Niederreiter's hit on Burrows

[stawns]

I'd like to see this front angle

Not really, if it was Burrows hitting NN, I would be fine with no suspension as well. Not sure what you're arguing here.

I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear that initial point of contact is shoulder to shoulder/chest, then the head snaps back. It was a tough hit to watch, because you could see it coming (when Burr didn't) and his head snaps back, but if you take that hit out of hockey, you effectively neuter the sport

I will say, the only spot I have concerns with the hit, is NN coming up, rather than straight into Burrows, and that's where I thought a fine/suspension could have been meted out.

[Nino]

Hmm, can I agree with that without you flip flopping just to disagree with me?

But people are once again confusing what principle/initial point of contact means. A hit that is squarely through the body with incidental contact to the head (whether it's the first part contacted or not) is currently a legal hit so long as no other rules are broken (late, elbow, charging, etc.). While I've seen hits more squarely through the body, Nied's arm is tucked in initially and hitting Burrows in the chest rather than missing that and hitting the back shoulder. The head making contact with the shoulder as a part of that doesn't automatically make it a headshot or illegal hit.

It'll come down to the NHL's opinion on how square through the body this hit was as I don't really see any other criteria that would make it a suspendable hit.

It doesn't really matter if his arm raises after the initial hit, so long as it wasn't raised coming in. There's no such thing as blindside in the rules anymore, and I'm not sure how you quantify predatory. It doesn't meet the current criteria of a headshot/illegal hit.

I also disagree this is worse than Edler's hit.

Lol, no problem.

[D-Money]

Sorry I love Burrows but nothing wrong with that hit. Responsibility of a player to watch for the hit. The NHL is becoming a bit of a joke. Used to be that the physical game was respected. Now it is all about finger pointing after a player takes a hard hit. Great for the

presstitutes who get something to debate after the game I guess.

Nothing wrong...like the Edler hit on Hertl?

[TimberWolf]

The self righteous indignation on this board.

I don't think Neiderreiter has been suspended before. A first offense without injury will likely be 2 games at most. I'd be fine with one game but it should be more than a fine.

Since it looks like it will be absolutely nothing maybe you can see where the attitude comes from with those posters. Hard to have any faith in the league

[TimberWolf]

I think a lot of you defending this hit don't see where others are coming from. When Rome got the biggest suspension in finals history for a late but otherwise clean hit and then Edler get suspended for hitting a guy coming in so low he was smelling the ice you can understand why they expect a suspension here.

Regardless of intent or damage Burr was hit in the head and like the Hertl hit that is a suspension or fine (a fine would have been enough IMO) Now if that sort of thing wasn't suspendable before then I would just say "good hit" but it seems that it's suspendable only some times. Based on what criteria?

[Ride the red Pony]

It's a contact league Deb, hits will be made, people will get hurt.

Sorry, the front angle is the one where we can see Burr's face directly......you know, the one that shows NN's shoulder making contact with Burr's shoulder first. When I first saw the play I thought, like you, that it was a headshot, as it was a view from the numbers side. I saw the hit, the head snap back and NN's elbow come up.

However, the front angle gives us a much more definitive view of the play and we can see NN come in, make contact with Burr's shoulder, then (slightly) with the head, then the elbow come up on the follow through (which makes no contact whatsoever).

It's a good hit, and if Burr made it on NN, you would have absolutely no issue with it. If you (the general you) think that kind of hit needs to be taken out of hockey, then I fear for the future of the league. Hockey is a physical game where the physically dominant often have the upper hand, and that's the way it should stay.

I don't agree with you on many points Stawns, but on this I do. Looks like NN's shoulder contacts the inside of Burrs shoulder first and then because of the angle of the hit it rolls up towards the head. I don't think there was much contact with the head as Burr was in the motion of raising it up. As I said above, if Burr hadn't have been and kept his head down he would have still been sleeping.

[Batmania]

I'd like to see this front angle.

Yes, it's a contact league but when hertl came in so low he was smelling the ice Edler was suspended for that. Burr got a shoulder to the head and regardless of intent that's automatic to be looked at by the league.

And maybe deb would be okay with Burr hitting NN but by how some post here others would be defending the inevitable suspension that Burr got for it.

It is but if the principle point of contact wasn't the head it's not a suspension. Having said that I'd like to see this front angle as well. The two angles posted here force us to use our imagination a bit so I'd like to see one that doesn't.

Intent doesn't matter. You bring up Edler and that's a good example of something where intent and common sense from the player being hit don't matter. Point of contact was the head. This hit looks like it is but I want to see this front angle because the two side angles sure look like it. If it's a follow through that makes contact with the head though than it's a legal hit. Just being hit in the head is not a suspension.

[Chalky]

What's more disturbing was the lack of response by the Canucks.

A disturbing post from a disturbing poster.

...I don't really mean that, I just couldn't help myself because of your name and the use of the word disturbing. I do agree, there should have been a better response.

[CowtownCanuck]

1.) Hit was on Burrows

2.) Burrows came back to play in the third

No suspension, no mention from player's safety is my guess

[-DLC-]

It's a contact league Deb, hits will be made, people will get hurt.

Sorry, the front angle is the one where we can see Burr's face directly......you know, the one that shows NN's shoulder making contact with Burr's shoulder first. When I first saw the play I thought, like you, that it was a headshot, as it was a view from the numbers side. I saw the hit, the head snap back and NN's elbow come up.

However, the front angle gives us a much more definitive view of the play and we can see NN come in, make contact with Burr's shoulder, then (slightly) with the head, then the elbow come up on the follow through (which makes no contact whatsoever).

It's a good hit, and if Burr made it on NN, you would have absolutely no issue with it. If you (the general you) think that kind of hit needs to be taken out of hockey, then I fear for the future of the league. Hockey is a physical game where the physically dominant often have the upper hand, and that's the way it should stay.

So where is this thinking when it's Gagne? When it's Hossa?

I'll wait for your answer.....

[roland]

Not really, if it was Burrows hitting NN, I would be fine with no suspension as well. Not sure what you're arguing here.

I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear that initial point of contact is shoulder to shoulder/chest, then the head snaps back. It was a tough hit to watch, because you could see it coming (when Burr didn't) and his head snaps back, but if you take that hit out of hockey, you effectively neuter the sport

It's not about the initial point of contact. It's about the principle point which in my opinion is his head. There have been many cases where it's shoulder on shoulder, but the player making the hit has his shoulder slide up to the other guys head. To me, both angles look like they are head shots (initial + principle) and the follow through makes it look like a body-check afterward.

I've also read other people saying that Burrows was reaching, was low or put himself in a vulnerable position? For anyone who thinks that, you can not be any more wrong as Burrows is clearly in a upright position as he is hit. You can even see niederreiters right skate push off the ice for that extra height

Either way, the league letting this go basically says, "Headshots are OK Now"

[aGENT]

I think a lot of you defending this hit don't see where others are coming from. When Rome got the biggest suspension in finals history for a late but otherwise clean hit and then Edler get suspended for hitting a guy coming in so low he was smelling the ice you can understand why they expect a suspension here.

Regardless of intent or damage Burr was hit in the head and like the Hertl hit that is a suspension or fine (a fine would have been enough IMO) Now if that sort of thing wasn't suspendable before then I would just say "good hit" but it seems that it's suspendable only some times. Based on what criteria?

This. The inconsistency is galling.

[-DLC-]

It's not about the initial point of contact. It's about the principle point which in my opinion is his head. There have been many cases where it's shoulder on shoulder, but the player making the hit has his shoulder slide up to the other guys head. To me, both angles look like they are head shots (initial + principle) and the follow through makes it look like a body-check afterward.

I've also read other people saying that Burrows was reaching, was low or put himself in a vulnerable position? For anyone who thinks that, you can not be any more wrong as Burrows is clearly in a upright position as he is hit. You can even see niederreiters right skate push off the ice for that extra height

Either way, the league letting this go basically says, "Headshots are OK Now"

Agree 100%.

I don't think his helmet would have been slightly ajar with the chin strap out of place if it's a body hit. And they HAVE to rule out any "decision making"....if the head is contacted during a hit, it's a foul. Until they do that, this is all for nothing.

[Mackcanuck]

It was a head shot!

Should have at least been a fine.

It really does seem that Burrows is a "target" to this league, it is unfortunate.

I would think that the group that is putting a lawsuit against the league for concussions would be interested in this.

[Darius]

If Nino hit Crosby the exact same way would it be a suspension? I cant imagine the league letting it go if Crosby was involved. This is a bush league if judgements are based on the players involved. Burrows probably paid for his reputation.

[Toews]

Agree 100%.

I don't think his helmet would have been slightly ajar with the chin strap out of place if it's a body hit. And they HAVE to rule out any "decision making"....if the head is contacted during a hit, it's a foul. Until they do that, this is all for nothing.

Are you saying every contact to the head should be suspendable because that is bit much imo.

The players know they cannot deliberately aim for the head anymore. They have to aim for the shoulder or the chest if they want to avoid a suspension. If you start suspending for even incidental contact then you will essentially make players nervous even attempting a hit.

[Toews]

It was a head shot!

Should have at least been a fine.

It really does seem that Burrows is a "target" to this league, it is unfortunate.

I would think that the group that is putting a lawsuit against the league for concussions would be interested in this.

Please do elaborate lol.

[-DLC-]

It was a head shot!

Should have at least been a fine.

It really does seem that Burrows is a "target" to this league, it is unfortunate.

I would think that the group that is putting a lawsuit against the league for concussions would be interested in this.

This is likely what will happen. If the league continues to fail players like Burr because they have a (pardon the pun) burr up their butts, then that is inappropriate. They are failing to do their job and protect their employees. And perhaps one day it will come back to bite them....they seem to feel a sense of power that over rules all, but there are other options and it seems that professional athletes are looking at that.

Just as in any job place, those in charge must ensure workers' safety and allow them to do their job without risk (obviously, in a contact sport, to some degree...there will be a certain element of risk assumed).

However, if the head is off limits there should be no decision making process even available beyond "you did it". Not "well, he was angled this way and the guy leaned that way and the wind was blowing in a Southerly direction at 3 mph with a tint off someone's glasses affecting things". It then nullifies the whole process because it's allowing for some headshots. And some will be bad.

Anyhow, enough on this from me....won't change things but it's ridiculous that we are still even having these conversations. That, in itself, proves there are unresolved issues in this. What, 10 years or so of trying to figure it out? Who's at the helm here?...get some new captains on board steering the ship.

[-DLC-]

So Toews...what if the guy making the decisions has an off day?

Has an agenda or is biased?

Needs his eyeglass prescription renewed?

Leaving it open to interpretation leaves it open. So, well, no crying foul when someone incurs a brain injury then, right?

The league is NOT doing a good job in this....this was a head shot and nothing is happening. Fail.

[Alex the Great]

No hearing schedule for Nino after Burrows hit.

"@HalfordPHT: No hearing scheduled for Niederreiter after Burrows hit http://t.co/1qkNRJjh5M"