Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 12:46:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by GuinnessMan on Nov 24, 2015 12:54:48 GMT
Hopefully neither of these 2 will be upgraded to a match penalty. Were they from Friday or Saturdays game?
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Nov 24, 2015 12:58:53 GMT
Hopefully neither of these 2 will be upgraded to a match penalty. Were they from Friday or Saturdays game? Can only be upgraded if they caused injury.
|
|
|
Post by cjmatt42 on Nov 24, 2015 13:00:19 GMT
Both from Saturday, neither caused injuries, neither looked that dangerous either so 2 games each it will be...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 13:03:45 GMT
Hopefully neither of these 2 will be upgraded to a match penalty. Were they from Friday or Saturdays game? Both were from Saturday's game
|
|
|
Post by tootootrain on Nov 24, 2015 13:37:06 GMT
Both from Saturday, neither caused injuries, neither looked that dangerous either so 2 games each it will be... Playing Steelers on Sunday so yeah, 2 games each.
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Nov 24, 2015 13:41:14 GMT
Both from Saturday, neither caused injuries, neither looked that dangerous either so 2 games each it will be... Playing Steelers on Sunday so yeah, 2 games each. RULE 123 – CHECKING FROM BEHIND DEFINITION: A player who delivers a check to a vulnerable player who is not aware of the impending hit or who is unable to protect or defend himself from such a hit. The point of contact is the back of the body. i. A player who hits an opponent from behind into the boards, the goal frame, or in open ice in any manner will be assessed at least a minor and misconduct penalty. ii. A player who recklessly endangers an opponent as a result of checking from behind will be assessed a major penalty and game-misconduct penalty. iii. A player who injures an opponent as a result of checking from behind will be assessed a match penalty. iv. If the skater being checked turns his back towards an opponent and puts himself in a vulnerable position immediately before a check to create a checking from behind situation, no penalty for checking from behind will be assessed (although other penalties might still be assessed).
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,625
|
Post by Yotes on Nov 24, 2015 13:49:42 GMT
I don't think the wording of the rule discounts the option of a match pen for a non-injury check from behind. i. A player who hits an opponent from behind into the boards, the goal frame, or in open ice in any manner will be assessed at least a minor and misconduct penalty. That, to me, would leave all options open if they deem it serious enough, just that if there was an injury on the play it should be a match pen immediately. Could be wrong though.
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Nov 24, 2015 13:52:51 GMT
I don't think the wording of the rule discounts the option of a match pen for a non-injury check from behind. i. A player who hits an opponent from behind into the boards, the goal frame, or in open ice in any manner will be assessed at least a minor and misconduct penalty. That, to me, would leave all options open if they deem it serious enough, just that if there was an injury on the play it should be a match pen immediately. Could be wrong though. See the way I read is that "at least" means could be upgraded to 5+game and an injury is required for it to be a match.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 13:56:48 GMT
Ha, do the math on this one folks. Sheffield on a terrible run, need some sort of morale boost.
They're both gonna be banned all weekend. It's inevitable.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,625
|
Post by Yotes on Nov 24, 2015 14:00:16 GMT
See the way I read is that "at least" means could be upgraded to 5+game and an injury is required for it to be a match. Yeah I can see what you mean, you're probably right. They could change the call entirely of course (Ling's knee/slash).
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Nov 24, 2015 14:07:30 GMT
See the way I read is that "at least" means could be upgraded to 5+game and an injury is required for it to be a match. Yeah I can see what you mean, you're probably right. They could change the call entirely of course (Ling's knee/slash). They will wangle it to give them a couple of games each
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Nov 24, 2015 14:07:44 GMT
See the way I read is that "at least" means could be upgraded to 5+game and an injury is required for it to be a match. Yeah I can see what you mean, you're probably right. They could change the call entirely of course (Ling's knee/slash). Not forgetting the massive importance of the 'who do Sheffield play next' rule.
|
|
Pies
Forum Moderator
Reluctant Chief of ITK
Posts: 4,879
|
Post by Pies on Nov 25, 2015 10:11:15 GMT
No action against Clarke or Schmidt
|
|
|
Post by Peacock on Nov 25, 2015 10:17:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thebestpanthers on Nov 25, 2015 10:22:38 GMT
Steelers must be losing their touch - or have they realised that previous bans have been looking highly suspicious - glad to see Lloyd banned for one of our games against Giants
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 10:29:26 GMT
Now let's stop the silly conspiracies!
|
|
|
Post by thebestpanthers on Nov 25, 2015 10:37:09 GMT
Now let's stop the silly conspiracies! WHAT!!! - We will have nothing else to talk about - blame the management, that always helps
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Nov 25, 2015 10:39:50 GMT
Lloyd will miss the Friday game at Belfast next week
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Nov 25, 2015 11:49:43 GMT
Belfast can appeal a 2 game ban though.
|
|
5+game
Terry Kurtenbach
Posts: 2,974
|
Post by 5+game on Nov 25, 2015 12:08:48 GMT
Belfast can appeal a 2 game ban though. What is the point tho, DOPS deemed it needing an extra game and just because they appeal they arnt going to back track on it. What else can Giants say to avoid the extra game.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,625
|
Post by Yotes on Nov 25, 2015 12:14:25 GMT
What else can Giants say to avoid the extra game. Giants: "Errm, game 2 is against the Panthers you know?" Tony DOPS: "Point well made chaps." And the silly conspiracy rides again!
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,625
|
Post by Yotes on Nov 25, 2015 12:30:03 GMT
Really stupid to get a talking penalty though.
Would be nice to see video of the no further action decisions, as we got the other week from the Cardiff/Sheffield game. I know it'll take time to put together, but it's rather unsatisfying just seeing them brushed off like that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2015 18:07:35 GMT
Just seen the DOPS report on Marsh. They've got this one spot on, terrible blind side hit. Moran was very lucky not to get a concussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2015 22:08:09 GMT
I see Cardiff have appealed.... This is brand new information.... What's the process now for this I wonder?
|
|