Stars D Robidas suspended one game for boarding misconduct

[edicius 3,269]

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=338863

Er...I don't know, I've watched the hit and it looked like a clean hit to me, just one with an unfortunate end result.

[#19=Legend 29]

like the comments said. it wasnt the actual hit that got him suspended... it was the fact that this happened just 41 games ago.

[woodrow40 42]

Okay that makes sense then because at first I couldn't believe he got suspended for that.

I'll have to watch the video again but did he even board him? Didn't look like it to me.

[Evans_18 4]

The comments on that article made me laugh.. I believe someone was stating Doan got suspended for a "clean" hit.

[Konnan511 1,736]

Well, rules state it must be a one game suspension... moving on...

In before "ZOMG Nhl is teh going down hillz, how could they suspend himz for thats!"

[wingslogo19 281]

It's too bad the guy is injured from that hit.. To me that's just a good old hockey hit

[HOCKEY MATTERS 167]

This vid is a little better...

I don't think this hit was suspension worthy.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

pretty clearly boarding.

Like someone else mentioned, he got a game misconduct for this less than 41 games ago so it gets an automatic game suspension by league rules.

Hockey is a fast game and it may have been unintentional, but two boarding misconducts in that amount of time, and it's probably good to send a message he needs to pick his spots better.

Edited October 28, 2010 by haroldsnepsts

[titanium2 867]

In before "ZOMG Nhl is teh going down hillz, how could they suspend himz for thats!"

Hehehehe...

[wingfan13 44]

Another hit when a player is in a vulnerable position. These are the hits I hate. It is the responsibility of the hiter to let up. I know it is a fast game. I just think this is a hit that shouldn't happen. I don't think it is a penalty and it doesn't deserve a suspension but this is a lack of respect hit.

[wingslogo19 281]

If he didn't have his previous hit 41 games ago, do you think he would have been suspended?

[toby91_ca 620]

Rule 41 - Boarding

41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact. However, there is also a responsibility on the player with the puck to avoid placing himself in a dangerous and vulnerable position. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

With that in mind, I don't know how someone could see this as a clean hit, it is very clearly boarding.

I'd have no problem with such a hit if it was at centre ice, but when a guy is in a vulnerable position like that, you need to let up. Someone could get seriously injured on a hit like that.

[newfy 695]

Another hit when a player is in a vulnerable position. These are the hits I hate. It is the responsibility of the hiter to let up. I know it is a fast game. I just think this is a hit that shouldn't happen. I don't think it is a penalty and it doesn't deserve a suspension but this is a lack of respect hit.

I think its the responsibility of the player to not put themselves in a vulnerable position or else youll get your clock cleaned.

[jollymania 162]

Boarding is far too of an ambiguous penalty, in this case it was just an unfortunate situation, they should have rescinded the major as it really is only enough to warrant 2 minutes at most, although in reality it was perfectly clean, but I guess in today's game you have to call something

[Guest Shoreline]

That looked like a clean hit to me -- Robidas was finishing a check on someone who had the puck. The technicality is it could be boarding due to the distance of when contact was made, though it took a bounce to even hit the boards, but what the f***? Suspension?! Is this a hit to the head? It looked like yet another shoulder to shoulder hit, and no intent whatsoever to cause harm. I'm getting really tired of reading about suspensions for hockey players playing hockey. This is bulls*** trying to romanticize a physical sport. I wouldn't even contest if Robidas got a two minute boarding penalty, if the refs/linesmen truly thought it was a boarding penalty. But this is not a major at all, and certainly not a misconduct or a suspension, just because the hit resulted in being hurt. Stupid ass NHL.

[BigWillieStyle 662]

The Stars are a dirty team. Their players are classless. Their fans are ignorant blowhards. They didn't resign Modano. I hate The Stars.

Signed,

Sherri

[Konnan511 1,736]

Boarding is far too of an ambiguous penalty, in this case it was just an unfortunate situation, they should have rescinded the major as it really is only enough to warrant 2 minutes at most, although in reality it was perfectly clean, but I guess in today's game you have to call something

I thought it was a luscious hit. The ref did call it immediately and didn't wait to see that the recipient was injured. But, you know, they only rescind penalties if it involves the golden team

That looked like a clean hit to me -- Robidas was finishing a check on someone who had the puck. The technicality is it could be boarding due to the distance of when contact was made, though it took a bounce to even hit the boards, but what the f***? Suspension?! Is this a hit to the head? It looked like yet another shoulder to shoulder hit, and no intent whatsoever to cause harm. I'm getting really tired of reading about suspensions for hockey players playing hockey. This is bulls*** trying to romanticize a physical sport. I wouldn't even contest if Robidas got a two minute boarding penalty, if the refs/linesmen truly thought it was a boarding penalty. But this is not a major at all, and certainly not a misconduct or a suspension, just because the hit resulted in being hurt. Stupid ass NHL.

Nice rant, remember though, the suspension isn't for the hit, it's because the time frame from this GM and his last GM.

[Guest Shoreline]

I thought it was a luscious hit. The ref did call it immediately and didn't wait to see that the recipient was injured. But, you know, they only rescind penalties if it involves the golden team

Nice rant, remember though, the suspension isn't for the hit, it's because the time frame from this GM and his last GM.

Nice story, but that was obviously covered..

wouldn't even contest if Robidas got a two minute boarding penalty, if the refs/linesmen truly thought it was a boarding penalty. But this is not a major at all, and certainly not a misconduct or a suspension, just because the hit resulted in being hurt.

Edited October 28, 2010 by Shoreline

[Konnan511 1,736]

Nice story, but that was obviously covered..

The ref called it immediately before seeing the player was injured. Good story to you as well?

[Guest Shoreline]

The ref called it immediately before seeing the player was injured. Good story to you as well?

It's a very cool story, especially if the ref called the misconduct before Beleskey hit the ground.

[Aussie_Wing 354]

Looked lilke a decent hit to me, didn't deserve a suspension IMO.

I appreciated the PIM's for my fantasy team (although Brown's game misconduct already sealed that category win), I didn't appreciate him missing a game due to suspension.

[MTU_Huskies963 398]

After seeing that bolland hit yesterday that led to a goal, I remembered this hit. I guess the only difference is an injury occurred on the Robidas hit.

http://www.versus.com/videos/chicago-bryan-bickell-goal