Should a Player be Penalized/Suspended for a Clean Hit if the other Player is Injured On the Play?

[Habby Gilmore]

Simple question, Player A hits player B hard with a check that is within the rules. Player B gets injured on the play. Should Player A be penalized or suspended because Player B was injured?

Take the Wilson hit for example since its fresh. If Wilson had delivered a clean check in that moment and Sundqvist was still injured on the play. Should Wilson still be penalized/suspended? If so, why?

Click to read more...

 

[Habby Gilmore]

How do you add a poll?

 

[Il Stugotz]

No

 

[Icarium]

Of course not, how is that even up for debate? You can't punish a player for something which isn't against the rules.

 

[Sheppy]

This got 5 and a game.

Unfortunately, refs will look at the outcome and just throw out a game misconduct if a player is injured. Honestly, look for guys to start selling hits in order to gain a 5 minute major, that's where we're heading.

Tell me on what planet this is a 5 and a game. This is as clean of a hit as you could deliver.

 

[Jozay]

no...

 

[BeastoftheEast85]

If a hit is “clean” then by definition it should not be penalize/suspend-ible.

The issue is defining what is and what isn’t “clean” is not always black and white. And if a hit is questionable, injuries are often factored into consideration. I believe they shouldn’t be, but it’s hard thing not to consider.

 

[SabresSharks]

Legal play is legal. Isn't this obvious?

Don't bother with the poll. This will be locked soon anyway.

 

[Habby Gilmore]

If a hit is “clean” then by definition it should not be penalize/suspend-ible.

The issue is defining what is and what isn’t “clean” is not always black and white.

Exactly, then add the injury and it looks worse, so we end up with penalties and suspensions to undeserving players. When all along it was the puck carrier who put himself in a position to be hit that hard in the first place. But the hitter gets all the blame.

 

[Empoleon8771]

And the injury makes it looks worse, so we end up with penalties and suspensions to undeserving players. When all along it was the puck carrier who put himself in a position to be hit that hard in the first place. But the hitter gets all the blame.

This sounds dangerously like victim blaming Sundqvist for Wilson crushing him in the head.

 

[Habby Gilmore]

This sounds dangerously like victim blaming Sundqvist for Wilson crushing him in the head.

Not at all, that’s why I made a new thread and new hypothetical situation, in this situation the hit is perfectly legal. Is it still a penalty/suspension?

 

[deepelemblues]

Exactly, then add the injury and it looks worse, so we end up with penalties and suspensions to undeserving players. When all along it was the puck carrier who put himself in a position to be hit that hard in the first place. But the hitter gets all the blame.

numbers or don't care

how often are players penalized or suspended for clean hits

also a more general question

how long before people finally stop acting like all responsibility is on the guy who gets hit and none is on the guy delivering the hit

ass backwards nonsense and it's a religious mantra with some hockey fans

 

[Habby Gilmore]

numbers or don't care

how often are players penalized or suspended for clean hits

also a more general question

how long before people finally stop acting like all responsibility is on the guy who gets hit and none is on the guy delivering the hit

ass backwards nonsense and it's a religious mantra with some hockey fans

Why is it on the hitter in this situation? He laid a clean hit, why should he be to blame for another player leaving himself open to a harder than normal hit?

 

[deepelemblues]

Why is it on the hitter in this situation? He laid a clean hit, why should he be to blame for another player leaving himself open to a harder than normal hit?

you're raising a non-issue unless you provide some actual numbers and video. one example doesn't cut it.

players getting penalized or suspended for clean hits is not an issue in the NHL. clean hits shouldn't be punished, and with rare exceptions, they aren't.

you can play this game all you want but it's not gonna work. you tried to change the subject in the wilson thread and now you've made a thread of your own to change the subject. the issue isn't clean hits that happen to injure someone.

 

[Habby Gilmore]

you're raising a non-issue unless you provide some actual numbers and video. one example doesn't cut it.

players getting penalized or suspended for clean hits is not an issue in the NHL. clean hits shouldn't be punished, and with rare exceptions, they aren't.

you can play this game all you want but it's not gonna work.

I wanted the opinions of as many people as possible on the matter, how else would one go about getting that info without posting a new topic on the subject?

 

[SUX2BU]

No

 

[HanSolo]

Not at all, that’s why I made a new thread and new hypothetical situation, in this situation the hit is perfectly legal. Is it still a penalty/suspension?

Obviously not. Why even ask the question? Legal clean hits happen every game and injuries less often but still do happen without penalties and certainly without suspensions.

This is like asking "if a player shoots a puck and it hits a goalie pad, should it be a shot on goal?"

I wanted the opinions of as many people as possible on the matter, how else would one go about getting that info without posting a new topic on the subject?

You could try paying attention when you watch hockey.

You're asking us a posited hypothetical that is just a reality of the game. Clean checks that are the result of the hit player's positioning and end in injuries don't result in penalties often, and when it happens, most fans recognize it as bad reffing. Most fans of the game understand injuries happen.

Edit: but let's call a spade a spade. This is a thinly veiled attempt to further the narrative that Sundqvist should be admonished for cutting across the ice when he got hit instead of focusing on the illegality and reckless nature of Wilson's hit. Your body of work in the Wilson thread has said enough. You're not fooling anyone.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Of course not. Punishing people for doing things correctly has no purpose whatsoever.

 

[ozzie]

There was once a time when hitting/checking was about separating the man from the puck. Those times and intentions have clearly passed us by.

Simple answer is no, are you going to extend that to an accidental high stick too?

 

[JerseyMike34]

No. It's a contact sport. They get paid. Some of that pay is hazard pay.

 

[pabst blue ribbon]

One of the more unnecessary threads I can think of

 

[FerrisRox]

This got 5 and a game.

Unfortunately, refs will look at the outcome and just throw out a game misconduct if a player is injured. Honestly, look for guys to start selling hits in order to gain a 5 minute major, that's where we're heading.

Tell me on what planet this is a 5 and a game. This is as clean of a hit as you could deliver.

Maybe I'm missing something here and you're being sarcastic, but are you seriously trying to suggest that's a clean hit?

 

[snipes]

Not a ****ing chance

 

[Habby Gilmore]

Obviously not. Why even ask the question? Legal clean hits happen every game and injuries less often but still do happen without penalties and certainly without suspensions.

This is like asking "if a player shoots a puck and it hits a goalie pad, should it be a shot on goal?"


You could try paying attention when you watch hockey.

You're asking us a posited hypothetical that is just a reality of the game. Clean checks that are the result of the hit player's positioning and end in injuries don't result in penalties often, and when it happens, most fans recognize it as bad reffing. Most fans of the game understand injuries happen.

Edit: but let's call a spade a spade. This is a thinly veiled attempt to further the narrative that Sundqvist should be admonished for cutting across the ice when he got hit instead of focusing on the illegality and reckless nature of Wilson's hit. Your body of work in the Wilson thread has said enough. You're not fooling anyone.

I’m not attempting to fool anyone, I just asked a question. It’s pretty hard to get others opinions a matter without actually asking other people you know.

 

[IceNeophyte]

Of course not, how is that even up for debate? You can't punish a player for something which isn't against the rules.

He is trying to find some ground on which to argue that Wilson shouldn't be punished.