NHL Season 08-09

[Evanos]

Yeah, one can make the argument all day about whether or not it was interference. I have seen some analysts make the argument that from Kronwall's perspective he assumed that Havlat was going to play the puck by the time he got to him (Havlat did make a movement toward puck with stick and missed as it went off boards) and by the time Kronwall was in motion it was too late to change. And I also have seen arguments that he knew Havlat didn't play the puck.

Regardless of the interference implications, the hit was clean as far as the NHL rulebook is concerned. At the time of impact elbow was down, feet were planted on the ice and it was a clean shoulder hit. His feet did leave the ice following impact with Havlat, but that is according to rulebook that is allowed.

[Norelco]

Yeah, I honestly don't have an opinion on the hit or the interference call. My main concern was Havlat's safety after the hit as players were fighting on top of him. They could have hurt him while he was down there.

edit: Interesting thing about that picture though...Kronwall is blurry from his incoming momentum and Havlat is pretty clear from basically standing still. Seeing this really sums up how hard of a hit it was.

[Ratatapa]

That havlat hit is yes simply an interferance.

As seen in the Youtube SS, no elbow or anything hit

He deserve the 5min +expulsion for 2 reasons 1 He kinda (how to say it) went too fast and too strong on havlat while a normal hit would be fine, and 2 it was near the end of the game iirc.

[Sepukku]

That havlat hit is yes simply an interferance.

As seen in the Youtube SS, no elbow or anything hit

He deserve the 5min +expulsion for 2 reasons 1 He kinda (how to say it) went too fast and too strong on havlat while a normal hit would be fine, and 2 it was near the end of the game iirc.

No such thing as too hard a hit. The hardest hits (aslong as they're legal - specifically, not to the head, not with an elbow, and not boarding someone from behind) won't severely injure a player. In this case, the hit was legal and suprise suprise, Havlat wasn't seriously injured as he managed to pass all the concussion tests to make it into Game 4.

And it was in the first period, not the end of the game.

[Dalek]

Interference ...maybe? I think charging would fit the bill better IMO... Like its been said, look how fast kronwall is barreling at him before havlat even had a chance to play the puck. He had him lined up way before the actual hit. Charging in on an unsuspecting player like that is still dirty IMO, even if the hit itself appeared clean.

[Brill Weave]

I had assumed, from all the replays I saw, that his feet left the ice to make the hit. I guess I was mistaken!

I will happily second this statement. Though I wouldn't have if you didn't post that picture. That had to be a pain in the ass to get paused at the exact right time lol. Still a scary sight to see a man just laying there. Sooner or later Kronwall is going to end someone's career.

Now onto the real question. Do I go to the gym after work before the game. Or do I go to the gym while the game is on. Because when you're running on the treadmill watching a hockey game it's amazing how quickly time goes. Decisions, decisions.

[Lost]

He deserve the 5min +expulsion for 2 reasons 1 He kinda (how to say it) went too fast and too strong on havlat while a normal hit would be fine, and 2 it was near the end of the game iirc.

Do you even play hockey or are you another ref in the stands? There is no such thing as too hard of hit. Second, you play til the whisle blows in any sport. It's not like the players are staring up at the clock waiting for the peroid to end or waiting for someone to blow the whistle...

If any of you that commented on the hit actually play or have played hockey, it's more so Havlats fault for getting hit like that. Why? HIS HEAD IS DOWN. The single biggest mistake you can make while playing hockey. He made the mistake, and paid for it, end of story.

Another bullshit call that should have never been a penality. If his head was never down, he would have known Hasek was that far out and could have EASILY staked around him for an empty net goal.
YouTube - Hasek Flips Gaborik

[Ratatapa]

Read what i said i was trying to find the word that i still cant find so i'll just express it another way


What kronwall did was simply taking speed from distance when havlat didnt had the puck atm to hit him hard that' what i meant by strong hit.



I found the word i think Kronwall was really far when havlat lost the puck and he took a burst of speed which wasn't neeed, that is what took the 5minute+expulsion.

There'S also the fact that Kronwall foot left the ice for the hit as you can see here

Which is also not accepted

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/3657/havlat.jpg

[Evanos]

Read what i said i was trying to find the word that i still cant find so i'll just express it another way


What kronwall did was simply taking speed from distance when havlat didnt had the puck atm to hit him hard that' what i meant by strong hit.



I found the word i think Kronwall was really far when havlat lost the puck and he took a burst of speed which wasn't neeed, that is what took the 5minute+expulsion

It may not have been needed per say, but hard hits are what hockey is all about. If you were watching on CBC the broadcasters on several occasions pointed out how it was not the two closest referees who made the call and eventually ejected Kronwall, but instead the farther of the three and after a delay at that. It seems to me that they ejected him simply on the result of the hit not based on the legality or intensity of the hit. If you aren't ready to take a hard check in the NHL you simply don't belong, and Havlat made a pretty foolish play. If you watch the video in the time coming up to the hit he looks up and sees Kronwall. I don't really know why he didn't do anything to further brace himself for impact.

I just googled the CBC broadcast and if you are interested here it is: YouTube - Kronwall Hits Havlat - Wings at Blackhawks Game 3 - May 22 09

[Evanos]

There'S also the fact that Kronwall foot left the ice for the hit as you can see here

Which is also not accepted

You are incorrect. The rule states that both feet must be planted -at the time of impact-. Therafter players feet are allowed to leave the ice simply because when two objects move toward each other they will generally go in one direction. It is true that feet are not allowed to leave the ice at the time of impact, but if you look at the still I posted Kronwall's feet are clearly planted when he hits Havlat.

[Lost]

Read what i said i was trying to find the word that i still cant find so i'll just express it another way

What kronwall did was simply taking speed from distance when havlat didnt had the puck atm to hit him hard that' what i meant by strong hit.

I found the word i think Kronwall was really far when havlat lost the puck and he took a burst of speed which wasn't neeed, that is what took the 5minute+expulsion.

There'S also the fact that Kronwall foot left the ice for the hit as you can see here

Which is also not accepted

Not a clean hit - Charging
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/...Vt2k9/610x.jpg

Clean hit - Feet are on the ice on impact
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KQkmYfG5atE/Sh...all_havlat.jpg

Please know the difference. Thank you.

To the people that say he didn't have possesion of the puck. It was "1.5 inches" from his stake. If the puck is close to you, you have possesion, whether you decide to make the play or not, that's your call (the hockey player). Just as an icing gets waved off because a player that could have made the play and was in the general area of the puck decided not to does not mean it's an automatic icing because he didn't want to play the puck and get an icing.

[Norelco]

I don't really know why he didn't do anything to further brace himself for impact.

It's cuz he was looking down.

[Norelco]

To the people that say he didn't have possesion of the puck. It was "1.5 inches" from his stake. If the puck is close to you, you have possesion, whether you decide to make the play or not, that's your call (the hockey player). Just as an icing gets waved off because a player that could have made the play and was in the general area of the puck decided not to does not mean it's an automatic icing because he didn't want to play the puck and get an icing.

The NHL rulebook doesn't say what possession is so how could you know? Besides, Havlat did have his head down to find the puck that never touched his skate or stick so he could GET possession, which he never had when he was blasted.

It's completely a judgement call made by the ref and in this instance he believed Havlat did not have clear possession.

[Lost]

The NHL rulebook doesn't say what possession is so how could you know? Besides, Havlat did have his head down to find the puck that never touched his skate or stick so he could GET possession, which he never had when he was blasted.

It's completely a judgement call made by the ref and in this instance he believed Havlat did not have clear possession.

From playing hockey? And no, im not talking about street hockey or deck hockey. I know it doesn't, it's just a generally accepted idea that if the puck is between your feet, you have possession. There is no difference between staking forward with the puck between his feet to where someone is pressed against the boards with it between their feet (without it touching them) and someone coming in and hitting them.

To be honest, it's besides the point whether he had possession of the puck or not cause you can argue that til the cows come home. The hit itself was a clean hit and did not justify a game misconduct that he was given.

[Brill Weave]

Honestly we're sitting here arguing about whether a hit is clean that was delivered by a guy who has a history of jumping into his checks and leading with his forearm(guess playing real hockey never taught you about the forearm shiver by the way?) and has a history of going for the highlight reel hit. The problem is most of the team he's delivering these hits, the players he's going after have no idea he's coming. Havlat had his head down, which is insane in the NHL. Does Eric Lindros ring a bell? Don't lower your head. But that's just one hit, that doesn't explain the multiple hits he's delivered while a player is looking the other way.

Bottom line, in the most basic technical form, it was a clean hit. Though it amuses me that at the point of impact his skates are on the ice, yet in mid hit he's about a foot off the ground. Nice timed jump. In most cases he leads with his forearm, which ends up hitting under the chin so when he goes airborne his shoulder is going right into their face and at the very least snaps their heads back. Now add on top of that the fact that 99% of his hits are complete blindsides and you have the perfect headhunter.

Fuck Kronwall.

[Selamis]

Very well said. And that youtube pic is bs anyway, because that's before the impact, as you can see in the second picture posted where Kronwall is clearly in the air. In all my years of playing ice hockey, both taking and giving big hits usually leave the guy getting hit in the air, not the one delivering the hit. Interference maybe not but charging, yes.

[Colm]

Pat Quinn named Oilers coach

Lucky bastards.

[Bregor]

Love having Pat Quinn back behind the bench, best of luck to Edmonton.

They should really rename this thread "NHL Disciplinary Committee Discussion (featuring 2009 Playoffs)". Coming soon, a "Sergei Gonchar rule" and a "Martin Havlat rule" just like the NFL now has a retarded "Tom Brady rule". It's like people want to go back in time and give Pat LaFontaine and Joe Theismann back their careers, or are so scared of seeing players injured in a similar way that it takes away from the sport itself.

[Selamis]

Pregame predictions: Canes hold Malkin in check, Crosby still a factor. Canes in OT, 3-2...or some variation of a one goal game.

[Gadritan]

I'll be a sad panda if Ward loses his perfect playoff record, but it's bound to happen sometime.

Edit: Woo! And they score as I'm typing. lol.