I live in Northern Virginia. The Caps are my second team. Tom Wilsonis trash. Close to Matt Cooke. He doesn’t belong in the league. Every game he targets at least one guy’s head.Maybe you need your TV or prescription checked - or I do.
Whatever the case, that was a clean open-ice check.I live in Northern Virginia. The Caps are my second team. Tom Wilsonis trash. Close to Matt Cooke. He doesn’t belong in the league. Every game he targets at least one guy’s head.
The people who became fans in the last ten years down here love him. The homer announcers talk about grit. This will never be a hockey town. It’s Washington Football Team lite
It’s not a good sign that Crosby is getting engaged in that. He needs to stay away from that if he wants to help his team.Crazy that is no call on Wilson - he is such a dick. Pens need to respond to that crap if refs wont....
Now some game misconducts and penalties - this one is approaching boiling point and we are not even in the third period....
He targeted his head. With his shoulder and left his feet. It was the opposite of clean.Whatever the case, that was a clean open-ice check.
Clear shoulder to head that never changed position as I saw it. Couldn’t tell if he charged but that’s his go-to move.Whatever the case, that was a clean open-ice check.
A guy goes in for a body check against another guy skating at him, both with their heads up and making eye contact - no shoulders or elbows up - one gets hit in the head and the other was supposed to avoid that how? I think the expectation that Wilson could have avoided that is wholly unreasonable lest body checking be removed from the game.He targeted his head. With his shoulder and left his feet. It was the opposite of clean.
I agree with your statement.It literally can't be clean if the principle point of contact was the head, which it was. It's the Matt Cooke Rule for goodness sake.
It’s fucking ridiculous at this pointI think Wilson is done for the rest of the series. Shoulder to head + leaving feet.
but the Pens get all the calls right?Wilson gets away with another penalty to spring the GWG. Just have to laugh.
Indeed. Not unlike the non-call when Letang tripped Couturier that directly led to the nail-in-the-coffin goal in G6 against the Flyers, just less egregious.Wilson gets away with another penalty to spring the GWG. Just have to laugh.
Clean check. What can you do, it's a rough game?Aston-Reese has a broken jaw and a concussion
Was not a clean check, imo, he launched himself and hit his face. The launch will get him suspended. Also looked like a charge.Clean check. What can you do, it's a rough game?
I was being ironical.Was not a clean check, imo, he launched himself and hit his face. The launch will get him suspended. Also looked like a charge.
To be an infraction, it has to be more than simply the head as the “main point of contact.” The second part of that sentence in the rule description is that the contact with the head had to be avoidable, and the rule provides three more detailed criteria to assist the referee in determining whether an infraction has occurred (paraphrasing): 1) Was the head the target? 2) Did the head contact occur because the opposing player put himself in a vulnerable position? and 3) Did the head contact occur because the checking player changed his angle or approach? In my estimation, the answers are no, no, and no, with the first and third being relevant to Wilson. I think head ended up being the main point of contact, but the rest of the criteria relevant to Wilson aren’t met. I think they made the right call on the ice according to the reading of 48.1.Principal point of contact looked like the jaw (makes sense if it's broken now) and Aston-Reese was bent but not incredibly so. He had his head up. Wilson had time to ease up and he went for it as hard as he could, leaving his feet. Definitely a bad hit.
He is 100% elevating. His right knee goes from slightly bent to totally straight. The left skate comes off the ice (except the front point) as he makes contact.To be an infraction, it has to be more than simply the head as the “main point of contact.” The second part of that sentence in the rule description is that the contact with the head had to be avoidable, and the rule provides three more detailed criteria to assist the referee in determining whether an infraction has occurred (paraphrasing): 1) Was the head the target? 2) Did the head contact occur because the opposing player put himself in a vulnerable position? and 3) Did the head contact occur because the checking player changed his angle or approach? In my estimation, the answers are no, no, and no, with the first and third being relevant to Wilson. I think head ended up being the main point of contact, but the rest of the criteria relevant to Wilson aren’t met. I think they made the right call on the ice according to the reading of 48.1.
As for your third sentence, I think you were watching a different video. Everything you wrote in that sentence is not supported by the events. To the players’ bench side of center ice, he started gliding for a shift change. As he saw A-R approach he apparently decided to check him, although he never even took another stride. His right blade was off the ice by about 2 inches and his left was still on the ice. His body didn’t materially change elevation. There’s video on the interwebs of this encounter. I think you’re better off in this discussion pretending that the head as the main point of contact is all that matters rather than arguing the other points.
Rest easy, Penguin fans and sympathizers (there’s a medical cure for that, by the way): George Parros is highly certain to follow in the long tradition of randomness set by the likes of Colin Campbell and Brendan Shanahan before him to suspend Wilson. The Magic 8 Ball will spin in your favor. However, I really don’t think you’re grasping what you’re asking for here - the litigating of open-ice hits between two players skating at and looking at each other. It was a classic hockey check that unfortunately had one player suffer an injury, and as I’ve belabored, I disagree that it was illegal.
I didn't think that "elevating" is the determinative factor here. I thought that the issue is whether he left the ice surface, not whether he straightened out from a bent knee. And I don't think he lost contact with the ice until after the collision.He is 100% elevating. His right knee goes from slightly bent to totally straight. The left skate comes off the ice (except the front point) as he makes contact.
His hit was not as bad as Kadri's because he didn't leave his feet and he can at least make the argument (however implausible) that he wasn't going for the head. Kadri got 3 games, so I would predict 1 game for Wilson.I think he gets a game or two in part because he laughed after the play and the Pens lost that player for the playoffs – if I am the league, I am going to suspend him just to defuse the situation a bit – if they don’t I suspect an “expendable” Pens player will do something retaliatory, like cheap shot Wilson in the head in game 4…
I was taking issue with the quoted poster stating "his body didn't materially change elevation". I agree that it isn't the determinative factor.I didn't think that "elevating" is the determinative factor here. I thought that the issue is whether he left the ice surface, not whether he straightened out from a bent knee. And I don't think he lost contact with the ice until after the collision.
I think your premise - that Parros got it right but the referees didn’t - is faulty. Rule 48 has two parts, and you are ignoring the criteria in the second part, and your call for the heads of those implementing hockey’s law is disturbingly Trumpian. Stop, please.Pretty hard to fathom a hit resulting in a three game suspension didn't even merit a minor penalty. I don't recall who was working the game last night but they should be gone too.
I believe that negligence should play into suspension length but injury in and of itself shouldn’t be a basis for suspension. It’s too bad the NHL didn’t focus more on the act instead of the outcome, which they too often do.Wilson is garbage, I'll never complain about him getting suspended, but I hate the inconsistency. He's done worse numerous times with no suspension. Probably in this series even, I don't think he should have been playing.
Injuries are random, they shouldn't factor into suspensions. The double minor high sticking rule is even more absurd.
Heh, I was referring specifically to the "if there's blood it's an extra 2 minutes". You can tap someone and give them a cut, or baseball swing someone and hit the visor and no blood. Former is 4 minutes, latter is 2.I believe that negligence should play into suspension length but injury in and of itself shouldn’t be a basis for suspension. It’s too bad the NHL didn’t focus more on the act instead of the outcome, which they too often do.
Agree on the double minor. Just call a damn major or leave it as a single minor. It’s one infraction and completely messes with my left brain.
Yes. Trump was the first person to ever call for the heads of people. Fans have never had that reaction before in the history of sports. Good observation and equivalence on your end.I think your premise - that Parros got it right but the referees didn’t - is faulty. Rule 48 has two parts, and you are ignoring the criteria in the second part, and your call for the heads of those implementing hockey’s law is disturbingly Trumpian. Stop, please.