rocketdoctor Posted April 28, 2015 Report Share Posted April 28, 2015 Just went to Redwings to see what reaction their forums had but their forums are extremely lightweight. I guess their fans must vent somewhere else. I thought the 1 game was fair and a lesson to Canucks fans what charging is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameter Posted April 28, 2015 Report Share Posted April 28, 2015 Seemed reasonable to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowl Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 Quite reasonable. Surprised it took this long for him to be suspended. Might have been 2 or 3 if it happened in the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CastleMania Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 The big thing for me is he left the ice prior to contact. One game was right. I don't think there was any malice in the hit. He was caught up in the moment and left his feet. Otherwise, this should have been 3 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 It's a sign of the times. Years ago, he laid out Havlat with an identical hit. Also very similar hit on Clowe as well. Back then, it's what they called getting "Kronwalled". Nowadays, it's called "1-game suspension". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 He for sure deserved the suspension. He was skating all the way into the hit, he left his feet and he targeted the head with his forearm/elbow. I was worried that The Department of Player Safety would get this wrong, and not suspend him because its game 7. The funny part is that if you go on Twitter all the Detroit fans are talking about that there is a conspiracy against the Red Wings or that the NHL is going to be a no hit league soon. I love the conspiracy part, because the rest of the league thinks that they get away with a lot more interference than any other team in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakofnature Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 Every team's fans thinks the refs are out to get them. I've seen it here often enough. Look at how Canucks fans reacted to being eliminated this year. I could go on. The refs are a natural scapegoat, often undeserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 The NHL wants to eliminate really hard hits and doesn't want to admit it because that would anger fans. So, they invent things like "targeting the head". Apart from some seriously evil guys (i.e. Matt Cooke, Ulf Samuelson types), who goes after another person's head? Some find it difficult to avoid hitting a person in the head if the check is hard, the guy is tall, and if the person being hit has his head down. Kronwall did leave his feet, so that was thuggish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 The NHL wants to eliminate really hard hits and doesn't want to admit it because that would anger fans. So, they invent things like "targeting the head". Apart from some seriously evil guys (i.e. Matt Cooke, Ulf Samuelson types), who goes after another person's head? Some find it difficult to avoid hitting a person in the head if the check is hard, the guy is tall, and if the person being hit has his head down. Kronwall did leave his feet, so that was thuggish. There would be no issue with the hit if Kronwall stayed on his feet and didn't explode up. If he kept his elbow and shoulder low, the hit would have been just as big and devastating, but it would have been clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 The NHL wants to eliminate really hard hits and doesn't want to admit it because that would anger fans. So, they invent things like "targeting the head". Apart from some seriously evil guys (i.e. Matt Cooke, Ulf Samuelson types), who goes after another person's head? Some find it difficult to avoid hitting a person in the head if the check is hard, the guy is tall, and if the person being hit has his head down. Kronwall did leave his feet, so that was thuggish.Prior to the CGY-VAN series this argument may have held water. Ferland had harder hits than that most games, but kept the check at should level or lower. No penalty was called unless he skated into it. Hamhuis's check on Benny wasn't suspendable, nor was Burrows on Johnny. Let's face it, the NHL loved that series. They could have changed it if they wanted to. They could have suspended Burrows and Hamhuis, but opted to keep the chance for retribution there for the next game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Prior to the CGY-VAN series this argument may have held water. Ferland had harder hits than that most games, but kept the check at should level or lower. No penalty was called unless he skated into it. Hamhuis's check on Benny wasn't suspendable, nor was Burrows on Johnny. Let's face it, the NHL loved that series. They could have changed it if they wanted to. They could have suspended Burrows and Hamhuis, but opted to keep the chance for retribution there for the next game. The NHL wants checking and lots of it, but they want to eliminate the truly devastating hits without saying so. I am not sure Ferland really unloaded on Canucks very often. He hit hard and frequently, but usually along the boards. I thought most of his checks were pretty textbook. Kronwall's hit was brutal because he left his feet and the other player was skating towards him. That makes for one heck of a wallop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameter Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 It's the leaving his feet the NHL wants to eliminate, not the devastating hits. And they are saying so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 It's the leaving his feet the NHL wants to eliminate, not the devastating hits. And they are saying so. Perhaps, but how do you think the NHL would deal with Scott Stevens today? My guess is that Shanahan would have suspended him several times for legal but particularly hard centre ice checks. What Stevens did was quite different than what Ferland does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameter Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Who's to say? They probably would suspend him. There's a lot of stuff that was legal then and being cracked down on now. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 If the refs had called a 5 minute major, I think the league might have stepped back from the suspension. 10 minute misconduct, something like that. The refs did nothing so kinda forced the league methinks. I'm a Wings fan. Didn't like the hit. Won't argue the suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Who's to say? They probably would suspend him. There's a lot of stuff that was legal then and being cracked down on now. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here... My bad, I think we are in agreement. I read your last post differently from how you intended it to be read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.