly".

And that's the whole thing. The double standard that takes out a team's #1 D before a game 7 and doesn't take out the opposing team's best forward before the same game for basically the same play.

Year, you Are right. Why can't we watch figure skating? It is so nice and ellegant. Even better, we could watch the swans lake and Chsaikovsky music.

 

[johan f]

I remember when Lindros hit Ulf Samuelsson really bad in (or just before) Canada Cup 1991 and fans in NA thought it was just hockey.''

Well Kronwall just plays hockey. You morons.

 

[johan f]

When a player comes from Europe an plays tough you all whine and cry.

 

[DanZ]

And don't just take take select stills out of context. If you watch all three hits, the difference is that Kronwall's was blatantly predatory.

How was it anymore predatory than the other hits? Because it was in open ice?

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Just because the league turns a blind eye, doesn't mean that the hit wasn't dirty. Weber's hit on your team's star player was dirty. But by your words, that was a perfectly clean hit, and absolutely nothing wrong with it because the league took no action.

That is not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that while the hit may have been dirty and other previous hits may have been dirty, he was not penalized for them. He should not have them held against him in this particular case.

The decision needs to have been about whether this hit in particular was suspension worthy, not whether any of his previous hits were. Since he hasn't been punished by the NHL, he is not a repeat offender and the extra scrutiny his play would receive because of it should not be there.

He could literally have pulled a Marty McSorely and assaulted a guy with his stick. If the league did not punish him for it at the time when it occured, they shouldn't use that as a reasoning to punish him later.

If Shea Weber had done this exact hit that Kronwall did, I wouldn't be calling for a suspension because he slammed Zetterberg's head into the boards. It would have nothing to do with it.

 

[DanZ]

This is a great graphic... It shows Kronwall BEFORE contact is made, and shows Callahan and Garrison AFTER contact is made.


and enough with the "No prior history" angle. Kronwall has gotten away with this crap for so long, it's like he had naked photos of someone. If the league had taken action on him at some point in the last decade, maybe he wouldn't be so willing to continue with these reckless hits and not having to sit out a game 7.

That's right at the point of contact. Get your eyes checked. Sorry it doesn't support your opinion.

Oh and Kronwall hasn't been punished before therefore he has no history. It's really that simple. Don't know why that's so hard to understand.

 

[Bench]

How was it anymore predatory than the other hits?

In his defense, Kronwall did use Kucherov's remains to feed his young. That's classic predator behavior.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Year, you Are right. Why can't we watch figure skating? It is so nice and ellegant. Even better, we could watch the swans lake and Chsaikovsky music.

Well, I mean, Ashley Wagner is a lot nicer to look at than Niklas Kronwall.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

When a player comes from Europe an plays tough you all whine and cry.

This has literally zero to do with Kronwall being Swedish.

 

[ElysiumAB]

...skating toward him while building up speed (I believe DoPS called it charging) isn't necessary to make a hit.

...both feet where off the ice. Only argument to make there is that the tip of the skate is on the ice.

Did you really say skating toward someone isn't necessary to make a hit?

Did you also just say both feet were off the ice, except the foot that was on the ice?

Bwahaha... I can't even.

 

[TheOtherOne]

If the league wants Kronwall to cut it out, that's fine. There are reasonable ways to force him to do so.

If it was a blatantly over-the-line hit that resulted in injury, you suspend him. Whatever.

It was not. It was borderline. It did not cause an injury. In fact it was so borderline the refs didn't even see fit to penalize it in-game. The only reason it deserved ANY supplemental discipline is because of the amount of force used. Literally. This was admitted by DoPS. I mean, really? What a joke. Anyway.

I think it's obvious that the right thing to do is fine him. That gives you your precedent. That gives Kronwall his official warning. If you do that and Kronwall throws another of those hits, THEN you can suspend him and nobody argues.

I mean I don't understand how this approach is not obvious to anyone. This is like trying to crack down on "subtle interference" by taking a random offender and kicking him out at the worst possible time. That's just stupid.

 

[Mattilaus]

Do you see a single fan at the game or in front of the tv enjoying high stick? Right, none.

Do you see fans jumping out of their seats after a great hit? Do I have to answer this for you too?

You can't see the difference between a grea hockey hit and high sticks.
Enjoy the hockey you watch.

Great hockey hits makes this game great and then you come with your high sticks.

Bravoooooooo

wait so we should base punishment and the rules on whether the crowd cheers or not? I am confused. If this is the case wouldn't teams only be penalized during away games since the home team would never cheer for the away team?

 

[RussianGuyovich]

In his defense, Kronwall did use Kucherov's remains to feed his young. That's classic predator behavior.

we use every part of the kucherov

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

If the league wants Kronwall to cut it out, that's fine. There are reasonable ways to force him to do so.

If it was a blatantly over-the-line hit that resulted in injury, you suspend him. Whatever.

It was not. It was borderline. It did not cause an injury. In fact it was so borderline the refs didn't even see fit to penalize it in-game. The only reason it deserved ANY supplemental discipline is because of the amount of force used. Literally. This was admitted by DoPS. I mean, really? What a joke. Anyway.

I think it's obvious that the right thing to do is fine him. That gives you your precedent. That gives Kronwall his official warning. If you do that and Kronwall throws another of those hits, THEN you can suspend him and nobody argues.

I mean I don't understand how this approach is not obvious to anyone. This is like trying to crack down on "subtle interference" by taking a random offender and kicking him out at the worst possible time. That's just stupid.

Yup, pretty much exactly my opinion on this.