Was Eakin's 5min major right call?

Discussion in 'Polls - (hockey-related only)' started by Ranksu, Apr 24, 2019.

?

Was Eakin's 5min major right call?

  1. yes

    15.0%
  2. no

    85.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ranksu

    Ranksu Crotch Academy ftw Sponsor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    14,016
    Likes Received:
    5,333
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Lapland
    speak up



     
  2. ijuka

    ijuka Registered User

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    14,127
    Likes Received:
    4,626
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Eakin's 5min major is a weird call because IMO the event becoming as bad as it did was Staal's fault. If he doesn't body slam Pavelski to the ice, what Eakin did isn't even a penalty.
     
  3. Devonator

    Devonator Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2003
    Messages:
    3,211
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    184
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Accounting
    Location:
    Proud Darul Harbian
    Nope...it was a terrible call.....
     
  4. Future GOAT

    Future GOAT Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,687
    Likes Received:
    1,428
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Location:
    Montréal
    You mean Stastny?

    But yeah, major injury and blood, that's gonna draw some majors a lot of the times. It could have easily been avoided, neither Eakin nor Stastny needed to do what they did, but they did and paid the price for it.
     
  5. imtheboy

    imtheboy Lisa Ann's Nephew Sponsor

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2015
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    66
  6. Bizz

    Bizz 120% Banter

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,814
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    San Jose
    Yes. And Eakin deserves a 10 game suspension to start next season minimum.
     
  7. 1865

    1865 Fired Dave Hakstol

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    14,609
    Likes Received:
    2,344
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    You don't get a major penalty for a cross check to the chest. That should have been 2 minutes, San Jose would have scored once and Vegas would probably be through.

    I'd be apoplectic if this had happened to the Flyers.
     
    kihei and Devonator like this.
  8. elmaco

    elmaco #68

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,483
    Likes Received:
    514
    Trophy Points:
    128
    Unnecessary cross-check ended up in accidental injury and he paid the price for it. Vegas PK lost the the game tho.
     
  9. HanSolo

    HanSolo Vegas Strong

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    83,222
    Likes Received:
    12,334
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    The sad thing is, knowing you, you actually believe this.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2019
  10. HanSolo

    HanSolo Vegas Strong

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    83,222
    Likes Received:
    12,334
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    No.

    59.3Major Penalty - A major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee based on the severity of the contact, shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who "cross-checks" an opponent (see 59.5).
    Unfortunate result but the severity of the contact was no different than any other crosscheck thrown without a call in this series and the fall happened as a result of Pavelski's awkward stumble into Stastny who lost his balance and directed Pavelski's downward motion that resulted in the injury.

    Two minute minor surely, and I could even see the argument for a 5 on 3 sending both Stastny and Eakin to the box. But 5 minutes based on the severity of the contact was unwarranted.

    But even presuming that (the refs thought Eakin crosschecked Pavs in the face) weren't true, the refs didn't have their hand up to make a call on this play. The penalty wasn't applied until Pavelski was helped off the ice. Either they didn't see it in the first place, or they didn't think much of it until they saw Pavelski was hurt. Either way, not a good look for the refs.

    Doesn't change that Vegas didn't keep their composure on the penalty kill, but they should've had the shorthanded situation nullified after one goal. Not four.

    EDIT: Owning my mistake. Eakin's ejection was not a match penalty just simple game misconduct which automatically latches onto a 5 minute misconduct as a result of a crosscheck.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2019
    Mud the ACAS likes this.
  11. Spilot23

    Spilot23 Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Messages:
    1,555
    Likes Received:
    947
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Where is the Are you kidding me.. absolutely no button? I feel bad for Vegas and their fans though.
     
  12. Pia8988

    Pia8988 Registered User

    Joined:
    May 26, 2014
    Messages:
    11,199
    Likes Received:
    4,634
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Saw him bleeding. No blood, no major. They never saw the play.
     
    PatriceBergeronFan likes this.
  13. The Duck Knight

    The Duck Knight Henry, you're our only hope!

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,669
    Likes Received:
    1,049
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    702
    For the bolded to apply the refs would have actually had to have seen the play. Given that they said he was cross checked in the head, they clearly didn't.
     
  14. Leidi J

    Leidi J Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,930
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    I would say 2 min to both Eakin and Stastny. I think they both cross checked him tbh. and maybe Stastny used excessive force on his, but Pavelski was also already unbalanced/falling so thats hard to say. Then again, easy for me to say watching replay. Harder for refs on the ice at full speed.
     
  15. AaronDellForPrez

    AaronDellForPrez Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,788
    Likes Received:
    836
    Trophy Points:
    115
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    New Zealand, South Island
    It was only the right call, by the rulebook, if it caused a significant injury. Otherwise its only a 2 minute minor.

    I'll leave it up to everyone else to determine if Pavelski's injury was significant.

    If it was, the 5 minute major was, by the book, absolutely the right call.

    "Series supervisor Don VanMassenhoven said the major penalty was given because the cross-check caused a significant injury."

    That really should be the end of the story, but I know people will debate this forever, which is fine by me
     
    rumrokh and SFtoBoston like this.
  16. BlueDream

    BlueDream Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    20,511
    Likes Received:
    6,633
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

    He's not going to get a single game.
     
  17. Le Grec

    Le Grec Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,305
    Likes Received:
    814
    Trophy Points:
    109
    No one hates the refs more than I do, but I don't blame a ref who sees a cross check near the face, and a guy collapse, call a major penalty.
    No one is perfect, you do what you think is right at the time.

    Vegas fans, I love you guys, but don't blame the ref...
     
    Violenza Domestica and rumrokh like this.
  18. The Duck Knight

    The Duck Knight Henry, you're our only hope!

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,669
    Likes Received:
    1,049
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    702
    Let's ignore the fact that it was nowhere near his face. What exactly is the thought process if the ref thinks he sees someone, who is wearing a full shield to begin, laying on the ice bleeding from the back of his head? At what point would that lead them to believe the injury was caused by the cross check?
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2019
    PatriceBergeronFan likes this.
  19. Corto

    Corto Faceless Man

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Messages:
    15,408
    Likes Received:
    569
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Braavos
    Never in a million years. To call it a cross-check is pushing, it's more like a shove to the chest that happens about half the time a faceoff is done.
    But sure, let's call it a cross-check. Let's call it a 2 min penalty.

    The refs called 5 and a game because they saw the injury and thought Eakin cross-checked Joe in the face.

    It really is that simple.

    They messed up. They made a horrible call and directly influenced the game, and both teams' seasons.
     
    Xanner and PatriceBergeronFan like this.
  20. Eagle Peninsula

    Eagle Peninsula Pardon mon français

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    4,864
    Likes Received:
    2,500
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Location:
    Finland
    Should be a minor interference call, nothing more than that. Doesn't change the fact that Vegas still blew it themselves but that's a bad call.
     
    Devonator likes this.
  21. BLNY

    BLNY Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    433
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Dartmouth, NS
    It's likely the worst major penalty call I've ever seen. 2 mins for interference? Sure, but we've seen worse examples of interference go uncalled frequently. Ideal call imo, if there was to be one, was the 2 mins for interference and 2 minutes for diving because the Sharks player sold that hard imo.
     
  22. HanSolo

    HanSolo Vegas Strong

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    83,222
    Likes Received:
    12,334
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Except it's not because that explanation doesn't line up with the rule as I told you in the other thread. Severity of the contact is the operative language. Other rules dealing with injurious results have specific language stating things like "contact to the head resulting in an injury"

    I don't know why they'd suddenly go vague about the meaning of "severity of the contact" to imply it actually means severity of the injury.

    It's only the end of the story in that the call was made and the league isn't going to retroactively have these teams try again because of an error in judgment. San Jose is through and Vegas isn't. That's the only story that's over.
     
  23. user26

    user26 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2018
    Messages:
    2,482
    Likes Received:
    1,166
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    NHL Jersey Collector
    Location:
    Ottawa Ont
    Are you ****ing kidding me that was a 5 min call?? Wow
     
  24. Le Grec

    Le Grec Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,305
    Likes Received:
    814
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Put yourself in the refs position.
    You see a high cross check, then the player falls, is bleeding and is out.
    Everything is simple in slow motion, but in real time, it's not that easy...
     
  25. The Duck Knight

    The Duck Knight Henry, you're our only hope!

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,669
    Likes Received:
    1,049
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    702
    I would confer with the linesman and my fellow referee and not take a wild guess. You still haven't explained to me how a cross check to the head that supposedly happened would even cause a guy that is wearing a full shield to suffer the injury Pavelski did.
     
    Jacob and PatriceBergeronFan like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"