2004 NHL Playoffs: Round 1 (1 Viewer)

[Micheal]

The ratings for this series (in Canada) have been record breaking! They haven't been this high for many years to say the least... (In Canada)

The hit deserves a game suspension. Aside from that... Vinny should do up his chin strap for tonights game.

 

[Sami Kallio]

Never questioned that, just stated that the extent of the injury was Vinnie's own fault. A player shuold be penalized for what he did, not to what happens to the other player.

As a repeat offender (I don't see the pestering of CuJo as an attempt to injure), one game suspension maybe but not two. If Stillman had been suspended for one, then two would have been possible but certainly not deserving.

Does anyone have footage of the hit? Was it to the head or did the arm hit him in the shoulder height?

 

[Law]

But Colin Campbell previously said in determining whether or not Stillman would be suspended, he kept close watch on Nilsson's condition. If Nilsson wasn't able to play, neither would Stillman.

Granted, even as a Calgary fan, I would say Niienmbuy-a-vowel's hit was more visious, they both had the same result. A mind headache and the injured player playing in the next game.

If the precident has already been set, why the double standard?

 

[nolesrule]

Campbell also said that Stillman's hit was from the side, which is not an "indefensible position". In addition, before anyone mentions Stillman's hit again (and that is just about the only "severe" hit the Lightning have done in this series") let's recall in Game 2 Simon's cross-check from behind on Stillman to get even. Fortunately, Stillman did not get hurt. So let's take a look at what has happened in this series.

Game 1 - Stillman TB, elbow
Game 2 - Simon CGY, cross-checking & unsportsmanlike, Gelinas CGY, cross-checking (major...fortunately the stick broke or there could have been a major injury with the force of the blow
Game 3 - Elbow to Kubina, no penalty; pinning Fedotenko's arms and holding/boarding him into the ledge of the boards, no penalty...both players had to miss Game 4.
Game 4 - Niemenen CGY, boarding major

So, after the retaliation to Stillman in Game 2 for the elbow in game 1, it should have been even. Instead, 4 major acts of thuggery were commited by Calgary in attempts to injure Lightning players after it was "even". There is no excuse for that style of play.

 

[Sami Kallio]

I'll take crosscheck to the back anyday over an elbow to the head. No contest there. I didn't see anything worthy of a penalty on Fedotenkos case. Gelinas crosscheck was nasty but I still take it lightly over incidents that involve big blows to the head and neck, that is were the serious injuries occur.

 

[Jerry Almeida]

Couldn't agree more.

 

[nolesrule]

Gelinas got lucky that his stick broke, otherwise someone would have gotten hurt. It's just a matter of physics...the enrgy of the blow went into the breaking of the stick. If the stick stays in one piece, the energy of the blow goes into the player being hit.

 

[Sami Kallio]

I don't think any of that happened. It just an ordinary play that had unfortunate results.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

An elbow would be illegal and would be called an elbow, but this hit was with the shoulder with the forearm involved. Regardless, the hit was called boarding, which it was, and would not have been called if it happened in open ice or if Vinny was not facing the boards. The danger came from hitting from behind into the boards, not from the shot to the head. Thornton knocked Markov to the ground (what a shock!) with a shoulder hit to the head against the boards, but it was not called because Markov was sideways to the boards. My only point was that of the three points of the "trifecta", only 2 make the hit illegal (boarding), the third did not.

Edit: Just to clarify, forearm hits to the face/head happen all the time in the course of a check (just watch any college game, they know no other way to hit). In the commission of a check, it is never called. If a guy just stiffarms someone for retaliation or aggression, it would probably be called a roughing penalty.

 

[nolesrule]

My problem is with the number of these seemingly-premeditated penalties that Calgary appears to be taking. Yes, it's a good thing that cross-checking to the back is less likely to cause an injury. I'm not concerned with the severity of the resulting injury beyond the fact that it appears that injury is the goal.

 

[Sami Kallio]

It's called good-old-fashioned-canadian-hockey. It has always been part of the game in North America.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Yup. As my brother has said many times - "It's not a game for timid boys".

 

[nolesrule]

I looked on the St. Pete Times website but couldn't find the photo.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

The rules state that the penalty is assessed on the action, NOT the outcome. Campbell is not abiding by the official rules when it comes to doling out suspensions. The Naslund hit in the regular season that preceded Bertuzzi's hit left naslund out for four games with a concussion. It was a mid ice hit, but he was in a vulnerable position without the puck - there wasn't even a penalty called.

The NHL has got to get its shit together when it comes to infractions and the penalties for them. Vinnie's hit was a penalty, but I don't think the suspension is warranted. The Brashear incident isn't even mildly related, since McSorely took a two handed swing at his head with the stick. A far cry from pushing a guy's head into the glass, and I agree that the damage was caused more by the loose helmet than the hit.

 

[Law]

While I don't claim to be a rules expert, I am a certified AHA (Alberta Hockey Association) level 4 referee (NHL refs are level 6). Personally, I would have called a 5 minute major on Nieminen for boarding and have that be the end of it (Although it wouldn't be my decision).

Saying things like, "Well Calgary has been a lot more brutal then Tampa Bay, look Stillman did this in game 1, Simon did this, Gelinas did this..." that's all beside the point. The only issue right now is did Nieminen deserve the suspension, I say no. The NHL says, "He's a repeat offender." And to that I say, he shouldn't have been suspended for the hit on Joseph either. That suspension was an absolute joke. Was he trying to hurt Joseph? No, if he was, Joseph would have been hurt.

Lastly, if the situation were reversed, would Lecavalier have been suspended if he hit Nieminen in the same way?

I don't think so.

 

[Bob-N]

I agree with the Joseph hit and suspension, that was a joke.

Now, whether or not Nieminen deserved the suspension depends on (for me) whether the intent of a 5 minute major (+ game misconduct/match penalty?) is suitable punishment for that kind of hit. If the intent of the NHL is the limit the amount of "cheap/dirty" hits, then I agree, the one game suspension is enough (I hope) to curb the cheap (Nienimen, marginal Stillman) or intent to injure (Simon cross check) type hits. If it is to be kept "in game" as Lew seems to elude to (sorry in advance if I'm assuming too much), then the refs are limited to a 5 min major and match penalty(?). Would that be enough of a consequence? Not for me.

I'd like to think if the reverse happened, Lecavalier would get the same penalties and suspension. Why would it be any different? Maybe because of the "repeat offender" tagged no Nieminen?

Anyhow, hope this game is a good one. I'm not really rooting for any specific team anymore, just want to see some good "clean" (rough and grinding is ok) hockey.

 

[Sami Kallio]

NA hockey has always been this way. When you are losing the dirty tricks appear. National teams for Canada and USA have always been notorious of this in the international ice.

 

[Tony Whalen]

I stand corrected.

Wow. 60,000 people jammed up 17th Ave after the game last night.

GO FLAMES GO! 1 to go!

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Yeah, and baseball rules state that the person manning second base has to contact the base when he catches the ball in order to start a double play. And hockey rules say that it is impossible to call a diving penalty and a tripping penalty for the same infraction. And Jordan never got more that 3 steps to the basket.

You cannot help but factor in the extent of an injury, especially when evaluating for a possible suspension. Anyone who says they do not look at the extent of the injury in order to evaluate an infraction is lying, no matter what the rules say.

 

[JamieD]

Nope, I'm pretty sure back when hockey was first played in Canada, premeditated runs at people weren't part of the game.