Niederreiter's hit on Burrows

[Goal:thecup]

The old rule book was fine.

They didn't need to change the rules.

They just need to call the infractions.

Overriding rules like Unsportsmanlike Conduct and Intent to Injure could be used in cases like Moore on Naslund and the whole "Bertuzzi Incident" would probably never have happened.

All penalties can be 2, 4, 5, 10, major, game as applicable and all can be reviewable.

All games can be reviewed and analyzed so that referee performance becomes measurable.

All we really need is an honest attempt to be fair and protect the players.

[Baggins]

So do you think, in the overall goal that is to eliminate head shots, this dissection will help in that?

I don't, which is my point.

If we have to take a magnifying glass, get a compass in place and do all these other things in deciding, it leaves too many options TO headhunt and then pass it off as something different. To present it in a way that it can be viewed as something else?

That won't help the league. You may be right but the league, in allowing for these ridiculous "explanations" (I tend to call them excuses) makes it a pick and choose thing. And, as long as that's the case, it won't deter as much as a zero tolerance would.

The league is just finding ways to bend the rules for some, that's all. The lip service isn't matching the overall application of the rules. As long as some are let off the hook, it's unfair and an unlevel playing field. Someone else will be seriously hurt and the league should/could be doing more to prevent it. But they keep playing with fire.

The league isn't making contact to the head illegal and likely won't unless you want a less physical Euro style of game. What they are eliminating is targeting the head of a player. It's actually well explained in the videos. As long as contact is into the core of the body contact to the head is incidental. This is the case in the Burrows hit. Cutting across the front of the player and "picking the head" is illegal. This is the case in the Edler hit and the videos I posted on the previous page.

The league has actually been consistent Deb. It's not picking and choosing. The rules are definite. Watch the videos of suspensions on the previous page. All of them are in line with the Edler hit. It's actually you guys that are picking and choosing by ignoring the stipulation of delivering the hit into the core of the body. You're ignoring the part that isn't convenient to your argument. But after watching several suspension video the league has been consistent with that stipulation.

Do you want a less physical league in the Euro style Deb? It's the only way to eliminate contact to the head which requires a change to the existing rules. As the rules stand, like it or not, the hit on Burrows was legal.

[-DLC-]

Maybe the fact that Burrows sold it HARD, then played dead, then left the game looking like he'd been seriously hurt only to return hale and hearty only minutes later (for the second game in a row no less) was a factor in the non-suspension. The hit itself was borderline at worst.

OK, here's what I have to say to all you tough guys watching from the comfort of their fluffy chairs.

Burr's had several injuries over the course of the season. As a matter of fact, not only did he NOT play dead when his jaw was fractured, but he returned to the game AND gave post game interviews after his mouth had pooled with blood.

So he reacts as any of you tough guys would to pain....but, in that he's tougher than most, he tries to quickly regroup and move past it, as he did with his broken jaw. And as he did here, after this hit

Regarding that surgery in the recent past that may make him a little more reactive than the guys in fluffy chairs eating Doritos:

He had immediate surgery, a plate was inserted in his jaw and braces were put on both his top and bottom teeth. In retrospect, he felt he should not have finished the Dec. 1 game, won 3-2 by the Canucks.

......"there is a nerve that runs through the jaw and if that gets damaged, you can lose sensitivity in half your face and you could start drooling and you wouldn't feel it, or when you smile you wouldn't be able to smile out of that side of your face. So you always want to be cautious about that."

Remember, this was just 3 months or so ago, so yeah, he's a little jumpy still in that. But he's not supposed to TAKE head shots? - remember? So it catches these guys off guard when they do - especially a guy who's spent more time injured this year than many. When guys are clearly targeting him, with the protection of the league turning a blind eye to it.

You'd likely cry to your Mama and never play again if you were Burr. He has a quick, momentary reaction, then continues on. Because he's a pro, that's why.

[Baggins]

He specifically said the direction Hertl spun was evidence it was a head hit. The fact Hertl wasn't moved in the direction of the hit showed the hit wasn't into the core of the body. Burrows spun, but he went in the direction of the hit, which is evidence the hit was into the core of the body.

Not true. The direct quote from the suspension video (as quoted from TSN story, but you can hear it yourself in the video) is, "Hertl's reaction to this hit -- getting spun rather than getting driven into the direction Edler was travelling -- reaffirms our view that his head is the main point of contact." They did NOT say that the direction of being spun was the important factor, only that being spun around rather than be driven into a specific direction was proof that the head was the main point of contact.

Umm.........

[-DLC-]

The league isn't making contact to the head illegal and likely won't unless you want a less physical Euro style of game. What they are eliminating is targeting the head of a player. It's actually well explained in the videos. As long as contact is into the core of the body contact to the head is incidental. This is the case in the Burrows hit. Cutting across the front of the player and "picking the head" is illegal. This is the case in the Edler hit and the videos I posted on the previous page.

The league has actually been consistent Deb. It's not picking and choosing. The rules are definite. Watch the videos of suspensions on the previous page. All of them are in line with the Edler hit. It's actually you guys that are picking and choosing by ignoring the stipulation of delivering the hit into the core of the body. You're ignoring the part that isn't convenient to your argument. But after watching several suspension video the league has been consistent with that stipulation.

Do you want a less physical league in the Euro style Deb? It's the only way to eliminate contact to the head which requires a change to the existing rules. As the rules stand, like it or not, the hit on Burrows was legal.

It's not what I want, I want the league to figure it out. It's been ongoing for them and the fact that they have to keep promoting that they're doing more than others is a farce. You don't tell people, you show people.

YOU SAY the league has been consistent. Others, like me, disagree and your word isn't THE or FINAL word.

You'll see. I don't have to argue this with you. One day this game of cat and mouse the league is playing will crash down on them and someone will, once again, be seriously injured. And they'll have to scramble with their tail between their legs and they'll explain why they aren't to blame. How they're doing all they can to protect players.

If you're trying but it's still not effective in eliminating problems, you're not trying hard enough.

I like hitting. I want it to stay. But if you're reckless and you miss, just as with a stick, you should have to account for that. Doesn't matter that you didn't intend to - if you connect with the head, you're guilty not innocent. Despite how it happened. That's the part that the league needs to change....for, as it stands, it's bogus and many are challenging the decisions being made.

Just because you have some guys in place making decisions, doesn't mean they're foolproof. Beyond reproach. They keep tweaking it and so it's highly possible that they still don't have it right. I'm sure they don't.

[Canuck Surfer]

If your goal is to stop head shots, that is a suspension!

Kassian did not mean to hit Gagner's head either, but?

[Baggins]

It's not what I want, I want the league to figure it out. It's been ongoing for them and the fact that they have to keep promoting that they're doing more than others is a farce. You don't tell people, you show people.

YOU SAY the league has been consistent. Others, like me, disagree and your word isn't THE or FINAL word.

You'll see. I don't have to argue this with you. One day this game of cat and mouse the league is playing will crash down on them and someone will, once again, be seriously injured. And they'll have to scramble with their tail between their legs and they'll explain why they aren't to blame. How they're doing all they can to protect players.

If you're trying but it's still not effective in eliminating problems, you're not trying hard enough.

I like hitting. I want it to stay. But if you're reckless and you miss, just as with a stick, you should have to account for that. Doesn't matter that you didn't intend to - if you connect with the head, you're guilty not innocent. Despite how it happened.

So you want the Euro style. Start your petition Deb.

[Baggins]

If your goal is to stop head shots, that is a suspension!

Kassian did not mean to hit Gagner's head either, but?

The goal isn't to stop contact to the head. The goal is to stop "picking" the head. There's a difference.

Kassians reckless use of his stick had nothing at all to do with a legal hockey play and is completely irrelevant to what constitutes a legal body check.

[-DLC-]

Here's another thing...and I'll follow up.

Edler wasn't even registering Hertl on the radar. It's not a 4 way stop where you have to stop and look both ways before proceeding...he's going in a straight line for the puck. It's actually Hertl that comes racing in, crouched, from directly to Edler's side, to also try for the puck. What the hell does Edler do there? Stop and say, "oh, pardon me sir, you go first?" in a nice Canadian manner? Hell no, it's a race for the puck. Burr's looked worse based on EVERYTHING to me. Don't just hide behind "the league says". The rule says. I want you to address what the actual videos and pictures say. Because I don't trust the league to enforce or even make the rules anymore, so it matters little to me what they spew.

Pics to follow, in usual Deb fashion.

[-DLC-]

So you want the Euro style. Start your petition Deb.

Weak Baggins. I didn't say that.

I said that you can't protect player's safety by trying to decipher after the fact. Because then the act's already been committed...you've allowed for it to. You've left that door open vs slamming it shut.

It's not going to matter much in the age of concussions when the ruling comes in after the fact...that protects no one. How can it? Answer that Baggins, don't use your BS one liners when you can't.

Direct answers to these points, or you're simply avoiding them because you don't have answers.

If head shots are "reviewed" to see if they're legal or not, isn't that already too late?

[-DLC-]

I had to go away for a minute and regroup.

Here's what I really want you to understand Baggins - I didn't call for or necessarily want the game to change. I love the good ol' rock em sock 'em hockey (have every single video - yes, VHS because that's how long I've known that kind of hockey for).

Wasn't my deal. My decision.

It was a league, in reacting to what happened with Bertuzzi and in seeing other sports leagues dealing with the issue of concussions. Basically, to cover their butts and pretend like they cared. I doubt that they do - it's damage control, little more. If it was truly about player safety, it would be turning into a Euro league because really, that's the only way.

I don't want that. But you can't have your cake and eat it too.

You can't pretend you're protecting players when you're only doing a half assed job.

Zero tolerance makes sure it doesn't happen. Looking at video after it has is not protecting anyone. Except the guys who are supposed to be protecting others. So they can pretend they tried.

That's the deal....I'd love if we didn't look at any of it - but I'm not out there risking my future health and appreciate that those who are deserve something more than what's important to me.

And you.

So if it takes making a soft Euro league in a surefire way to eliminate headshots (if you don't, then you're not protecting anyone), that's what you do.

In no taking headshots out - in trying to justify some, it's not effective. You'll still get headshots mixed in there.

Punishing someone doesn't take back what happened. It doesn't rewind and undo it. So it's too late.

The league doesn't know their asses from a hole in the ground on this one. That is confirmed by the fact that, for 10 years now, they're still "explaining" and head shots are still happening...legal ones, but they're still happening. And how is that protecting guys? When they are concussed it matters little - no, not at all - that the blow was delivered "legally".

NHL head shot ban gets clearer

Tuesday, 06.21.2011 / 8:11 PM / News

Associated Press

Print

NEW YORK (AP) - The NHL is targeting hits to the head again, broadening the landmark ban that is only one year old.

After outlawing only shots to the head that came from the blindside, the NHL board of governors approved a pair of rule changes on Tuesday that Commissioner Gary Bettman hopes will decrease the number of concussions suffered by players.

Players will now face a minor penalty for any hit that involves primary contact to the head and shots that target an opponent's head and make it the principal point of contact. The original wording to Rule 48 applied only to hits that came from the lateral or blindside. Those words have been eliminated.

This ban, effective immediately, applied to hits anywhere on the ice and from any direction.

So they were "getting clearer" in 2011.

And you're arguing that they have it right? They haven't even perfected it...they keep having to redefine things because they never set the boundaries as they should have. They keep moving the markers closer, but still aren't there yet. It's not my doing...THEY are the ones who jumped into this pool in trying to provide lip service and in now having to find actions that meet that.

Because it isn't about protecting players, it's about covering their butts. Doing what they have to so they're not held accountable or responsible.

[Baggins]

Weak Baggins. I didn't say that.

I said that you can't protect player's safety by trying to decipher after the fact. Because then the act's already been committed...you've allowed for it to. You've left that door open vs slamming it shut.

It's not going to matter much in the age of concussions when the ruling comes in after the fact...that protects no one. How can it? Answer that Baggins, don't use your BS one liners when you can't.

Direct answers to these points, or you're simply avoiding them because you don't have answers.

If head shots are "reviewed" to see if they're legal or not, isn't that already too late?

Deb, everything you are saying is pointing to you wanting a less physical league. You want a complete elimination of hits to the head. That's the Euro rules and the result of those rules is less hitting. That's the only way to get remotely close to what you want "before the fact". You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's one way OR the other.

Per the rules as they stand, the hit on Burrows was legal. Period. So you either want a player suspended contrary to the current rules or you're advocating a rule change. Which is it Deb? That's a pretty simple either/or question.

Unfortunately suspensions can't be handed out until the offense has occurred. Such is suspension life in any sport and suspensions occur in football, baseball, and basketball in the same manner: after the fact. After the fact video is reviewed to determine what occurred and a decision made according to the rules. Lacking the ability to punish players before the event happens, like the movie Minority Report, can you see any other way of doing it? Even if the rules were changed to no head contact at all it will still happen at times, just as it does in the Euro leagues, and punishment will come after the fact.

In summary: You will never slam that door shut. No matter what the rules there will be those who violate those rules whether intentionally, by accident, or heat of the moment. Punishment will always be after the fact.

[poetica]

Umm.........

Umm....

Just because you highlight a single word does not erase all context.

You said, "He specifically said the direction Hertl spun was evidence it was a head hit." No, he did not. What the suspension video actually said was, "getting spun rather than getting driven into the direction Edler was travelling..." Notice that in your statement the word "direction" is relating to the spinning, but in the NHL's statement it was used in relation to the absence of being pushed in a specific direction, not the direction of the spinning. Those are completely different things.

[-DLC-]

Let's do it this way, to help make it clearer to you:

Deb, everything you are saying is pointing to you wanting a less physical league. You want a complete elimination of hits to the head. That's the Euro rules and the result of those rules is less hitting. That's the only way to get remotely close to what you want "before the fact". You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's one way OR the other.

The NHL refers to a "head shot ban". As flattering as it is, they don't call Deb to consult with her...this wasn't my doing, this was theirs. And my words state what I want...you can't do that, only I can....I want consistency. I don't want them to play less physical....how did you decide that? The league said they were doing something. They doled out some suspensions and then, in other instances, they didn't. They updated the rule in "making it clearer" - would that that be necessary if it was perfect? And it still isn't...that's my gripe. So get it straight....I've helped simplify it for you.

Per the rules as they stand, the hit on Burrows was legal. Period. So you either want a player suspended contrary to the current rules or you're advocating a rule change. Which is it Deb? That's a pretty simple either/or question.

No, as the rule was interpreted by someone. I want them to clearly define the rule so it isn't subjective. Remember, they had to make it clearer. I'm convinced they still don't have it tweaked to perfection. You can't have a "ban" on something if it's still permitted. Kind of contradictory. They call it a headshot ban. But they allow headshots, provided they aren't "targeting" the head. That can be manipulated.

Unfortunately suspensions can't be handed out until the offense has occurred. Such is suspension life in any sport and suspensions occur in football, baseball, and basketball in the same manner: after the fact. After the fact video is reviewed to determine what occurred and a decision made according to the rules. Lacking the ability to punish players before the event happens, like the movie Minority Report, can you see any other way of doing it? Even if the rules were changed to no head contact at all it will still happen at times, just as it does in the Euro leagues, and punishment will come after the fact.

There shouldn't be any "review" necessary - a suspension should be applied without further review or decision. It should be a done deal - that's how a ban works. Or it isn't a ban.

In summary: You will never slam that door shut. No matter what the rules there will be those who violate those rules whether intentionally, by accident, or heat of the moment. Punishment will always be after the fact.

You can slam the door shut in that guys will know if they commit a head shot, they'll be gone. By allowing some to slither through - no? It won't happen, so thanks for helping to make my point. But yes you can set a zero tolerance and guidelines - 1st one: 5 games. Second: 10. Third, Indefinite, with a 20 game minimum.

Something with some severity that deters headshots.

This clearly isn't working? Do you think it is?

I don't want it any more than you do. But the league shouldn't "dabble"...it's a great injustice to do so.

[Baggins]

Because it isn't about protecting players, it's about covering their butts. Doing what they have to so they're not held accountable or responsible.

I don't buy that at all. There isn't an owner out there that wants to see his star players lost to concussion, or any other injury, and it's the owner that make the rules. What they're attempting to do is keep the physicality of the game and protect the players as much as possible. The hit on Burrows is proof you can't fully protect the players and retain the physical nature they want. It's simply impossible to have both. It really is an either/or situation. You'd have to eliminate all hits to the chest of a player to avoid head contact.

I'd be really curious to see a player poll on the question of removing head shots completely. Would the players themselves prefer the Euro type rule that greatly reduces hitting or if they think the way the NHL is currently enforcing head shots as sufficient.

You've mentioned several times about affecting the players lives. But they know full well the risks they're taking and are extremely well compensated for the profession they've chosen. Considerably more so than occupations where death and loss of limbs occur yearly.

The bottom line is this Deb: The way the rules are currently enforced the hit on Burrows was legal. Nobody is asking you to like the hit on Burrows. No fan likes that type of hit when it happens to one of their own. But you can't suspend a player for following those rules simply because it happened to one of your guys. So it's either advocate changing the rules or accept that type of hit as part of the game. Personally, I'd prefer to see the "big hit" remain in the game as opposed to the Euro style alternative.

[Baggins]

Umm....

Just because you highlight a single word does not erase all context.

You said, "He specifically said the direction Hertl spun was evidence it was a head hit." No, he did not. What the suspension video actually said was, "getting spun rather than getting driven into the direction Edler was travelling..." Notice that in your statement the word "direction" is relating to the spinning, but in the NHL's statement it was used in relation to the absence of being pushed in a specific direction, not the direction of the spinning. Those are completely different things.

Which I already explained. Not sure what it is you're not getting about it. It's all about the DIRECTION the player went after contact. Hertl was simply spun as opposed to having his direction change. That's evidence the hit was not into the core of the body and simply picked the head instead. You're focusing solely on the single word "spun" rather than the context of the entire sentence.

Watch the videos on the previous page with a little objectivity and you'll see that they are consistent with the Edler suspension.

[Baggins]

Deb, it doesn't matter what you want. They won't suspend a player who doesn't violate the rules as written and enforced because you don't like the play. They have been consistent in this regard. They haven't flip flopped at all about hitting into the core of the body as opposed to picking the head. You'd have to eliminate hits to the chest to eliminate contact to the head. One almost always leads to the other.

You can say all you want you don't want the Euro style and prefer the physical NHL game but you can't eliminate all contact to the head without changing to that Euro style. It's one or the other. You can't have both. Again, everything you posted in red there screams you want the Euro style.

Did you even watch the videos on the previous page? They seem pretty consistent to the Edler suspension to me. Plus the explanation of how to make each it a legal hit is consistent with the hit on Burrows.

Btw, in the Euro leagues players still get suspended for hits to the head. They all know they'll be suspended and it still happens. The door is never shut Deb. Suspensions would never occur if the door was truly closed.

[poetica]

Which I already explained. Not sure what it is you're not getting about it. It's all about the DIRECTION the player went after contact. Hertl was simply spun as opposed to having his direction change. That's evidence the hit was not into the core of the body and simply picked the head instead. You're focusing solely on the single word "spun" rather than the context of the entire sentence.

Watch the videos on the previous page with a little objectivity and you'll see that they are consistent with the Edler suspension.

Which of your claims are you saying I'm missing the context for?

He specifically said the direction Hertl spun was evidence it was a head hit. The fact Hertl wasn't moved in the direction of the hit showed the hit wasn't into the core of the body. Burrows spun, but he went in the direction of the hit, which is evidence the hit was into the core of the body.

I know what the video said, but which exactly are you saying now? "The direction Hertl spun was evidence it was a head hit" or "Hertl was simply spun as opposed to having his direction change"?

I did watch the video of Burrows being hit and I clearly see that he is spun around and not driven in the direction Niederreiter was traveling but instead had his own directional travel stopped and his body simply spun around in place. It's particularly clear if you look at Burrow's left foot in the 2nd video clip on the first page. Given that that was the reasoning behind Edler's suspension, the fact that this hit did not result in a suspension is NOT consistent.

[stawns]

I would say that Orpik's hit on Toews is the most comparable ht to NN's on Burrows. Hits him pretty square, but makes incidental contact with the head.

[-DLC-]

Toews was putting on the brakes and more crouched than Burr...Burr had just sent the puck off and was more upright. But fairly close...

They both involved launches, which is the part I don't like. Propels more in an upward motion. Sure, it's part of how you brace yourself in delivering a hit, but if it connects part of the hit to the head, then it's a problem.

Based on the lack of suspension to NN, I'd expect the same here.