Duncan Keith suspended 1 game for his high stick on Jeff Carter - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

WilderPegasus · 06-05-2013, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I'm sorry Kaine, but you're reading way too much into this.

Nearly all high sticks are accidental, and obviously so.

This one was the result of deliberate intent to slash Carter. In fact, it warranted a major penalty and a game misconduct.

There is no blurry line here.

Carter should have received a match penalty for his attempt to injure Keith by slashing at his exposed hand.

Stay Golden · 06-05-2013, 06:20 PM

I'm good with 1 game anymore than that would not be correct for the playoffs JMO, but i think Carter slashing Keiths ungloved hand was intential and caused the whole retaliation. It was an a-hole move by Carter.

Bertuzzied · 06-05-2013, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

I'm good with 1 game anymore than that would not be correct for the playoffs JMO, but i think Carter slashing Keiths ungloved hand was intential and caused the whole retaliation. It was an a-hole move by Carter.

Well if people think Marchand is dirty because of that missed slash, Keith should be the devil since he actually connected.

Erick Estrada · 06-05-2013, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gargamel

The suspension is appropriate, though I'd have given Carter a game too for trying to slash Keith's ungloved hand. There's no place for either of those plays in the game.

Can you please explain what rule would be used to suspend Carter seeing his stick hit Keith's glove that was on the ice not on his hand?

T@T · 06-05-2013, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

Carter should have received a match penalty for his attempt to injure Keith by slashing at his exposed hand.

Watching the clip Carter doesn't even look down, looked like a "I'm going by you" type of move.

zamler · 06-05-2013, 11:15 PM

You can get a match penalty for not even touching a player?

thefoss1957 · 06-05-2013, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

You can get a match penalty for not even touching a player?

(Rule 61 deals with slashing)

Rule 61.4 Match Penalty - The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgement, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by slashing.

So even with a miss, a match penalty can be applied.

zamler · 06-05-2013, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

So even with a miss, a match penalty can be applied.

I dunno, the rule can be interpreted in different ways. The rule does say "by slashing" so you're saying slashing at air qualifies as slashing?

thefoss1957 · 06-05-2013, 11:56 PM

In the event, I am ok with Keith getting a game, the retaliation was stupid. I would have liked to have seen a slash called on Carter to begin with...and perhaps the situation would not have escalated.

Like the Sedin incident, Keith took a late head shot from Sedin, and apparently felt that he had to take an eye for an eye approach. Loose officiating, not wanting to "affect the outcome" DOES AFFECT THE OUTCOME, and playoff, regular season, 1st period, 3rd OT, an obvious call should be an obvious call.

After his ridiculous roughing call on Saad in game 7 of last round (apparently Saad's face roughed up Quincey's fist to negate a GWG), I was irritated to see Walkom assigned to the Conference finals round. Non-existant penalties that are called to "even-up" the situations demonstrate a lack of testicular fortitude to call a game fairly.

thefoss1957 · 06-05-2013, 11:57 PM

Rule 61.1 Slashing - Slashing is the act of swinging his stick at an opponent, whether contact is made or not.

Hanna Sniper · 06-06-2013, 12:23 AM

Both Keith and Carter got exactly what they deserved.

jeffman · 06-06-2013, 12:27 AM

A bit harsh, it looked like it deserved a 5 min major but not a suspension

The Voice of Reason · 06-06-2013, 12:30 AM

Carter deserved the stitches and broken teeth for being a little #### disturber.

Keith deserves the game for hitting Carter in the face with his stick.

All in all, everything turned out correctly.

doctajones428 · 06-06-2013, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

Carter should have received a match penalty for his attempt to injure Keith by slashing at his exposed hand.

Carter lifted his stick to get past and began lowering it before Keith even bent down to grab his glove. If it was a split second sooner the stick wouldn't of been anywhere near his hand and nothing would of happened. There was zero swinging motion

Keith on the other hand purposely tried slashing him and caught him in the mouth

FAN · 06-06-2013, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaine

Suspension for high sticking (stupid decision he obviously regretted right away or not)... sounds like a can of worms to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaine

I just think this is one of those "can of worms" events.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaine

this has the potential to open the door supplemental discipline for other high sticking calls.

I don't think it's a "can of worms" event and I think your concerns are misplaced. There have been suspensions for sticks to the face in the past. Ciccarelli got 10 games for swinging his stick but not injuring Richardson. Bray May got 20 games, McSorely got 23, Boulerice got 25 for crosschecking Kesler in the face, Chris Simon got 25. The difference here is that Keith didn't have the forethought that those others had. You keep your stick down. If you purposely swing your stick and it hits someone in the face are likely going to get suspended. If you purposely bring your stick up and crosscheck someone in the face even if it's for defensive purposes you will likely get suspended. The only thing that this suspension might influence future outcomes is that I think Keith should have gotten more than a game, then again Shanahan isn't consistent so it doesn't matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

Seems appropriate. Keith isn't known as a dirty player and he felt bad immediately after, but then again so did McSorely.

Keith reputation as a dirty player is certainly growing. Keith is a very good player. There's no need to make him into a saint.

Coach · 06-06-2013, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffman

A bit harsh, it looked like it deserved a 5 min major but not a suspension

Deserved an ejection IMO. I think the one game is appropriate. If a 5 min had been given out in the first place, he probably wouldn't have been suspended.

Hockeyguy15 · 06-06-2013, 07:10 AM

Time to ban hockey sticks and make these guys use pool noodles.

Some funny comments in this thread.

DoubleK · 06-06-2013, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAN

Keith reputation as a dirty player is certainly growing. Keith is a very good player. There's no need to make him into a saint.

I'd put him in the same category as Taylor Hall. Tremendously skilled, but can goon it up when they want to.

red sky · 06-06-2013, 11:36 AM

Lol, they are essentially anti-goons. More like twerps.

Erick Estrada · 06-06-2013, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Time to ban hockey sticks and make these guys use pool noodles.

Some funny comments in this thread.

Yeah because losing teeth and possibly an eye from obvious intent to hit a player's face with a stick is just part of the game. There's no hockey play to hide behind with this incident because this wasn't a hockey play at all.

There's funny comments in this thread all right.