Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Which is precisely why I have suggested a couple times now that the correct response is to strike a fine balance between safety and the promotion of skill in the game, and physicality and intensity that makes the game so good.
So, clearly "physicality" according to some people's definition includes body slams that make NO contribution to the quality of the play. I don't think I am okay with that. I believe that physicality is necessary, and it manifests in hits along the boards like Bennett's from Saturday night, and like Matheson's on Pettersson without the takedown. I don't see why that is such an affront to some who pontificate on behalf of "physicality."
Perhaps someone can explain to me what is good about the end of Matheson's hit? What are you missing from the game without seeing a kid like Pettersson crumpled in a heap on the ice?
|
Well, not sure this is what was said. At least I would suggest it's more nuanced than that.
The "check-pin-push to the ice" play is a hockey play. We see it almost every single game, often multiple times per game. It's how NHL defensemen are taught to play the body in the corner. Rarely does it ever result in an injury. In 99% of instances, that exact play is what's expected, it doesn't cross a line, and it doesn't portray as "violent".
The only reason the play in question ended up being a "body slam to the ice" was because Pettersson has the frame of a young boy.
I admit this argument is based on the premise that the play was a routine play, and that the violent outcome was the result of size disparity. That's how this played out, IMO. If you think that sequence is not routine, then I understand where the disconnect may be.
But I struggle with the "...but was it necessary?" argument. Such a slippery slope. I agree that the push down wasn't necessary, but it's a routine play in that situation. It only ended up being a violent throw down because it was man vs. boy. The referee watched the entire sequence and elected not to even call a penalty. For that reason I really don't like the two game suspension.
My point about Bennett's legal hit is that there is a very good chance that same hit if thrown on Pettersson would have left Pettersson "in a crumpled heap on the ice".
I still maintain that this was more about size mismatch than it was about an overly dirty play. If our goal is to prevent the Pettersson's of the world from ending up in a heap on the ice, then there will be a lot of other important aspects of the current game that will need to change. I'm not sure I love that.
Anyway, I'm inclined to agree with others who have cited the play against Dube as being more dangerous and more blatantly away from the play. And yet nothing on that one. Once again, a decision from the NHL that's based more on who the injured player is and less about the actual transgression.