|
Post by richard1969 on Nov 10, 2011 13:46:24 GMT
all im saying is somebody is going to end up seriously hurt when they pretty much encourage that And EIHL officials will need to live with the responsibility when it happens
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Nov 10, 2011 14:51:57 GMT
I guarantee the fact the player is not badly hurt has had an impact on the EIHL review - makes it far easier for them to turn a blind eye I dont care what you call it that is a seriously dangerous and nasty strike to a players neck (cheapshot as well imo) If the player had been out for the season or worse as a result - Doucet would be getting a big ban now IMO - the outcome of these checks/hits (i.e the seriousness of any injuries caused) is clouding the issue Should just look at the act and decide whether it was dangerous or not I may not watch as much hockey as some of you guys but thats the most blatant nasty thing I have seen in last 4 years watching GB ice hockey (regardless of whether its technically a check or anything else - its just plain bad) The opponent was very lucky I still am trying to imagine the recation of our fans and Lepine if it had happened to one of our guys on our ice - especially if our player had been badly injured as a result Some of you guys would have been on the ice throwing punches at him - let alone Lepine ! Do you want them to stick to the rules or not? If he didn't break any rules and didn't injure anyone then how could they justify a ban? It may have been boarding and at a long stretch you could argue excessive roughness but then what would you call the stuff that's much worse than that hit, and there is and has been plenty. It's not just intent that's taken into account, the outcome is too. That's as per IIHF and NHL rules.
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Nov 10, 2011 14:56:18 GMT
Sammy has tweeted today the following. First missed practice in years, courtesy of the #Gianthit all im saying is somebody is going to end up seriously hurt when they pretty much encourage that I hope he recovers soon. Unless I'm mistaken, that video shows he got up and joined in the handbags after the hit. I hear he didn't miss a shift for the rest of the game, and the game sheet shows he played the day after. I know concussion is a complex injury so maybe he had a delayed reaction. It'll be interesting to see if he plays Fife and Cardiff this weekend.
|
|
seedy
Pat Casey
Posts: 330
|
Post by seedy on Nov 10, 2011 14:58:45 GMT
The worse thing possible is to call bans because fans think a check looks bad. Fact is, its a legal hit, end of story. No penalty required. The league need consistency, but they can't start discouraging legal plays. What next? Disallow a goal because the goalie wasn't ready?
|
|
|
Post by pantherfan007 on Nov 10, 2011 15:20:08 GMT
Let's be honest. It wasn't a legal hit. If it was one of our players on the receiving end of that we'd have all gone into meltdown, no use denying that.
Excessive Roughness, Boarding, Elbows, etc etc all could be called as penalties on this one. We've seen much cleaner hits being punished at the NIC over the years.
As for the clean hit on Globke (who admitted he had his head down) that got what, a four game ban? For a clean hit?
This hit was bad enough to be given a penalty by the match night official. There is no way the EIHL should have downgraded the penalty. Does this mean they will be reviewing every penalty awarded in every game?
It is a farce. No more and no less.
|
|
|
Post by james1977 on Nov 10, 2011 15:22:55 GMT
I hope he recovers soon. Unless I'm mistaken, that video shows he got up and joined in the handbags after the hit. I hear he didn't miss a shift for the rest of the game, and the game sheet shows he played the day after. I know concussion is a complex injury so maybe he had a delayed reaction. It'll be interesting to see if he plays Fife and Cardiff this weekend. Crosby suffered a concussion on 1st Jan 2011 but felt well enough to play on the 5th Jan 2011, a game in which he then suffered a further head injury, which has kept him out of hockey since. Concussion is not just complex, it can be damn right baffling (as it can present differently in every person who suffers it) and exposes how little clinicians actually know about the workings of the brain.
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Nov 10, 2011 15:42:35 GMT
As for the clean hit on Globke (who admitted he had his head down) that got what, a four game ban? For a clean hit? Don't forget that the EIHL used their super slow-mo high-tech image enhancing Ferguson Videostar type thingy gadget to find Lepine guilty. The evidence has since been there for all to see since the Squealers EIHL disciplinary panel reached their decision. Hasn't it?..............
|
|
|
Post by jono222 on Nov 10, 2011 16:27:11 GMT
I'm going to get some stick for this i'm sure but hey, i dont care. I'm a panthers fan, my take and reaction to seveal comments follows. There my opinions, dont like them TOUGH! Not the clearest view but it looks like his elbow definately come up in the face of Zajac. Does It? i dont see his head snap back as if he's hit in the face. Looked like a vicious pre-meditated elbow to me which deserves at least the four games Lepine got last season, but we are talking Elite league discipline here aren't we. A little bit of an over exaggeration there. Yes it was a bad hit. I dont think it was a bad hit, just a bad angle to view it from. Looks shoulder to shoulder to me. How ever i do think its boarding. zajac is close to the boards and he doesnt minimise contact! that being said i believe they are NHL rules not IIHF. Of course, if Zajac was injured and Hanson was following the IIHF rule book he should have assessed a match penalty for injuring an opponent as a result of checking from behind (or to the head). Thats fair enough but he played the rest of the game i understand so is he injured? Im assuming that zajac wears a half visor and if he was not he could be minus a few teeth. Not wishing to be hostile by why would the presence of a half visor protect your mouth/jaw/teeth? Guys I know it sounds dramatic but it is a serious point I am making about what you can and cannot get away with under the guise of sport Definition of manslaughter for legal terms: "when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm" Then its not manslaughter is it, Doucet isn't going in to cause serious bodily harm is he?! At .09 on that video you can clearly see the forearm/elbow making initial contact with Zajac's neck/head - it's certainly not shoulder-to-shoulder or shoulder-to-chest. You cant clearly see anything! look shoulder to shoulder to me 2mins for boarding or at max 5 mins form elbows. dont argee with the elbow but maybe at a push. boarding yeah IMO Do you want them to stick to the rules or not? If he didn't break any rules and didn't injure anyone then how could they justify a ban? It may have been boarding and at a long stretch you could argue excessive roughness but then what would you call the stuff that's much worse than that hit, and there is and has been plenty. It's not just intent that's taken into account, the outcome is too. That's as per IIHF and NHL rules. Nail on head IMO, again however i dont think the league should over turn the penalty given. Crosby suffered a concussion on 1st Jan 2011 but felt well enough to play on the 5th Jan 2011, a game in which he then suffered a further head injury, which has kept him out of hockey since. Concussion is not just complex, it can be damn right baffling (as it can present differently in every person who suffers it) and exposes how little clinicians actually know about the workings of the brain. Both hits leading to crosby's absence were both contributing, first head bounce off the glass and second was a hit to the head!
|
|
|
Post by oneillthegiant on Nov 10, 2011 16:35:54 GMT
1st time i watched it i said dirty hit.. Slow mo clears it up though in my opinion. Clean hit that looked worse than it was .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2011 17:26:56 GMT
Watched it in slow motion several times now and I agree with the conclusion, there is no contact with the head/neck and it is from the side. (It does look shocking at full speed though) The only contentious issue is that his stick is in the air rather than on the ice, but in slow-mo that's a fair check.
|
|
5+game
Terry Kurtenbach
Posts: 2,974
|
Post by 5+game on Nov 10, 2011 19:10:18 GMT
I'm going to get some stick for this i'm sure but hey, i dont care. I'm a panthers fan, my take and reaction to seveal comments follows. There my opinions, dont like them TOUGH! Not the clearest view but it looks like his elbow definately come up in the face of Zajac. Does It? i dont see his head snap back as if he's hit in the face. A little bit of an over exaggeration there. Yes it was a bad hit. I dont think it was a bad hit, just a bad angle to view it from. Looks shoulder to shoulder to me. How ever i do think its boarding. zajac is close to the boards and he doesnt minimise contact! that being said i believe they are NHL rules not IIHF. Thats fair enough but he played the rest of the game i understand so is he injured? Not wishing to be hostile by why would the presence of a half visor protect your mouth/jaw/teeth? Guys I know it sounds dramatic but it is a serious point I am making about what you can and cannot get away with under the guise of sport Definition of manslaughter for legal terms: "when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm" [/quote] Then its not manslaughter is it, Doucet isn't going in to cause serious bodily harm is he?! You cant clearly see anything! look shoulder to shoulder to me dont argee with the elbow but maybe at a push. boarding yeah IMO Nail on head IMO, again however i dont think the league should over turn the penalty given. Crosby suffered a concussion on 1st Jan 2011 but felt well enough to play on the 5th Jan 2011, a game in which he then suffered a further head injury, which has kept him out of hockey since. Concussion is not just complex, it can be damn right baffling (as it can present differently in every person who suffers it) and exposes how little clinicians actually know about the workings of the brain. Both hits leading to crosby's absence were both contributing, first head bounce off the glass and second was a hit to the head![/quote] Just to clear a couple of things up jono222. You quote two of my posts which were both posted befor seeing the slo mo replay. having seen the slo mo i have since held my hands up said that i do not consider it to be a hit to the head and warrents no more than a 2min penalty max, so why you pick and argue these posts is baffling.
|
|
|
Post by chris111 on Nov 10, 2011 19:10:48 GMT
Well what a difference a replay makes eh?
First time seeing the video I thought Doucet would be facing a ban, as it looked like a hit from behind while leading with an elbow. However the slow motion reply shows it differently.
Firstly it wasnt a hit from behind, but from the side, and while I think his arm was a bit high it looks more shoulder than anything. An over zealous hit yes, but from looking at the reply I can see why the league have decided not to give the ban.
|
|
|
Post by richard1969 on Nov 10, 2011 19:12:53 GMT
Too many guys on here who know their ice hockey are saying there is nothing wrong with the challenge
That keeps making me go and watch it even more closely
I see him skate alongside and then deliberately just swing his elbow straight towards the guys head but then catch him either on the neck or top of the chest
Am I describing what you guys are seeing ?
If so is what I am seeing or describing legal in ice hockey ?
Is that classed as checking ?
Genuine question I want to be educated because that doesnt look anything like what I see whenever I watch Panthers matches in either normal speed or slow motion
It looks to me like something we would all be jumping out of our seats about
|
|
Zukiwskyfan
Simon Hunt
ENL heavyweight champ
Posts: 1,115
|
Post by Zukiwskyfan on Nov 10, 2011 19:17:00 GMT
Called on page 1. Well not really, I thought a little contact was made to the head but did say it looked worse than what it is. Maybe its the EIHL deliberately trying to be controversial
|
|
|
Post by richard1969 on Nov 10, 2011 19:22:32 GMT
for me with no injury on the play this was nothing and 2 mins for elbows. What difference does it make if there was an injury ? Its either legal or illegal surely ?
|
|
Ghost
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,698
|
Post by Ghost on Nov 10, 2011 19:30:01 GMT
Only just seen the video, clear intent for me. He cocks his elbow clearly. Clear hit to the head, even with the poor video quality.
|
|
|
Post by giantfan on Nov 10, 2011 19:30:14 GMT
As for the clean hit on Globke (who admitted he had his head down) that got what, a four game ban? For a clean hit? Don't forget that the EIHL used their super slow-mo high-tech image enhancing Ferguson Videostar type thingy gadget to find Lepine guilty. The evidence has since been there for all to see since the Squealers EIHL disciplinary panel reached their decision. Hasn't it?.............. To be fair to the league they have obviously decided to show the videos and provide an explanation (a la the NHL) from this point on. Why would they show retrospective videos of lepine or anyone else? Where would it end? For the record I didn't like the hit from Doucet but I can't argue with too many of the official reasons from the league. I 'think' it's an elbow but can't tell from the video. I was expecting a ban because it looks awful in real time. Importantly I hope Zajac is back on the ice soon.
|
|
Zukiwskyfan
Simon Hunt
ENL heavyweight champ
Posts: 1,115
|
Post by Zukiwskyfan on Nov 10, 2011 19:30:40 GMT
for me with no injury on the play this was nothing and 2 mins for elbows. What difference does it make if there was an injury ? Its either legal or illegal surely ? Because if it causes injury the penalty goes from 2 mins to 5+Game.
|
|
|
Post by heja on Nov 10, 2011 19:38:10 GMT
What difference does it make if there was an injury ? Its either legal or illegal surely ? Because if it causes injury the penalty goes from 2 mins to 5+Game. Think it actually meant to go straight to a match penalty if you cause an injury through an illegal hit.
|
|
|
Post by giantfan on Nov 10, 2011 19:39:43 GMT
I see him skate alongside and then deliberately just swing his elbow straight towards the guys head but then catch him either on the neck or top of the chest. Can you see that? I just can't see enough from the video to be sure. I think we are all guessing. [/quote]
|
|
Zukiwskyfan
Simon Hunt
ENL heavyweight champ
Posts: 1,115
|
Post by Zukiwskyfan on Nov 10, 2011 19:43:29 GMT
Because if it causes injury the penalty goes from 2 mins to 5+Game. Think it actually meant to go straight to a match penalty if you cause an injury through an illegal hit. I thought was on major penaltys? I may be wrong. I thought minors went to 5 and game.
|
|
abi
Jim Keyes
Posts: 899
|
Post by abi on Nov 10, 2011 20:39:37 GMT
Definitely haven't read the last 9 pages. Just watched the video and it definitely looks like a high elbow with some welly on it. That being said, it would have been 100x worse at centre ice. A few games ban as discipline would suffice.
And for whoever mentioned it on p1. Sammy is 5'6. I think the general concensus is that a player adapts if they know they're about to thump a hit onto someone on the vertically challenged side, where possible. That being said, Sammy isn't exactly some wimpy wuss, he's developed a lot of similarities to his former coach, Danny Stewart, and was never exactly going to grow up into a wimp...he learnt his hockey at whitley bay. Nuff said.
|
|
seedy
Pat Casey
Posts: 330
|
Post by seedy on Nov 10, 2011 21:31:57 GMT
We still need to look at the fact its a legal hit, as defined by the rules.
No obvious injury, no problem with the hit. If he's confused, its unlucky, that's all.
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Nov 11, 2011 10:16:30 GMT
for me with no injury on the play this was nothing and 2 mins for elbows. What difference does it make if there was an injury ? Its either legal or illegal surely ? It's not just intent and the action that are taken into account, the outcome is too. Injuries draw stiffer penalties. That's as per IIHF and NHL rules. I might update the FAQ page for this one, to save me repeating myself again next time.
|
|
|
Post by jono222 on Nov 11, 2011 10:49:27 GMT
Just to clear a couple of things up jono222. You quote two of my posts which were both posted befor seeing the slo mo replay. having seen the slo mo i have since held my hands up said that i do not consider it to be a hit to the head and warrents no more than a 2min penalty max, so why you pick and argue these posts is baffling. I'm not arguing anything, just my opinion! Definitely haven't read the last 9 pages. Just watched the video and it definitely looks like a high elbow with some welly on it. That being said, it would have been 100x worse at centre ice. A few games ban as discipline would suffice. if it was mid ice, it would have been clearer and not as shocking. the boards IMO make this more than it actually is. its not a ban 2mins for boarding
|
|