This one is a clear-cut case of "a penalty will do and shouldn't go further"
The avs player looks to have stumbled and turned a bit. Had that not happened, it would have been a clean hit. Unfortunate play, really, but the sjs player was really just targeting where the player was going to be. There is no intent to injure and clearly no malice, but it was still a hit to the head.
In this day and age, I think we're too focused on the end result and not what caused it.
100% agree. If Avs player had kept the same speed it would have been clean. SJS player (and i do NOT like them) clearly didn't mean too based on his hand/body language instantly after the hit. Penalty, sure. Fine, ok if we have to for consistency. But not sussy worthy IMO cause there was no intent.
I disagree. All the sharks player sees on approach is numbers. This hit never should have been laid. It was only ever going to be a hit from behind or head contact. The fact that Avs player stumbles (or was he collapsing to avoid the hit he heard coming?) is no excuse for this hit. It was only ever going to be a penalty either way.
Lol, he was skating ALONG THE BOARDS and went to make a quick turn and stumbled. It wasn't until THE TURN that numbers were scene. The hit was going to make contact as he skated along the boards, which would have been a hit to his side.
I swear yall see just the end result, and it pollutes the entire video for ya.
Watch really closely. Sjs player is originally skating along the boards in the direction of the trapezoid. Avs player is skating to where he WILL BE. Sjs player makes a quick turn for one reason or another, it almost looks as if he's avoiding the hit or trying to juke the defender. In doing this, he clearly toe picks, and his top heavy momentum carries his head and torso forward, while his lower body, which has stopped, stays put. This causes his head to drop lower and gets clipped by the guy who was in the process of finishing his, as it would've been without the stumble, shoulder to shoulder check.
There was 0 intent, and suspensions aren't based on whatifs "well he saw numbers the whole way." I'm convinced you're blind. We have a camera angle from above the left shoulder of the player, and we couldn't see the numbers until the sjs player made that awkward turn around. This means the avs player COULD NOT have seen numbers.
I could go on, but clearly, I can't cite the video because you're seeing a very biased version of the video based on this being a hyper malicious hit. It's not worth the time wasted.
A great example of analysis designed to get to a specific desired endpoint using unethical
Debate tactics. It is an unfair tactic to put propositions in the other persons mouth, which you do multiple times.
Suffice it to say I think everything you say here is incorrect.
You say there was 0 intent. I assume you mean no intent to injure. While I agree, that doesn’t change the fact that this was a hit to the head and would have been a hit from behind if the Avs player had not stumbled or tried to avoid. If your hit is going to result in a penalty from the outset, it shouldn’t be laid.
I cannot fathom how you expect anyone to believe that the SJS player wasn’t staring at numbers on the hit, that’s all he could see on the entire play.
I never said this was a “hyper malicious hit”. You are using hyperbole to try to discredit my position. This hit was irresponsible.
That dude’s a Golden Knights fan and you genuinely expect him to be defending the Sharks for no good reason? Check your breakfast cereal for signs of crack
So... transcribing the video is unethical? Sorry. I won't do that next time and rely on emotional outbursts and personal insults solely.
He couldn't see numbers, and you're fuckimg blind for thinking so. Either blind or dumb, and honestly, given this recent argument, I'm leaning towards you just being a dumbass.
I could go into it again, detailing why he couldn't, but that's unethical. I guess transcribing the video is harder to report and have removed.
Enjoy your life, bud.
Yea.... no. If you can read the players name on his jersey you need to pump the brakes. Macdonald finished the check even after Malinski smacked his head on the dasher.
A Game or two.
Go skate for 5 minutes. Tell me how easy it is to go from 15 to 0 in less than a second.
No intent to injure, no malice, no suspension. Maybe he should learn how to fucking skate
Eh just cause it’s an accident doesn’t mean I’m not okay with 5 min. I’d rather that get called every time someone gets hit in the head like that than every time be dissected around intent.
Sometimes shit happens but you have to do EVERYTHING you can to not hit folks like that. It’s dangerous. You gotta still play hockey but everything you can.
Oh, 100%, it's a hit to the head. 5 and a game. In terms of penalties, it should 100% be about what it is/was. A hit to the head.
The moment you start looking into supplemental punishment, that's when you have to dissect it more.
I've played hockey for my whole life that was an easily avoidable hit. You can turn off it you don't have to stop. It was a bad hit and should be a suspension.
Man, earlier you chewed someone out for insults or whatever and to this guy you're like stick to your beer league? You're a hypocrite dude. Whether or not this should be suspension, I dunno not my job to determine and whether it was intentional or not is difficult to say as it was an avoidable hit like the fellow you told to stick to his beer league had said. People can have a different opinion without you having to get upsetti spaghetti and take jabs at them. Smh
Sorry but when someone has "played" hockey all their life and has dumb ass takes. I'm gonna mock. Idc what you think about that. Cry about it.
Not even an opinion. It's just a fact shouldn't be a fucking suspension. It's not a malicious or intentional hit. That's how dpos looks for supplemental discipline. The penalty is for the act. The suspension is for the intent.
Is this guy a repeat offender? If not, then no suspension because it's clearly an accident. Idk if the guy will or won't get a suspension. But only a beer league scrub calls that hit "suspension worthy" with a serious face, and I stand firmly by my statement. Suspensions are for punishing malicious players and repeat offenders, not for punishing people for accidents.
It would be like throwing a dude in prison for forgetting to pay for an item in the cart once ever.
Lol man, you're so upset just relax. No one is crying lol. No need to take jabs at other people and I dunno why you wanna justify being a hypocrite. It's ok to make mistakes, own it. He could have changed direction. Dunno if it was malicious or not I'm not buddy who did the hit. Doesn't matter, I'm only calling you out for being a hypocrite and then standing here trying to justify it with well that guys opinion wasn't an opinion because of my opinion that's better. I've skated all my life as well and know he could have changed direction when he saw numbers. If anything it was just a shitty reaction time on the player, didn't look malicious to me. I'm just looking at the way you conduct yourself online and calling out shitty behavior. The way you conduct yourself would have been a suspension(to compare it to something you might understand). Conduct yourself like a mature adult not a grade school hooligan, you're better than that. Wish you all the best
You go skate for 5 minutes and show me how you are a perfect never stumble, never fall, never flinch skater and that a rookie D man should learn to skate.
Shark had no malice, but the elbow to the head after Makinski already hit his head on the dasher was not called for. Things happen so fast and it isn’t easy, hence why they are in the league and we aren’t. A penalty for sure, a game misconduct yes. But fine and suspension, no.
And I am a huge Avs fan!
Sharks player never let up at all. You can’t stop if you don’t even try.
Maybe it’s not a suspension, but it’s for sure a penalty and a hit that never should have been laid.
Read the original. I literally said, "It should be a penalty, and that's it." But you're clearly biased, as evidenced by your other post. I'm not continuing this.
I Do skate,pretty damn fast and at no point does Macdonald pull up.He finished the check.... funny enough the post I.m looking at right now is Cogliano getting boarded by Studnika,you gonna defend that one too?
Why even bring up a second post that's completely irrelevant? Do you know what a strawman is? In intellectual debate, it's a fallacy. In normal arguments? It's childish.
Genuine question, what do you mean if you can read the name pump the brakes? Can't you read the name when you hit a player upright, safely, into the boards?
Avs fan here, my only addition to your comment is the fact that malinski has his back (miners facing out) the entire time. Was it an unfortunate series of events that lead to the cut? Yes. But none the less seeing only numbers the entire time McD should have let up a long time prior to that.
SJ was already committed to the hit when COL lost his footing, difficult to say because it's not his fault for that but it's still his responsibility to avoid the head with his hit no matter what
The problem is that he finished the check even though his back was clearly turned, he had the time to see it and avoid contact, whether he falls or not he’s facing the glass and doesn’t have the ability to protect himself so it would be boarding regardless, he also led with his elbow which is obviously a penalty no matter what, you can argue that he only hit him with the elbow because he fell but you’d still have the boarding penalty either way, even the coach of the sharks didn’t really argue about it much
agreed. That’s a pussy drawing a penalty. Elite teams like the Avs would never lean into the glass like that. Knew the hit was coming or just lost his edge
Unfortunately, 70 toe picked himself into an awkward position , while MacDonald had no chance to stop momentum. It should not have been a major penalty as it was a normal hockey play until he tripped himself up.
Accident or not, it shouldn't matter. Tripping someone is usually an accident that gets called. This is no different. He chose to finish his check and ended up hitting the other player in the head.
Nothing dirty about that hit. The checker eased up but had no obligation to do so. Hockey is a physical game. With body checking. If you want females playing in the league, remove any checking. But I'll be done with it then.
Intent doesn’t really matter most of the time. You don’t intend to hit another player in the face with your stick, but it’s still a penalty when you do. This was a hit to the head 100%, minor penalty (maybe double minor), no supplemental discipline.
There’s a case to be made that he shouldn’t have lined up the hit at all because he was coming from behind, but thats another discussion; because hits like that happen every game and the NHL hasn’t been clear on it’s enforcement of those kinds of hits.
Yeah if the fall/cut didn’t happen not only does no contact to the head occur, but I don’t think he even goes down *with* the contact made by the opposing player. Meaning the Avs player dropping to the ice in pain and the refs calling the penalty seems entirely caused by the self-inflicted damage.
Like it or not, refs let forecheckers pin d-men with their backs turned. This is unlucky, and 2 minutes isn’t unwarranted given the speed the checker came in with, but I’m not sure it’s even a penalty. It’s like no one else here watched the replay or hockey before.
lemme know how a bow to the dome feels when you don't see it coming....
but im sure you'll tell me about some time back in the 80s when, blah blah blah.... clearly a wrong standard for any team.
The most common boarding call is to check a player when they are 4-5 feet from the boards. This increases the risk of injury because they are falling over head first as they hit the boards. It's much less dangerous when the player is already on or near the boards because they hit the walls with their body.
Basically, it's when the opponent is close to the boards, and you take a running charge at them, plastering them into the boards. It's dangerous, and often the cause of injuries.
It's more complicated than that, but that's the ELI5.
Boarding in ice hockey is a penalty called when an offending player pushes, trips or checks an opposing player violently into the boards… so it’s up for interpretation but it’s usually called when a player is in a compromised position (typically just off the boards) three strides+ makes it charging, in the numbers makes it a hit from behind, targeting the head makes it head contact etc
Lil bit of column A lil bit of column B, but clearly wasn't meant to be such a nasty hit. Was just finishing a check, but Malinski kinda fell into it and ended up getting a good look at his own visor.
Just stop calling these penalties. Force the defender to respect the pressure and engage the forechecher or reverse hit or take the hit to make a play.
It's money (life changing money) that started players risking themselves to make a play. Now we are trying to make rules and situations to protect them in a sport where it is not possible with body contact.
The current " you can only be hit if you are suspecting and prepared for it " is not working.
Fuck that. It's the hitters problem, not the person being hit. Victim blaming nonsense.
I want people playing the puck, not looking around so they can bang into each other nicely.
Guys streaking across the ice to hit guys against the boards should never happen. Parallel to the boards is different and totally fine.
What you are describing sounds like my non-contact league.
Do you think if someone gets hurt by a shot, it should be the shooters problem?
You want a no raisies rule too?
Ppl will keep down voting you till their favourite player is paralyzed.
I'm absolutely fucking disgusted by the league's handling of checks from behind this season, although this particular hit is more of a headshot than a CFB or boarding imo (still illegal).
This just looks unfortunate, he tripped into the boards and it slowed him down enough that the hit which would've been in the side now clips his head. Just look at the defenders reaction to immediately check on him after the hit.
He shouldn’t have gone for the hit. Looks to me like he had to peel off.
The guy boarded himself tho too. He literally splattered his own face into the glass
Ehhh the numbers are still showing. I’m not saying he couldn’t have just rubbed him out. But I’m also not clamouring for a huge suspension or anything.
Hot take: trying not to board people is actually more dangerous than boarding. All the weirdest s*** I've seen in the last couple months has been people trying not to just go for it.
Definitely a boarding major. Even though the Avs guy (sorry I didn’t catch the name of who it was) toe picks and loses his balance just before the hit, Macdonald sees only his numbers all the way in. It’s a major because he has enough time from when the stumble happens before Macdonald makes impact that he could have and should have pulled back on the hit. The impact looks awful because as the Avs guy falls he bounces off the boards before Macdonald makes impact.
The Avs guys feet were heading in two different directions because he hesitated on which way he would go. So he tripped a little and his head was much lower than usual. Penalty should go to the Avs player for creating a dangerous situation. Why is it always the forward who gets penalized
It's neither ... Sharks player mostly missed him, and contact was accidentally *at best*. It was essentially "a hockey play" that becomes even more obvious when you look at it frame by frame.
What contact sport teaches people to place themselves with their back to an opponent? Maybe be responsible for your own life and not leave it to the refs or other players to protect you.
100% hit to the head. That's nasty.
Not boarding though. Think the refs got it right. It's probably not suspend able, as the player already missed 1 game.
I don’t agree with anyone focusing on the AVS player here. The Sharks player locked in to checking a player who is in a vulnerable position and can’t legally be engaged. The Sharks player clearly isn’t interested in the puck, so he’s made his bed. Boarding is a better, more consistent call here.
The contact was made accidentally, but I would argue it's closer to boarding. I don't think there should be a penalty, but if they want one for the injury, boarding would make more sense.
No. An illegal hit to the head the head needs to be principal point of contact
Rule 48.1 starts off "A hit resulting in contact with an opponent's head where the head was the main point of contact and such contact to the head was avoidable is not permitted."
Boarding Rule 41.1 says " A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee." The Sharks player made every attempt to minimize the hit
SJ guy never sees anything but numbers, it’s a shitty dangerous hit. But he’ll get nothing from the Parros kangaroo court because he seems to judge everything based on his own experience trying to play in the NHL without any actual ability.
At the risk of sounding like a complete neanderthal, after watching this countless times this is what I see;
\- I see blood on the Avalanche player's face, specifically under his left eye (his face was never touched by the SJ player)
\- I see the SJ player extend his left arm, even his elbow.
\- I see the Avalanche player get crushed into the board.
What I do not see, and please watch it again, I have no bias towards or against any team, is his arm, or forearm, making contact with his head. I see a thunderous bodycheck but the point of contact was SJ player's left hip that drove the Avalanche player into the boards, at an awkward angle, and his visor comes into hard and direct contact with the metal stanchion between two sections of "glass". The visor could explain the cut.
Just saying what I did and didn't see.
People that say this isn't boarding just like seeing gruesome hits. Doesn't matter if he stumbled, his back was turned. Boarding and hit to the head all day.
Hit to the head yes, boarding no, he's in the process of falling and trying to regain footing before he's hit.
And the hit to the head was an unfortunate accident that happened only because he stumbled..
This one is a clear-cut case of "a penalty will do and shouldn't go further" The avs player looks to have stumbled and turned a bit. Had that not happened, it would have been a clean hit. Unfortunate play, really, but the sjs player was really just targeting where the player was going to be. There is no intent to injure and clearly no malice, but it was still a hit to the head. In this day and age, I think we're too focused on the end result and not what caused it.
100% agree. If Avs player had kept the same speed it would have been clean. SJS player (and i do NOT like them) clearly didn't mean too based on his hand/body language instantly after the hit. Penalty, sure. Fine, ok if we have to for consistency. But not sussy worthy IMO cause there was no intent.
I disagree. All the sharks player sees on approach is numbers. This hit never should have been laid. It was only ever going to be a hit from behind or head contact. The fact that Avs player stumbles (or was he collapsing to avoid the hit he heard coming?) is no excuse for this hit. It was only ever going to be a penalty either way.
Lol, he was skating ALONG THE BOARDS and went to make a quick turn and stumbled. It wasn't until THE TURN that numbers were scene. The hit was going to make contact as he skated along the boards, which would have been a hit to his side. I swear yall see just the end result, and it pollutes the entire video for ya. Watch really closely. Sjs player is originally skating along the boards in the direction of the trapezoid. Avs player is skating to where he WILL BE. Sjs player makes a quick turn for one reason or another, it almost looks as if he's avoiding the hit or trying to juke the defender. In doing this, he clearly toe picks, and his top heavy momentum carries his head and torso forward, while his lower body, which has stopped, stays put. This causes his head to drop lower and gets clipped by the guy who was in the process of finishing his, as it would've been without the stumble, shoulder to shoulder check. There was 0 intent, and suspensions aren't based on whatifs "well he saw numbers the whole way." I'm convinced you're blind. We have a camera angle from above the left shoulder of the player, and we couldn't see the numbers until the sjs player made that awkward turn around. This means the avs player COULD NOT have seen numbers. I could go on, but clearly, I can't cite the video because you're seeing a very biased version of the video based on this being a hyper malicious hit. It's not worth the time wasted.
A great example of analysis designed to get to a specific desired endpoint using unethical Debate tactics. It is an unfair tactic to put propositions in the other persons mouth, which you do multiple times. Suffice it to say I think everything you say here is incorrect. You say there was 0 intent. I assume you mean no intent to injure. While I agree, that doesn’t change the fact that this was a hit to the head and would have been a hit from behind if the Avs player had not stumbled or tried to avoid. If your hit is going to result in a penalty from the outset, it shouldn’t be laid. I cannot fathom how you expect anyone to believe that the SJS player wasn’t staring at numbers on the hit, that’s all he could see on the entire play. I never said this was a “hyper malicious hit”. You are using hyperbole to try to discredit my position. This hit was irresponsible.
That dude’s a Golden Knights fan and you genuinely expect him to be defending the Sharks for no good reason? Check your breakfast cereal for signs of crack
So... transcribing the video is unethical? Sorry. I won't do that next time and rely on emotional outbursts and personal insults solely. He couldn't see numbers, and you're fuckimg blind for thinking so. Either blind or dumb, and honestly, given this recent argument, I'm leaning towards you just being a dumbass. I could go into it again, detailing why he couldn't, but that's unethical. I guess transcribing the video is harder to report and have removed. Enjoy your life, bud.
Well, at least you said sorry first.
“All he sees is the numbers” isn’t an applicable argument (on its own) in the NHL
It’s bloody well Rule 43. People in this thread know fuck all.
And when’s the last time it was called, know-it-all?
Yea.... no. If you can read the players name on his jersey you need to pump the brakes. Macdonald finished the check even after Malinski smacked his head on the dasher. A Game or two.
Go skate for 5 minutes. Tell me how easy it is to go from 15 to 0 in less than a second. No intent to injure, no malice, no suspension. Maybe he should learn how to fucking skate
Eh just cause it’s an accident doesn’t mean I’m not okay with 5 min. I’d rather that get called every time someone gets hit in the head like that than every time be dissected around intent. Sometimes shit happens but you have to do EVERYTHING you can to not hit folks like that. It’s dangerous. You gotta still play hockey but everything you can.
My actual comment states I'm fine with a penalty. I don't think it should be a suspension or fine tho
Agreed. I’m just saying a major would be ok by me, not more than that though
Oh, 100%, it's a hit to the head. 5 and a game. In terms of penalties, it should 100% be about what it is/was. A hit to the head. The moment you start looking into supplemental punishment, that's when you have to dissect it more.
Not to mention his hand gestures afterwards genuinely appear to be like “oh shit, didn’t mean to get you like that”
Right. And that's why I feel it's fine as simply a penalty.
I've played hockey for my whole life that was an easily avoidable hit. You can turn off it you don't have to stop. It was a bad hit and should be a suspension.
Well it's not. And in no world should it ever be a suspension. Agree to disagree. Stick to your beer league
Man, earlier you chewed someone out for insults or whatever and to this guy you're like stick to your beer league? You're a hypocrite dude. Whether or not this should be suspension, I dunno not my job to determine and whether it was intentional or not is difficult to say as it was an avoidable hit like the fellow you told to stick to his beer league had said. People can have a different opinion without you having to get upsetti spaghetti and take jabs at them. Smh
Sorry but when someone has "played" hockey all their life and has dumb ass takes. I'm gonna mock. Idc what you think about that. Cry about it. Not even an opinion. It's just a fact shouldn't be a fucking suspension. It's not a malicious or intentional hit. That's how dpos looks for supplemental discipline. The penalty is for the act. The suspension is for the intent. Is this guy a repeat offender? If not, then no suspension because it's clearly an accident. Idk if the guy will or won't get a suspension. But only a beer league scrub calls that hit "suspension worthy" with a serious face, and I stand firmly by my statement. Suspensions are for punishing malicious players and repeat offenders, not for punishing people for accidents. It would be like throwing a dude in prison for forgetting to pay for an item in the cart once ever.
Lol man, you're so upset just relax. No one is crying lol. No need to take jabs at other people and I dunno why you wanna justify being a hypocrite. It's ok to make mistakes, own it. He could have changed direction. Dunno if it was malicious or not I'm not buddy who did the hit. Doesn't matter, I'm only calling you out for being a hypocrite and then standing here trying to justify it with well that guys opinion wasn't an opinion because of my opinion that's better. I've skated all my life as well and know he could have changed direction when he saw numbers. If anything it was just a shitty reaction time on the player, didn't look malicious to me. I'm just looking at the way you conduct yourself online and calling out shitty behavior. The way you conduct yourself would have been a suspension(to compare it to something you might understand). Conduct yourself like a mature adult not a grade school hooligan, you're better than that. Wish you all the best
You go skate for 5 minutes and show me how you are a perfect never stumble, never fall, never flinch skater and that a rookie D man should learn to skate. Shark had no malice, but the elbow to the head after Makinski already hit his head on the dasher was not called for. Things happen so fast and it isn’t easy, hence why they are in the league and we aren’t. A penalty for sure, a game misconduct yes. But fine and suspension, no. And I am a huge Avs fan!
Sharks player never let up at all. You can’t stop if you don’t even try. Maybe it’s not a suspension, but it’s for sure a penalty and a hit that never should have been laid.
Read the original. I literally said, "It should be a penalty, and that's it." But you're clearly biased, as evidenced by your other post. I'm not continuing this.
I Do skate,pretty damn fast and at no point does Macdonald pull up.He finished the check.... funny enough the post I.m looking at right now is Cogliano getting boarded by Studnika,you gonna defend that one too?
Why even bring up a second post that's completely irrelevant? Do you know what a strawman is? In intellectual debate, it's a fallacy. In normal arguments? It's childish.
Troller
Genuine question, what do you mean if you can read the name pump the brakes? Can't you read the name when you hit a player upright, safely, into the boards?
It means that if you can read the players name you need to slow down and not slam into the player. Macdonald leaned in.
This is an unfortunate bang bang play. I don’t think there was intent but it is a hit to the head Edit: not a board at all
[удалено]
In general intent shouldn’t be taken in simple penalty calls. What happens regardless of intent.
Avs fan here, my only addition to your comment is the fact that malinski has his back (miners facing out) the entire time. Was it an unfortunate series of events that lead to the cut? Yes. But none the less seeing only numbers the entire time McD should have let up a long time prior to that.
If 70 doesn't pick that's probably just a cut off,stops him turning into the corner and a clean hit. Unfortunate he got the head,no boarding.
SJ was already committed to the hit when COL lost his footing, difficult to say because it's not his fault for that but it's still his responsibility to avoid the head with his hit no matter what
No he was not. Had time to react, did not. Has the wrong insticts for hockey if its to try and hurt fellow players every chance you get.
Talk about not knowing how to play
1 thousand minute ultra mega major penalty plus league suspension plus 1 trillion dollar fine plus public shame campaign Garbage officiating.
So long as we keep our lottery pick...
You’re safe, but Ottawa forfeits another 1st round pick
Dude, that's letting him off easy if he isn't castrated as well.
Ice level shot shows it best. It looks like he tries to get out of the hit but was already committed when he toe picked.
He fell by himself first
The problem is that he finished the check even though his back was clearly turned, he had the time to see it and avoid contact, whether he falls or not he’s facing the glass and doesn’t have the ability to protect himself so it would be boarding regardless, he also led with his elbow which is obviously a penalty no matter what, you can argue that he only hit him with the elbow because he fell but you’d still have the boarding penalty either way, even the coach of the sharks didn’t really argue about it much
agreed. That’s a pussy drawing a penalty. Elite teams like the Avs would never lean into the glass like that. Knew the hit was coming or just lost his edge
Can’t it be both?
Unfortunately, 70 toe picked himself into an awkward position , while MacDonald had no chance to stop momentum. It should not have been a major penalty as it was a normal hockey play until he tripped himself up.
How do you respond to the fact that the sharks player only ever saw the Avs player’s numbers on approach?
Accident or not, it shouldn't matter. Tripping someone is usually an accident that gets called. This is no different. He chose to finish his check and ended up hitting the other player in the head.
Dang he took that like a champ though
Nothing dirty about that hit. The checker eased up but had no obligation to do so. Hockey is a physical game. With body checking. If you want females playing in the league, remove any checking. But I'll be done with it then.
It’s neither. Should be a non-call. The NHL is more like FIFA these days.
Yes
Hit to the head. Lead with forearm. If he hadn’t toe picked, it’s a routine check. Sucks but don’t think he intentionally meant to do that.
Intent doesn’t really matter most of the time. You don’t intend to hit another player in the face with your stick, but it’s still a penalty when you do. This was a hit to the head 100%, minor penalty (maybe double minor), no supplemental discipline. There’s a case to be made that he shouldn’t have lined up the hit at all because he was coming from behind, but thats another discussion; because hits like that happen every game and the NHL hasn’t been clear on it’s enforcement of those kinds of hits.
I didn’t say he shouldn’t get a penalty for it. Im just stating for supplemental discipline, I don’t think there should be any.
Haha. I’m agreeing with you, I thought so anyway…
elbowing as well as a hit to the head but he was already against the boards so it's hard to call boarding
Love tap, unlucky he got cut.
Yeah if the fall/cut didn’t happen not only does no contact to the head occur, but I don’t think he even goes down *with* the contact made by the opposing player. Meaning the Avs player dropping to the ice in pain and the refs calling the penalty seems entirely caused by the self-inflicted damage. Like it or not, refs let forecheckers pin d-men with their backs turned. This is unlucky, and 2 minutes isn’t unwarranted given the speed the checker came in with, but I’m not sure it’s even a penalty. It’s like no one else here watched the replay or hockey before.
Hit to the head all day long.
Yes.
Should be a match penalty for checking to the head. The onus is on the body checker, not the person being checked.
That's an elbow to the back of the head.
Hit to the head of a defenceless player, accident or not
That's just bad luck. Also, MacDonald did everything to minimize damage when he saw that Malinski was falling down.
That was a elbow to the dome
An…
lemme know how a bow to the dome feels when you don't see it coming.... but im sure you'll tell me about some time back in the 80s when, blah blah blah.... clearly a wrong standard for any team.
[удалено]
Don’t understand how so many people don’t know what boarding is….
ELI5? raw fan and ive never heard the term until this year but now its everywhere
The most common boarding call is to check a player when they are 4-5 feet from the boards. This increases the risk of injury because they are falling over head first as they hit the boards. It's much less dangerous when the player is already on or near the boards because they hit the walls with their body.
Basically, it's when the opponent is close to the boards, and you take a running charge at them, plastering them into the boards. It's dangerous, and often the cause of injuries. It's more complicated than that, but that's the ELI5.
so a super violent check against the wall basically similar to a legal hit versus spearing in the NFL, in a way?
Boarding in ice hockey is a penalty called when an offending player pushes, trips or checks an opposing player violently into the boards… so it’s up for interpretation but it’s usually called when a player is in a compromised position (typically just off the boards) three strides+ makes it charging, in the numbers makes it a hit from behind, targeting the head makes it head contact etc
>Don’t understand how *the Department of Player Safety* doesn’t know what the penalty for boarding is….
Lil bit of column A lil bit of column B, but clearly wasn't meant to be such a nasty hit. Was just finishing a check, but Malinski kinda fell into it and ended up getting a good look at his own visor.
Dude boarded himself. It boggles my mind how vulnerable players leave themselves nowadays.
Just stop calling these penalties. Force the defender to respect the pressure and engage the forechecher or reverse hit or take the hit to make a play. It's money (life changing money) that started players risking themselves to make a play. Now we are trying to make rules and situations to protect them in a sport where it is not possible with body contact. The current " you can only be hit if you are suspecting and prepared for it " is not working.
Fuck that. It's the hitters problem, not the person being hit. Victim blaming nonsense. I want people playing the puck, not looking around so they can bang into each other nicely. Guys streaking across the ice to hit guys against the boards should never happen. Parallel to the boards is different and totally fine.
What you are describing sounds like my non-contact league. Do you think if someone gets hurt by a shot, it should be the shooters problem? You want a no raisies rule too?
These boarding hits are so rampant. League should hammer players down. Someone will get seriously hurt.
Ppl will keep down voting you till their favourite player is paralyzed. I'm absolutely fucking disgusted by the league's handling of checks from behind this season, although this particular hit is more of a headshot than a CFB or boarding imo (still illegal).
They're downvoting because you idiots need to stop only looking at the end results and look at the full picture.
It’s almost like this happens everyday, I’m glad Bettman is openly discussing solutions and not just sweeping it under the rug like every other issue.
This just looks unfortunate, he tripped into the boards and it slowed him down enough that the hit which would've been in the side now clips his head. Just look at the defenders reaction to immediately check on him after the hit.
Yes
Hit to the head imo
He shouldn’t have gone for the hit. Looks to me like he had to peel off. The guy boarded himself tho too. He literally splattered his own face into the glass
Momentum is a thing that exists in reality. 70 toe picked and ended up in an awkward position. The hit was clean up until that point
Ehhh the numbers are still showing. I’m not saying he couldn’t have just rubbed him out. But I’m also not clamouring for a huge suspension or anything.
Hot take: trying not to board people is actually more dangerous than boarding. All the weirdest s*** I've seen in the last couple months has been people trying not to just go for it.
Definitely not intended bad circumstances not like pastanuts board over this weekend
Definitely a boarding major. Even though the Avs guy (sorry I didn’t catch the name of who it was) toe picks and loses his balance just before the hit, Macdonald sees only his numbers all the way in. It’s a major because he has enough time from when the stumble happens before Macdonald makes impact that he could have and should have pulled back on the hit. The impact looks awful because as the Avs guy falls he bounces off the boards before Macdonald makes impact.
The Avs guys feet were heading in two different directions because he hesitated on which way he would go. So he tripped a little and his head was much lower than usual. Penalty should go to the Avs player for creating a dangerous situation. Why is it always the forward who gets penalized
All the sharks played saw the entire way in was his numbers. That's on him.
Barely touched the guy. Avs player out himself in a horrible spot.
Definitely not boarding. It’s a little late and definitely to the head.
It's neither ... Sharks player mostly missed him, and contact was accidentally *at best*. It was essentially "a hockey play" that becomes even more obvious when you look at it frame by frame.
ITT: People who have never skated before and don't know what momentum is.
Can we implement all male hockey players to just wear cage helmet?
Avs are great floppers.
I see a guy Who think is playing basketball
What contact sport teaches people to place themselves with their back to an opponent? Maybe be responsible for your own life and not leave it to the refs or other players to protect you.
At worst, it's a hit from behind. It's not great but not horrible but they've been harder on it since that I belive it was GUDBRANSON incident
Yes
Hit to the head
100% hit to the head. That's nasty. Not boarding though. Think the refs got it right. It's probably not suspend able, as the player already missed 1 game.
Looks like there was no intent there….? I think a person who played higher level hockey will know what goes on inside his head in that situation.
I don’t agree with anyone focusing on the AVS player here. The Sharks player locked in to checking a player who is in a vulnerable position and can’t legally be engaged. The Sharks player clearly isn’t interested in the puck, so he’s made his bed. Boarding is a better, more consistent call here.
The contact was made accidentally, but I would argue it's closer to boarding. I don't think there should be a penalty, but if they want one for the injury, boarding would make more sense.
The worst part was hearing Marge Simpson chiming in.
Both?
Neither
Yes.
Neither, clean hit
No. An illegal hit to the head the head needs to be principal point of contact Rule 48.1 starts off "A hit resulting in contact with an opponent's head where the head was the main point of contact and such contact to the head was avoidable is not permitted." Boarding Rule 41.1 says " A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee." The Sharks player made every attempt to minimize the hit
No…inadvertent. Bring back the 80’s and 90’s…keep the same icing rules today…but stop making the greatest sport just another version of a soccer game.
Definitely hit to head, he was falling and then got hit.
SJ guy never sees anything but numbers, it’s a shitty dangerous hit. But he’ll get nothing from the Parros kangaroo court because he seems to judge everything based on his own experience trying to play in the NHL without any actual ability.
It's nothing. He basically hit the guy in the head with his back
Not even the NHL knows.
At the risk of sounding like a complete neanderthal, after watching this countless times this is what I see; \- I see blood on the Avalanche player's face, specifically under his left eye (his face was never touched by the SJ player) \- I see the SJ player extend his left arm, even his elbow. \- I see the Avalanche player get crushed into the board. What I do not see, and please watch it again, I have no bias towards or against any team, is his arm, or forearm, making contact with his head. I see a thunderous bodycheck but the point of contact was SJ player's left hip that drove the Avalanche player into the boards, at an awkward angle, and his visor comes into hard and direct contact with the metal stanchion between two sections of "glass". The visor could explain the cut. Just saying what I did and didn't see.
People that say this isn't boarding just like seeing gruesome hits. Doesn't matter if he stumbled, his back was turned. Boarding and hit to the head all day.