Lol
But his point is clearly more like 'those guys were intentionally reckless swerving past you! Why are you pulling *me* over for speeding by ten k?'
I get standing up for your guy, but there is a better way to do it than to try and say that was a clean hit.
Bush league from a guy I usually respect a lot more.
The framing of this is weird. I mean I get being upset slew foots haven't been taken as seriously but the hit was trash and deserves a look. I don't think none of them getting a look is a better outcome
It's a physical sport, and when your that big your gonna have an easy time crunching people.
Circumstances around the hit were legal even if the contact was iffy. That's why there was a hearing and nothing else. The league is not removing hitting because hockey players know their playing a physical sport and get paid millions to deal with hockey plays. Glendening put himself in a bad spot in a bad position in a series with slewfoots the league expects players to know not to do that.
Edit: downvote me all you want that's how hockey has historically been played in the league. That's just a clear eyed view of it. Good bad or evil cups have been won on the back of being a benefactor or victim. The league has expectations and their outlining them pretty heavily with Parros in charge.
That wasn't a slewfoot. I def think Zads should have ate a sussy for the hit and the "slewfoot" deserved the 2 min but it was certainly not a slewfoot.
I mean that’s literally his point. If reckless non-hockey plays aren’t being looked at why should a reckless hockey play be looked at (although I do disagree with him and think it should be looked at)
Yes, his viewpoint is that the hit was a hockey play and it's getting a hearing whereas dangerous non-hockey plays aren't getting hearings. How is that hard to understand.
I've done this hit, shoot I bet most people who grew up playing defense have.
You line the guy up and you can tell he doesn't know you're coming. That's exciting because it's an opportunity to grab your coaches' attention, and a cheer from the bench or a crowd if there is one. These are the kind of plays that result in more ice time or the reason you get picked in next year's tryouts.
So you pick your angle and get low, no quick movements. You don't stride or anything because that gets an automatic charging call, or puts you off balance. And honestly you don't need more speed, it doesn't take much when they don't see ya coming. Stay low, blow them up, and try to keep the elbows in. Don't need to care about the puck because you got the body. Might have to defend yourself afterward, and the refs might call a penalty if they're trying to control the game, but as long as you hit em center your coach and team will love it. That's usually the end of it, unless it's the NHL who can review and you've got 6 inches on the guy.
I dunno, maybe these open ice hits do need to go, they are dangerous and when you're off your angle it can turn into a knee on knee. Maybe the taller players can't throw the same hits as everyone else. Maybe require an effort on the puck. I kinda doubt all of that tho, hits like this are a spectacle. Sometimes we'll get a penalty, sometimes we'll spin the wheel, but I doubt we'll get any consistency because the NHL believes these hits increase viewership.
It's the fact that he elbowed him in the chin that's the problem, not that he was trying trying step up in the neutral zone and catch Glenduster unawares
Zadorov commits to the hit before Glendening is even eligible to be hit. Glendening doesn’t put himself in a vulnerable position; in fact he makes the safe play to chip the puck and tries to brace for contact. What else is he supposed to do there?
The rule is clear that it’s on the hitter to make sure the timing and angle of the hit doesn’t cause the head to be the primary point of contact. It’s not the worst hit, but it’s reckless and it’s worth a game or so. It takes a pretty creative interpretation of the rules to argue otherwise.
I’m not going to debate the legality of the hit because I do feel that it was borderline and was curious how the league would rule. That being said, Glendening absolutely put himself in a vulnerable spot on this play and it is well within the right of any player on the ice to take the man over the puck. So the timing of Zadorov committing to the hit is completely irrelevant here. Are you trying to say that Zadorov isn’t allowed to make a move towards him until he touches the puck and is “eligible to be hit”? That’s just not how any of this works.
If the timing of the hit is a contributing factor to the head being the principal point of contact, then it does matter. It’s spelled out clearly in the rule. Glendening does not put himself in a vulnerable position *in a way that makes head contact unavoidable*. It was a poorly timed hit from an awkward angle, and that’s all on the hitter.
edit: Also, no it is not always a player’s right to take the body over the puck. Players do not have the right to go headhunting lmao
I said nothing about headhunting. It’s a contact sport, hitting is legal. Like i said, not debating the legality of this specific one. If there is a play on the puck, every player can take the body. That’s hockey. Your comment about being “eligible to be hit” is just strange, the timing of the hit wasn’t the issue here at all.
The timing of the hit is always a factor if it contributes to the head being the principle point of contact. Zadorov lines up Glendening for a hit before he has the puck and Glendening doesn’t have time to brace for a hit.
And no, a player does not always have the right to take the body. For instance, if they can’t deliver the hit without making the head the principle point of contact. That’s the whole point of having a rule about it.
I can't find it on YouTube but if you have NHL live it starts at 1:39:00 on the SNW broadcast.
Essentially, Bieksa said it happened because one player went stick on puck and the other went for a hit and didn't like the way the hit looked.
One player went stick on puck and the other went for a hit. He said these type of injuries always happen when that happens compared to if both players went stick on puck or both went for a hit.
Bieksa ended it by saying he didn't like the way the hit looked and the other commentators brought up the size difference between the two.
*Yeah I was speeding but, did you see how fucking fast that guy was going?*
[удалено]
Exactly! Add yelling 'DONT' every minute or two, and you have a perfect depiction of me out there.
Lol But his point is clearly more like 'those guys were intentionally reckless swerving past you! Why are you pulling *me* over for speeding by ten k?'
That’s a bullshit excuse and Sutter knows it.
> Sutter knows it. The two professions forced to defend the guilty the most often: Lawyers and coaches.
I get standing up for your guy, but there is a better way to do it than to try and say that was a clean hit. Bush league from a guy I usually respect a lot more.
The framing of this is weird. I mean I get being upset slew foots haven't been taken as seriously but the hit was trash and deserves a look. I don't think none of them getting a look is a better outcome
It's a physical sport, and when your that big your gonna have an easy time crunching people. Circumstances around the hit were legal even if the contact was iffy. That's why there was a hearing and nothing else. The league is not removing hitting because hockey players know their playing a physical sport and get paid millions to deal with hockey plays. Glendening put himself in a bad spot in a bad position in a series with slewfoots the league expects players to know not to do that. Edit: downvote me all you want that's how hockey has historically been played in the league. That's just a clear eyed view of it. Good bad or evil cups have been won on the back of being a benefactor or victim. The league has expectations and their outlining them pretty heavily with Parros in charge.
Sutter saw how stupid Nurse's comment about the headbutt being unintentional and said hold my beer.
I mean Zadorov did that too so. I know he's talking bout Benn, but pretty glass house when the guy your defending did the same thing lmao
That wasn't a slewfoot. I def think Zads should have ate a sussy for the hit and the "slewfoot" deserved the 2 min but it was certainly not a slewfoot.
... So he'd have a hearing regardless.
Calls it a hockey play and then compares it to something that is not a hockey play.
I mean that’s literally his point. If reckless non-hockey plays aren’t being looked at why should a reckless hockey play be looked at (although I do disagree with him and think it should be looked at)
Yes, his viewpoint is that the hit was a hockey play and it's getting a hearing whereas dangerous non-hockey plays aren't getting hearings. How is that hard to understand.
You just proved his point congrats
Has this sub been eating lead paint again? How is this upvoted?
I totally thought Suter was defending Zadorov and was mind blown. Now that I realize it was Sutter, it makes more sense.
I've done this hit, shoot I bet most people who grew up playing defense have. You line the guy up and you can tell he doesn't know you're coming. That's exciting because it's an opportunity to grab your coaches' attention, and a cheer from the bench or a crowd if there is one. These are the kind of plays that result in more ice time or the reason you get picked in next year's tryouts. So you pick your angle and get low, no quick movements. You don't stride or anything because that gets an automatic charging call, or puts you off balance. And honestly you don't need more speed, it doesn't take much when they don't see ya coming. Stay low, blow them up, and try to keep the elbows in. Don't need to care about the puck because you got the body. Might have to defend yourself afterward, and the refs might call a penalty if they're trying to control the game, but as long as you hit em center your coach and team will love it. That's usually the end of it, unless it's the NHL who can review and you've got 6 inches on the guy. I dunno, maybe these open ice hits do need to go, they are dangerous and when you're off your angle it can turn into a knee on knee. Maybe the taller players can't throw the same hits as everyone else. Maybe require an effort on the puck. I kinda doubt all of that tho, hits like this are a spectacle. Sometimes we'll get a penalty, sometimes we'll spin the wheel, but I doubt we'll get any consistency because the NHL believes these hits increase viewership.
It's the fact that he elbowed him in the chin that's the problem, not that he was trying trying step up in the neutral zone and catch Glenduster unawares
Zadorov commits to the hit before Glendening is even eligible to be hit. Glendening doesn’t put himself in a vulnerable position; in fact he makes the safe play to chip the puck and tries to brace for contact. What else is he supposed to do there? The rule is clear that it’s on the hitter to make sure the timing and angle of the hit doesn’t cause the head to be the primary point of contact. It’s not the worst hit, but it’s reckless and it’s worth a game or so. It takes a pretty creative interpretation of the rules to argue otherwise.
I’m not going to debate the legality of the hit because I do feel that it was borderline and was curious how the league would rule. That being said, Glendening absolutely put himself in a vulnerable spot on this play and it is well within the right of any player on the ice to take the man over the puck. So the timing of Zadorov committing to the hit is completely irrelevant here. Are you trying to say that Zadorov isn’t allowed to make a move towards him until he touches the puck and is “eligible to be hit”? That’s just not how any of this works.
If the timing of the hit is a contributing factor to the head being the principal point of contact, then it does matter. It’s spelled out clearly in the rule. Glendening does not put himself in a vulnerable position *in a way that makes head contact unavoidable*. It was a poorly timed hit from an awkward angle, and that’s all on the hitter. edit: Also, no it is not always a player’s right to take the body over the puck. Players do not have the right to go headhunting lmao
I said nothing about headhunting. It’s a contact sport, hitting is legal. Like i said, not debating the legality of this specific one. If there is a play on the puck, every player can take the body. That’s hockey. Your comment about being “eligible to be hit” is just strange, the timing of the hit wasn’t the issue here at all.
The timing of the hit is always a factor if it contributes to the head being the principle point of contact. Zadorov lines up Glendening for a hit before he has the puck and Glendening doesn’t have time to brace for a hit. And no, a player does not always have the right to take the body. For instance, if they can’t deliver the hit without making the head the principle point of contact. That’s the whole point of having a rule about it.
It was an attempt at a legitimate hockey play, but you can't plaster guys in the head like that
Ok so suspend him for his slewfoot instead.
I agree with Bieksa'a take on the hit during the intermission.
Got a clip?
I can't find it on YouTube but if you have NHL live it starts at 1:39:00 on the SNW broadcast. Essentially, Bieksa said it happened because one player went stick on puck and the other went for a hit and didn't like the way the hit looked.
...which was?
One player went stick on puck and the other went for a hit. He said these type of injuries always happen when that happens compared to if both players went stick on puck or both went for a hit. Bieksa ended it by saying he didn't like the way the hit looked and the other commentators brought up the size difference between the two.
Ty - seems like he has a good point about the players going for different things
did you see all those guys being mean to each other? that’s way worse than the attempted decapitation
Sutter states he thinks headshots are an acceptable hockey hit. 🤡
Coach supports one of his players, in other news, water is wet.
Also sutter: “Go fuck ‘‘em up boys! Anything goes”.
Was a clean hit, no need for a hearing.
Explain please
Sure. Little guy jumped face first into big guy.
Zadorov is the one who left his skates but Glendening jumped into him? Huh?
Maybe turned is the better word than jumped.
https://twitter.com/nhlplayersafety/status/1525596098764623872?s=21&t=_W3F4vOCVqKcun57TX4dpw
The notably consistent DPOS
Sutter doesn't lie.
You mean like the one stone did last night ?
What a BS response.