Wilson gets 20 games

[twabby]

It's this. And I think the biggest issue as others have alluded to, and probably why the meeting went all day yesterday, is that the league doesn't have any more clear sense of its own rules than we or the players do and has no reasonable metric by which to evaluate or provide meaningful guidance for a player like Big Willy.

The rules are clear, but just like other rules/laws they are selectively enforced based on the player. It sucks for Wilson, but again this is his 4th suspension in 100 games. He's not doing himself any favors by continually being on the DOPS radar. 20 games is hardly unfair.

 

[g00n]

The rules are clear, but just like other rules/laws they are selectively enforced based on the player. It sucks for Wilson, but again this is his 4th suspension in 100 games. He's not doing himself any favors by continually being on the DOPS radar. 20 games is hardly unfair.

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2018-2019-NHL-rulebook.pdf

Please define the legal difference between acceptable use of "violently" and unacceptable use of "violently". Is a difference stated in the rules, and do all refs and players know the line? Is there such a thing as a legal hit that is not violent?

Offenses like "boarding" and "charging" contain language exactly like that which is vague and subject to interpretation.

 

[Silky mitts]

I remember trying explain hockey to friends while watching games. A penalty is only a penalty some times. Yes, if you are on the power play the defending team may legally dismember you.

Against Toronto Vrana got called for hooking 40 seconds in and it was like barely any force. During the power play Orpik cupped a guy in the back of the head and drove his head into the boards and it was like of course that isn't a penalty.

 

[txpd]

I loved the league in that era. The single ref, the players getting away with things, everything actually. I was an NHL addict.

The open ice era half puts me to sleep.... I need action - yes even if its a guy being held and a guy turning around and slashing him. You can't even do a light stick check now. Heaven forbid the easily breakable composite stick.... breaks.

Here is the thing, and its largely true even now. When push comes to shove, the refs still bury the whistles. Admittedly, less so now, but no less widely inconsistent. Why call things differently than they did in the 9 months before that?

You know damn well some of the best games you watched featured the whistles put away. Us losing most of them, aside. Love the buried whistles - which allows players to do anything to win. As long as its even for both sides, what do we care? Instead of the modern day skate fests, we saw battles.

At one point I found I had to choose. Guy LaFluer/have or Moose Duponte/flyers. I chose Scotty Bowman hockey. Not Dave Schultz

 

[txpd]

Against Toronto Vrana got called for hooking 40 seconds in and it was like barely any force. During the power play Orpik cupped a guy in the back of the head and drove his head into the boards and it was like of course that isn't a penalty.

Stick on the hands. Penalty. Don't do it period. I support that. The way to slow down Ovechkin is chopping his hands a wrists as much as they will let you get away with. Orpik. Ok. Thats terrible. He's awful. Referees miss stuff. It happens all the time. Guys bleeding from high sticks in the face without a call because no one saw it

 

[RandyHolt]

Stick on the hands. Penalty. Don't do it period. I support that. The way to slow down Ovechkin is chopping his hands a wrists as much as they will let you get away with. Orpik. Ok. Thats terrible. He's awful. Referees miss stuff. It happens all the time. Guys bleeding from high sticks in the face without a call because no one saw it

It was great watching playoff OT hockey knowing the refs were not going to call anything less than a major. I am surprised to know you didn't enjoy those OTs/ that aspect of hockey in the 80s and 90s. Those were the best games I ever saw.

I never once heard a caps fan complain about a game 7 OT penalty.... before the Flyers series in Bruce's first year. Heaven forbid a guy stepped on Poti's stick. We complained a bit about an offside on Easter but that was about it.

 

[VaCaps Fan]

We need Randy Holt to sub for Tom Wilson!

 

[ovikovy817]

You can be sure that they won't reduce his suspension for at least another 7 games. Game number 14 will be against Pens on national TV.

 

[g00n]

Probably already been said but the long hearing and long delay before announcing the decision is probably indicative of a thorny legal situation brewing for the NHL. IMO the extra days are for league lawyers to get together and figure out what the best reduction is that will prevent another arbitration and/or to prepare for one.

 

[Raikkonen]

At this point I dont care about suspension itself. Just about Wilson and how he will come back mentally.

The start of the season is messy due to new regime and Wilson's absence can only help via showing weak links. So 15 or 20 games - doesnt matter much.

 

[Ridley Simon]

At this point I dont care about suspension itself. Just about Wilson and how he will come back mentally.

The start of the season is messy due to new regime and Wilson's absence can only help via showing weak links. So 15 or 20 games - doesnt matter much.

Hope not. Save the jumble this is the Metro.

Just can’t too far behind. Long as they are staying at or around (above) a point per game, it’s all good. Like now. 8pts, 7 games. Won’t sink with it at that clip (won’t soar either, but that’s not the issue)

 

[Corby78]

If we were a lesser team the 20 games would be huge, but I agree it’s not keeping us out of the playoffs and may not have a huge impact on a seed. I agree the biggest issue is how will Tom Reapond. No change will be bad, going neutered will be bad. We need a physical but smarter TW

 

[Chokingdogs]

The rules are clear, but just like other rules/laws they are selectively enforced based on the player. It sucks for Wilson, but again this is his 4th suspension in 100 games. He's not doing himself any favors by continually being on the DOPS radar. 20 games is hardly unfair.

You said it, selectively enforced. That’s the issue. Player A does same thing Player T does, A goes Scott free while W gets parked.

Yes, 4 suspensions in 100 games. But, how many of those 4 were truly warranted?

 

[Ridley Simon]

You said it, selectively enforced. That’s the issue. Player A does same thing Player T does, A goes Scott free while W gets parked.

Yes, 4 suspensions in 100 games. But, how many of those 4 were truly warranted?

Prob 2

 

[twabby]

You said it, selectively enforced. That’s the issue. Player A does same thing Player T does, A goes Scott free while W gets parked.

Yes, 4 suspensions in 100 games. But, how many of those 4 were truly warranted?

I’d say all 4 were warranted, and the one hit on Dumoulin that he got away with was probably worthy of a suspension as well.

The remedy to the situation isn’t to let Wilson get away with or to lessen the punishment for his bad hits, it’s to punish other players for their bad hits. I’m personally not cool with dudes’ heads getting smashed with avoidable hits.

 

[Calicaps]

I’d say all 4 were warranted, and the one hit on Dumoulin that he got away with was probably worthy of a suspension as well.

The remedy to the situation isn’t to let Wilson get away with or to lessen the punishment for his bad hits, it’s to punish other players for their bad hits. I’m personally not cool with dudes’ heads getting smashed with avoidable hits.

So then do you think Ovie should be dinged for his hit last game Pysyk (sp?)? Body contact that pushed through to the head, same as Willy’s preseason hit.

 

[twabby]

So then do you think Ovie should be dinged for his hit last game Pysyk (sp?)? Body contact that pushed through to the head, same as Willy’s preseason hit.

I haven’t looked at the hit yet but if he broke rule 48, sure I’d be in favor of him being suspended.

Edit: here it is: Bob Boughner wants the Department of Player Safety to review Alex Ovechkin’s high hit on Mark Pysyk

And yes it looks like something the league should have looked at (I doubt they will at this point since the Caps play tomorrow). It looks like a headshot that should warrant a suspension.

 

[Bieronymus Trotz]

Ovechkin's hit looks worse than Wilson's to me, in terms of the actions taken by the players. Wilson's was a lot more dangerous because of the speed, but Ovechkin seemed to rise into it a lot more.

 

[Sam Spade]

Ovechkin's hit looks worse than Wilson's to me, in terms of the actions taken by the players. Wilson's was a lot more dangerous because of the speed, but Ovechkin seemed to rise into it a lot more.

Really? The Panther player was bent over slightly and Ovechkin was standing straight up.....

 

[txpd]

What are the chances we could get Kuzy suspended for anything? Get the whole 1st line suspended.

 

[Chokingdogs]

Honestly, if every “hit” is going to be dissected, just take it out of the game. The NHL can be relegated to FX2 on Saturdays and be fine.

That being typed, what the DOPS and league could do is...make any elbow to the face/head a 5 minute major, that would stop a lot of the crap

 

[g00n]

Honestly, if every “hit” is going to be dissected, just take it out of the game. The NHL can be relegated to FX2 on Saturdays and be fine.

That being typed, what the DOPS and league could do is...make any elbow to the face/head a 5 minute major, that would stop a lot of the crap

High sticking is a penalty regardless of intent. What if "significant" head contact of any kind, whether intentional or accidental, becomes either a double minor or a major.

 

[txpd]

High sticking is a penalty regardless of intent. What if "significant" head contact of any kind, whether intentional or accidental, becomes either a double minor or a major.

Exception. A high stick is not a penalty in a follow through regardless of the injury caused. Players are not retroactively penalized, fined or suspended for unintentional high sticks.

If I hit you and then your head makes significant contact with the boards or the ice, penalty? If no, then how can I make a technically correct hit on you that somehow results in contact to the head a penalty? If that is now a penalty how much of a risk is any body check?

If I can drive thru your shoulder or chest and make contact with your head and that is a penalty, then wouldn't a hip check where you land on your head or a body check against the boards that pulls your skates off the ice and you land on your head be the same penalty?

 

[g00n]

Exception. A high stick is not a penalty in a follow through regardless of the injury caused. Players are not retroactively penalized, fined or suspended for unintentional high sticks.

Right, there's ONE exception to the high stick rule. ONE. And it's on a shot, not on anything else. Shots MUST happen in the game for players to score, and for the game to exist, so it's impractical to apply high sticking there. Every other 'unintentional' high stick is a penalty.

There is no such requirement for hitting/checking in the game, as we see with other levels of hockey. It's something the NHL chooses to leave intact, so they can determine where the line of necessity is.

If I hit you and then your head makes significant contact with the boards or the ice, penalty? If no, then how can I make a technically correct hit on you that somehow results in contact to the head a penalty? If that is now a penalty how much of a risk is any body check?

That's not what I'm talking about. There are already rules in place for those circumstances (charging, roughing, boarding, etc.). Just like it's up to the player to control his stick, it would then be up to the player to control the rest of his body when delivering a hit/check.

If I can drive thru your shoulder or chest and make contact with your head and that is a penalty, then wouldn't a hip check where you land on your head or a body check against the boards that pulls your skates off the ice and you land on your head be the same penalty?

Again, same as above. There are already penalties for that.

This deals specifically with hits to a player where YOUR BODY/EQUIPMENT contact their head. That's it.

If people want to piss and moan about these hits over and over, then let's enact reform in a way that's already been established. The closest parallel is the high stick rule.

If people want to change the rules then there is already precedent.

 

[txpd]

Unintentional high sticks are for not controlling your stick. Shooting/passing motion is controlled. If I make a textbook hit, I am controlled. Same same. No? Shooting/Passing and hitting are legal. By the rule book. You can change the high sticking rule at anytime to include playing the puck.

A charge is an overhit. An illegal hit by the book. You are suggesting a hit legal by the book that results in collateral head contact could be a penalty. If the game is to protect the head, then any otherwise legal hit that results in collateral head contact could be a penalty. Recently Orpik took a legal hit behind the net. The nature of the hit pulled his skates off the ice and forced him backward. He hit his head on the ice and went to concussion protocal before he could play further. If a clean hit results in should to head contact, why not the same legal hit that results in head to board or head to ice contact?

No, there are not already penalties for that. There are penalties for bad hits, not the result of good hits. The hip check is legal. Properly done it flips a player over and they can land on their head. You are doing the apples and oranges thing. A charging penalty that results in a head injury is an ejection and supplemental. A charging penalty that results in no damage remains a penalty. You are talking about making a hit where there is no penalty in the book a penalty. So I am saying that any otherwise legal hit the results in head contact with anything should also be a penalty.

Explain to me the difference between my legal hit on you where you hit your head secondarily on my helmet or the ice? Its a legal hit. Its not charging or boading or clipping or slew foot tripping. As of today it is a perfectly legal hit.