ubkev Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 And the biggest news of the day! http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/39641/jaromir-jagr-bringing-back-the-mullet This makes me so, unbelievably happy. I may grow one too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Something ain't adding up Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 There was a reference to the hit being .8 seconds after loosing possession being a reason the hit was illegal. Is this part of the new language? I work to bargain and support a cba so I am particularly interested in the wording. For the sake of curiosity. I'm shaking my head at that one. In fact the narrator (the new Shanny?) said .8 seconds is "well past" the time a check can legally be made. That should be a fun interpretation to watch this season. Even when the NHL gets it right, they get it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 The NHL got it right. Mark this down, it may be a while before it happens again. Are the Sharks a MFT? They sure treated him like a repeat offender. Good. And no, the Sharks are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I'm shaking my head at that one. In fact the narrator (the new Shanny?) said .8 seconds is "well past" the time a check can legally be made. That should be a fun interpretation to watch this season. Even when the NHL gets it right, they get it wrong. I haven't watched it. Why say something like that? That's a hard and fast rule that is bound to be an ill fit with another scenario in the coming season. Isn't it enough to say, "Given the distance traveled, the speed of approach, and the timing of the hit in view of the player's possession of the puck, this hit is reckless and late." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I haven't watched it. Why say something like that? That's a hard and fast rule that is bound to be an ill fit with another scenario in the coming season. Isn't it enough to say, "Given the distance traveled, the speed of approach, and the timing of the hit in view of the player's possession of the puck, this hit is reckless and late." Yes it is, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I haven't watched it. Why say something like that? That's a hard and fast rule that is bound to be an ill fit with another scenario in the coming season. Isn't it enough to say, "Given the distance traveled, the speed of approach, and the timing of the hit in view of the player's possession of the puck, this hit is reckless and late." Honorable Smell, allow me to introduce you to the National Hockey League... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Honorable Smell, allow me to introduce you to the National Hockey League... Quite right. Rather than #BecauseItstheCup, it's #BecauseItstheNHL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I haven't watched it. Why say something like that? That's a hard and fast rule that is bound to be an ill fit with another scenario in the coming season. Isn't it enough to say, "Given the distance traveled, the speed of approach, and the timing of the hit in view of the player's possession of the puck, this hit is reckless and late." It wasn't late. Why gild the lily? Charging and hit to the head are enough. Throw in intent to injure. But it wasn't interference, not unless the league want to make the amount of time that's less than .8 seconds so small that you can't legally check anyone who isn't touching the puck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Looking at the video, if that was any other player I doubt it gets much if anything especially if the player isnT badly hurt. I saw it and don't think the hit looked that bad, or any worse then what they typically let go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) It wasn't late. Why gild the lily? Charging and hit to the head are enough. Throw in intent to injure. But it wasn't interference, not unless the league want to make the amount of time that's less than .8 seconds so small that you can't legally check anyone who isn't touching the puck. Interesting. Looking at the video, if that was any other player I doubt it gets much if anything especially if the player isnT badly hurt. I saw it and don't think the hit looked that bad, or any worse then what they typically let go. Unfortunately, I think you're right for many players (maybe not *any* other player), and that's one of the problems with this league. Ok, PA, now I've watched it a few times and I think the hit was late. Still, stupid to be counting tenths of a second. Edited October 6, 2015 by eleven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I actually don't have a problem with putting some math to this. There is research out there about athlete reaction times. NBC I believe did a study on goalies and found reaction times around 0.5 seconds or less. I don't think it's unreasonable to hold pro athletes accountable based on their abilities to react to changing situations. I almost wonder if the standard was driven by the players, looking for some guidelines to make discipline more fair. "Okay, you know you have bad reaction times. Better control yourself." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Agreed. It smells fishy. If we could just get a sniff of the truth. Lines have to be drawn somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) It wasn't late. Why gild the lily? Charging and hit to the head are enough. Throw in intent to injure. But it wasn't interference, not unless the league want to make the amount of time that's less than .8 seconds so small that you can't legally check anyone who isn't touching the puck. The Hossa hit (by Torres) prompted me to look back at this issue. Turns out, .5 seconds is an official standard for the Department of Player Safety. (I believe Burke is the director now - he's probably the voice on the video explanation.) Patrick Burke@BurkieNHL @emptynetters We begin looking at hits that occur around .5 seconds late. A 2 second late hit would be absurdly late. 9:51 AM - 3 Dec 2014 So, there you have it. If you're over .5 seconds, you're probably getting a second look. At .8 seconds, you're probably getting disciplined. And I'm with d4rk: There are innumerable reactions in the NHL that happen in fractions of a second. These standards sound and seem fair, actually. Look at the Torres hit. Is it late? Yes it is. Egregiously late? Maybe not. But it's late, for sure. Edited October 6, 2015 by That Aud Smell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 It wouldn't shock me if the more talented players, ie the ones with better reactions times, would push for something like this in order to prevent the low level dirtbags from hurting them with cheap shots and late hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted October 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 NYI claims Berube TOR claims Corrado MON claims Byron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 NYI claims Berube TOR claims Corrado MON claims Byron Our (well used to be) Byron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted October 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Our (well used to be) Byron? Yes, Paul Byron, once of the Regierian era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Yes, Paul Byron, once of the Regierian era. Drafted by Regier and traded for Regehr? Mind = blown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Drafted by Regier and traded for Regehr? Mind = blown So the Kings are picking up large parts of the Regierian defense, and Montreal has picked up several Regierian forwards? We need Darcy back, he was a genius! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted October 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 someone I don't know was traded to the NJD: Brian O'Neill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Look at the Torres hit. Is it late? Yes it is. Egregiously late? Maybe not. But it's late, for sure. My point was that apparently the league is changing its longtime standard (which was always in violation of its written rule that talks about the period of time "immediately" after loss of possession). Players are hit more than a second after giving up the puck all the time. See every check Kaleta has ever laid. What of the refs' reaction time? How on earth does he calculate .5 vs. .8 seconds? And what about players who turn their back, or otherwise make themselves vulnerable, at the last second, before a hit? The league has always given the player delivering the hit the benefit of the doubt there. Also: the greatest hit in Sabres history should have resulted in a penalty, using this standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) Woman tells Jimmy Kimmel that she cheated on her boyfriend with an NHL player. Further research determines that there's only one possibility to her claim. Tyler Johnson of the Lightning denies it, though. I lean towards believing her. :w00t: http://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2015/10/06/tyler-johnson-lightning-jimmy-kimmel-cheating-video Edited October 6, 2015 by EastsideOasis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) My point was that apparently the league is changing its longtime standard (which was always in violation of its written rule that talks about the period of time "immediately" after loss of possession). Players are hit more than a second after giving up the puck all the time. See every check Kaleta has ever laid. It's apparently not .5+ seconds in a vacuum -- you need other aggravating factors in order to get supp. discipline (speed, distance, lunging up, head as principal point of contact). What of the refs' reaction time? How on earth does he calculate .5 vs. .8 seconds? I don't think anyone is suggesting that the refs are doing that. It's the Dept of Player Safety that uses this as a tool of guidance, apparently. After the fact. The refs are still making calls based on what they see in real time. And what about players who turn their back, or otherwise make themselves vulnerable, at the last second, before a hit? The league has always given the player delivering the hit the benefit of the doubt there. Dept of Player Safety has "educational" videos on that very issue. Also: the greatest hit in Sabres history should have resulted in a penalty, using this standard. Off to re-watch it now. Edited October 6, 2015 by That Aud Smell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 My point was that apparently the league is changing its longtime standard (which was always in violation of its written rule that talks about the period of time "immediately" after loss of possession). Players are hit more than a second after giving up the puck all the time. See every check Kaleta has ever laid. What of the refs' reaction time? How on earth does he calculate .5 vs. .8 seconds? And what about players who turn their back, or otherwise make themselves vulnerable, at the last second, before a hit? The league has always given the player delivering the hit the benefit of the doubt there. Also: the greatest hit in Sabres history should have resulted in a penalty, using this standard. Do you mean the hit on Umberger? The rules were different then and I think Campbell had the puck. Or do you mean one of Peca's beauts, ALL of which probably would be illegal now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts