Chalky Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 He could have Kronwalled him but chose to Matt Cooke him. I hope he gets a game or two. Would have been an entertaining hit if he targeted the hip. With the variation in opinions even amongst one teams fanbase on what supplementary discipline should be levied, it's tough for me to say Shanny could ever please the majority, regardless of the decision. I'm not defending him, I'm just saying people are calling from nothing to a fine to 5 games, no matter what he does, he's going to piss people off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Autistic1 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Looked clean to me. Nino is an idiot for flaring out his elbow like that though. The refs could have easily mistaken that as an elbow and given him a game misconduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiznak Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 It wasn't even an elbow, nothing more than a fine. NHL = No Hitting League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I'd be surprised if he was suspended. I could see a game or two maybe. Not because of some league wide hate-on for the Canucks, but because it really wasn't that bad of a hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lestwest49 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 When I look at the video, it seems Burrow's head snaps back first before his chest. But, I am not a doctor. The only rearson why the suspension will be any less would be because Burrows came back to the game. Plus, just like Valk said in the intermission, Nino is very lucky that Burrows was able to come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I'd be surprised if he was suspended. I could see a game or two maybe. Not because of some league wide hate-on for the Canucks, but because it really wasn't that bad of a hit. Yes because a blatant head shot 'wasn't that bad'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferlands_Head Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 What's more disturbing was the lack of response by the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austy Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 If edlers was a suspension then so should this. But looking at the first gif maybe body hit pre head? Nice to see booth jawing him at the face off though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Looked clean to me. Nino is an idiot for flaring out his elbow like that though. The refs could have easily mistaken that as an elbow and given him a game misconduct. I don't know. It sure looks like the head is the point of contact. What I don't get is why it was called an interference penalty. It wasn't interference because the puck had just left Burrows stick. It was either a head shot penalty or nothing at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The only way we'll get the corruption out of the league office is if the union steps in and applies some serious pressure to get rid of Shannahan's garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ugli Fruit Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The contact was the head AND the shoulder, so not sure what bs Shanahan will pull. That said you do see Niederreiter's elbow come up after the impact as though he was focusing he blow towards Burrows' head. It looks more intentional than not, so it merits a suspension in my book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Yes because a blatant head shot 'wasn't that bad'... As I mentioned generally earlier, you're confusing what the NHL's definition of an illegal check to the head is. I don't know. It sure looks like the head is the point of contact. What I don't get is why it was called an interference penalty. It wasn't interference because the puck had just left Burrows stick. It was either a head shot penalty or nothing at all. I don't get the interference penalty at all. I think they just called that because they felt they needed to call something. But whether or not this is an illegal hit to the head depends on how much you think the hit was squarely through the body (based on the rule I just posted). The head was contacted - square hit on the body or not - but incidental contact on an otherwise legal hit is ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I don't know. It sure looks like the head is the point of contact. What I don't get is why it was called an interference penalty. It wasn't interference because the puck had just left Burrows stick. It was either a head shot penalty or nothing at all.Agreed. And to add insult to injury, a short while later, Bieksa is given an 'interference' penalty for holding his opponent's stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apricot Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 After close review of the incident, the NHL Department Of Player Safety has decided to suspend Alex Edler 3 games.HAHAHAHAOh man, I laughed so hard I think I woke up my parents... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandmaster Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 What's more disturbing was the lack of response by the Canucks. This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt kilgore Posted March 27, 2014 Author Share Posted March 27, 2014 I don't know. It sure looks like the head is the point of contact. What I don't get is why it was called an interference penalty. It wasn't interference because the puck had just left Burrows stick. It was either a head shot penalty or nothing at all. that's something we can agree on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thema Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 2 minute "Interference" on Nino Niederreiter...really? A clear shot to the head IMO. His head moves first upon impact. I'm surprised he didn't get a concussion. It still could show up.I think Niederreiter deserves at least a one or two game suspension.Maybe. BTW Thanks for the video; I wish that the bottom one was as clear and as long as the replay that Sportsnet showed immediately after the hit (and which they showed not one more time afterwards). To me the video of Burr for the first few seconds after the hit was fairly damning but until somebody can provide video I will refrain from further comment. The video provided here suggests that Burr was going down as Nino was going up and Burr (who had the puck) basically veered into Nino. A tough call for sure. BTW Nino can play on my team anytime; he seemed to be the only Wild player who was pissed to be beaten tonight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Hopefully Burr has no real damage from that hit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck or Die Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Surprise, surprise. Elvis15 is back again showing his inconsistencies similar to the league. This is without a doubt suspension worthy, especially if Edler's hit earlier in the season was. There was nothing "incidental" about this hit. It deserves a suspension. But, even by that rule elvis15 loves to post, if this doesn't deserve a suspension, neither did Edler's hit. Try a little consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 As I mentioned generally earlier, you're confusing what the NHL's definition of an illegal check to the head is. I don't get the interference penalty at all. I think they just called that because they felt they needed to call something. But whether or not this is an illegal hit to the head depends on how much you think the hit was squarely through the body (based on the rule I just posted). The head was contacted - square hit on the body or not - but incidental contact on an otherwise legal hit is ok. Well if you watch that slow-mo video Burrows body position doesn't significantly change. So he didn't put himself in a vulnerable position at that unavoidable last moment, he was in it when he was targeted. If anything he raises his head slightly at the last moment. Niederreiter on the other hand straightens his body upwards putting his shoulder more in line with Burrows head. He also leans into the hit and pushes upwards. I think the hit would have been much worse had Burrows not started straightening up. His head would have taken even more of the impact. To me the head was targeted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.