Rick Nash destroyed

[blues_demitra38 11]

Oshie vs. Nash Part II- different pursuit, same result, same whining.

[blues_demitra38 11]

As someone who has refereed quite a few games...this is absolutely a charge.

Oshie starts skating full speed towards Nash from the blue line. Now whether he is skating after the puck initially or not doesn't matter because of the fact that he hit Nash full on well after the puck left the area without any indication he was thinking of turning to follow the puck.

So definitely a it's a charge.

Um, he came out of the penalty box and went to cover his man. He anticipated the play going to Nash (he was right) and was in a great position to lay him out. Your argument is trash because Nash played the puck seconds before Oshie destroyed his life.

Clean hit. Go watch some more hockey.

[AtomicPunk 296]

I think the lesson learned here is that Rick Nash better stay away from T.J. Oshie. The guy is a wrecking ball with his name on it.

[ComradeWasabi 109]

He got him again!!!! hahaha

[Guest E_S_A_D]

I want 18 seconds of my life back.

[uk_redwing 495]

The first one was a textbook charge, but still good to see

The second...Nash needs to leave that guy alone. Or do something unknown around these parts and drop the gloves!

[CenterIce 83]

Um, he came out of the penalty box and went to cover his man. He anticipated the play going to Nash (he was right) and was in a great position to lay him out. Your argument is trash because Nash played the puck seconds before Oshie destroyed his life.

Clean hit. Go watch some more hockey.

It's not a clean hit because he skated straight from the box and hit him. That is the main definition of a charge.

From the rule book:

Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "Charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

The part II looks clean. I think the announcers whined more on the second one, which was cleaner.

Edited March 30, 2009 by CenterIce

[Krayzie_Bone 58]

On a side note I have never been clear on what exactly is considered charging and also boarding. Can anyone explain it to me? I have always kind of wondered what is considered both.

Edited March 30, 2009 by Krayzie_Bone

[KronwallCRUNCH 5]

That's a charge. If I were a Jackets fan/player, I'd be calling for Oshie's head. Imagine if that were Datsyuk/Z in Nash's position..

Edited March 30, 2009 by KronwallCRUNCH

[blues_demitra38 11]

That's a charge. If I were a Jackets fan/player, I'd be calling for Oshie's head. Imagine if that were Datsyuk/Z in Nash's position..

1. It wasn't a charge as many before you have clearly stated. He was simply trying to get into the play and wound up in a position to hit another player (the gliding proves that). That is significantly different from skating stride for stride until you hit your opponent.

2. Oshie certainly wasn't picking his spots because Nash outweighs him by a good 50 lbs and he gives up about 5 inches in height. It actually took a lot of guts to do what he did and he gets major props for doing it so well (twice in two nights now).

3. Nash actually did try to go for Oshie in today's game and, well, you saw what happened (scroll up a bit).

[Guest Shoreline]

Oshie vs. Nash Part II- different pursuit, same result, same whining.

HAHA. Wow was the Jax broadcast ever whining. Jeezus.

ZOMG he crosscheck-- er elbow-- er.. f***, he HIT Rick Nash! That's gotta be a penalty! Flagrant foul!

Edited March 30, 2009 by Shoreline

[CenterIce 83]

1. It wasn't a charge as many before you have clearly stated. He was simply trying to get into the play and wound up in a position to hit another player (the gliding proves that). That is significantly different from skating stride for stride until you hit your opponent.

What part of this rule makes you think it is not a charge? The rule doesn't mention speed or skating versus coasting. It mentions distance and leaving your feet. Oshie went straight from the penalty box to Nash without stopping. That is a big distance.

Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "Charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

1. A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.

2. When a major penalty is imposed under this Rule for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed, and an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100).

3. A minor, major or a major and a game misconduct shall be imposed on a player who charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease.

(NOTE) A goalkeeper is NOT "fair game" just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

Although goalkeepers are provided with additional protection under Rule 78 -- Protection of the Goalkeeper, they are still subject to penalties for infractions of the rules that they commit in or out of the goal crease. Particular attention will be made by the Referees to goalkeepers that embellish the contact in an attempt to draw a penalty.

[toby91_ca 620]

(the gliding proves that).

That is complete BS. As I already stated, any good check is going to include gliding. I'd like you to go try and hit someone from full out skating....no gliding. Let me know how that works out for you. If you want to hit a guy, you need to get your feet set first and get your balance, which you can't really do all that well without gliding. If you do not set your feet and glide before contact, there is a good chance that you are the one that ends up on the ice.

The problem with the hit, which is why it's a charge, is that there did not appear to be any intention at all of playing a puck, he travelled a straight line from the blue line to the corner and never once changed direction, just directly in for the hit, even though the puck was moving around the wall.

I'm not saying it's that big of a deal or that it's really dirty, but it is a charge, simple as that. If I were a CBJ player, I wouldn't like it though and I'd be going after the guy.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

the blue jackets announcers have got to be the worst around maybe tied with nashviles guys

i live in columbus so unfourtunetly its blacked out on center ice when red wings play the jackets

they are terrible homers tho

they were telling a story and the red wings scored a goal and they didnt even stop to say "red wigns score" they continued the story and ignored the goal

least ken would aknowledge the other teams goal and comment on it

or something

I suggest you watch a Boston Bruins game.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

That is complete BS. As I already stated, any good check is going to include gliding. I'd like you to go try and hit someone from full out skating....no gliding. Let me know how that works out for you. If you want to hit a guy, you need to get your feet set first and get your balance, which you can't really do all that well without gliding. If you do not set your feet and glide before contact, there is a good chance that you are the one that ends up on the ice.

The problem with the hit, which is why it's a charge, is that there did not appear to be any intention at all of playing a puck, he travelled a straight line from the blue line to the corner and never once changed direction, just directly in for the hit, even though the puck was moving around the wall.

I'm not saying it's that big of a deal or that it's really dirty, but it is a charge, simple as that. If I were a CBJ player, I wouldn't like it though and I'd be going after the guy.

Absolutely agree Toby on all accounts.

As for the hit itself, just because you glide right before the hit, it doesn't negate the 17 ******* strides or whatever he took prior to that. You could most definitely call it a charge. Hell, they could've called it boarding. They should've called something.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Um, he came out of the penalty box and went to cover his man. He anticipated the play going to Nash (he was right) and was in a great position to lay him out. Your argument is trash because Nash played the puck seconds before Oshie destroyed his life.

Clean hit. Go watch some more hockey.

While you are running your mouth, telling folks to "go watch more hockey", maybe you ought to learn something about the game. Check out a rulebook or two. Maybe address the other posters comments here. Oh wait, you can't because you just got your anal sphincter pwned.

Destroyed his life? Hardly kid, seeing as how Nash got right up after the hit.

Now this.............this is destroying life! BWAAAHAHAHAHA!

[OsGOD 3]

Glad to see Nash jump back up both times

[blues_demitra38 11]

That is complete BS. As I already stated, any good check is going to include gliding. I'd like you to go try and hit someone from full out skating....no gliding. Let me know how that works out for you. If you want to hit a guy, you need to get your feet set first and get your balance, which you can't really do all that well without gliding. If you do not set your feet and glide before contact, there is a good chance that you are the one that ends up on the ice.

The problem with the hit, which is why it's a charge, is that there did not appear to be any intention at all of playing a puck, he travelled a straight line from the blue line to the corner and never once changed direction, just directly in for the hit, even though the puck was moving around the wall.

I'm not saying it's that big of a deal or that it's really dirty, but it is a charge, simple as that. If I were a CBJ player, I wouldn't like it though and I'd be going after the guy.

So now we're talking intent? How does anyone really know what TJ's intentions were? But since we're speculating I'll join right in.

After killing a penalty a player normally either rushes back into the play or goes to the bench to sub for a more desirable matchup, depending on the situation. The play was deep in the Blues zone so Oshie has full intent to get back into the play first and foremost. He spots Nash uncovered and marks him as his man. The PUCK IS PLAYED TO NASH merely seconds before he is flattened. This makes the timing okay because he is simply finishing his check. Him skating like a madman can be attributed more to getting back in the play than trying to hurt someone.

Could I be wrong? Maybe. But I think most people see this as a more plausible scenario than yours, which assumes that Nash was targeted regardless of the situation. So, your assumption includes an NHL player charging someone over a hundred feet just to lay him out while mine suggests an NHL player finishing his check.

The most telling aspect of this all is that Nash had no problem with the hit, further proving you to be a dunce.

Stick to finger painting, son.

[theman19 47]

Note to red wings, Hit Nash, win game,.....

[toby91_ca 620]

So now we're talking intent? How does anyone really know what TJ's intentions were? But since we're speculating I'll join right in.

After killing a penalty a player normally either rushes back into the play or goes to the bench to sub for a more desirable matchup, depending on the situation. The play was deep in the Blues zone so Oshie has full intent to get back into the play first and foremost. He spots Nash uncovered and marks him as his man. The PUCK IS PLAYED TO NASH merely seconds before he is flattened. This makes the timing okay because he is simply finishing his check. Him skating like a madman can be attributed more to getting back in the play than trying to hurt someone.

Could I be wrong? Maybe. But I think most people see this as a more plausible scenario than yours, which assumes that Nash was targeted regardless of the situation. So, your assumption includes an NHL player charging someone over a hundred feet just to lay him out while mine suggests an NHL player finishing his check.

The most telling aspect of this all is that Nash had no problem with the hit, further proving you to be a dunce.

Stick to finger painting, son.

He skated like a madman to get back in the play, yes, but then he stoped skating near the top of the circles....THEN...he went to Nash, you make it sound as if he jumped out of the box an immediately rushed to cover Nash, the open man.

I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of refs would have called a penalty here if they had the vantage point we do with this video. But you can feel free to disagree, I have no problem with that.

FYI, I'm not good at finger painting, but I'll look into it.

[VM1138 1,921]

Love the repeated replays faster and faster on the second clip.

[CenterIce 83]

On a side note I have never been clear on what exactly is considered charging and also boarding. Can anyone explain it to me? I have always kind of wondered what is considered both.

I have already posted the charging rule, so I will just post boarding, below. Charging could include a boarding, but as the charging rule states, the hit could be open ice, as well.

Boarding rule:

# A minor or major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards.

(NOTE) Any unnecessary contact with a player playing the puck on an obvious "icing" or "off-side" play which results in that player being knocked into the boards is "boarding" and must be penalized as such. In other instances where there is no contact with the boards, it should be treated as "charging".

# When a major penalty is imposed under this Rule for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed.

# Any player who incurs a total of two (2) game misconducts for Boarding under Rule 44 (b), in either Regular Season or Playoffs, shall be suspended automatically for the next game of his Team. For each subsequent game misconduct penalty the automatic suspension shall be increased by one game.

# When a major penalty is imposed under this Rule, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall be imposed.

[HOCKEY MATTERS 167]

Hmmmm....let's see....

round 1

Oshie; head up, aims for the man with the puck, finishes check.

Nash: head down, passes puck, floored.

round 2

Nash: head up, sees Oshie with puck, moves in for the check, floored.

Oshie: head up, has puck, sees check coming, Nash floored.

moral: keep yer head up Nashie.

[C-TownWing 0]

Oshie's just POed about the Sioux giving that game away against UNH and was out for blood.

Seriously, I know this is Wings fan faux pas, but who isn't enjoying watching the Blues right now? And as someone who's seen local TV guys for everyone in the league (including Boston and Nashville), the BJs have the worst homers by far.

IMO, the one was a charge. But I did greatly enjoy it, so play on.

Edited March 30, 2009 by C-TownWing

[MidMichSteve 1,115]

So now we're talking intent? How does anyone really know what TJ's intentions were? But since we're speculating I'll join right in.

After killing a penalty a player normally either rushes back into the play or goes to the bench to sub for a more desirable matchup, depending on the situation. The play was deep in the Blues zone so Oshie has full intent to get back into the play first and foremost. He spots Nash uncovered and marks him as his man. The PUCK IS PLAYED TO NASH merely seconds before he is flattened. This makes the timing okay because he is simply finishing his check. Him skating like a madman can be attributed more to getting back in the play than trying to hurt someone.

Could I be wrong? Maybe. But I think most people see this as a more plausible scenario than yours, which assumes that Nash was targeted regardless of the situation. So, your assumption includes an NHL player charging someone over a hundred feet just to lay him out while mine suggests an NHL player finishing his check.

The most telling aspect of this all is that Nash had no problem with the hit, further proving you to be a dunce.

Stick to finger painting, son.

He skated like a madman to get back in the play, yes, but then he stoped skating near the top of the circles....THEN...he went to Nash, you make it sound as if he jumped out of the box an immediately rushed to cover Nash, the open man.

I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of refs would have called a penalty here if they had the vantage point we do with this video. But you can feel free to disagree, I have no problem with that.

FYI, I'm not good at finger painting, but I'll look into it.

Priceless :thumbup:

Edited March 30, 2009 by MidMichSteve