dlbalr Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Rather than see the GDT continue to discuss the merits of whether or not to suspend (there's plenty to discuss still about the hit and the game though), it's probably best to keep all suspension predictions and whatnot here. We know the probability of 5+ is extremely low, given the phone call hearing, there's been no indication Chara waived his in-person hearing right (but I'll put that in nonetheless in case it just wasn't reported). So make your predictions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Rather than see the GDT continue to discuss the merits of whether or not to suspend (there's plenty to discuss still about the hit and the game though), it's probably best to keep all suspension predictions and whatnot here. We know the probability of 5+ is extremely low, given the phone call hearing, there's been no indication Chara waived his in-person hearing right (but I'll put that in nonetheless in case it just wasn't reported). So make your predictions. Like I said in the game thread, I think the fractured vertebrae may push the league to do something it doesn't want to do, but that is probably wishful thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I would be shocked if he got more than 2 games, even though I feel he deserves more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrenDittero Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Like I said in the game thread, I think the fractured vertebrae may push the league to do something it doesn't want to do, but that is probably wishful thinking. I think he'll get 3 games though he deserves more. Off the top of my head I would have said 2 but the talk of a fractured vertebrae might be enough push it one more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Forget the stanchion. Let's talk about the head shot and the abject lack of respect that pervades in the NHL. That should be the point. What better case to use to make a very public point about where headshots stand in the NHL. Unfortunately, the NHL doesn't punish stars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Like I said in the game thread, I think the fractured vertebrae may push the league to do something it doesn't want to do, but that is probably wishful thinking. Unfortunately, I think you're right. If it were up to me, I'd give him 7-10 games, but I'll be VERY VERY surprised if he gets more than 2-3 games! I voted for 2 games! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Unfortunately, I think you're right. If it were up to me, I'd give him 7-10 games, but I'll be VERY VERY surprised if he gets more than 2-3 games! I voted for 2 games! The way some talk, you would think it was Campbell that made the hit. This is all secondary, to the most important issue which is to bring Pax back to health. Campbell will never be able to get the penalty right in terms of the masses. Right now , I would rather have Pax back to health, regardless whether he ever plays again. Suspension talk just has no weight now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I think they should (and maybe will) make an example of it. 5+ gets my vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I'm on the fence. I honestly expect zero games, especially with MOST of the talking heads out there pulling out the "it was a hockey play" line. I wasn't able to see the game live, and I'm glad I didn't have to witness the incident in real time. But watch the variety of shows afterward that are available in the US (Versus, NHL Net, and random Melrose blurbs on ESPN), the only dissenting view that this much more than a "hockey play" was Kevin Weekes on the NHL Net. Do I think Chara deserves a suspension? Yes, intended or not, the rising elbow/hand movement guaranteed the result. I also firmly believe that every player, and much more so a professional player with quite a few years under their belt, knew exactly where he was on the ice when that hit occurred. Do I think it'll happen? Not one as substantial as some people would prefer. I voted for 2 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrenDittero Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) The way some talk, you would think it was Campbell that made the hit. This is all secondary, to the most important issue which is to bring Pax back to health. Campbell will never be able to get the penalty right in terms of the masses. Right now , I would rather have Pax back to health, regardless whether he ever plays again. Suspension talk just has no weight now. I would guess that Patch being looked after by the best doctors in Montreal. Everyone here wants to see him get better and wishes him the best. While Patch recuperates, the issue of suspensions is important. The Habs and 11 other teams will have to play Boston in the next 5 weeks. Some sort of line in the sand needs to be drawn so that more people don't get hurt. Edited March 9, 2011 by BrenDittero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) It boils down to whether you think intent is the key variable or not. Looking at the slow-motion replay, it really does appear to be a deliberate act, but Wamsley is right that guessing at intention - unless you're a repeat offender with a history of such 'unfortunate incidents,' in which case intention can be inferred - is a mug's game. If you think 'intent' is indeed the key variable then you will give Chara the benefit of the doubt. This is the position of almost all the official commentators outside Montreal, including sober people like Ray Ferraro and Bob McKenzie. And I agree with them that IF intention is the key consideration, Chara should get only a modest suspension. However, I completely disagree with that principle. My view is that the entire philosophy that stresses intent rather than the action as such and its effects is responsible for the life-threatening proliferation of head-shots and dirty plays in the NHL. The appropriate philosophy is one that says that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS ON THE ICE, in precisely the same way that you are responsible for shooting the puck over the glass or high-sticking a guy and drawing blood. If I run a stop sign, without any intention to hit anybody, but I inadvertently end up running down a pedestrian, nobody gives a sh*t that I didn't mean to do it. I pay the price. Until the same principle becomes the guiding principle of NHL discipline, the brutality will not end. And any of these commentators who simultaneously bemoan the 'lack of respect,' AND who advocate an intentionality-based system of discipline, are contradicting themselves in my book. The latter creates the conditions in which the former can flourish. Edited March 9, 2011 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) It boils down to whether you think intent is the key variable or not. Looking at the slow-motion replay, it really does appear to be a deliberate act, but Wamsley is right that guessing at intention - unless you're a repeat offender with a history of such 'unfortunate incidents,' in which case intention can be inferred - is a mug's game. If you think 'intent' is indeed the key variable then you will give Chara the benefit of the doubt. This is the position of almost all the official commentators outside Montreal, including sober people like Ray Ferraro and Bob McKenzie. And I agree with them that IF intention is the key consideration, Chara should get only a modest suspension. However, I completely disagree with that principle. My view is that the entire philosophy that stresses intent rather than the action as such and its effects is responsible for the life-threatening proliferation of head-shots and dirty plays in the NHL. The appropriate philosophy is one that says that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS ON THE ICE, in precisely the same way that you are responsible for shooting the puck over the glass or high-sticking a guy and drawing blood. If I run a stop sign, without any intention to hit anybody, but I inadvertently end up running down a pedestrian, nobody gives a sh*t that I didn't mean to do it. I pay the price. Until the same principle becomes the guiding principle of NHL discipline, the brutality will not end. And any of these commentators who simultaneously bemoan the 'lack of respect,' AND who advocate an intentionality-based system of discipline, are contradicting themselves in my book. The latter creates the conditions in which the former can flourish. It allows for a trap door in any situation, that is why the intent argument is ridiculous. It is unprovable 90% of the time and is exactly why the NHL and their consistent lack of precedent like to use it. Chara knows he has to say "I didn't mean it". We know he is going to say it. So what value does it offer? What value is talking to Chara on the phone? Did you mean it Zdeno. No. Do you know you endangered a man's life. Yes. But you didn't mean it? No. Sorry, no intent there. Next call. They use the trap door over and over. Richards devastated Booth's career and they dropped intent. Really? Targeting the head as you drop your shoulder into his chin while he is looking the other way is not intent? If you can't prove it then, when can you actually prove it? The answer is almost never. Accountability is the word they need to use, not intent. AND there is the trap door in full view. blah blah blah....intent.....blah blah blah....hockey play....blah blah blah..intent....blah blah blah...no suspension. Edited March 9, 2011 by Wamsley01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Might as well close this thread, now that no suspension is confirmed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted March 9, 2011 Author Share Posted March 9, 2011 Might as well close this thread, now that no suspension is confirmed. Or I could just change the name to "Chara non-suspension talk." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Unbelievable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I feel like my ass was raped and there's nothing I can do about it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 There's just no justice in this league. It's sickening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I am at a loss. How can the league look at the picture of chara with his hand clearly on the back of Pacs head and say he didn't target the head... there was no hip check. there was no shoulder. the only contact at the point of injury was chara pushing with his arms on pacs head. I can see how at full speed it looks like Chara is just pinching him off, but the pictures clearly show chara behind and pushing him into the stanchion. Last time I checked, pushing a guy into the glass from behind with a hand to the head, is a head shot. I give up on this league. You turn that play around and have Pacs do it to Chara, and Pacs would be thrown to the wolves by the league. The next game, the Bruins would attempt to kill PK and Pleks, and the league would do nothing to them. By the way, if there was ever a time for the habs management to speak out and "take the fine..", now is the time. If the league won't protect the players and continues to reward the Bruins and Phillys of this league, then call them out in the press. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrenDittero Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) It boils down to whether you think intent is the key variable or not. Looking at the slow-motion replay, it really does appear to be a deliberate act, but Wamsley is right that guessing at intention - unless you're a repeat offender with a history of such 'unfortunate incidents,' in which case intention can be inferred - is a mug's game. If you think 'intent' is indeed the key variable then you will give Chara the benefit of the doubt. With video evidence at their disposal it's mind blowing that the powers that be did not find intent to injure. Chara checking Patch is absolutely a hockey play. Following that up by pushing his head into the extension is not. It's a cheap shot that was meant to injure Patch. Chara could not have anticipated whether he would knock the wind out of Patch, break his shoulder, or fracture vertebrae. What cannot be put in question though is whether or not he intended to hurt another player. He nearly broke a guys neck. It's right there on the last 15 frames of the tape for everyone to see. I don't think I'm guessing what his intentions were. Of course Zdeno will say he didn't mean to. If Chara had said " I didn't mean to hurt Patch that bad " I would say he's telling the truth. But he didn't say that, he told reporters that Patch jumped into the glass, the games moves so fast etc etc. Comments and excuses like that are nothing more than padding for his phone call today. There is a video all over the internet right now that shows Zdeno Chara pushing Max Pachioretty's head into a solid metal post and people are still pretending that the key to solving this mystery is proving intent. Where else does the offenders version of the events trump video evidence? I guess in the NHL. Edited March 9, 2011 by BrenDittero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted March 9, 2011 Author Share Posted March 9, 2011 By the way, if there was ever a time for the habs management to speak out and "take the fine..", now is the time. If the league won't protect the players and continues to reward the Bruins and Phillys of this league, then call them out in the press. From the sounds of it, they've already said they will make no further comment on the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I'm speechless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I emailed Butthead... Mr. Bettman, I am simply appalled at the league decision that there was nothing illegal about the hit by Chara. Pictures clearly show that he used his outstretched arm on the head of Pacs to direct his head into the stanchion. It was not a shoulder hit (clean), gone wrong, as implied by the league. Here is a picture. http://twitpic.com/47se2y I guess the message you are sending to kids playing hockey is clear. I hope you never have to go watch your child play a game where pushing someone's head into the glass at full speed is considered a legal play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted March 9, 2011 Author Share Posted March 9, 2011 I honestly can't say I'm surprised. With the key word being intent, was it intent to injure, decapitate, or just finish a check? If you can't prove one specifically, this is what happens (and I think a case could be argued for each side...one may not be more right than the other, but a case could be made nonetheless). We're preparing a Writers Weigh In for either late tonight/early tomorrow, certainly wasn't fun sending in my 2 thoughts basically saying what I just said here, under their strict guidelines for intent, probably was the right call. Moral of the story - the rule could use some rewording. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) See why I was already pissed? Clowns in charge. I still say eye for eye. Screw the Bruins. Somebody retaliate please, the league won't...... How about everybody drills pucks at Chara's head every chance we get, start Auld, screw the 2 points and just fire pucks at heads all night. Even aim at the bench. No rules against that! Maybe even take out a coach or 2 with pucks off the head. I would enjoy watching that. Edited March 9, 2011 by johnnyhasbeen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) I emailed Butthead... Mr. Bettman, I am simply appalled at the league decision that there was nothing illegal about the hit by Chara. Pictures clearly show that he used his outstretched arm on the head of Pacs to direct his head into the stanchion. It was not a shoulder hit (clean), gone wrong, as implied by the league. Here is a picture. http://twitpic.com/47se2y I guess the message you are sending to kids playing hockey is clear. I hope you never have to go watch your child play a game where pushing someone's head into the glass at full speed is considered a legal play. I hop esomebody does ride his son into the boards. Serve him right! Edited March 9, 2011 by johnnyhasbeen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.