Burrows not suspended for hit on Gaustad :Team 1040

[RUPERTKBD]

He has no obligation to.

..also it's "could have" not "could of"

He doesn't, but most NHL coaches (or any coach for that matter) will tell you that it's a bad idea to put a referee in a position where he can make that call, especially with a game on the line.

[Qwags]

It sure is nice to see the league do something right for once, and on Alex Burrows no less.

[-DLC-]

Whatever. Burr could of avoided quite easily.

Also I doubt Gaustad was faking it. The guy has a concussion history.

The day you start avoiding bumping another player in hockey is the day you should pack it in. It's a physical game of contact.

He grabbed at his leg/groin area. Ain't no brains down there.

[oldnews]

According to what proof? As of now it's inconclusive and we need a better angle. Besides, I said 'perceived' elbow, since obviously Burrows received a major infraction for a reason.

Can you smell the obvious, fairly dense contradiction?

I find your newfound faith refreshing.

Kudos to you for a tinfoil free moment. TOML trusts their judgement without proof or a better angle. Now there's a first.

[TOMapleLaughs]

It's choppy on purpose, because I used only 2 stills to illustrate that it is in fact Gaustad that turns into Burrows to initiate the contact and lowers his head significantly as he's turning, causing the head contact. Burrows did nothing wrong simply skating towards Gaustad and had Gaustad not significantly altered his trajectory and body position immediately before the contact there would have not been contact because Burrows did nothing to initiate the contact. As you rightly said, there were mere "microseconds in between" Gaustad turning into Burrows and the contact, so how can you fault Burrows? That's the definition of an accidental collision.

I'm not sure what your point about it being avoidable was. Burrows didn't hit him, so Burrows was not responsible for avoiding contact he did not know was coming.

Also, I don't believe Gaustad did return to the game. Of course that shouldn't be relevant. Accidental contact resulting in an injury (or not...I believe there's supposed to be a report on him today) is not supposed to make someone magically responsible after the fact. Either Burrows was responsible or he wasn't.

Burrows skated across the ice towards Gaustad for meters. Gaustad wasn't aware of his presense until right before the hit. It is likely still incidental contact, but I believe the full context of the hit will point towards Burrows far more than Gaustad.

I do think Gaustad was trying to draw a penalty, and he succeeded. I'm glad Burrows wasn't suspended on that. I'm equating this to the Toffoli hit on Burrows. Major, no suspension, move on. To me, Bieksa being tossed too was the refs pandering to the home crowd. We'll live.

[canuck73_3]

<p>

Posted 23 minutes ago

oldnews, on 01 Apr 2015 - 10:33 AM, said:Sucks for Vrbata, but doesn't come close to a perceived elbow to the head. Esp. when Vrbata wasn't affected. I guess the fact that Burrows and Gaustad were totally fine after the hits they sustained from Toffoli and Burrows had an affect on NHL disciplinary action or rather non-action. What the trolls fail to realize is that 5mins and a game is still pretty significant. If the Preds had capitalized, that's a huge win from a Gaustad dive.

• 1

Thanks for posting this clip, I hadn't seen it yet. Not much to it really and not a cross check. Vrbata tries to sell it a bit but that's unfortunately a necessary part of today's game. Everyone does it to help get the call and thus help their teams chances of winning.

Vrbata tried to sell it? The hit busted his mouth open...

[TOMapleLaughs]

Can you smell the obvious, fairly dense contradiction?

I find your newfound faith refreshing.

Kudos to you for a tinfoil free moment. TOML trusts their judgement without proof or a better angle. Now there's a first.

Typical oldnews response. Deflection of the point in order to further generic rant on 'TOML.' Yawn.

[oldnews]

Posted 23 minutes ago

oldnews, on 01 Apr 2015 - 10:33 AM, said:

Sucks for Vrbata, but doesn't come close to a perceived elbow to the head. Esp. when Vrbata wasn't affected. I guess the fact that Burrows and Gaustad were totally fine after the hits they sustained from Toffoli and Burrows had an affect on NHL disciplinary action or rather non-action. What the trolls fail to realize is that 5mins and a game is still pretty significant. If the Preds had capitalized, that's a huge win from a Gaustad dive.

• 1

Thanks for posting this clip, I hadn't seen it yet. Not much to it really and not a cross check. Vrbata tries to sell it a bit but that's unfortunately a necessary part of today's game. Everyone does it to help get the call and thus help their teams chances of winning.

It's the second part of the hit that is problematic, where he drives Vrbata's face into the dasher that should have resulted in a penalty.

I certainly didn't expect any discipline as a result of that hit - but what I clearly posted is that it is more suspendable than the Burrows hit - from behind - to the head - and a missed call at the time.

They slowed that hit down on the live broadcast - he clearly drives his face into the dasher with the second hit to the back of the head - the first push is really nothing - the second hit is a cross check to the back of the head.

[-DLC-]

According to what proof? As of now it's inconclusive and we need a better angle. Besides, I said 'perceived' elbow, since obviously Burrows received a major infraction for a reason.

As for tinfoil, how about easing off on stating that an obviously non-suspendable act is suspendable.

The infraction was interference. As called by a linesman?

And I thought I remembered this name...his MO? Seems this crawling on the ice stuff is something he's practiced for awhile now and has perfected. Path-etic. Honestly. And he collides with everyone out there....maybe it's an issue with him (being aware on the ice), NOT everyone else?

[oldnews]

[MadOgre]

That guy from TSN2 will not be pleased.

LOL and he was so adamant LOL

[JamesB]

Craig Button: "This is a suspension, there is no question in my mind....Complete interference and Burrows is a repeat offender."

I guess your incompetence is not limited to drafting.

Craig Button is an idiot. I am surprised he is still on TSN.

And "interference" is not in itself a suspendable offense. Also, being a repeat offender affects only the length of a suspension. It does not affect whether a suspension is imposed.

But I have noticed that Button tends to be wrong about pretty much everything.

[Down by the River]

Bob McKenzie actually clarified that a bit on a morning radio show today.

The fact that Burrows is a "repeat offender" is only germane if the league decides that the hit is suspendable. It comes into play when determining the subsequent level of supplementary discipline. (ie: how many games, etc.)

However, a previous suspension does not elevate what would normally be considered non-suspendable into a suspendable offence. Long story short, the Burrows suspension for hitting Emelin did not factor into this decision. It only would have done so had the league decided the hit suspendable on it's own "merits"....

This was a really important detail. Prior misbehavior does not mean the player is assumed to have had a predatory motive.

What also was interesting, and if I'm McKenizie, I'm rather annoyed, was that TSN's headline made it appear that Bob was arguing that Burrows should be suspended. In actuality, he made no such comment. When one of the most respected journalists in the game is having his words misrepresented by his own employer, something is off.

[RUPERTKBD]

LOL and he was so adamant LOL

Craig Button never says anything at normal volume, or with a normal level of enthusiasm. He's basically a walking advertisement for Ritalin...

[MoneypuckOverlord]

Gaustad is also 6'5. both players skated in the same direction, Gaustad runs into him and Burrows gets a penalty. reminded me of the calls going against us in The San Jose Series in 2013.

[SamJamIam]

Typical oldnews response. Deflection of the point in order to further generic rant on 'TOML.' Yawn.

Your defense of the Jones cross-check not being dangerous is based on the fact the refs didn't call it. But then go on to say that Burrows' "hit" was dangerous despite the DOPS not even fining him.

The fact that such a basic amount of logical consistency isn't noteworthy to you either means that you're just being argumentative or you're pretty damn dense. Deflecting childishly doesn't change the fact that you're arguing against yourself at this point.

[TOMapleLaughs]

The infraction was interference. As called by a linesman?

And I thought I remembered this name...his MO? Seems this crawling on the ice stuff is something he's practiced for awhile now. Path-etic.

LOL that was horribly embarrassing.

Imho the call on Burrows was more a repuation call than anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lK0GWEVzQw

Nashville absolutely detests Burrows and the linesman/refs pandered to the home crowd a bit. Glad we won despite this.

[RUPERTKBD]

This was a really important detail. Prior misbehavior does not mean the player is assumed to have had a predatory motive.

What also was interesting, and if I'm McKenizie, I'm rather annoyed, was that TSN's headline made it appear that Bob was arguing that Burrows should be suspended. In actuality, he made no such comment. When one of the most respected journalists in the game is having his words misrepresented by his own employer, something is off.

That's how I interpreted it as well. From what I heard, he didn't think it was that big a deal.

Buff's crosscheck, OTOH....

[TOMapleLaughs]

Your defense of the Jones cross-check not being dangerous is based on the fact the refs didn't call it. But then go on to say that Burrows' "hit" was dangerous despite the DOPS not even fining him.

The fact that such a basic amount of logical consistency isn't noteworthy to you either means that you're just being argumentative or you're pretty damn dense. Deflecting childishly doesn't change the fact that you're arguing against yourself at this point.

No, the hit on Vrbata wasn't suspendable because... It wasn't suspendable.

[Carl's Jn]

Not exactly. Toffoli deliberately hit an ineligible player in an illegal way at a dangerous position on the ice. Burrows just accidentally collided with a player who turned into him while also lowering his head, initiating the contact and causing the head contact.

You can clearly see that Gaustad turns into Burrows and significantly lowers his head. Burrows didn't do anything but prepare for impending contact once he realized it was coming, which is not against the rules. Had Gaustad not turned into Burrows they would have just continued skating side by side as Burrows was covering his man, nothing more.

Toffoli's hit on Burrows and Burr's collision with Gaustad were not even close to comparable, despite the fact that they ended up with the exact same punishment.

as i agree with gaustad turning into burrows there was a plan for burrows to be right there at that time burrows knew he was going make the turn... you can tell as burrows was laying down the hit...