Lucic hit - any chance of further discipline?

[flamesfever]

Lucic should know better. On tv it looked to me like an intentional, dangerous hit. When my wife saw it, she said the Flames are going to lose because of it.

2 games

[1_Flames_Fan]

No

[N-E-B]

Maybe a game but I think the 5 and a game was the right call. Not sure it needs much more than that.

[shniper]

Might get a game but should've only been 2 for boarding. Dude brake-checked Lucic 2 feet from the boards. Sometimes you gotta take the hit.

[Ryan Coke]

Don’t want to blame the victim, Lucic has to be responsible for the hit. But as Lucic was skating into the corner, everyone watching and the Dman going in knew Lucic was going in for a big hit. And then he puts himself in a vulnerable position at the last second.

[Igottago]

I think he gets a game or 2.

[powderjunkie]

I hate how split second awkward hits exacerbated by player size are treated more harshly than more deliberate/intentional actions.

I think there are reasonable arguments for anywhere between 2 mins and 1 game. 5 + ejection is plenty IMO. Lucic is ultimately responsible, but I didn't see any intent for a dirty hit.

[1Nite]

Few years ago but I think it would fall into this category.
https://youtu.be/w0AsTcjZLsM?list=PL...gdWeb6pG&t=409

[browna]

My guess is 2 games based on past history of Lucic.

But Bieksa hit the nail on the head in the intermission on how he played against the exact same guy in Lucic just a few years ago. As a guy in a position who knows that may be on the end of a heavy hit from a player, you are aware where and when that player, and Lucic specifically, is on the ice.
One of those pictures the guy was looking right at Lucic. Bieksa said he then will stand up straight and jump up on the boards and into the hit when receiving the hit to get his shoulders and head as high above a guy like Lucic, to lessen the blow but better absorb it. This dude ducked, got smaller, and turned away last minute.

Basically, you treat players like Lucic differently when you know he's out there because he hits heavy and finishes checks, just as you'd defend JG differently if he's coming in on you 1 on 1 then you would Tanev coming in 1 on 1.

And besides the Kylington (didn't bleed so its a minor) Coleman got rammed into the boards from the back 3 mins after the Lucic hit, to nothing.

[sureLoss]

Looks like no further discipline

https://twitter.com/user/status/1465045105232924676

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Looks like no further discipline

https://twitter.com/user/status/1465045105232924676

That’s good. The new look 4th line has actually been quite good lately; so good, they’ve actually taken minutes from the 3rd line.

[N-E-B]

IMO that’s the right call. The 5 and a game was enough. Dumb hit and he payed a price for it. Ended up hurting his team and they lost the game.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I'm with you.

It should make not one iota of difference if someone is hurt or not when deciding the call on the ice.

If it was a penalty, call it...if it wasn't then don't....simple.

Doesnt matter whether or not someone is leaking or limping.

Its all about the intent, not the result.

But that would fall under common sense, and that is far much to ask in this day and age.

Common sense? Not one iota? Shoul driving while impaired have the same penalty as dangerous driving causing death? Of course intent matters but consequences of one's misdeeds should always factor into punishment. Especially when looking at reckless rather than deliberately malicious hockey plays.

Glad he escaped suspension though. In my view, 5 and a game was sufficient.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Everybody in the building knew that hit was coming.

*I* was bracing for that hit. Don’t know what the heck that dude was thinking turning his back.

5 mins is fine, because he did board the guy. Don’t think it’s suspension-worthy though.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

Common sense? Not one iota? Shoul driving while impaired have the same penalty as dangerous driving causing death? Of course intent matters but consequences of one's misdeeds should always factor into punishment. Especially when looking at reckless rather than deliberately malicious hockey plays.

Glad he escaped suspension though. In my view, 5 and a game was sufficient.

So if I take a two handed swing at your head but just graze your helmet, I get a lesser punishment than if I’m just reckless with a stick lift and get your eye?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

Common sense? Not one iota? Shoul driving while impaired have the same penalty as dangerous driving causing death?

Foolish comparison. Breaking the rules of hockey is not the same thing as violating the criminal law. And there is nothing in the rules of hockey as written about penalties becoming more severe in case of injury (except for the silly double-minor if a high-sticked player can find a drop of blood on his person). The law is quite clear that it is about punishing consequential actions.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Foolish comparison. Breaking the rules of hockey is not the same thing as violating the criminal law. And there is nothing in the rules of hockey as written about penalties becoming more severe in case of injury (except for the silly double-minor if a high-sticked player can find a drop of blood on his person). The law is quite clear that it is about punishing consequential actions.

The injury (aka bleeding) to the players face made Lucic’s hit into a major I thought? That’s what they discussed on the broadcast and post game.

Edit: my bad, that was referring to the misconduct portion.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

Common sense? Not one iota? Shoul driving while impaired have the same penalty as dangerous driving causing death? Of course intent matters but consequences of one's misdeeds should always factor into punishment. Especially when looking at reckless rather than deliberately malicious hockey plays.

Glad he escaped suspension though. In my view, 5 and a game was sufficient.

LOL....what?

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So if I take a two handed swing at your head but just graze your helmet, I get a lesser punishment than if I’m just reckless with a stick lift and get your eye?

Come on, the comparison is if you take a swing with intent and graze my head vs taking a swing and cracking my skull. You're telling me the punishment should be the same?

That's essentially what Transplant is arguing when he says you can only look at the intent.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Glad that there was no further punishment meted out.