Erik Gudbranson suspended one game for hit on Frank Vatrano

[coastal.view]

5 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

He didn't come charging in at high velocity though.

Many posters are saying five and a game was enough.

That's not homer goggles.

If every similar hit is treated the same henceforth, then okay.

If not, then what?

Nothing, that's what.

We've seen this before!

so you are saying that the hit was illegal

and deserves punishment

 

but

because enforcement is uneven

the nhl should just let this one go ?

how does that improve safety in the game ?

this hit needs to be eliminated entirely from the game

 

edit: and saying 5 and a game is enough is water under the bridge approach

that is what he got and no one can change that

so how is that  a factor in this discussion

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Re-read my response. I was talking about posters who blindly hate or love players.  If you chose to self identify with those type of posters, that is actually your issue. I went on to state my point; and yes Edler is injured therefore he can't play and is open to that type of criticism without the ability to answer with his play.

No. I read it already. When you quote a post, and issue a response to that post, the person being quoted will generally assume that you are referring to them. And yes, I know what assuming does....

 

Self-identifying? Really, Sigmund?

 

Edler, I'm going to bet, isn't reading CDC at all, so any "attacks" on him here are of no consequence to him. His play, when he returns from his injury, will be based on what's best for his team, not as an affront to a bunch of hockey fans on this online asylum. Saying that Edler toned down his physicality is not an insult to him, he reacted to the suspension.

[Topcheeze86]

Size difference looks like a mismatch thats why it looked so bad

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, Topcheeze86 said:

Size difference looks like a mismatch thats why it looked so bad

If that was Stecher making that play, Vatrano wouldn't have had half the issues he did. Kinda like Chara and Pacioretty.....but wait.....did Chara have to speak to the DoPS?......

[RWMc1]

2 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

so you are saying that the hit was illegal

and deserves punishment

 

but

because enforcement is uneven

the nhl should just let this one go ?

how does that improve safety in the game ?

this hit needs to be eliminated entirely from the game

 

edit: and saying 5 and a game is enough is water under the bridge approach

that is what he got and no one can change that

so how is that  a factor in this discussion

Awful lot of assumptions in there.

I'm saying that the force was minimal because of his speed and that should be a mitigating factor,

You characterized many posters as homers.

I was stating an alternative to that assumption.

I also went on to state that if subsequent hits were treated in a similar fashion then okay.

If they want to take away those hits then it seems reasonable to expect similar hits to be treated  in the same way with similar punishments.

But will they?

This thread is about the hearing and potential repercussions.

The opinion that his penalty and game was enough is a factor because that is one potential outcome.

 

 

 

[RWMc1]

Just now, PhillipBlunt said:

Really?

I was never a Sigmund fan.

 

I wonder what his definition of gravity is?

[coastal.view]

2 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Awful lot of assumptions in there.

I'm saying that the force was minimal because of his speed and that should be a mitigating factor,

You characterized many posters as homers.

I was stating an alternative to that assumption.

I also went on to state that if subsequent hits were treated in a similar fashion then okay.

If they want to take away those hits then it seems reasonable to expect similar hits to be treated  in the same way with similar punishments.

But will they?

This thread is about the hearing and potential repercussions.

The opinion that his penalty and game was enough is a factor because that is one potential outcome.

 

 

 

so make up your mind

was it illegal or not

you imply it is.. well you kinda do

 

if it was it should warrant a suspension

and the penalty is assessed on the circujstances

he was not standing still when he hit the player

he was moving and actually drove the player into the boards

that warrants more than 1 game.. so 2

if he skated across the zone to target and then hit the player, which he did not, it is 5

 

[-DLC-]

5 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

so make up your mind

was it illegal or not

you imply it is.. well you kinda do

 

if it was it should warrant a suspension

and the penalty is assessed on the circujstances

he was not standing still when he hit the player

he was moving and actually drove the player into the boards

that warrants more than 1 game.. so 2

if he skated across the zone to target and then hit the player, which he did not, it is 5

 

Tell all this to the NHL brass.  So it applies to every player on every team on every similar hit. 

 

You're preaching to the choir here.  We KNOW it was illegal, however, that seems to change on a nightly basis and depending on who's delivering it.  As do the consequences.

[RWMc1]

11 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

so make up your mind

was it illegal or not

you imply it is.. well you kinda do

 

if it was it should warrant a suspension

and the penalty is assessed on the circujstances

he was not standing still when he hit the player

he was moving and actually drove the player into the boards

that warrants more than 1 game.. so 2

if he skated across the zone to target and then hit the player, which he did not, it is 5

 

 

My opinion is that it was illegal to the point where it warranted a five minute major and an ejection from the game.

If any other punishments are to be imposed a fine would be best.

 

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

I was never a Sigmund fan.

 

I wonder what his definition of gravity is?

It would probably involve a prescription for cocaine.

[Shekky]

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

You'd make a great coach. Scratch a top four defenseman when you're already down a top four defenseman.....

It was a dirty hit plain and simple and cost the Canucks the game I'm no coach and nor will I ever be my feeling is that he should sit a game or 2 if he doesn't get suspended. Whatever TG does is his choice he is a professional and I am not. I'd be really steamed after watching that as a better play could of been made instead of mowing the guy into the boards like that. He was trying to draw a penalty and milk it for every penny and it worked. Canucks have a bad rap with the refs and seem to take more unjust penalties. Either way he saw his numbers and went for him as a result we saw what happened.

[-DLC-]

9 minutes ago, Shekky said:

It was a dirty hit plain and simple

 

Canucks have a bad rap with the refs and seem to take more unjust penalties. Either way he saw his numbers and went for him as a result we saw what happened.

We may have different ideas about "dirty".  I call this a hit that had a bigger guy up against a smaller one who wasn't really commited to a direction...was going one way, but sort of had trouble grabbing the puck and halted a bit.

 

I don't think it was intentionally "dirty".  A bit careless maybe.

 

And the bad rep thing just supports the point that some of us are making here.  Refs are supposed to officiate without bias and with a clean sheet...NOT carry things over from game to game as they label them.

 

I don't think he "saw then went for his numbers".  I think that momentary hesitation factored in to presenting his numbers to him as he went in to make a hit.

[GritGrinder]

38 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

um, maybe my glasses are faulty

but  i see guddy totally pancaking the numbers on the back of the jersey and fully flattening the player face first against the boards

nothing subtle about that hit

it was in the category of

'go big or go home"

 

cdc hommies can dress it up or rationalize it anyway they wish

but it is the type of hit the nhl is trying to get rid of

in gud's defence he had a split second to make a decision and he made the wrong one

the player was injured (which is why this hit is no longer allowed)

2 games in my view

 

but well earned guddy . if you are gonna cross the line . make it worthwhile

he did

his physical presence reputation will continue to grow

and put a bit of a chill in the opposition

i think the team can live with this incident

it will help guddy in his contract year

 

It literally cost the Canucks the game, they'll likely be down a top 4 dman tonight against Buffalo and possibly Sunday against Detroit at a time when they can't afford that at all. And now hes on DoPS' radar and if this hit gets him 1-2 games the next infraction will probably be in the 5-7 range. Gudbranson has played nearly 350 NHL games so he's already gained any reputation he has and doesn't need to try and impress anybody with dumb hits that cost his team games.

[PhillipBlunt]

8 minutes ago, Shekky said:

It was a dirty hit plain and simple and cost the Canucks the game I'm no coach and nor will I ever be my feeling is that he should sit a game or 2 if he doesn't get suspended. Whatever TG does is his choice he is a professional and I am not. I'd be really steamed after watching that as a better play could of been made instead of mowing the guy into the boards like that. He was trying to draw a penalty and milk it for every penny and it worked. Canucks have a bad rap with the refs and seem to take more unjust penalties. Either way he saw his numbers and went for him as a result we saw what happened.

I hear you, but when your defense is already depleted by injury, you don't purposely deplete it further to teach someone a lesson.

 

Gudbranson isn't a repeat offender, and probably felt bad about the hit. That's plenty.

 

I have to give you credit for using the word steamed. I haven't heard that in a while.

 

The Canucks "rep" with the officials is a joke. This league has the most biased bunch of zebras in professional sports, who are also consistently inconsistent in performance.

[Bigturk8]

 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

[-DLC-]

If this is true, while I don't like it, I accept it.  Moving on, but watching closely for the inconsistent application of the rules that we keep being subjected to.

[-AJ-]

Well, one game is one game too many, but it could've been a lot worse. Let's hope that's what it is.

[CanuckGAME]

One game.  Guess we have no choice But to accept it.  Funny Kassian didn't even get a second thought for his hit.   It is what it is.

[RWMc1]

The bar has been set. Let's hope there's consistency in future decisions.