Chara's hit on Pacioretty

[ogreslayer 1,069]

When it comes right down to it, I think the reaction would be the same regardless of where the hit occurred due to the injury suffered. Imagine the hit occuring at the bench door, the force of the impact jarring it loose or it wasn't closed completely to begin with, & Pacioretty was injured that way. Even in a case like that, you would have plenty of people screaming that "Chara knew where they were on the ice & was hoping that would happen!".

Would I be one of those screaming if he had done that to anyone on the Wings? Yeah, probably. That's what being a fan does to you so I can understand much of the angst over this. Now to start throwing out the idea of police investigations into the matter & the like, well that's just lunacy. Anyone who plays a sport like hockey or football where there is so much violent contact involved assumes the inherent risk of injury by even stepping or skating onto the playing surface. Anyone saying there was intent on Chara's part to seriously harm Pacioretty enough to where the normal line of injury risks assumed when playing hockey is crossed & into where a criminal case for assult exists is seriously mental in my opinion.

Bottom line: It was a hockey play, the extent of the injury was an unlucky accident & nothing more, and Chara was penalized already with a game misconduct. Can I see why he wasn't suspended further? Sure. Could I understand why the NHL would give him 1 or 2 games more if they did? Sure. A criminal investigation though? Who the hell are we kidding here?

Edited March 10, 2011 by ogreslayer

[Dimaline312000 51]

Here's my two cents on this issue and than I'm going to try to leave it at that. First I don't see Chara as a dirty player while I do think this was a questionable check I don't know how dirty it is. Plus I don't know if there is a past history between the two players and if this was some type of payback or not. I know it's Montreal and Boston an Orginal 6 matchup and that's history in itself. If this was some type of payback than I don't agree with it and I think it should be penalized. The thing that gets me as I see the hit is that the check was some what delayed in my point of view. Max had already passed the pucl so it's not like Chara was coming after the person with the puck and was fully commited to the check when Pacioretty passed it, it was somewhat after that. I don't really follow Boston or Montreal so I don't really know the whole story but I don't see Chara as a dirty player in all the times that I've seen him play. I think it was the right move by the ref to give him a mjor and a game misconduct but I also agree with the NHL that he won't face any further charges. It didn't look like a head hunting play as I've seen with other players and other teams but than again all I saw was this clip, I never saw the game or anything leading up to or after the check. I hop that Pacioretty is ok and will be able to play as early as possible but these types of hits do happen and I don't think it was the type of hit that is like what needs to be taken out of the league. Like knee or knee or other forms of head hunting. That's all I'm going to say right now I'm going to try to make this the one and only thing I say about this. Thanks. Go Wings!!

[CrimsonFlame 424]

The police have no business getting involved. By stepping out onto the ice, each player knows that they are risking their physical well being. If you don't want to risk being seriously hurt or even killed, don't play the game. There was nothing criminal about what happened. Dirty yes, but criminal no.

[Steve Sample 31]

The thought that the Police are involved is not right. However, if Air Canada uses it's weight to force the league into doing a better job of protecting its players I think thats great. Somebody has too. For those on here that think the Canadians fans are over reacting, if Chara or any player did that to a Wings player we would be all looking for heads to roll as well. The bottom line is the NHL has done a s*** job of protecting its players from needless injuries. If Air Canada calls them out, well its about time.

[chuklz 15]

History aside, it looked like intent to injure. Obviously if he was just going to rub him against the boards and Pacs hit the stantion, then I'd think other wise, but Chara made sure he actually threw Pacs into the stantion. Just look at the replay, you can clearly see him throw him into it. You don't need to be a dirty player to let your emotions get the best of you. look at Bertuzzi, he was never a dirty player and just that one incident will forever label him as a dirty player when we all know he isn't.

Hell, even LePuke wasn't a dirty player, but that one incident he lost his brain and smushed Draper. Players can have a relatively clean career and still do something dirty.

No offense but Bertuzzi was a dirty player. He's mended his ways and plays even lighter than he should, but he deserves the albatross around his neck.

[Din758 371]

I still didnt think it was that dirty. Weve all seen similar hits many times before, with most resulting in no injury. I dont think Chara's size is taken into consideration enough here, and you cant blame him for that. This to me was a hockey play, that fluked its way into a big time injury.

Hopefully Pacioretty is back soon.

[Finnish Wing 110]

For those who say intention doesn't matter and the punishment should be judged only by the outcome, think about this: murder and kill (dunno if it's the correct legal term).

Two guys get into a fight on a balcony - yes, on a balcony - and the other accidentally falls because of the contact and dies. Elsewhere, a guy intentionally pushes other guy from the balcony to his death. Now, are these two cases identical in terms of the punishment because of the same outcome?

Maybe some of you think Chara did it intentionally, which I find veeery hard to believe. Still, there are some people where who say that it "doesn't matter if it's intentional or not". Now, that I find absurd.

[Electrophile 3,554]

For those who say intention doesn't matter and the punishment should be judged only by the outcome, think about this: murder and kill (dunno if it's the correct legal term).

Two guys get into a fight on a balcony - yes, on a balcony - and the other accidentally falls because of the contact and dies. Elsewhere, a guy intentionally pushes other guy from the balcony to his death. Now, are these two cases identical in terms of the punishment because of the same outcome?

Maybe some of you think Chara did it intentionally, which I find veeery hard to believe. Still, there are some people where who say that it "doesn't matter if it's intentional or not". Now, that I find absurd.

IANAL, but murder requires malice aforethought, and the first scenario you described would be manslaughter. The second WOULD be murder, because of the word "intentionally." That would imply malice aforethought. To answer your question, the two cases are not identical. If you get into a fight with someone, and as a result of that fight they die, you could be charged with voluntary manslaughter in that your actions led to their death, but you didn't intend for that to happen. There was no premeditation to kill that person.

To bring it back to this topic, it absolutely matters if something is intentional or not.

[esteef 2,679]

I don't find it hard to believe at all that a player would take advantage on a hit against another player who has been a royal pain in the ass the last few times they've played. This notion that Chara didn't know about the stantion or who was even on the ice at the time is laughable.

esteef

[Grim 5]

well, whatever the issue, it wouldn't hurt to remove or re-engineer those dangerous stantions

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

From TSN:

...

"Our hockey operations people are extraordinarily comfortable with the decision that they made," Bettman said. "It was a horrific injury, we're sorry that it happened in our fast-paced physical game, but I don't think whether or not supplemental discipline was imposed would change what happened and in fact the people in the game who I have heard from almost to a person ... believe that it was handled appropriately by hockey operations."

...

[RedFX 48]

I don't know if anyone saw this, but literally THE EXACT SAME PLAY happened in the Buffalo-Pittsburgh game earlier that night. Can't remember the 2 players involved, but the Sabres player was trying to beat the Penguins players along the boards. The Penguins guy got beat, came in late from the side, and slammed the Sabres guy into the turnbuckle. To be honest, that play looked like it was done with more malicious intent than this one. And yet, nobody is talking about that play being a dirty hit...nobody is demanding a suspension from the Penguins player...and no sponsor is threatening to boycott the game based on that play.

As harsh as it may sound, the only two reasons were discussing this right now is 1.Pacioretty got hurt, and 2. it's two players and teams with a recent history. Obviously, it's unfortunate what happened to Patch, and my thoughts and prayers are with him and a speedy recovery. But to be honest, there was nothing dirty about that hit. It was a play you see all the time, just with a tragic end result. That should be the end of it

[Wingzman91 134]

How many people have been hurt by the puck this year, do we change that to a nerf ball?

We can remove all the glass so no one can get hurt on it, the boards too, hell. the arena, its dangerous for players to have to drive there in traffic.

This was a fluke, these guys know that they can get hurt out there, ask Boyce and Modano.

That said, if this wasn't a Hab that got hurt, there would be no police involved.

[Finnish Wing 110]

From TSN:

"but I don't think whether or not supplemental discipline was imposed would change what happened"

Weird for Bettman to say something like that. Isn't that the case with all the suspensions? No suspension is going to change something that has already happened. I thought they are meant to prevent something from happening again.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Well, now that the police are involved, this story made headlines again. Another shining moment for hockey. Thanks Montreal. You elevated an unfortunate borderline hit to the Bertuzzi incident, and once again hockey looks like a bunch of barbarians skating around braining one another without punishment.

[wingslogo19 281]

My God, Canada is making this out to be an international incident. It was just a hit on a bad spot on the ice with a horrible outcome.

Hey what's wrong with Canada

[HankthaTank 1,100]

Sooo this gets 3 games and I am guessing it's the "intent" right? That lovely word we have heard the past few days and even the past few seasons. But how after Bolland spins around, stays on his feet and continues to play does this warrant 3 and the Chara hit none???? Please do not tell me intent....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGLoXMmwzBU

[wingslogo19 281]

Sooo this gets 3 games and I am guessing it's the "intent" right? That lovely word we have heard the past few days and even the past few seasons. But how after Bolland spins around, stays on his feet and continues to play does this warrant 3 and the Chara hit none???? Please do not tell me intent....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGLoXMmwzBU

It's intent

[vladdy16 2,154]

[Finnish Wing 110]

It's intent

There is rules for blindside hits, headshots, hits from behind etc. so they don't even have to be intented. Players know the rules. In the Chara-case only rule that was broken was the interference and there was no intention to anything else.

I don't see how the method of punishing should be any different in hockey than it is for real life. In real life intent means a lot. Why should it mean nothing in hockey then?

Or better yet, let's try a year in real life without intent meaning anything. Wouldn't it be fun if every accident would get the same punishment than a planned murder? Yayyy!

[VM1138 1,921]

I don't know about the police getting invovled, or even if it was a dirty hit. It was a routine play.

However, I never played hockey for a team, so I'm not sure if it's possible, but it certainly looked like Chara just tried to pinch him and shove him. It's totally reasonable to assume he wasn't thinking about the stanchion.

Regardless, I doubt the cops find anything criminal in this, dirty or not. Nothing would stand up in court because of that question of intent.

At any rate it's not an OBVIOUS intent to injure.

[hckypete96 3]

gettin the cops involved is a joke right?? ffs this is HOCKEY. head shots have always been a part of the game... i didnt hear ppl cryin then lindros career was ended shortly because of them. its up to the players to police themselves..... and if they wanna go for each others heads then clearly thats what theyre gonna do. to involve the police is completely ridic tho wasnt even taht cheapt of a play. I think the refs got this one right.

[wingslogo19 281]

There is rules for blindside hits, headshots, hits from behind etc. so they don't even have to be intented. Players know the rules. In the Chara-case only rule that was broken was the interference and there was no intention to anything else.

I don't see how the method of punishing should be any different in hockey than it is for real life. In real life intent means a lot. Why should it mean nothing in hockey then?

Or better yet, let's try a year in real life without intent meaning anything. Wouldn't it be fun if every accident would get the same punishment than a planned murder? Yayyy!

I was joking around with Hank there

[dallas27 7]

I got through about a page and a half before I couldn't read anymore without posting.

A) If this happens anywhere other than Montreal the NHL doesn't have to deal with the threats of losing sponsorships

B) For the "he knew what he was doing" crowd...he didn't. By no means am I bragging but I know how the internet works; I've played junior a hockey - and in all honesty probably a higher level of hockey than most everyone here - and the game moves extremely fast even at that level. I can imagine how fast it must be at the NHL level. That being said, you don't have time to think on the ice. If you think you are dead in the water, plain and simple. The game of hockey is knowing where to be and sub-consciously knowing what to do in that situation. This is why goalies, and I know firsthand, have reflexes as quick as cats (thanks sports science!) or at least the good ones haha.

But you either have this, or you don't. And that's what makes the best players the best. If you were to personally ask Hank or Pavel what they were thinking when they made so and so play I would be willing to bet their answer would be I don't know. Or they are just gonna feed you the same lines of bulls*** they give reporters.

There will now be two sides to this if anyone replies. The people that have never played a game of hockey in their life and will argue to the death that he knew exactly what he was doing. And on the opposite end, the people that will agree with me as they have played hockey . I'm not trying to be a jerk by any means, it's one thing to watch and understand hockey but it's totally different to have played the game and understand it.

C) I would not have given a penalty, saw nothing wrong with it. But for the sake of it, let's call it interference.

D) Why can't we be friends?

[Hossa4Life 4]

I got through about a page and a half before I couldn't read anymore without posting.

A) If this happens anywhere other than Montreal the NHL doesn't have to deal with the threats of losing sponsorships

B) For the "he knew what he was doing" crowd...he didn't. By no means am I bragging but I know how the internet works; I've played junior a hockey - and in all honesty probably a higher level of hockey than most everyone here - and the game moves extremely fast even at that level. I can imagine how fast it must be at the NHL level. That being said, you don't have time to think on the ice. If you think you are dead in the water, plain and simple. The game of hockey is knowing where to be and sub-consciously knowing what to do in that situation. This is why goalies, and I know firsthand, have reflexes as quick as cats (thanks sports science!) or at least the good ones haha.

But you either have this, or you don't. And that's what makes the best players the best. If you were to personally ask Hank or Pavel what they were thinking when they made so and so play I would be willing to bet their answer would be I don't know. Or they are just gonna feed you the same lines of bulls*** they give reporters.

There will now be two sides to this if anyone replies. The people that have never played a game of hockey in their life and will argue to the death that he knew exactly what he was doing. And on the opposite end, the people that will agree with me as they have played hockey . I'm not trying to be a jerk by any means, it's one thing to watch and understand hockey but it's totally different to have played the game and understand it.

C) I would not have given a penalty, saw nothing wrong with it. But for the sake of it, let's call it interference.

D) Why can't we be friends?

yea your right because the game moves fast there has never been intent to injure.