jollymania 162 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 WRONG SIR!.. That call was a call that should of been made... Was there contact to the head? YES! the rule is this Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted. and there is only one penalty for the infraction. 5 min major and automatic game misconduct. the Ref made the call as he saw it... Good Call Ref . The Kings got shafted because their Captain went and put a Illegal Check to the Head on a player who could not see it coming. HE shafted his own team. there isn't head contact, watch the replay Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Bad call. f***, guys, please don't turn into the NFL with this ticky tack s***. I know they are trying to protect players from blind side hits but it's obvious when a player is actually hit to the head with a blind side hit, he doesn't bounce up like that. You can't expect a player not hit another player who's shooting from the circles in an area that can easily result in a goal. This ticky tack nonsense obviously hasn't been calculating for when the player receiving the hit adjusts their body height anticipating an oncoming hit. The only real way to enforce this fairly is after the game and by the league. Don't make it screw with games on the fly like this penalty could have done. Thankfully it didn't result in any Wild goals. For some reason I think the NHL is getting far too afraid of possible collateral with people's ire directed at the NFL and dangerous hits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) there isn't head contact, watch the replay yes he was...watch his head! put yourself ON THE ICE where the REF is and tell me you don't make the same call. penalties are not reviewable. (On the ice is where I stated that the call was good by the way) Read the rule .. then watch the hit. The call onthe Ice was based on how the rule is Interpreted. just because he got back up does not mean he was not hit in the head. the point of contact, lateral movement, Just like the announcers said in the 1st post video. all the criteria were met for that call to be made. Edited October 26, 2010 by Hockeytown_Ryan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plopster 136 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 First off, the guy knew he was coming. Brown didn't skate in from behind him. Clearly he hit his shoulder and it looked blindsideish because it was on the follow through. However the guy bounces right back up. There was not any contact to the head. Its clear because you can see his shoulder fly back and his head didn't jerk back. This call was made pretty much because the ref was looking right at it. That hit on Datsyuk in the hawks game wasn't called for that very reason; the ref wasn't looking. Since there have been head shots being missed already this season, I am sure the ref committee or whatever is saying to the refs on the ice to tighten up and blow the whistle. Except this guy was too quick on the whistle instead of too slow. Its a shame that the NHL and the NFL are going the wrong way about making sure their athletes are being protected from head injuries. The rules are already in place in both those leagues against dirty plays, the officials just haven't been enforcing them. Thats all they need to do is enforce the rules in place. I can't remember the last time I saw a charging call made, or hit from behind in the NHL. Those are the rules already, why do they need to add to it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) 1)First off, the guy knew he was coming. Brown didn't skate in from behind him.2) Clearly he hit his shoulder and it looked blindsideish because it was on the follow through. However the guy bounces right back up. There was not any contact to the head. 3) Its clear because you can see his shoulder fly back and his head didn't jerk back. This call was made pretty much because the ref was looking right at it. That hit on Datsyuk in the hawks game wasn't called for that very reason; the ref wasn't looking. Since there have been head shots being missed already this season, I am sure the ref committee or whatever is saying to the refs on the ice to tighten up and blow the whistle. Except this guy was too quick on the whistle instead of too slow. Its a shame that the NHL and the NFL are going the wrong way about making sure their athletes are being protected from head injuries. The rules are already in place in both those leagues against dirty plays, the officials just haven't been enforcing them. Thats all they need to do is enforce the rules in place. I can't remember the last time I saw a charging call made, or hit from behind in the NHL. Those are the rules already, why do they need to add to it? 1)Even so...Brown should of held up or hit the side of his body... body language suggested he was hit in the head 2)Not a reason to say that head contact was not made....just because a guy bounces back up does not mean he was not hit in the head. It does not say SEVERE head contact. or Knocking a guy out! it says "HEAD CONTACT" which was made obviously because BOTH refs saw it... 3)Watch again. on a more clear vid. They are protecting the athletes.... I dont think there is anything wrong with that... This is a sport to watch for skill and competition. there are no stat categories in either sport for how many guys you knocked out of the game. How would YOU suggest they stop head hits then? (EDIT) The rule also states "Head is Targeted" just because he missed (as you state) is not a reason not to penalize someone either. Edited October 26, 2010 by Hockeytown_Ryan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 They are protecting the athletes.... I dont think there is anything wrong with that... This is a sport to watch for skill and competition. there are no stat categories in either sport for how many guys you knocked out of the game. How would YOU suggest they stop head hits then? Players should keep their heads up? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollymania 162 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 yes he was...watch his head! put yourself ON THE ICE where the REF is and tell me you don't make the same call. penalties are not reviewable. (On the ice is where I stated that the call was good by the way) Read the rule .. then watch the hit. The call onthe Ice was based on how the rule is Interpreted. just because he got back up does not mean he was not hit in the head. the point of contact, lateral movement, Just like the announcers said in the 1st post video. all the criteria were met for that call to be made. his head snaps back independent of the contact Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 According to the new rules, it's a blindside hit. Shoulder to neck/head. Glad the title of this thread isn't bias Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollymania 162 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Players should keep their heads up? i think most people who argue against keeping your head up have never played the game, if you so much as simply have your head up at all times you will get hit 90% less or even more than that, personally when i played I went after guys whether they were looking at me with their head up or not, but if a guy was paying attention 90% of the time I ended up with an elbow or a missed hit According to the new rules, it's a blindside hit. Shoulder to shoulder. Glad the title of this thread isn't bias fixed it for ya Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 i think most people who argue against keeping your head up have never played the game, if you so much as simply have your head up at all times you will get hit 90% less or even more than that, personally when i played I went after guys whether they were looking at me with their head up or not, but if a guy was paying attention 90% of the time I ended up with an elbow or a missed hit Yep I agree, it's too fast of a game to try and rule out shoulder to head hits without really hurting open ice hits in the long run. Players just aren't going to take those chances in the open ice because it's almost impossible to insure you do not contact the head at all. I thought the rule was that the principle point of contact could not be the head, and in the Dustin Brown hit it wasn't yet he stills get the game. It's really going to hurt the number of open ice hits in the future, and I really dislike it. 1 Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 fixed it for ya No, I'm sticking to my guns on this one. Shoulder to neck/head. I liked the hit, but it was blindside in the new NHL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) Yep I agree, it's too fast of a game to try and rule out shoulder to head hits without really hurting open ice hits in the long run. Players just aren't going to take those chances in the open ice because it's almost impossible to insure you do not contact the head at all. I thought the rule was that the principle point of contact could not be the head, and in the Dustin Brown hit it wasn't yet he stills get the game. It's really going to hurt the number of open ice hits in the future, and I really dislike it. in theory no... "the head is targeted" is the way the rule is written RULE 48: (edit) and Brown curling his arm up well before the hit does not help his cause.. Edited October 26, 2010 by Hockeytown_Ryan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) in theory no... "the head is targeted" is the way the rule is written RULE 48: (edit) and Brown curling his arm up well before the hit does not help his cause.. Exactly I said "I thought". I know that the rule is a horrible now, thanks though. Ruining the NHL, one step at a time. Edited October 26, 2010 by Carman 1 Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
esteef 2,679 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Booools***. Shoulder to shoulder. Plus Brown's stick is clearly in Antii's view before the hit so I would even argue "blind" side hit. He knew it was coming. This crap is getting ridiculous. esteef 1 Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Exactly I said "I thought". I know that the rule is a horrible, thanks thought. Ruining the NHL, one step at a time. Easy... I was just helping clarify. In My Opinion....the way the rules are written and the way they are interpreted by fans and refs alike is what the issue is here. by reading the rule and seeing the hit..that call HAS to be made. it is in the books. 1 Konnan511 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollymania 162 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 in theory no... "the head is targeted" is the way the rule is written RULE 48: (edit) and Brown curling his arm up well before the hit does not help his cause.. brown aimed for shoulder and hit shoulder, how is that targeting the head and how do you know he was targeting it, that should be removed from the rule, it is far too ambiguous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 brown aimed for shoulder and hit shoulder, how is that targeting the head and how do you know he was targeting it, that should be removed from the rule, it is far too ambiguous. Are you joking...? was he going for his RIGHT shoulder????? he had a whole side of his body to lay a shoulder to shoulder hit on him did not have to go in front to hit shoulder to shoulder... and why go shoulder to shoulder if you are coming in from the side..... why not go hands to to shoulder..... his head was targeted..the only reason his hands went past the shoulder of the guy he was hitting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grwingfan 21 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Total BS call. If this is what we can expect from the NHL them I won't be watching for much longer! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plopster 136 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) Easy... I was just helping clarify. In My Opinion....the way the rules are written and the way they are interpreted by fans and refs alike is what the issue is here. by reading the rule and seeing the hit..that call HAS to be made. it is in the books. Ok so why wasn't the sucker elbow to Salei's snout called? That was more blatant to the head that what Brown did. Or how about the hit from behind to Pavel's head shortly after that after he took a shot? Or the number of other hits to the head we have seen so far this young season in other games? Come on, if they want to call charging or hitting from behind, ok, the argument can be made, but he didn't intentionally go for the head, if he did he would have hit him there with no trouble, the guy was in no position to avoid that. MY point is, if you're going to call one, you have to call them all, picking and choosing when to enforce things are what piss me off. The rules seem to be enforced entirely too arbitrarily to me. And to add to that, the next time someone gets Kronwalled, should we be ok that he is gone just because the victim doesn't see him coming because he isn't looking at whats coming like he has been taught since he started skating? Edited October 26, 2010 by plopster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Ok so why wasn't the sucker elbow to Salei's snout called? That was more blatant to the head that what Brown did. Or how about the hit from behind to Pavel's head shortly after that after he took a shot? Or the number of other hits to the head we have seen so far this young season in other games? Come on, if they want to call charging or hitting from behind, ok, the argument can be made, but he didn't intentionally go for the head, if he did he would have hit him there with no trouble, the guy was in no position to avoid that. MY point is, if you're going to call one, you have to call them all, picking and choosing when to enforce things are what piss me off. The rules seem to be enforced entirely too arbitrarily to me. Honestly I agree with you on that point...BUT! the fact is that the Refs are Human not machines. there is no Ctrl-Alt-Del for a ref. there is no mouse click for a penalty. thats where the problem is Its a different ref that your pissed at for not calling some and calling others. uniformity for the NHL Refs is where the problem is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollymania 162 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 Are you joking...? was he going for his RIGHT shoulder????? he had a whole side of his body to lay a shoulder to shoulder hit on him did not have to go in front to hit shoulder to shoulder... and why go shoulder to shoulder if you are coming in from the side..... why not go hands to to shoulder..... his head was targeted..the only reason his hands went past the shoulder of the guy he was hitting. he didn't go past the shoulder, are you even watching the video?, he hits miettinen right on the numbers of his sleeve Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted October 26, 2010 (edited) he didn't go past the shoulder, are you even watching the video?, he hits miettinen right on the numbers of his sleeve clean your glasses... how is that possible when he was on a follow through from a shot? and from behind Brown is in front of him? the game cannot be played YOUR way.. or MY way and it cannot be called YOUR way or MY way. Either your a fan of it or you like to ***** about it..... I guess we know which of the 2 you are. (EDIT) those who don't like/get the call that was made...watched it too many times. and watched the replay....the only thing that a ref cannot do during a game and have like 1/2 second to decide. on the ice...they made the right call. Edited October 26, 2010 by Hockeytown_Ryan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollymania 162 Report post Posted October 27, 2010 clean your glasses... how is that possible when he was on a follow through from a shot? and from behind Brown is in front of him? the game cannot be played YOUR way.. or MY way and it cannot be called YOUR way or MY way. Either your a fan of it or you like to ***** about it..... I guess we know which of the 2 you are. (EDIT) those who don't like/get the call that was made...watched it too many times. and watched the replay....the only thing that a ref cannot do during a game and have like 1/2 second to decide. on the ice...they made the right call. The NHL ruled it a shoulder on shoulder hit today, so be it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 27, 2010 WRONG SIR!.. That call was a call that should of been made... Was there contact to the head? YES! the rule is this Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted. and there is only one penalty for the infraction. 5 min major and automatic game misconduct. the Ref made the call as he saw it... Good Call Ref . The Kings got shafted because their Captain went and put a Illegal Check to the Head on a player who could not see it coming. HE shafted his own team. It does meet either of the criteria of the rule. The head was not targeted and the head was not the principle point of contact. That's different than there being contact to the head. At least the league got it right even if the ref didn't. Wrong call ref! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted October 27, 2010 Los Angeles Times. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites