Dekey Pete Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 he was pushed in but i have seen plenty of goals waived off because a player got pushed into the goalie by his teammate i honestly don't understand the refs view on these goals because for the most part they are waived off and very few actually count as goals That's Bieksa's favourite move. Watch, he does it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigturk8 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Emelin was putting himself in an even worse position trying to avoid the hit, he did the damage himself. I don't disagree with you but in the past, that hasn't always held up when they make the decision. I think that, despite the hit being incidental from the movement of Emelin, The league will say it was dangerous and use the contact with his head as support for a short suspension. I said in the post that you quoted that I tend to get these things wrong. For whatever reason, I always seem to miss things that others see. I hope that's the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 It's us, it's Burr. I will be very surprised if he doesn't get anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekey Pete Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 He deserves one game for the fact it was extremely late. The principle contact wasn't his head it was the shoulder, so he will be suspended for the hit being late. The hit was not extremely late at all. You've got it backwards. He will be suspended because even though he may have connected with the shoulder first (which I'm not sure is even true), most of the force is delivered to Emelin's head. Every hit looks late in slow motion, try watching the play in realtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't disagree with you but in the past, that hasn't always held up when they make the decision. I think that, despite the hit being incidental from the movement of Emelin, The league will say it was dangerous and use the contact with his head as support for a short suspension.I said in the post that you quoted that I tend to get these things wrong. For whatever reason, I always seem to miss things that others see. I hope that's the case.I think the league will suspend based on 1) player in vulnerable position (even before he changed position at the last moment and 2) late hit...Burr had lots of time to recognize Emelin was off balance and change his path 3) the head was contacted. Basically a careless play possibly causing head damage that could/should have been avoided.I'm not saying I agree but I believe they will suspend him based on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 calls were 3-0 in favor of Montreal up until late in the third period there were dozens of calls that could of made both sides numbers go up more importantly the Canucks pp stayed 0 until very late and in ot but before that the calls were 3-0 it was blatantly obvious they were ignoring everything Montreal was doing until late in the game on top of that somehow the refs were really helping the Canucks with the Kerry Fraser article and all the media driven bs about 2 picks that didn't get called in ot despite the other missed calls in regulation that seem to have gone unnoticed by the NHL and the media The game ended with 3 penalties to the Canucks and 2 penalties to the Habs. It's pretty even, and for all the so called missed penalties the refs never called on Montreal a Habs fan could point out the same about the missed calls on the Canucks. The clear thing about the reffing this game is that is was bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The game ended with 3 penalties to the Canucks and 2 penalties to the Habs. It's pretty even, and for all the so called missed penalties the refs never called on Montreal a Habs fan could point out the same about the missed calls on the Canucks. The clear thing about the reffing this game is that is was bad. well said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfruits Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The game ended with 3 penalties to the Canucks and 2 penalties to the Habs. It's pretty even, and for all the so called missed penalties the refs never called on Montreal a Habs fan could point out the same about the missed calls on the Canucks. The clear thing about the reffing this game is that is was bad. again i mentioned how that 3-0 until late in the 3rd period could of been higher for both sides it could of been 7-3 or even 3-7 the fact is that 3-0 pp advantage plus the missed calls didn't get resolved until late in the 3rd period and ot Montreal didn't even deserve to be in this game what happens if the calls were even going into the 3rd period would it be 1-0 still or perhaps more for the Canucks we won't know the fact remains Montreal had the pp advantage until late in the 3rd period and OT Canucks took advantage in OT and won the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Rick Nash didn't get suspended for jumping up in the air and elbowing Kopecky in the head from behind. Edler got suspended because the NHL's flavour of the month (Hertl) ran into his shoulder. Holy freaking shiat! I totally forgot about that hit. Still makes my blood boil that he didn't get a long suspension, much less than he got NONE. Disgusting!! I mean, how much more "blind side" could a deliberate head hit to the back of the freaking head be?! *sigh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoman13 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Honestly after allowing the Gryba incident to just go free not sure how Burrows can see more than a fine as he's not any kind of record like this. Added the awesome montage of whiplash antics from the Habs over last years' playoffs should seal that. It wasn't a pretty hit and it might have been a tad shady but 2 games would be a joke to a discipline group that has basically done well this year. Again if the Gryba incident goes unpunished not sure how this can be a suspendable incident. Edit* If this DOES get punished what is the explanation for Subban not getting 2 minutes for blatantly cross checking Daniel to the head more than once last night? 2 games would make sense to me, how would that be a joke? You think Emelin missed part of the game on purpose just to maybe get a suspension out of it? That is ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as you thinking that the refs and the people who suspend are the same people..... the suspension people really don't care about a different incident that may or may not have been a penalty (in my mind it was, but nowhere close to a suspension). They are completely irrelevant with each other, and dealt with by two different groups of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Barzal.. you just said he grazed Emelins shoulder so thats the principle point of contact, then you said he targeted his head..make your friggin mind up. Principal is not the same as initial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoman13 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 he was pushed in but i have seen plenty of goals waived off because a player got pushed into the goalie by his teammate i honestly don't understand the refs view on these goals because for the most part they are waived off and very few actually count as goals Also for that goal at first I was angry, then when i saw it a few more times I think they got the right call. Bieksa pushes him right into Miller AND he doesn't even make contact until after the puck is in the net. Yes I know his presence could have disrupted Miller, but those two factors together make me happy with the call they made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfruits Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Also for that goal at first I was angry, then when i saw it a few more times I think they got the right call. Bieksa pushes him right into Miller AND he doesn't even make contact until after the puck is in the net. Yes I know his presence could have disrupted Miller, but those two factors together make me happy with the call they made. they got the call right but the league is very inconsistent with that call the majority do get waived off and very few are actually allowed when a teammate pushes another player into their own goalie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgilny896 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Wow usually I'm not one to point this out but the homerism in this thread is brutal. It's a slightly late hit that regardless if intentional or not, was to the head. Burrows had at least a couple strides to change his direction before he committed to the hit, which he should have done because Emelin's head was so low. It's pretty clear it's not a dive, if you get hit in the head, while off balance and already moving backward and upwards it's only natural for the arms to flail the way they did. Burrows should get at least a fine and up to a maximum of 2 games. Also the reffing in this game was terrible, both ways. They missed a lot of calls on Vancouver and Montreal. They should have called Subban for grabbing Daniel, they missed a bunch of picks, not just the ones in overtime, and it seemed like they just let a lot go that should have been called. I'm not sure how it was so lopsided to some of you that it's a conspiracy though. Edit- some of you don't understand the difference between initial and principal. Yes, but he fell the wrong way. Anyone in their right mind can see that Mr. Eller. Burrows didn't line Emelin's head up it just circumstantially ended up there, therefore got hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 when do you think we find out ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoman13 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 again i mentioned how that 3-0 until late in the 3rd period could of been higher for both sides it could of been 7-3 or even 3-7 the fact is that 3-0 pp advantage plus the missed calls didn't get resolved until late in the 3rd period and ot Montreal didn't even deserve to be in this game what happens if the calls were even going into the 3rd period would it be 1-0 still or perhaps more for the Canucks we won't know the fact remains Montreal had the pp advantage until late in the 3rd period and OT Canucks took advantage in OT and won the game I strongly disagree with the bolded statement. They played well, and I would say scoring chances were about equal, pretty even game for the most part in my opinion. Yes there were calls that could have gone either way, but in the end I think they were pretty even. Just inconsistent. Regardless of what you think about a suspension, the Burrows hit SHOULD have been a penalty, and cancelled out that goal. It really should have. It wasn't called though, which is awesome, and we scored. We also got away with a few pick plays in overtime right after they had called Montreal on it. Yes we are all aware of the calls/non calls that go against us, but we never really pay attention to the ones that go FOR us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycho_Path Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 It would be a joke because of the precedent that's been set, not to mention (as others already have) that Emelin turned into the vulnerable position that caused his head to get hit anyways. Go look at the Neiderreiter hit on Burrows again (which got no games) and tell me how it would make sense to penalize Burrows for this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 when do you think we find out ? Surprised we haven't yet. It's getting late back East Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoman13 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Yes, but he fell the wrong way. Anyone in their right mind can see that Mr. Eller. Burrows didn't line Emelin's head up it just circumstantially ended up there, therefore got hit. I just want to say, that by the rules that is still a suspension. They don't have to prove intent to suspend someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Blast from the oh so recent past (March 2014)... Niederreiter did NOT get a suspension for this hit on Burrows: Which (other than timing) sure looks a lot like this hit: About the first hit the NHL said: If they say Burrows deserves a suspension, they're not following their own interpretation of the rules from earlier this calendar year! Great find. Burrows initially went shoulder to shoulder. Nino goes shoulder to torso/head. If that isn't a suspension then this can't be even a fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.JPG.3a53b5523f530f3c27087ec846689eb4.thumb.JPG.4722123320ee0f43d9420127cc6246af.JPG)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.