• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jollymania

Get ready folks, hitting is about to exit our game

Rate this topic

138 posts in this topic

Isn't "blindside" relative to where the player is looking? Technically Cooke was in front of Savard when he hit him, but Savard had been looking left and just turned around, much like what happened here. Thornton comes from the "blindside" and specifically targeted the head when he had everything thing else available to hit. That's what they're trying to eliminate, unnecessary hits to the head. I don't like it, but he'll be suspended.

esteef

I agree, there isn't a signficant difference in this his vs. the Cooke hit. There is a difference in that the Cooke hit was more clearly targetting the head and he started from behind, but he was in front of Savard before he turned to make that hit. The Cooke hit was worse, but I wouldn't call the Thornton hit completely different.

Edit - I should clarify that I agree to an extent. Blindside isn't really about where you are looking. Example, if you have your head down and a guy comes north south and hits you straight on, you won't see it, but it's not a blind side. I think blindside assumes that you are looking in the direction you are skating and if you wouldn't see the hit coming, or only see it at the last minute, that's blindside.

In the Thornton case, Perron definately should have saw it if his head was up, but he only would have saw it at the last minute becuase Thornton came from the side = blindside hit.

Everyone also has to remember that blindside hits are not illegal, it's only those that target the head.

Edited by toby91_ca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit - I should clarify that I agree to an extent. Blindside isn't really about where you are looking. Example, if you have your head down and a guy comes north south and hits you straight on, you won't see it, but it's not a blind side. I think blindside assumes that you are looking in the direction you are skating and if you wouldn't see the hit coming, or only see it at the last minute, that's blindside.

Agree.

esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Murph and Bobby Holik were addressing this on NHL on the Fly last night. Holik was pissed because he felt like Perron embellished, which I agree with him on. Perron made it look like the hit was really serious, yet he was out there later scoring a goal. Then after the game, he was vague in his answers but basically admitted he wasn't really that hurt but he wouldn't know til 24 hours had passed. There is going to be a big adjustment period but I'm hoping to see diving penalties called way more often. However, both Murph and Holik agreed that the 5 minute penalty should have been assessed but not a game misconduct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I feared the most - the proverbial slippery slope.

IMHO it was a clean hit; what was Thornton supposed to do - let him skate on by with the puck?

Elbow was tucked in, both feet were on the ice, but it was Perron who had his head down watching the puck...Once again boys, and girls it was a clean hit...It's hockey afterall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, both Murph and Holik agreed that the 5 minute penalty should have been assessed but not a game misconduct.

If that is the case, I think both Murph and Holik need to educate themselves on the rule:

Rule 48 – Illegal Check to the Head

48.1 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.

48.2 Minor Penalty – There is no provision for a minor penalty for this rule.

48.3 Major Penalty – For a violation of this rule, a major penalty shall be

assessed (see 48.4).

48.4 Game Misconduct Penalty – An automatic game misconduct penalty

shall be assessed whenever a major penalty is assessed under this

rule.

Z Winged Dangler likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, but it wasn't a north south hit, not even close.

FYI, a disciplenary hearing has been scheduled with Mr. Thornton.

whether it was purely north south or slightly diagonal is debatable, but what isn't is that if perron was simply looking forward with his head up Thornton would have been visible, thus you can't possibly penalize this hit

If that is the case, I think both Murph and Holik need to educate themselves on the rule:

the rule is horribly flawed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only potential call I could see here is targeting the head, other than that, Joe was in front of Perron, elbow was tucked, and the puck went through Perron.

It was indeed a shoulder to the head, but was the head the target?

What should taller players whom are 6'3" plus in height do?

Scrouch down so they're equal in height to smaller opponents :hehe:

Seriously - this is just 1 of those situations where height can have it's advantages, or disadvantages.

IMHO Thornton didn't go after Perron's head; Perron, and many other players around the league have gotta keep their heads up.

Not target the head.

esteef

So what's a taller player like Thornton supposed to do - bend down, and go for Perron's knees?

Seriously guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not target the head.

esteef

he didn't, 70% of this hit was body to body, only thornton's shoulder hit perron's head, lets not forget the arm to arm, hip to hip , thigh to thigh, and possibly even knee to knee (incidental.) contact. thornton hit perron in the head partially because 1. he is much taller 2. perron was hunched over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what's a taller player like Thornton supposed to do - bend down, and go for Perron's knees?

Seriously guys.

Thornton could have easily dropped Perron with a shoulder to shoulder here, still would've knocked him down, still would've broken up the play, but he made sure to get around the shoulder to get to the head. That's against the new rule, primary contact is with the head. I'm not a huge fan of it but he did break the rule.

esteef

Dano33 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, but it wasn't a north south hit, not even close.

FYI, a disciplenary hearing has been scheduled with Mr. Thornton.

That's because he crushed someone from behind later on and got 5 and a game, I believe.

The hit on Perron was nice. The dude needs to keep his head up.

I hate the direction the NFL & NHL are going.

Edited by Tr!PoD#19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because he crushed someone from behind later on and got 5 and a game, I believe.

The hit on Perron was nice. The dude needs to keep his head up.

I hate the direction the NFL & NHL are going.

No, Thornton was coming out of the box from serving his 2 minutes for that hit from behind when he made the hit on Perron. He got the 5 and a game for the hit to the head which is what the hearing is for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thornton could have easily dropped Perron with a shoulder to shoulder here, still would've knocked him down, still would've broken up the play, but he made sure to get around the shoulder to get to the head. That's against the new rule, primary contact is with the head. I'm not a huge fan of it but he did break the rule.

esteef

From where I sit I find it pretty challenging for players whom are moving very fast nowadays to specifically target 1 particular part of the human anatomy when attempting to deliver what is now deemed a "legal/clean" bodycheck...Just think of the ass-chewing Joe would've gotten from the coaching staff had Perron gotten by, and created a scoring chance?

Nailing a guy square in the chest is the easy way to separate him from the puck; unfortunately with Big Joe's height advantage, and Perron looking away we have what some would feel is a deliberate attempt at head hunting with an intent to injure...I'm way to old-school, and don't see this at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Thornton was coming out of the box from serving his 2 minutes for that hit from behind when he made the hit on Perron. He got the 5 and a game for the hit to the head which is what the hearing is for.

You're right. (I can't watch YouTube videos at work)

Edited by Tr!PoD#19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is the case, I think both Murph and Holik need to educate themselves on the rule:

The rule you provided only proves that the hit was against the rules. Lateral hit to the head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From where I sit I find it pretty challenging for players whom are moving very fast nowadays to specifically target 1 particular part of the human anatomy when attempting to deliver what is now deemed a "legal/clean" bodycheck...

I hear ya, but in this case was Joe really moving very fast right out of the box? These will be things discussed at the hearing I'm sure.

esteef

Edited by esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whether it was purely north south or slightly diagonal is debatable, but what isn't is that if perron was simply looking forward with his head up Thornton would have been visible, thus you can't possibly penalize this hit

the rule is horribly flawed

It shouldn't be debatable to anyone that watched the video. I'd rephrase is to say "whether it was purely east west or slightly diagonal is debatable." Thornton practicly skated along the red line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1288978116.jpg

look at all of these body parts, they are actually all synonyms for head

This is after his head is already whipping around from being contacted. :thumbdown:

esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't be debatable to anyone that watched the video. I'd rephrase is to say "whether it was purely east west or slightly diagonal is debatable." Thornton practicly skated along the red line.

what? i think you have a seeing disorder that skews your vision

This is after his head is already whipping around from being contacted. :thumbdown:

esteef

it was all simultaneous, seriously i don't know why you have such a burr in your saddle over this hit, it was nothing and perron wasn't even unjured

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As bad as it looked. It looked like a clean hit to me. Hard to tell if Thornton used his elbow. After a lot of replays I'd say there was no elbow to the head. Clean hit. Kudos to Thornton...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was all simultaneous, seriously i don't know why you have such a burr in your saddle over this hit, it was nothing and perron wasn't even unjured

Whether he's injured or not is irrelevant, the hit was blindside (east/west) and to the head. That's against the new rule. Thornton does skate right up the red line to make the hit (at the 5-6 second mark of the vid) and makes sure he hits the head first.

You can disagree, that's fine but Thornton will be suspended here because he passed up a safer hit to deliver one to the head. That's what the NHL wants out of the game, the unnecessary blindside hit to the head.

esteef

Edited by esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0