I don't agree with this. Hertl does 3 different things that change his head position. He slows down, he starts to stand up and as seen by the rear video he changes direction towards center ice. All 3 of these change head and body position. So how can a hit that only misses hitting the shoulder by an inch or two not be affected?
I think the make or break as far as the suspension goes was the optics of his lid flying through the air.
I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. Tighten those chin straps boys
Then what's to stop players from bending over with their heads out in front of them when handling the puck? Are they now immune from physical contact?
Hertl looks like he's sitting on an invisible chair.
That last frame doesn't really show the whole picture. Hertl is leaning forward as he reaching for the puck. As mentioned Edler looks like he is playing the puck and at the last second he engages. Hertl barely touched the puck, if he didn't it would be interference.
What's so hard to understand about 'you can't have the principle point of contact be the head'. It doesn't matter if it was intentional or not. It's no different than high sticking in that regard(punishment not withstanding). Edler hit him squarely in the head. Period. It looked to me like he could have easily avoided contact to the head.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Zevo For This Useful Post:
Edler has proven to be a dirty player by his acxtions in the past. Just like when he kneed Eric Staal, he tries to make it look like he isnt intending a dirt bag play.
There are a number of ways to make that play. He could have played the puck or just stopped in front of Hertl, he could have took a line to hit hit more from the front, or contained him.
Edler chose to go for the head shot. Glad he got suspended.
The Following User Says Thank You to Oil Stain For This Useful Post:
Blah blah he's a Canuck so I'm sure it's possible I'm bias. But I like this call. While I agree there appears to be no consistency in suspensions right now, I see that as a separate issue.
East / West check (not an elbow I agree) that primary point of contact was the head, with no other mitigating circumstances IMO. Exactly the type of hit they want to get out of the game and they type that can causes concusions needlessly. Would have been a clean hit 5 years ago, but I'm glad they are trying to get those hits out of the game.
Think that picture above actually makes me like the suspension more.
Why is Edler taking that line to the puck?
Hertl was not is possession of the puck so technically Edler should be aiming to play the puck and not the man.
Edler gets to that puck first easily if he attempts to play it, instead he goes to take the body and doesn't even do that right because he only connects with the head directly. Plus gives up a scoring chance in the other direction.
He clearly is trying to make a big hit here and connects only with the head. May not have been the intent but probably was suspension worthy. Edler could have easily hit him in the shoulder there and the hit would have been just as devastating.
Not from the blindside, but in terms of point of contact it is pretty similar to this hit.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 10-11-2013 at 02:15 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
I would have liked it more if shannys comment was just Priciple point of contact was the head. 3 games.
Everytime the head is the priciple point of contact it should be automatic regarless of circumstance. 3 games seems like a reasonable number. Any head shot for any reason = suspension.
The only way consistency is going to be achieved is if hits to the head are suspensions, period. It doesn't matter if it was an accident, if he took the wrong angle, whatever. You hit the head, you get a suspension. Shanahan got this right.
Agreed. The NFL has a similar policy for hits to the head on QBs. If you hit the QB's head, it's a personal foul penalty of 15 yards. They don't want the refs having to make judgement calls about how hard the hit to the helmet was, since different refs could see it differently. Just like catching the ball, you caught it, or you didn't. If we can get hits to the head eliminated in hockey and football, it will be better for players and fans.
A player is responsible for his stick. If he highsticks a guy (not in the motion of shooting) it's a penalty. It may be an accident, but it's still a penalty. It also eliminates the decision from the ref about whether the player is trying to make it look like an accident. This leads to less controversy. I like a similar line of thinking on hits to the head. I also think that just because there was no call on the ice, doesn't mean he's immune. Like any crime, if there is evidence you did it, you can be punished.
__________________
My thanks equals mod team endorsement of your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Jesus this site these days
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnet Flame
He just seemed like a very nice person. I loved Squiggy.
Not a fan of this one. Edler's moving in a straight line with his elbow tucked in. Is the rule now that if a player sticks his head out and puts himself in a dangerous position, then you have to hold up and let him have a breakaway?
At some point players have to be responsible for not placing themselves in a dangerous position.
Shanny got it right, head shot and he targeted or as they put it the principle point of contact was the head.
Joe should have waved his junk at the Van bench.