[MNHavlatFan]

I am Furious. The hit was clearly intent to injure. Nhl is trying to crack down on Headshots?

BULLS***.

a previous hit by Jovanowski on Ebbett Had Jovanowski suspended for 2 games and ebbett out for 2 weeks. This is a headshot, so why no suspension? Let's say that the hit was done by Boogaard or Clutterbuck for that matter on a player such as Jordan Stall, there would be a suspension no doubt. Also the rule clearly states that if a intentional headshot is to take place a game misconduct is to take place. Not a 5 min. slap on the wrist.

Anyways, Thank God Clutterbuck was not injured on the play, and what are your opinions on the matter?


here is the Jovanowski Ebbett hit

[DropTheGloves]

Gonchar has the same problem as Jovo. They are tall and when they hit the shorter players if they're not careful it's a hit to the head. Not sure if it was done on purpose but I do agree that he deserves a suspension. I guess the rules are only for certain players or teams.

[MNHavlatFan]

DropTheGloves, on Jan 14 2010, 06:33 AM, said:

Gonchar has the same problem as Jovo. They are tall and when they hit the shorter players if they're not careful it's a hit to the head. Not sure if it was done on purpose but I do agree that he deserves a suspension. I guess the rules are only for certain players or teams.

sorry not attacking you, but you cant tell that the hit was intentional? he clearly came after him after clutterbuck made a clean hit. did you watch the video till the end?

[DropTheGloves]

MNHavlatFan, on Jan 14 2010, 05:40 AM, said:

sorry not attacking you, but you cant tell that the hit was intentional? he clearly came after him after clutterbuck made a clean hit. did you watch the video till the end?

I didn't say he didn't go looking for the hit. I just said I'm not sure the shot to the head was done on purpose.

[MNHavlatFan]

DropTheGloves, on Jan 14 2010, 06:44 AM, said:

I didn't say he didn't go looking for the hit. I just said I'm not sure the shot to the head was done on purpose.

kk I can see your point there. thanks for the input. anyone else?

[Griggsy96]

As Gonchar said himself, he was looking to deliver a hit to Clutterbuck. He expected to time it so the puck arrived at the same time. Ruslan Fedotenko, however, cut off the puck so it never reached Clutterbuck, and it became interference because of that.

Was the hit deserving of the 5-minute penalty? Yeah, probably. He came in high, and Clutterbuck was bloodied by the hit.

Was Clutterbuck's hit in the neutral zone clean that led to Gonchar's responding hit? Of course not. Clutterbuck came in 2-3 seconds after Gonchar got rid of the puck. And Clutterbuck came in high with his elbows also. Don't fool yourself into thinking that Clutterbuck is an angel in this. His hit was dirty. Gonchar's hit was a bit dirtier, and was in retaliation, so he got the penalty.

[damned]

It was an elbow to the head that he got a major penalty for, I think he should have got the suspension like everyone else does. It doesn't matter to me if he intended to hit the guy in the head or not.

[MNHavlatFan]

Griggsy96, on Jan 14 2010, 09:07 AM, said:

As Gonchar said himself, he was looking to deliver a hit to Clutterbuck. He expected to time it so the puck arrived at the same time. Ruslan Fedotenko, however, cut off the puck so it never reached Clutterbuck, and it became interference because of that.

Was the hit deserving of the 5-minute penalty? Yeah, probably. He came in high, and Clutterbuck was bloodied by the hit.

Was Clutterbuck's hit in the neutral zone clean that led to Gonchar's responding hit? Of course not. Clutterbuck came in 2-3 seconds after Gonchar got rid of the puck. And Clutterbuck came in high with his elbows also. Don't fool yourself into thinking that Clutterbuck is an angel in this. His hit was dirty. Gonchar's hit was a bit dirtier, and was in retaliation, so he got the penalty.

In no way did I say Clutterbuck was a saint, I understand his role is in aggravation. But I do not believe his hit was dirty. late? debatable. Suspension is needed for Gonchar's hit.

[Tashimojo]

Huzzah for the NHL's disciplinary system. Gonchar is not a "repeat offender" like Jovo, so no suspension.

[MNHavlatFan]

as a matter of a fact I do not even believe his hit was late. He was already on his way to hit Gonchar. Clearly was not cheap or late, as the ref was staring directly at the hit.

[shandizlo]

damned, on Jan 14 2010, 10:30 AM, said:

It was an elbow to the head that he got a major penalty for, I think he should have got the suspension like everyone else does. It doesn't matter to me if he intended to hit the guy in the head or not.

Pretty Much.

[Steelwool]

Once again, the NHL double standard shows up.
It doesn't matter if it was intentional or not. It was a hit to the head. Players are held responsible for their sticks, and even if it's totally accidental, they are still penalized.
Therefore, players should be held responsible for their elbows. All hits to the head should be suspendable.
As far as the height issue, how often does Chara deliver a head shot. Not very often, if ever.
And once again that stupid repeat offender is used. But if he never gets suspended the first time, he will never become a repeat offender, so he gets a free pass.

[Tashimojo]

Steelwool, on Jan 14 2010, 10:04 AM, said:

Once again, the NHL double standard shows up.
It doesn't matter if it was intentional or not. It was a hit to the head. Players are held responsible for their sticks, and even if it's totally accidental, they are still penalized.
Therefore, players should be held responsible for their elbows. All hits to the head should be suspendable.
As far as the height issue, how often does Chara deliver a head shot. Not very often, if ever.
And once again that stupid repeat offender is used. But if he never gets suspended the first time, he will never become a repeat offender, so he gets a free pass.

Agreed! It's so effin stupid...

EDIT: Actually I feel a need to clarify. I don't completely agree that all hits to the head should be suspendable. Lots of headshots happen when the guy getting hit is being a moron and running along with his head down, and the hitter is trying for a clean hit but ends up connecting with moron's head. I don't think there should be suspensions in those cases. But leading hits with elbows is not clean, and elbows to the head should most definitely be suspendable.

This point has been edited by Tashimojo: 14 January 2010 - 12:10 PM

[MNHavlatFan]

Steelwool, on Jan 14 2010, 11:04 AM, said:

Once again, the NHL double standard shows up.
It doesn't matter if it was intentional or not. It was a hit to the head. Players are held responsible for their sticks, and even if it's totally accidental, they are still penalized.
Therefore, players should be held responsible for their elbows. All hits to the head should be suspendable.
As far as the height issue, how often does Chara deliver a head shot. Not very often, if ever.
And once again that stupid repeat offender is used. But if he never gets suspended the first time, he will never become a repeat offender, so he gets a free pass.

:shiny:

Great Input, Someone says it haha.

thanks.

[Griggsy96]

From Yahoo's Greg Wyshynski, Colin Campbell stated the Sergei Gonchar was not suspended because "Clutterbuck's earlier hit could have been called for charging, and Gonchar has no prior history". Pretty much exactly what I expected the reasoning to be.

Don't get me wrong. I hate that Campbell falls back on the "past history" line of thinking when doling out punishment. But, in the system as it is, Gonchar didn't deserve a suspension.

[pantsboyusa]

In a league that's "cracking down on headshots" Gonchar certainly deserves to be suspended. But, apparently, the NHL isn't cracking down on headshots.

Here's another disparity for you; Gonchar received his 5 min major for interference, because if they gave him a major for elbowing, he would have been ejected with the automatic game misconduct. For a game that doesn't want to be impugned on ref integrity, it's this sort of thing that needs to be looked at.

This point has been edited by pantsboyusa: 14 January 2010 - 02:12 PM

[Tashimojo]

Griggsy96, on Jan 14 2010, 10:38 AM, said:

From Yahoo's Greg Wyshynski, Colin Campbell stated the Sergei Gonchar was not suspended because "Clutterbuck's earlier hit could have been called for charging, and Gonchar has no prior history". Pretty much exactly what I expected the reasoning to be.

Wow... I'm actually really shocked to hear that Campbell thinks dirty hits are ok if they are in retaliation for a questionable hit that didn't get called. That's even worse than the prior history crap. WTF.

[pantsboyusa]

Tashimojo, on Jan 14 2010, 01:13 PM, said:

Wow... I'm actually really shocked to hear that Campbell thinks dirty hits are ok if they are in retaliation for a questionable hit that didn't get called. That's even worse than the prior history crap. WTF.

Yeah, so now the league allows retaliation, but still has the instigator penalty? Make up your minds NHL.

[JoeyHurricane]

Unfortunately, the issue becomes not hits like Clutterbuck's or Gonchars, but it's the system of penalty from the league. Unfortunately, the Pens also have precedent in their corner when Duncan Keith's hit to Matt Cooke garnered no more than a two minute minor (for interference if I recall correctly) and Cooke was completely blindsided as well. Matt Cooke makes that hit on, I believe, Anisimov (sorta similar to Richards to Booth without the total knockout) and Cooke sits for two games.

[jacketsfan77]

JoeyHurricane, on Jan 14 2010, 02:39 PM, said:

Unfortunately, the issue becomes not hits like Clutterbuck's or Gonchars, but it's the system of penalty from the league. Unfortunately, the Pens also have precedent in their corner when Duncan Keith's hit to Matt Cooke garnered no more than a two minute minor (for interference if I recall correctly) and Cooke was completely blindsided as well. Matt Cooke makes that hit on, I believe, Anisimov (sorta similar to Richards to Booth without the total knockout) and Cooke sits for two games.

I think the system for penalties from the league has been in question by most of us for a long time now. I think it just proves even more that Colie Campbell is throwing darts at a board to decide players fates.