Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

helgrenze wrote: But you should also note that it cost the Blackhawks a player, a 5 minute powerplay disadvantage, and at least one goal.

Completely irrelevant.

That which happens after the fact has no bearing on the initial action.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andrew1975 wrote:
Same to you!

I'm curious, how many sports have you played?

Andrew1975 wrote:

Fact is, if they play was exactly the same, and both players just skated it off, there would be no issue. That play happens hundreds of times a game.

Bingo.

Except in Montreal where they flip on the bat-signal, call in criminal investigators and demand an international tribunal...

I'm curious, how many sports have you played?

I've played just about everything pick up style. But in actual leagues, I've played, Football, Basketball, Baseball, and wrestled in grade school. Football and Lacrosse in Highschool. Men's Lacrosse, (Women's Club lacrosse for kent.....They needed a goalie and oddly enough you can have a male goalie in womens lacrosse, well club at least, and I always wanted to try to play goalie) and Fencing for Kent state. Hockey in pick up leagues. And many intermeral leagues of all of that plus broom ball......which is possibly my favorite. Oh and soccer but that was only ever played backyard style with a bunch of drunk Russians in Volgograd.

Andrew1975 wrote:And as you so often point out "Your feelings are irrelevant".

Not in this instance, being as we all know it was an objectively illegal hit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andrew1975 wrote:...and wrestled in grade school.

The Mills series is legal, but if I put you into a full nelson and push your head downward ever so slightly past 35 degrees you will die.

But that's alright, because its a physical sport.

That's probably why full nelsons were illegal when I wrestled in grade school, have no idea if they are legal later on. Not subjectively illegal.

Boarding is a completely subjective call in the NHL. Do you want them to call a penalty every time someone get checked into the boards? Might as well make all hitting illegal, like women's Lacrosse, they don't even need to wear pads. It's really not even the same sport at that point.

I say if you have the balls to put yourself in the position to get boarded then you have the balls to take the hit. The form on that hit was great, not from behind (quite clearly the side), not head hunting, not high sticking, not crosschecking, nor was it blind sideing or out of the blue, Gilbert clearly saw him, had his chance to back of and quite clearly assessed the threat poorly. A little over zealous with the power...maybe? But these are big boys, they hit at full strength.

Look as brutal as people claim that NHL hockey is it is still possible to play well into your 40's and in some instances 50's and that is playing 82 games a season not counting playoffs which can almost double that amount. That is more games than you average NFL player plays in his whole lifetime, not just his NFL Career. It's not that bad for these guys. Yes an average person would die from one game. But these are hockey players.....let them play. Now we have all seen truly unsportsmanlike hits in hockey.....those need to go, this was not that situation.

Not in this instance, being as we all know it was an objectively illegal hit.

No we don't. It may have been ruled such, but it's a defensible play and hit, and it was not malicious. We've all seen malicious unnecessary hits in hockey.....this was at the most spirited play.

Those hits look brutal and they would be, as was said, for an average person, BUT the typical NHL player has been playing nearly year round his entire life. They've gotten use to it and can handle most of the hits.

After rewatching the video It should also be noted that Gilbert initiated contact by skating directly into Carcillo, and placed his arm over Carcillo's stick.

The only reason that "Boarding" was called was due to the force in which Gilbert hit the boards behind the net.
There was no possibility of an "Icing" call because Carcillo took his shot between the center line and the Blue line. Nor was there an Offsides as Carcillo was following the puck.
So the only reason that "Boarding" was called was the force that Gilbert hit the boards after Carcillo checked him.

(Under Rule 41) However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

Gilbert put himself in the position, the check was unavoidable, as was any contact.
Carcillo just used more force, as determined by the Ref, than required to make said check.

Andrew1975 wrote:That's probably why full nelsons were illegal when I wrestled in grade school, have no idea if they are legal later on. Not subjectively illegal.

Boarding is a completely subjective call in the NHL. Do you want them to call a penalty every time someone get checked into the boards? Might as well make all hitting illegal, like women's Lacrosse, they don't even need to wear pads. It's really not even the same sport at that point.

The officiating in the NHl has gone strait to hell because the league doesn't care much about player safety, and they weren't too concerned about training up the current batch of officials before guys like Fraiser and others retired...
So now they have a faster, more dangerous game with 'learning as we go' officials.

Andrew1975 wrote:I say if you have the balls to put yourself in the position to get boarded then you have the balls to take the hit. The form on that hit was great, not from behind (quite clearly the side), not head hunting, not high sticking, not crosschecking, nor was it blind sideing or out of the blue, Gilbert clearly saw him, had his chance to back of and quite clearly assessed the threat poorly. A little over zealous with the power...maybe? But these are big boys, they hit at full strength.

Brilliant, blame the victim! So I suppose if I'm out walking about and cross at a designated stop sign while noticing that an oncoming car *might* try coasting through it's still my fault if I get hit?!!

Gilbert was doing what any good defenseman is taught to do - get the outside lane shoot the puck up to the wing to start the breakout and take the hit along the boards. All Carsillo had to do was wait about 2 more strides and he could have finished his check cleanly. But no, instead the neandrathal desides to take advantage of the opposing player who's intent is focused on making the correct play and pound him senseless.
Hockey doesn't need idiots like him and all Carsillo did was show that he has 0 respect for anyone else.

Andrew1975 wrote:Look as brutal as people claim that NHL hockey is it is still possible to play well into your 40's and in some instances 50's and that is playing 82 games a season not counting playoffs which can almost double that amount. That is more games than you average NFL player plays in his whole lifetime, not just his NFL Career. It's not that bad for these guys. Yes an average person would die from one game. But these are hockey players.....let them play. Now we have all seen truly unsportsmanlike hits in hockey.....those need to go, this was not that situation.

If you go all 4 rounds through the play-offs and each series you play goes to 7 games, you're only playing 28 additional games, hardly 'almost double that amount'.

And funny thing to point out, Sid Crosby has trained to take 'those hits' and look at him right now...
I'm not advocating taking checking or even fighting out of hockey, I just don't want to see the @$$hat goons getting away with murder and taking the actual talanted players out for half or more a season each year!

The point is, the NHL has litterly burried it's collective heads in the sand to the point that headhunting is deemed 'okay' because you'll get a few games and a small fine at worst, while you'll take a highly skilled player out of the game for months, if not the entire season! I don't spend money to watch crap players like Avery or Carsillo, I pay money to see skilled players which are becoming quite rare considering how many big names are currently out with 'upper body injuries'.

Andrew1975 wrote:

Not in this instance, being as we all know it was an objectively illegal hit.

No I don't. It may have been ruled such, but it's a defensible play and hit and it was not malicious. We've all seen malicious unnecessary hits in hockey.....this was at the most spirited play.

Then you need to learn the rules of the game... A legal body check is not delivered with both your fists to the other guy's head/shoulder area from a blindside angle - it's actually exactly what it sounds like; ducking your shoulder towards your target while tilting your own head back & pulling your elbow into your side to check with the other guy with your body! (not your fists or wildly swinging stick or elbow or head - the solid profile of your freakin' body!)
What Carsillo did was nothing remotely like that, hence it was indeed a very illegal hit! Not to mention he made no attempt to play the puck, which was only at least 3 or 4 feet away from either player. (ie: it was at least an interference penalty because you're not allowed to cream a guy who's not playing the puck!)

Bodychecking itself is taught piss-poorly nowadays and that's a BIG part of the problem as kids are being taught to lead with their fists and/or set to recieve a check with their fists raised.


Trying to say you know NHL playstyle when you've only ever played pick-up or house-league hockey doesn't work. Untill you've honestly & truely played the game at a high-level such as AAA Major Migit/Major Junior/'varsity/Senior Women's or the like, you can't understand how damaging these plays really are.
The speed is so much faster that the hits are alot worse and the equipment todays is pretty much modern plate armour, which only adds to the force of an impact! While on tv it doesn't seem too bad and that 'guys can take it', try it out for yourself sometime...

Sure these guys train almost every minute all year long to get to this level and play at this intensity, it doesn't do crap all to offset the laws of physichs which only make things hurt a helluva lot more at this much higher a tempo. (and these guys aren't supermen either!)

Andrew1975 wrote:I say if you have the balls to put yourself in the position to get boarded then you have the balls to take the hit. The form on that hit was great, not from behind (quite clearly the side), not head hunting, not high sticking, not crosschecking, nor was it blind sideing or out of the blue, Gilbert clearly saw him, had his chance to back of and quite clearly assessed the threat poorly. A little over zealous with the power...maybe? But these are big boys, they hit at full strength.

Brilliant, blame the victim! So I suppose if I'm out walking about and cross at a designated stop sign while noticing that an oncoming car *might* try coasting through it's still my fault if I get hit?!!

No your just stupid and or have a poor grasp of physics and possibly a death wish or just completely careless. Either "Hey you, out of the gene pool!". Before I cross the street I look both ways and make sure tons of metal are not in a position to squish me like a bug.

I love when people scream blame the victim. The last refuge of pu###s. He is not an innocent victim crossing the street. There are no cross walks or safezones in hockey. Hes a athlete playing in a contact sport who saw the defensman behind him and had the balls to make a play.

Gilbert was doing what any good defenseman is taught to do!

Fixed that for you

Andrew1975 wrote:Look as brutal as people claim that NHL hockey is it is still possible to play well into your 40's and in some instances 50's and that is playing 82 games a season not counting playoffs which can almost double that amount. That is more games than you average NFL player plays in his whole lifetime, not just his NFL Career. It's not that bad for these guys. Yes an average person would die from one game. But these are hockey players.....let them play. Now we have all seen truly unsportsmanlike hits in hockey.....those need to go, this was not that situation.

If you go all 4 rounds through the play-offs and each series you play goes to 7 games, you're only playing 28 additional games, hardly 'almost double that amount'.

I call it as definite Interference and would say boarding as well. Possible dangerous play. I would think that would be a 2+2 or 5 min major. If the ref saw it as dangerous play then that is a game misconduct at least.

Then again I only watch the EPIHL matches, so not same level.

Azza007 wrote:I call it as definite Interference and would say boarding as well. Possible dangerous play. I would think that would be a 2+2 or 5 min major. If the ref saw it as dangerous play then that is a game misconduct at least.

Then again I only watch the EPIHL matches, so not same level.

And your post illustrates the main problem in the NHL: the refs all see it differently as well.

Too much free interpretation required leads to inconsistant enforcement and leads to games/players getting out of control.

That's how it is when a penalty is called based purely on the result of an action, not because of it.

And to clarify a player does not actually have to have possession of the puck to be checked. He has to be in near the puck. Hence man/puck drills where one man calls puck while the other clears an opponent. They were near a loose puck.

I'll admit, at full speed it looks bad, but in slow mo you can break down what happens and examine the hit. It was textbook. I probably would have blown the call if I was a ref, it all happens so fast, and yet was completely predictable. Start at 1:14 on this video you can see in slow mo that this hit is completely clean. Hands together, leads with the body, follows through with his arms, hits him directly in the side under his arm pit, not the back. It's beautiful. It's textbook.....IT"S LEGAL

I got thrown from a playoff game because as I was winding up for the game winning slapshot (and a hat trick) another player slid and layed down between me and the puck while I was in mid swing. I ended up hitting him instead of the puck. I broke or bruised one of is ribs and he just laid there. The ref threw me out of the game. When I asked what I did, he said I broke the guys ribs and that was that. How was that my fault?

The guy was my RA and a good friend in college, his team ended up winning the playoffs because of that call. He showed me is trophy and I poked him in the ribs, he winced in pain. "I still win" I said.

The outrage fans sometimes have over bad/non-calls or at players doing something "dirty" can be summed up visually in this pic:

Andrew1975 wrote:That's probably why full nelsons were illegal when I wrestled in grade school, have no idea if they are legal later on.

So you're saying that, in a physical sport, especially dangerous moves are considered to be illegal?

Does this not invalidate the argument from "Its a physical sport."?

Andrew1975 wrote:
Not subjectively illegal.

Utter nonsense. In folkstyle wrestling there are two rules that render the full nelson illegal. The first is the obvious one that bans the move. This is the least subjective, but still entails a degree of judgment on the part of official (When is the full nelson completed?). The second is the rule against dangerous positions. This rule imposes upon the official to bring competitors to the last starting position if one or both is placed in a position likely to cause harm. If one competitor deliberately violates the ban on dangerous positions, he is subject to forfeit, and possible suspension (depending on the ruling body).

Andrew1975 wrote:
Boarding is a completely subjective call in the NHL. Do you want them to call a penalty every time someone get checked into the boards?

No, I want them to call a penalty when players check other players in a dangerous fashion.

Andrew1975 wrote:
...Gilbert clearly saw him, had his chance to back of and quite clearly assessed the threat poorly.

Gilbert saw Carcillo, and addressed the threat as he would be expected to given the rules. He, perhaps foolishly, failed to consider that Carcillo is an idiot who likely does not know the rules of the game he plays at a professional level.

Andrew1975 wrote:
Look as brutal as people claim that NHL hockey is it is still possible to play well into your 40's and in some instances 50's and that is playing 82 games a season not counting playoffs which can almost double that amount. That is more games than you average NFL player plays in his whole lifetime, not just his NFL Career.

Terrible comparison. Hockey and football are not at all comparable in terms of physicality. Indeed, football has its own set of problems regarding the fate of its larger players, and the pressure on young men to adopt that physique. Not to mention players like Rodney Harrison, and the concomitant emphasis on big hits over making tackles.

Andrew1975 wrote:
No we don't. It may have been ruled such, but it's a defensible play and hit, and it was not malicious. We've all seen malicious unnecessary hits in hockey.....this was at the most spirited play.

It was obviously boarding per the letter of the rule, claiming otherwise is simply being obtuse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andrew1975 wrote:
And to clarify a player does not actually have to have possession of the puck to be checked. He has to be in near the puck. Hence man/puck drills where one man calls puck while the other clears an opponent. They were near a loose puck.

That's not how the rule works.

A player has to have possession of the puck in order to be legally checked. Possession, in this sense, does not mean "in physical possession" but possession as defined by the rule cited.

Experiment 626 wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_T2cjRHgb8&feature=player_embedded

Enough of this crap. Carcillo should be gone for the season and made an example of. 5 suspensions since '08 hasn't given him a clue yet?!

Keep this crap up and we will soon see a guy get killed by one of these tallantless 'goons' who are only in the league because money-grubbing morons are more concerned about selling hockey in the desert than they are about icing a quality sport!
This kind of silly brutality belongs in MMA or boxing, not in hockey.

These kinds of hits ended my own hockey carreer. Sure it was only city-level rep, but it still doesn't make it any easier to now be sitting on the sidelines and never be able to lace-up and play a meaningfull game again because of danergous, cowardly hits that have resulted in me suffering 8 concusions over 18 years of playing.

You never see that sort of thing in real MMA. Maybe in those low-level "Toughman" contests, but then again only idiots enter those. Actually, Hockey is the only sport where I've seen that sort of wanton violence. It is excessive though, nearly criminally so.

I'll admit, I watch hockey for the checking. Some might not agree with me on that and that's fine. What I want to know is could the players wear additional padding to prevent some of the more dangerous injuries?

chaos0xomega wrote:

rodgers37 wrote:I want to start watching Ice Hockey, who should I follow?

You want to be a New Jersey Devils fan. Come, join the Devils Legion!

How dare you.
The Bruins of course.

Good god, how does the team go from taking the Atlantic Division like 13 years in a row to this... 6-1...srsly?

Bwahaha. I'm sorry I didn't even check scores or watch the game before I posted; which makes that epic.
Seriously the Bruins are a good team to watch of you are getting into hockey solid but not exeptional.

dogma wrote:

Andrew1975 wrote:That's probably why full nelsons were illegal when I wrestled in grade school, have no idea if they are legal later on.

So you're saying that, in a physical sport, especially dangerous moves are considered to be illegal?

Does this not invalidate the argument from "Its a physical sport."?

Andrew1975 wrote:
Not subjectively illegal.

Utter nonsense. In folkstyle wrestling there are two rules that render the full nelson illegal. The first is the obvious one that bans the move. This is the least subjective, but still entails a degree of judgment on the part of official (When is the full nelson completed?). The second is the rule against dangerous positions. This rule imposes upon the official to bring competitors to the last starting position if one or both is placed in a position likely to cause harm. If one competitor deliberately violates the ban on dangerous positions, he is subject to forfeit, and possible suspension (depending on the ruling body).

Andrew1975 wrote:
Boarding is a completely subjective call in the NHL. Do you want them to call a penalty every time someone get checked into the boards?

No, I want them to call a penalty when players check other players in a dangerous fashion.

You can easily tell when someone is in a full nelson. It's not guess work, they don't call you on the full nelson only after you have snapped your opponents neck. The rules of boarding are so ambiguous the could have been written by GW. It's completely subjective.

"A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent."

In this situation you can hardly call Gilbert Defenseless, he saw what was coming and continued to play the puck. He wasn't on his knees, he wasn't off balance, he was in no way physically hampered or defenseless.

"the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered."

I've considered it. Gilbert was making a play for the puck, he put himself in the vulnerable position. He put himself between the puck and the players skating line. He could have been somewhere else, but he wasn't

Andrew1975 wrote:
...Gilbert clearly saw him, had his chance to back of and quite clearly assessed the threat poorly.

Gilbert saw Carcillo, and addressed the threat as he would be expected to given the rules. He, perhaps foolishly, failed to consider that Carcillo is an idiot who likely does not know the rules of the game he plays at a professional level.

I have to disagree. I'm not a fan of Carcillo, I haven't been interested in the hawks since Belfour played for them. But he appears to know the rules and he sure as hell knows how to throw a legal check. That check is textbook!

Andrew1975 wrote:
Look as brutal as people claim that NHL hockey is it is still possible to play well into your 40's and in some instances 50's and that is playing 82 games a season not counting playoffs which can almost double that amount. That is more games than you average NFL player plays in his whole lifetime, not just his NFL Career.

Terrible comparison. Hockey and football are not at all comparable in terms of physicality. Indeed, football has its own set of problems regarding the fate of its larger players, and the pressure on young men to adopt that physique. Not to mention players like Rodney Harrison, and the concomitant emphasis on big hits over making tackles.

Point please. They are both very physical sports where men hit each other hard. Sure they hit differently and with different equipment. I've seen plenty of dirty plays in hockey, I just can't see how this one is a big deal. This play happens 100 times a game. The only difference here is someone almost got hurt. Pad the boards better, make them safer, but don't make players play softer.

Andrew1975 wrote:
No we don't. It may have been ruled such, but it's a defensible play and hit, and it was not malicious. We've all seen malicious unnecessary hits in hockey.....this was at the most spirited play.

It was obviously boarding per the letter of the rule, claiming otherwise is simply being obtuse.

It was obviously nothing of the like. The rule for boarding is obtuse!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andrew1975 wrote:
And to clarify a player does not actually have to have possession of the puck to be checked. He has to be in near the puck. Hence man/puck drills where one man calls puck while the other clears an opponent. They were near a loose puck.

That's not how the rule works.

A player has to have possession of the puck in order to be legally checked. Possession, in this sense, does not mean "in physical possession" but possession as defined by the rule cited.

Andrew1975 wrote:
You can easily tell when someone is in a full nelson. It's not guess work, they don't call you on the full nelson only after you have snapped your opponents neck.

You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

The full nelson itself is clearly evident, and easily discerned, but enforcing the prohibition on the full nelson doesn't start at "Is the initiating wrestler currently holding his opponent in a full nelson?"

It is illegal to even attempt a full nelson (this is derived from the prohibition against dangerous holds), which is why officials are granted the purview of whistling something as innocuous as a slipped hand while attempting a 1/2 or 3/4.

If you want another wrestling example, there are prohibitions against the use of "excessive force" when taking down an opponent.

Andrew1975 wrote:
In this situation you can hardly call Gilbert Defenseless, he saw what was coming and continued to play the puck. He wasn't on his knees, he wasn't off balance, he was in no way physically hampered or defenseless.

He saw Carcillo skating for the puck, how he could realize that Carcillo would execute an illegal hit is beyond me (Beyond, you know, Carcillo being an idiot). I suppose we can claim that hockey players possess some kind of prescience, but that seems unlikely.

Andrew1975 wrote:
I've considered it. Gilbert was making a play for the puck, he put himself in the vulnerable position. He put himself between the puck and the players skating line. He could have been somewhere else, but he wasn't

This is a terrible argument. Its tacit to claiming that any given player could have elected not to play the game, so if he got hurt its not a flaw in the game, but a flaw in his decision-making.

Andrew1975 wrote:
Point please. They are both very physical sports where men hit each other hard. Sure they hit differently and with different equipment.

Even if we accept the comparison, you still have to acknowledge that the NFL and the NCAA have done a lot of work to make the game safer.

Rodney Harrison would last all of 5 minutes on a modern NFL team if he played as he did historically.

Andrew1975 wrote:
This play happens 100 times a game.

It doesn't, actually. People check against the boards, sure, but they don't do so in a fashion that is likely to cause an injury.

Andrew1975 wrote:
It was obviously nothing of the like. The rule for boarding is obtuse!

It doesn't matter if the rule is obtuse, by the letter of the rule it was boarding. Gilbert was defenseless, and Carcillo bears the burden of ensuring he is not checking a defenseless opponent. It doesn't matter if Gilber made himself defenseless.

Andrew1975 wrote:
In your original post, you threw everything, highsticking, hit from behind crosschecking and hit to the head.

I didn't say he was guilty of highsticking, or that he hit him in the head.

Andrew1975 wrote:
You blamed it all on technique like Carsillo was just blatantly out to kill the guy.

No, I blamed it on Carcillo being an idiot.

Andrew1975 wrote:
It might technically have been an illegal because Gilbert did not have possession yet, but how does that change the hit?

For one, it makes it illegal.

Yeah but people weren't crying for an interference call, they want 10 game suspensions. For what, that would be the biggest interference call ever.

How the hell is he defenseless? He's not unaware of the hit coming, he's not in a compromised position or off his skates. Carcillo could have just as easily bounced off if Gilbert had stood up to the hit instead of chasing the puck. Gilbert should have halled of on Carcillo because technically Carcillo had possession of the puck by NHL rules, he was the last guy to touch the puck.

Boarding does happen all the time. That same hit applied with the same force doesn't have the same result every time. How far you actually throw a guy depends on many factors. Size differences, body positions, whether the opponent resists you or not, they all play a role. It looks as if Gilbert's blade may have even caught the ice. Who knows? Usually when you hit a guy 5 feet from the boards he doesn't superman into them. All you can do is either make knocking someone into the boards legal or illegal...I'll take legal, pad the boards if it is such a concern.

Players need to be protected from sneaky dirty play with penalties and suspensions, no doubt. We have all seen an actual defenseless player get taken out of a game because some goon sneaks up on him and crushed him from behind, or unsuspectingly wracks him when the puck is on the other side of the rink. They don't need to be protected from spirited play, or else we end up with all star game hockey.....boring. That's not what happened, they were fighting for position on the puck. Gilbert know exactly what was going to happen. He may not have known what the result was gonna be, but he know there was a potential hit coming his way. He could have backed off, he didn't.

If the NHL is interested in protecting players from spirited and physical play then they need to pad the boards or research better equipment, because making checks like this illegal will just ruin the game.

If you want to get technical give him an interference call, even though the puck was right there. Boarding should be reserved for situations where you blind side and opponent, or hit an opponent that is in a compromised position, that is what I call defenseless(not the case here). It should not be called for hitting a player that knows full well a hit will come if he chases the puck into the boards and goes for it anyway. Learn to take or avoid the hit better, or pack you gak and go home. I'm pretty sure you HAVE to put on the big boy pants to play in the NHL.

If you want to protect the health of the players cut the number of games in half, I love hockey but each team does not need to play close to 100 games a year. This is not basketball or baseball. Make each game actually mean something.

The possession rules in hockey have never made sense to me. In lacrosse you just have to be playing the ball, or if the ball is loose you have to be within 3 feet of the ball to check. Makes more sense than the silly possession rules of the NHL

Interference and boarding. Any referee in the league would have whistled that play. Carcillo's going to endure a Shanahammer.

Word came down late last night that Carcillo's been given a 7 game suspension. Wish it could have been 10, but 7 is still pretty big in today's NHL considering how Campbell was notorious for outright ignoring these kinds of hits over the last few years.

Right from the TSN article on this is Shany's comments:
In citing a clear violation of the boarding rule, NHL disciplinarian Brendan Shanahan said the onus is on a player to minimize contact with an opponent in a vulnerable position.

"Not only does Carcillo not minimize contact, he hits Gilbert into the boards with tremendous force," Shanahan said in a video posted on NHL.com. "This is not a case of two players bumping each other for position and one player winning that battle. Nor is it a play in which Gilbert loses balance after initiating a reverse hit.

"At an extremely dangerous distance from the boards, Carcillo finishes high and hard with his hands, using the boards as a weapon."

Full report here: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=384235


For those who actually understand how the sport is played, it's most definately NOT Gilbert's faut he got hit the way he did... As the defensman who's beaten the attacking forward in a race for a loose puck behind the net, Gilbert is looking up ice to take in 'the big picture' of what's going on in front of him. He's looking for possible line changes and where his teammates are so he can begin the 'fast breakout'. Sure he likely knew a Chicago attacker is coming at him, but he doesn't have time to register who it is and/or what their intent is - just that he has to get to the puck and get up along the boards to take the hit that's coming.
It is Carcillo's responsibility to not be a complete tool and take advantage of Gilbert who's intent is on playing the puck. It's an unwritten rule so to speak among hockey players that you *never* try and crush a guy when he's only a foot or two from the board and not in a position where can defend himself from a hit!!! To turn around and take advantage of an opponent like this a cowardly move and only proves you're a complete dick.

You see this same kind of play happen dozens of times in a game, and what typically happens is the defenseman is allowed to play the puck and the attacker is then allowed to 'finish the check' and hit the defensman even though to the play has technically moved up ice. (as you're allowed to hit within a second or two of the puck being played)
Carcillo simply saw an oppertunity to main another player and did just that, so he deserves to park his talentless @$$ in the cheap seats for almost a tenth of his season!

I hope Gilbert recovers quickly and can return to play before the month is out! (along with all the other great players who are currently sidelined due to these brutal & stupid hits)

Guys like Carcillo have no respect for other players and the game doesn't need them.

Like I said, turn the game into a shadow of itself like watching those boring all-star games where no one hits anybody, hell guys are afraid to take a shot that is too hard. Carsillo probably got the suspension for past deeds, he has been known to be a jerk in the past. Just like Harrison got suspended by the NFL for his hit against Colt Mcoy. He should not have been fined or suspended for that one, now the ones earlier against Massaqui and Cribbs, well those he should have been suspended for.

Necroshea wrote:I'll admit, I watch hockey for the checking. Some might not agree with me on that and that's fine. What I want to know is could the players wear additional padding to prevent some of the more dangerous injuries?

I already touched on this earlier, but apparently you missed it: Hockey needs LESS padding not more.

The advance in technology and design of present day protective equipment used in hockey is partly to blame for many of the injuries.

The amount and stiffness of current padding leads to a sense of invincibility that promotes high impact/ultra-fast hits, and those hits in effect turn a player into a hardened missile weapon.

If players wore less padding and/or padding that was less rigid it would force them to tone back some of the current reckless play due to increased fear/liklihood of self-injury.

This has been discussed by the NHL and the greater hockey community in recent years, but hasn't gained serious momentum at this time...

CT GAMER wrote:

Necroshea wrote:I'll admit, I watch hockey for the checking. Some might not agree with me on that and that's fine. What I want to know is could the players wear additional padding to prevent some of the more dangerous injuries?

I already touched on this earlier, but apparently you missed it: Hockey needs LESS padding not more.

The advance in technology and design of present day protective equipment used in hockey is partly to blame for many of the injuries.

The amount and stiffness of current padding leads to a sense of invincibility that promotes high impact/ultra-fast hits, and those hits in effect turn a player into a hardened missile weapon.

If players wore less padding and/or padding that was less rigid it would force them to tone back some of the current reckless play due to increased fear/liklihood of self-injury.

This has been discussed by the NHL and the greater hockey community in recent years, but hasn't gained serious momentum at this time...

A parallel to this argument is that boxing has become more likely to cause permanent damage since the advent of boxing gloves, as the people can hit much harder than they used to without hurting their hands.

In any sport where the amount of force that can be applied is limited by the body, introducing padding or protection is likely to increase the amount of force used.

I would say that american football players would tackle with much less force if they didn't wear padding, and that rugby would have much more dangerous tackles if padding was used (not including scrum caps or pads, I mean padding of the level that american footballers or hockey players use).

Goliath wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Necroshea wrote:I'll admit, I watch hockey for the checking. Some might not agree with me on that and that's fine. What I want to know is could the players wear additional padding to prevent some of the more dangerous injuries?

I already touched on this earlier, but apparently you missed it: Hockey needs LESS padding not more.

The advance in technology and design of present day protective equipment used in hockey is partly to blame for many of the injuries.

The amount and stiffness of current padding leads to a sense of invincibility that promotes high impact/ultra-fast hits, and those hits in effect turn a player into a hardened missile weapon.

If players wore less padding and/or padding that was less rigid it would force them to tone back some of the current reckless play due to increased fear/liklihood of self-injury.

This has been discussed by the NHL and the greater hockey community in recent years, but hasn't gained serious momentum at this time...

A parallel to this argument is that boxing has become more likely to cause permanent damage since the advent of boxing gloves, as the people can hit much harder than they used to without hurting their hands.

In any sport where the amount of force that can be applied is limited by the body, introducing padding or protection is likely to increase the amount of force used.

I would say that american football players would tackle with much less force if they didn't wear padding, and that rugby would have much more dangerous tackles if padding was used (not including scrum caps or pads, I mean padding of the level that american footballers or hockey players use).

The rugby/NFL comparison is totally true. The fact is that professional athletes have transcended the protective ability of the padding. I don't know that limiting what players can do is the solution. Now in the NFL the quarterback and receivers are treated differently than anyone else. It takes away from the game. It seams there must be a better solution.

Goliath wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Necroshea wrote:I'll admit, I watch hockey for the checking. Some might not agree with me on that and that's fine. What I want to know is could the players wear additional padding to prevent some of the more dangerous injuries?

I already touched on this earlier, but apparently you missed it: Hockey needs LESS padding not more.

The advance in technology and design of present day protective equipment used in hockey is partly to blame for many of the injuries.

The amount and stiffness of current padding leads to a sense of invincibility that promotes high impact/ultra-fast hits, and those hits in effect turn a player into a hardened missile weapon.

If players wore less padding and/or padding that was less rigid it would force them to tone back some of the current reckless play due to increased fear/liklihood of self-injury.

This has been discussed by the NHL and the greater hockey community in recent years, but hasn't gained serious momentum at this time...

A parallel to this argument is that boxing has become more likely to cause permanent damage since the advent of boxing gloves, as the people can hit much harder than they used to without hurting their hands.

In any sport where the amount of force that can be applied is limited by the body, introducing padding or protection is likely to increase the amount of force used.

I would say that american football players would tackle with much less force if they didn't wear padding, and that rugby would have much more dangerous tackles if padding was used (not including scrum caps or pads, I mean padding of the level that american footballers or hockey players use).

I don't know about the rugby side, I have seen some nasty and hard hits without the shoulder pads or scrum caps. Delivered a few myself. The thing is armour can be used almost as a weapon, as it doesn't only protect, if used right can cause injuries. In rugby, the body protection is soft and won't hurt anyone on the level of American Football padding.

(sorry if not making sense, brain not wholly engaged today.)

Equipment that needs to stay the same in hockey;
- helmet
- neck guard
- hockey pants
- shin pads
- skates

All of these are perfectly fine as they are. The shin pads especially need the re-inforced plastic since shots are alot harder these days! Oh, and you silly Americans should honestly be mandating neck guards since they're only critical life saving equipment!

Equipment that needs to be toned way down because they're now weapons;
- shoulder pads
- elbow pads
- gloves
- non-wood sticks!!! (goalies HATE those compound pieces of worthless turd that explode into shrapnel at least 6 times/game!)

I can still recall that Coach's Corner when Cherry took a pair of elbow pads you could have stitched together and then worn as freaking shoulder pads!
And while I was never stupid enough to turn my own fully plastic scout-armour-mimiking shoulder pads into a weapon, it doesn't mean they were 'safe' for use. While I love 'em and they've saved my skin nurmerous times, those puppies are double-padded with solid 5mm-thick plastic over the shoulder! (They *almost* make that armoured 'clinking' sound when I walk!)

Equipment that still needs improvement;
- ankel guard for skates

I think every single defenseman would welcome a set of these that worked!

Goalies pads also need to be shrunk and their jeresies need to be re-sized so they're not small tents that stop pucks on their own!



As for the All-Star hockey being boring? I supose you also think that Olympic hockey & the World Juniors is boring & sissy too, because that's what real hockey is ment to be - skilled players being allowed to play without fear of some goon taking their head off when they're not looking!
The NHL is a farce compared to what's been played the past 2 weeks out west.