Random Hockey Observations

[Dubey 1,035]

I just wanted to add that this is not necessarily a Chara/Pacioretty thing...they just happened to be the guys involved...but rather a shared mentality of many players and those closely involved in the game. The intent of bodychecking is to remove your opponent from the puck...not to remove him from the game...or make the highlight reels.

I agree with this 100%. I don't know how it changes, maybe they need to start penalizing really vicious hits, even if they are 'clean'.I thought Chara's hit was extremely dirty, and he knew exactly what he was doing. He probably won't get more than 1-2 games though, and it would be 0 games if Pacioretty wasn't severely injured.

[FCP Bob 1,321]

I think Chara's intent was about the same as Scott Stevens' intent on his open-ice hits. Neither was hoping for serious injury, but both wanted to crunch their targets. Chara had an issue with Pacioretty from previous games. This was a predatory hit and provides the perfect opportunity to send a serious message to the players/coaches/GMs that there is hockey and there is this type of thing. The NHL will fail. Someone will get killed and then the NHL will put up a traffic light.

I've watched the play a few times now and from a couple different angles. To me it looked like a standard forward gets a half step ahead of the defenseman play and Chara tried to shove him and take him out but he did it at the worst possible place on the ice. I really doubt there was any thought or intent to injure.That being said Chara showed a lack of awareness at best and a lack of respect for what the consequences of his actions could be and he deserves to be punished. It was an unfortunate play but I would classify it as more of a negligent play than a dirty one.

[digitalmonkey 929]

I agree with this 100%. I don't know how it changes, maybe they need to start penalizing really vicious hits, even if they are 'clean'.I thought Chara's hit was extremely dirty, and he knew exactly what he was doing. He probably won't get more than 1-2 games though, and it would be 0 games if Pacioretty wasn't severely injured.

I've watched the play a few times now and from a couple different angles. To me it looked like a standard forward gets a half step ahead of the defenseman play and Chara tried to shove him and take him out but he did it at the worst possible place on the ice. I really doubt there was any thought or intent to injure.That being said Chara showed a lack of awareness at best and a lack of respect for what the consequences of his actions could be and he deserves to be punished. It was an unfortunate play but I would classify it as more of a negligent play than a dirty one.

The NHL needs to change the mentality so that there IS thought and intent NOT to injure.

[digitalmonkey 929]

Thishttp://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/3893...Pacioretty.html

[ajs510 122]

Big hits = Big money (for the NHL and for players that are willing to dish them out). Nothing is going to change whatsoever, Chara will get two games and maybe the league will double the thickness of the padding on the stancheons.

[digitalmonkey 929]

Some are saying Chara shouldn't be blamed for the design of the rink. That's like claiming Todd Bertuzzi shouldn't be blamed for the hardness of the ice. Ridiculous!

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

Im kinda sitting back and trying to figure out my own opinion on all this Chara/Pacioretty. Watched it a few times last night, and nothing concrete jumps out at me.I find myself giving Chara a lot of the benefit of my doubts, because I have always believed the guy played the game the right away. Hard, but not dirty. I wont lie, if Cooke did this, I would just assume he knew exactly where they were.To me, this all comes down to if you knew where you were. If the NHL, or NHL players/experts, think that in that situation most players should be aware, then he def deserves a suspension. But if its deemed by those who played that you cant always recognize the dangers, then its another matter.Because at nearly every other area in the rink, this would be a nothing play that happens 5times a game. I guess reckless is as good a term as any, but Im not buying intent to injure.

[Fenxis 99]

The NHL needs to change the mentality so that there IS thought and intent NOT to injure.

Amen; judging the "intent" of the actions is one giant cop-out -- and should be no excuse for what happens.It make for inconsistent suspensions and make the league seem more amateurish than any amount of fighting that the league wants to stamp out.Bottom line: name recognition sell the game, having your players / stars out for extended periods of time (see: Crosby / Savard) and have the perpetrators walk away with no discipline is a joke. The NFL learned years ago that the quarterback is the face of the franchise and needs to be protected at all costs. It's time that the NHL comes into the 21st century.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

Amen; judging the "intent" of the actions is one giant cop-out -- and should be no excuse for what happens.It make for inconsistent suspensions and make the league seem more amateurish than any amount of fighting that the league wants to stamp out.Bottom line: name recognition sell the game, having your players / stars out for extended periods of time (see: Crosby / Savard) and have the perpetrators walk away with no discipline is a joke. The NFL learned years ago that the quarterback is the face of the franchise and needs to be protected at all costs. It's time that the NHL comes into the 21st century.

Im trying to understand this.So, if you dont mean to hurt the guy, but he gets a concussion from a legal bodycheck (not a hit to the head), is it suspendable?What the NFL did with qb's is pretty much make new rules for them, in that you cant really hit them. I dont know if you can do that for every NHL player.Im as big a proponent as anyone in getting rid of malicious hits, but I dont know how you do that without judging intent. Is it as simple as calling it reckless?

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

Intent has to matter. You can still punish the result, but if the intent is there it needs to be punished more severely.I watched the video clip with no knowledge of what happened. The first time I watched it I didn't even know what happened; it just looked like a standard hockey play to me.

[digitalmonkey 929]

Im trying to understand this.So, if you dont mean to hurt the guy, but he gets a concussion from a legal bodycheck (not a hit to the head), is it suspendable?What the NFL did with qb's is pretty much make new rules for them, in that you cant really hit them. I dont know if you can do that for every NHL player.Im as big a proponent as anyone in getting rid of malicious hits, but I dont know how you do that without judging intent. Is it as simple as calling it reckless?

Intent is impossible to determine.Chara injured a player while committing an act that was/is against the rules. He should be punished.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

Chara injured a player while committing an act that was/is against the rules. He should be punished.

So, if I trip a player, and he falls and gets a concussion, I should be suspended?

[FCP Bob 1,321]

So, if I trip a player, and he falls and gets a concussion, I should be suspended?

If it's a Canadien's player yes.

[Jason12 0]

If the early word of C4, C5 fracture is true than I think it completely changes the Chara suspension. He may never play again if thats true.

[digitalmonkey 929]

So, if I trip a player, and he falls and gets a concussion, I should be suspended?

If one chooses to be obtuse, then yes.

[digitalmonkey 929]

If it's a Canadien's player yes.

How's Steve Moore doing these days?

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

This is how I'd do it:Edit: "Penalty" should be "Penalty/fine," but I'm not going back to change it.

[Dubey 1,035]

So, if I trip a player, and he falls and gets a concussion, I should be suspended?

I don't think it can be as cut and dry as Dale says. It is probably something that would be difficult to clearly state in a written rule.I think, once again, it comes down to respect. If a player is in a vulnerable position, whether it be approaching the turnbuckle along the boards, or skating through center ice with his head down, or look back to recieve a pass, you have to let up. Out of respect for your fellow players' health and safety. If you don't, and the player is injured, there should be consequences.I could probably find 50 instances every year where a player takes advantage of another player in a vulnerable position, and goes way beyond the neccesary measures needed to remove the player from the puck. These are the situations that need to be removed from the game, in my opinion; the only way to do this is to start punishing the acts.

[Dubey 1,035]

I don't think it can be as cut and dry as Dale says. It is probably something that would be difficult to clearly state in a written rule.I think, once again, it comes down to respect. If a player is in a vulnerable position, whether it be approaching the turnbuckle along the boards, or skating through center ice with his head down, or look back to recieve a pass, you have to let up. Out of respect for your fellow players' health and safety. If you don't, and the player is injured, there should be consequences.I could probably find 50 instances every year where a player takes advantage of another player in a vulnerable position, and goes way beyond the neccesary measures needed to remove the player from the puck. These are the situations that need to be removed from the game, in my opinion; the only way to do this is to start punishing the acts.

I should mention, there are players who seek out these situations just for the chance to lay a big hit, and I think the 'mentality' needs to be removed from the game. I don't think Chara is one of these players in general. Scott Stevens made a career out of hits that I would consider dirty, and definitely were delivered with an intent to injure. (he was 'succesful' quite a few times as well).Oh, before somebody says it, to a certain extent, I'd put Dion Phaneuf into this group of players.

[digitalmonkey 929]

So, if I trip a player, and he falls and gets a concussion, I should be suspended?

If one chooses to be obtuse, then yes.

There is something called a reasonably expected outcome. Expecting someone to get a concussion from being tripped (unless they are tripped into the boards) is not a reasonably expected outcome. The expectation that someone could be injured from being nailed into the boards when they don't have the puck seems reasonable to me...especially when the person doing the nailing is 6' 9" and 255lbs without hockey equipment.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

If one chooses to be obtuse, then yes.

Im not trying to be a dick. Im trying to ask a question, and not an illogical one, cause your smart enough to know your gonna have to draw the line somewhere, right? You say its impossible to judge intent, but how do you judge recklessness? On every play practically someone could get hurt.If you think you can discuss this without the emotion of it being "your" player, Ill keep going.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

If the early word of C4, C5 fracture is true than I think it completely changes the Chara suspension. He may never play again if thats true.

f*ck, is this true/reported as fact? Thats terrible.

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

The expectation that someone could be injured from being nailed into the boards when they don't have the puck seems reasonable to me.

Why do you draw the line at whether he has the puck or not?

[digitalmonkey 929]

And for the record, although I'm sure few (hi Bob) will believe me, I don't care that it was Boston on Montreal. I don't like to see any player laying on the ice. I didn't like seeing Bergeron on the ice and I won't like seeing the next one on the ice. Hopefully, the next one isn't more serious.BTW, broken vertebrae and serious concussion has been confirmed.

[digitalmonkey 929]

Why do you draw the line at whether he has the puck or not?

Because if he doesn't have the puck then it's already against the rules. If he has the puck then the rules state he can be checked legally.