Niederreiter's hit on Burrows

[poetica]

Edler gave up on the puck, slowed up and positioned his shoulder to deliver a hit. Go to the 1:05 mark (the above view) and you even see he draws his stick back and tucks his elbow in which is consistent with delivering shoulder check. If he was going for the puck as you claim. he would have reached forward with his stick not drawn it back further away from the puck. This alone makes it clear he was playing the hit as opposed to the puck.

I wouldn't suggest you actually put your stick in front of you as you skate with speed into the boards. Rather, I'd suggest you do exactly what Edler did, pull your stick to the side, get body position and then go for the puck. It'll help prevent injury.

[TimberWolf]

I wonder how most people here are feeling about the Orpik hit on Toews last night? If that hit happens to a Canucks we most certainly would have a thread about it.

Perhaps the problem is our interpretation more than anything else? Are we willing to concede that as a possibility?

That works both ways, really.

Usual suspects appear whenever this sort of thing comes up on either side of the fence.

[Baggins]

I did. And I still disagree. The only thing plain as can be to me is their inconsistency.

Are you saying you can't tell if a hit is into the core of the body or not? Their consistency is: hit core of body good, hit head and not core of body bad. They have been consistent in that application of the rule. There's no was it and accident or what was his intent. They don't care. It's black and white, core of the body or not.

[poetica]

you know many scientists who played professional hockey? Having played through the WHL and BCHL I played with a lot of professional players and a lot of college players.........of those who went to uni, almost all of them either go into business or education. Most that do go into sciences go into engineering, and most of them don't go on to play in the NHL.

The game will always be better in the hands of those who played it.

I don't know many scientists at all to be honest. But then, the NHL should have a far larger pool of candidates than people I, or you for that matter, personally know.

I find it hard to believe there wouldn't be a handful of qualified scientists throughout the world who have some hockey experience if that's important (even though it doesn't seem to be important for the people make the rules.)

[poetica]

Are you saying you can't tell if a hit is into the core of the body or not? Their consistency is: hit core of body good, hit head and not core of body bad. They have been consistent in that application of the rule. There's no was it and accident or what was his intent. They don't care. It's black and white, core of the body or not.

If they're saying that Nolan launched himself up into the "core of the body" (causing head and neck injuries in the process) but Edler's lowered body and hip thrust out was him picking the head rather than the body, then no I guess I don't have a clue what the NHL defines as "core of the body" since apparently it's a moving target.

[Chalky]

Are you saying you can't tell if a hit is into the core of the body or not? Their consistency is: hit core of body good, hit head and not core of body bad. They have been consistent in that application of the rule. There's no was it and accident or what was his intent. They don't care. It's black and white, core of the body or not.

Except when they get it wrong...like with Edler's hit on Hertl.

[Absent Canuck]

The puck being there didn't really matter. It still should have only been a fine for being careless but the puck doesn't matter.

Also you can't honestly tell me you don't see Edler lean into the hit well before it happened. There's no way you missed that fact.

You mean brace for the hit as he saw Hertl coming? Save the hyperbole.

The puck does matter. Every player is entitled to a direct path to the puck and Edler is not responsible for Hertls well being while pursuing the puck. I am afraid you obviously see it differently.

[Baggins]

I wouldn't suggest you actually put your stick in front of you as you skate with speed into the boards. Rather, I'd suggest you do exactly what Edler did, pull your stick to the side, get body position and then go for the puck. It'll help prevent injury.

I've never in my life seen a player position the butt of his in his belly to take puck off the boards. But I've also never seen a player get a puck off the boards by drawing his stick back away from the boards and the puck. I have seen a player go directly at the boards sweep the puck away and turn his body for contact with the boards. No injury.

Edler makes no effort to play the puck at all. So he was either playing the hit or coasting along with no idea what he was doing there. Shanny even describes how Edler positioned himself to "deliver a hard legal hit". The problem comes in where the hit was delivered, targeting the head instead of through the core of the body.

[Baggins]

If they're saying that Nolan launched himself up into the "core of the body" (causing head and neck injuries in the process) but Edler's lowered body and hip thrust out was him picking the head rather than the body, then no I guess I don't have a clue what the NHL defines as "core of the body" since apparently it's a moving target.

Well at least as we agree you have no clue. Hey, we've managed to actually agree on something. Pop the champagne!

[Absent Canuck]

Edler gave up on the puck, slowed up and positioned his shoulder to deliver a hit. Go to the 1:05 mark (the above view) and you even see he draws his stick back and tucks his elbow in which is consistent with delivering shoulder check. If he was going for the puck as you claim. he would have reached forward with his stick not drawn it back further away from the puck. This alone makes it clear he was playing the hit as opposed to the puck.

No he didnt. You are simply spinning it to justify a conclusion. He took a direct path to the puck, saw Hertl was going to get there at the exact same time and he braced himself for the contact. This is allowed you know. Edler is not responsible for Hertl trying to play the puck.

Shanahan doesnt even bother to split hairs like this anyways. He outright ignores the puck is there and decrees Edler should have skated to Hertl from the side instead of going in front of him. He ignores the fact Edler made a line for the puck, not Hertl.

And we can go back and forth defending our point of view which makes the discussion irreverent. You see it your way. I see it mine. The league agrees with your hindsight view.

[Absent Canuck]

Well at least as we agree you have no clue. Hey, we've managed to actually agree on something. Pop the champagne!

What has come over you the last few days. Feds seize your house?

[poetica]

I've never in my life seen a player position the butt of his in his belly to take puck off the boards. But I've also never seen a player get a puck off the boards by drawing his stick back away from the boards and the puck. I have seen a player go directly at the boards sweep the puck away and turn his body for contact with the boards. No injury.

Edler makes no effort to play the puck at all. So he was either playing the hit or coasting along with no idea what he was doing there. Shanny even describes how Edler positioned himself to "deliver a hard legal hit". The problem comes in where the hit was delivered, targeting the head instead of through the core of the body.

Edler didn't have a chance to sweep the puck away until he was in too close to the boards as it hadn't arrived yet. He did the right thing by keeping his stick to the side and attempting to get body position.

And yes, Shanahan did say that Edler positioned himself for a legal hit. The only reason head contact was made was because of the vulnerable position Hertl knowingly left himself in. That is a factor that is supposed to be considered in determining head hits according to Shanahan himself in the Hard Hits vs Illegal Hits video. You'll also notice that a player putting himself in a vulnerable position and a player materially changing the position of his head just before the hit are 2 separate factors. Hertl had the responsibility to make himself able to be legally hit. He didn't. Edler had the responsibility to not pick the head by raising his body position or launching into the hit. He did his part.

I don't see Edler was guilty of a vicious head hit but this hit is an example of a legal hit:

Well at least as we agree you have no clue. Hey, we've managed to actually agree on something. Pop the champagne!

You're right. I have no clue what the NHL is thinking. But congrats on speaking condescension so you can.

[Chalky]

I've never in my life seen a player position the butt of his in his belly to take puck off the boards. But I've also never seen a player get a puck off the boards by drawing his stick back away from the boards and the puck. I have seen a player go directly at the boards sweep the puck away and turn his body for contact with the boards. No injury.

Edler makes no effort to play the puck at all. So he was either playing the hit or coasting along with no idea what he was doing there. Shanny even describes how Edler positioned himself to "deliver a hard legal hit". The problem comes in where the hit was delivered, targeting the head instead of through the core of the body.

Edler leads with his bottom, Hertl leads with his head. Shanny made the wrong call, this was a Kronwall style hit. The only reason the suspension happened was because Hertl was on a tear and the league wanted to make a statement.

[Batmania]

That works both ways, really.

Usual suspects appear whenever this sort of thing comes up on either side of the fence.

I think this is absolutely correct.

I just think part of the problem on the fan side of things is a lack of understanding the equation (every math teacher I ever had that told me I needed to show my work is rolling in their grave right now)

I think if there's one thing I would like to see the nhl do better is give the fans more information. It's a million times better than it was but it's certainly not close to perfect.

[Batmania]

You mean brace for the hit as he saw Hertl coming? Save the hyperbole.

The puck does matter. Every player is entitled to a direct path to the puck and Edler is not responsible for Hertls well being while pursuing the puck. I am afraid you obviously see it differently.

Brace for the hit my arse. Aside from just what his body does his direction changes. There's no hyperbole (I'm not even sure you're using the word correctly to be honest) there's just what happens. The puck doesn't matter in that situation. He has every right to go for the puck without question but that doesn't take away from what happened.

As I said imo it didn't deserve a suspension but it deserved to be looked at and I would have said a fine would have been sufficient.

[Baggins]

1 - Hertl had the responsibility to make himself able to be legally hit.

2 - You're right. I have no clue what the NHL is thinking. But congrats on speaking condescension so you can.

1 - No he doesn't. Unless of course you want to take speed out of the game. Any player skating with speed will be leaning forward. That doesn't mean his head is fair game when hitting from the side. From the side the hitter can target the shoulder instead of the head. It still comes down to hitting into the core of the body. If the hit comes from the front, or an angle from the front, hitting into the core of the body is legal regardless of contact to the head. That's because avoiding the head is not possible in delivering a full body check. Coming from the side a slight direction change can make the shoulder the point of contact instead of the head. Meaning head contact is avoidable.

An example of a player putting himself at risk is a player ducking down or turning his back to a hit just prior to contact. Thus giving the hitter no chance to avoid delivering an illegal hit and the hitter is thus absolved of responsibility. The Getzlaf hit on Hamhuis a while back is an example of this. Getzlaf did everything right in the hit, as he coasted in, tucked his elbow in, and dropped his shoulder. But Hamhuis turned his back to the hit at the last moment. The result was Hamhuis was hit from behind spinning him into the glass with force and suffering a concussion. Of course most here were calling it a dirty hit and intent to injure. It was charging, boarding, a late hit, hitting from behind, and elbowing. In reality it was none of those. It was Hamhuis putting himself in a vulnerable position when about to be hit. That's where the player getting hit holds responsibility.

2 - Ok, no sense of humor. My bad.

[poetica]

1 - No he doesn't. Unless of course you want to take speed out of the game. Any player skating with speed will be leaning forward. That doesn't mean his head is fair game when hitting from the side. From the side the hitter can target the shoulder instead of the head. It still comes down to hitting into the core of the body. If the hit comes from the front, or an angle from the front, hitting into the core of the body is legal regardless of contact to the head. That's because avoiding the head is not possible in delivering a full body check. Coming from the side a slight direction change can make the shoulder the point of contact instead of the head. Meaning head contact is avoidable.

An example of a player putting himself at risk is a player ducking down or turning his back to a hit just prior to contact. Thus giving the hitter no chance to avoid delivering an illegal hit and the hitter is thus absolved of responsibility. The Getzlaf hit on Hamhuis a while back is an example of this. Getzlaf did everything right in the hit, as he coasted in, tucked his elbow in, and dropped his shoulder. But Hamhuis turned his back to the hit at the last moment. The result was Hamhuis was hit from behind spinning him into the glass with force and suffering a concussion. Of course most here were calling it a dirty hit and intent to injure. It was charging, boarding, a late hit, hitting from behind, and elbowing. In reality it was none of those. It was Hamhuis putting himself in a vulnerable position when about to be hit. That's where the player getting hit holds responsibility.

2 - Ok, no sense of humor. My bad.

1. First, according to the NHL's Hard Hits vs Illegal Hits video the NHL "must" consider whether or not a player put themselves in a vulnerable position when determining if the head could have been avoided. That means players have a responsibility to avoid putting themselves in a vulnerable position. In fact, in the video he even says, "It's important to note that players receiving checks must still be aware of their surroundings and any impending legal checks."

Also note that the example they offer of a clean hit where a player putting himself in a vulnerable position is a guy leaning forward for speed and puck control.

Also, note that the "vulnerable position" consideration is NOT the same as the "material change just prior to the hit" consideration.

Obviously, they are considered separately. Otherwise, "vulnerable position" would simply be covered by the "change position immediately prior to the hit." And that is where the NHL flubbed the Edler decision. While they note that Hertl doesn't change his position just prior to the hit, they failed to consider their own criteria of whether or not he put himself in a vulnerable position.

Edler didn't blindside Hertl. He knew Edler was in front of him and that contact was coming. As such, Hertl had the right to expect that Edler would attempt to make clean contact by not raising his body position or his arms, which he didn't. And Edler had the right to expect that Hertl would make clean contact possible by not leaving himself in a vulnerable position, which he chose not to do. As such, Edler should not have been held responsible for Hertl's choice to remain in a vulnerable position.

Second, I don't know what the bolded part of your message is referring to. Not only can you clearly see that the contact is between Edler's side and the front of Hertl, even the NHL video says, Edler "cuts across the front of Hertl." No one has ever said Edler hit Hertl from the side. That's actually what the NHL said he should have done.

From the suspension video:

Edler is very clearly in front of Hertl, not hitting him from the side. Hertl is putting himself in a vulnerable position for speed and puck control, like the guy in the "clean hit" example.

2. It's okay if you don't have a sense of humor. We all have our faults.

[-DLC-]

The thing is (guess I'm not done...but had to take a breather) - Edler was on that same path the whole time...going straight at the puck.

It isn't a yield or merge situation....Hertl's angling himself and crouching/reaching for the puck. He actually runs INTO Edler. Edler's right skate is turned as he goes in toward the boards and there was absolutely no veering off path.

Hogwash. BS. A crock. That's what it is.

[elvis15]

That's what I'm arguing.

And I've proposed how to address every hit to the head...anything less is ineffective in eliminating this problems.

I never asked to keep the same amount of hitting in to fairly apply this rule in an effective manner. I said it would have to be sacrificed to some degree as a zero tolerance is applied. Here's the thing...don't have rulings on the hits, have varying degrees of punishment...that's how you can address them all without having to throw the book at someone who inadvertently contacted the head through way of a body check.

Yup, and I understand that but you keep replying to others arguing the different point (not that you haven't replied to people making a similar point to you as well). Its another discussion worthwhile having though, even if it's still fraught with potential issues: why one long suspension, one short; clearly accidental and doesn't warrant anything but why no leeway; players afraid to even hit legally with no grace suspension policy; etc.

I wonder how most people here are feeling about the Orpik hit on Toews last night? If that hit happens to a Canucks we most certainly would have a thread about it.

Perhaps the problem is our interpretation more than anything else? Are we willing to concede that as a possibility?

Finally got to see it and I can easily see what they'd argue, that Orpik didn't make his body position low enough and he came up into the hit. They've been consistent in their stance on what they feel is wrong.

In Shanahans explanation he conviently forgets to mention the puck is right where Edler is skating to. Edler is entitled to go get the puck regardless if Hertl is bearing down on him.

Shannys explanation is that he did not move to hit Hertl square on and claims Edler waited to target the guy in the head. However, the fact is Edler is playing the puck , not Hertl. I am still galled that he somehow missed that.

It should never have been a suspension. In my opinion the worst decision Shanny rendered this year.

It's been beat to death in the Edler suspension thread, but Edler wasn't playing the puck. He had a better position to do so, but he pulls his stick back and in the very least braces for contact with Hertl. That certainly explains why the NHL ignores that the puck is right there since Edler himself ignored it.

Now if Edler had moved to play the puck instead of bracing (or in my opinion we can even call it a back hit by Edler where he hits the person coming in to check him) he doesn't have the responsibility to worry about if Hertl's head gets it. He just goes and plays the puck, and if he's really worried about Hertl's safety he can even turn toward his own end while playing the puck to lessen or avoid any contact.

He doesn't play the puck though, and instead looks to make contact with Hertly instead but misses out on hitting squarely through the body and picks the head instead.

I think the league has certain things they look for. I actually think they know exactly what they are doing and they do have people other than just the group of former players that help with these decisions.

We also have to remember this is how the General Managers wanted thing, the competition committee and the NHLPA. This is right from the CBA which both groups created.

...

Not only with the suspensions, but certainly there was a large group involved in creating the rules currently in place as you say. It's one thing to say three guys sitting in a room just decided on the current check to the head rule, but they in the very least took the advice of GMs on what they were looking for to protect players as well as the players themselves via the NHLPA and safety committee.

I'd make an educated guess they also enlisted help of people who are experts on physics and how the body works as well as the aforementioned hockey expertise, but I don't recall if it was ever mentioned in reports around when they revamped the rule the last time. People seem to think they haven't, but do they know that for sure?

I don't know many scientists at all to be honest. But then, the NHL should have a far larger pool of candidates than people I, or you for that matter, personally know.

I find it hard to believe there wouldn't be a handful of qualified scientists throughout the world who have some hockey experience if that's important (even though it doesn't seem to be important for the people make the rules.)

But who says they don't? And that they aren't already utilizing people who specialize in sports science?

[elvis15]

You mean brace for the hit as he saw Hertl coming? Save the hyperbole.

The puck does matter. Every player is entitled to a direct path to the puck and Edler is not responsible for Hertls well being while pursuing the puck. I am afraid you obviously see it differently.

But he is if he avoids playing the puck and instead back hits into Hertl. That's the point of the NHL and those of us arguing it was a suspendable hit under the current rules.

Was Brown excused when he got suspended for sticking his elbow back when Pominville was coming in to hit him? Brown was actually playing the puck at that time too, so do you think the same excuse would apply to him?

It's seems spin has come up again, and while it's easy to accuse someone else of spinning their posts, it's not always easy to see how it looks just like spin on your part as well.

Man, I hate getting into this stuff again, but I never got a good answer on this scenario: If Edler were to just leave the puck to go up the boards beside him and brace for contact without initiating any himself, why wouldn't Hertl just skate around him, pick up the puck on the other side and skate in unmolested?

Edler leads with his bottom, Hertl leads with his head. Shanny made the wrong call, this was a Kronwall style hit. The only reason the suspension happened was because Hertl was on a tear and the league wanted to make a statement.

It could have been if Edler had made contact squarely through the body, as Kronwall did when he hit Voracek. But, since Edler didn't make contact squarely through the body it's not a legal hit. That's as simple as I can make the explanation.

...

2 - Ok, no sense of humor. My bad.

You really need a smiley face if you're going to say something like that in a thread that gets a little heated in the discussion around a serious issue like checks to the head.

*Note for below post, removed pics for readability. Those referenced are reposted in the reply.

1. First, according to the NHL's Hard Hits vs Illegal Hits video the NHL "must" consider whether or not a player put themselves in a vulnerable position when determining if the head could have been avoided. That means players have a responsibility to avoid putting themselves in a vulnerable position. In fact, in the video he even says, "It's important to note that players receiving checks must still be aware of their surroundings and any impending legal checks."

*...

Also note that the example they offer of a clean hit where a player putting himself in a vulnerable position is a guy leaning forward for speed and puck control.

...

Also, note that the "vulnerable position" consideration is NOT the same as the "material change just prior to the hit" consideration.

...

Obviously, they are considered separately. Otherwise, "vulnerable position" would simply be covered by the "change position immediately prior to the hit." And that is where the NHL flubbed the Edler decision. While they note that Hertl doesn't change his position just prior to the hit, they failed to consider their own criteria of whether or not he put himself in a vulnerable position.

Edler didn't blindside Hertl. He knew Edler was in front of him and that contact was coming. As such, Hertl had the right to expect that Edler would attempt to make clean contact by not raising his body position or his arms, which he didn't. And Edler had the right to expect that Hertl would make clean contact possible by not leaving himself in a vulnerable position, which he chose not to do. As such, Edler should not have been held responsible for Hertl's choice to remain in a vulnerable position.

Second, I don't know what the bolded part of your message is referring to. Not only can you clearly see that the contact is between Edler's side and the front of Hertl, even the NHL video says, Edler "cuts across the front of Hertl." No one has ever said Edler hit Hertl from the side. That's actually what the NHL said he should have done.

From the suspension video:

...

Edler is very clearly in front of Hertl, not hitting him from the side. Hertl is putting himself in a vulnerable position for speed and puck control, like the guy in the "clean hit" example.

2. It's okay if you don't have a sense of humor. We all have our faults.

I think that's all great information, but you conveniently ignore part of the very rule you're using as evidence.

"vulnerable position ... on an otherwise full body check"

Edler's hit isn't a full body check and Niederreiter's is. That's determined in part by the rule preceding the one you've quoted (part (i)) referencing hitting squarely through the body.

I know you aren't seeing what we're seeing when describing hits squarely through the body or we would have had a much shorter discussion on it back in October. That's a key point in our argument that makes the hits legal or illegal which you're avoiding. It certainly covers the Kronwall hit on Voracek you show in the next picture:

The point to that part of the rule is if the player getting hit is in a vulnerable position - while it doesn't excuse the hitter from making an otherwise clean body check - then contact to the head is not illegal in and of itself. You even reference that yourself when talking about Edler "not raising his body position or his arms" but don't take it far enough to cover hitting squarely through the body.

Edler doesn't elbow, charge or make a late hit on Hertl, but he fails to make a full body check squarely through the body and that's why that hit is illegal.

If there hadn't been head contact in that hit then it wouldn't have been illegal because it's a rule about checks to the head. People miss hits all the time where they don't hit squarely through the body, but so long as it doesn't break a rule (like checks to the head, but also kneeing or elbowing) then they aren't illegal. Do that along with an illegal act and suspensions come into play.

That's the responsibility of a player making a hit, to make it legal under the current rules. If they want to do more to protect another player's safety then good for them.

The player getting hit also has responsibility to protect himself but that doesn't absolve the hitter from making a legal check. If he's in a bad spot but gets hit with a legal, full body check then he should have kept his head up.

That's as simple as we can make it, so I'll stop right there.