45 replies to this topic

[haroldsnepsts]

harold, I'm pretty sure he got penalized for the late, blindside hit to the head on Ruutu, not the clean hit on Ruutu

I call BS on this idea that we have to allow hits like this as "part of the game." What if instead of saying Erat got a concussion on that play, we said he got a "life-altering head injury"? Because that's what a concussion is. Players shouldn't be subject to hits that predictably cause concussions, even if they don't look particularly dirty to us because a player doesn't throw an elbow or leave his feet. There are plenty of hits that don't cause concussions that we can keep in the game.

I'm guessing you meant Erat.

I know what you're saying, but I really don't think this is the same as what Cooke did to Savard. And they definitely need to try and limit concussions, it's just that they're such an unpredictable thing, I don't think you can punish guys because a hit results in a head injury. There's plenty of squeaky clean hits that could cause concussions. You can however limit the kind of headshot hits that often lead to concussions and are more about trying to brain a guy than separating him from the puck, I just don't think this hit qualifies.

[Third Man In]

I'm guessing you meant Erat.

I know what you're saying, but I really don't think this is the same as what Cooke did to Savard. And they definitely need to try and limit concussions, it's just that they're such an unpredictable thing, I don't think you can punish guys because a hit results in a head injury. There's plenty of squeaky clean hits that could cause concussions. You can however limit the kind of headshot hits that often lead to concussions and are more about trying to brain a guy than separating him from the puck, I just don't think this hit qualifies.

oops, eh?

I agree with most of what you're saying. And I hate that whether a player is injured or not plays so much into league discipline--the act, not the result, should be what's considered. I just disagree on the last bit: I don't think this hit adds anything to the game, it is one kind of hit known predictably to cause concussions, and it is a hit you can easily categorize and take out of the game.

[RedLightGoesOn]

Funny how Torres hit on Seabrook did not result in a suspension but this did. I love consistency from the NHL. Whats next, poke checks are now automatic hooking calls?

[OHwing]

Man, this discussion just proves how subjective this whole thing is. In my opinion, the only thing wrong w/ the hit was that it was interference. I can't see how people are calling it blindside. The victim has to bear some responsibility on a play like that as well. Erat should have seen him coming. An the hit wasn't that violent a hit. It was more of a freak injury than anything. There didn't even appear to be direct head contact. While I agree with the decision not to suspend him, the Torres hit was much more of a blindside and much more violent. I think this decision was based on 2 criteria: 1) the history of the offending player, and 2) the resulting injury to Erat, which by that logic, Torres should have got suspended as well. Campell seems to be a confused and schizophrenic on these decisions. There needs to be a board put together that evaluates each hit and votes on subsequent punishment. His bitter rant on the radio the other day proves that he is allowing all the criticism to affect him, and thus he produces these decisions are all over the board. Regardless of what he says, they appear to be very reactionary.

[matt198913]

I cannot believe I didn't see this thread yesterday... The puck was long gone easy call not a clean hit. Rutuu obvious suspension

[Konnan511]

I cannot believe I didn't see this thread yesterday... The puck was long gone easy call not a clean hit. Rutuu obvious suspension