Think it was more just because it looked bad at full speed, especially if you consider the angle the ref would have seen Dumoulin fly into the boards at.
Puck was gone, and even though Watson tried to get him on the shoulder it still did contact him from behind (Hit Dumoulin on the Dum of his namebar). The hit kind of spun Dumoulin too and drove him into the boards.
Probably shouldn't have been called but tough at full speed to catch.
A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.
That Watson came in from the blind side would probably satisfy the "defenseless" part.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
That was most certainly a clean hit. Dumoulin should of known the forechecker was coming and instead just admires his pass instead of brace for the hit. He jerked his upper body last second while making the pass putting him in a vulnerable position.
It was a shoulder to shoulder hit so you can't call it boarding.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bandwagon In Flames For This Useful Post:
It wasn't really a "north to south" hit either. He came from the side and the league has said they want to crack down on that.
Also those helmets. If there is a questionable call and you're wearing a yellow helmet, you get a penalty.
So should players be untouchable behind the net or should players be jumping over the goalie in order to check the player looking to make an outlet pass? Silly argument IMO.
What Resolute said, but I've seen that penalty called for someone who just really violently checks a player into the boards, even though it's a "clean" hit. The penalty is meant for a referee's discretion to use when they view something that is more an intent to injure than a hockey play.
I don't have a problem with the call. Hockey is a physical game, but that doesn't necessitate it being an overtly violent game.
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Could it just be that the refs screwed up durring a high speed game?
Is this really worth a thread?
If he gets suspended then yeah, maybe go ahead and try to figure it out. But maybe this is just a case of something that may have looked one way, so the refs called it that way, but on closer inspection they may have got it wrong.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
The Following User Says Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
welcome to the new NHL, surprised he doesn't get a 1 game suspension so they can come back to it later and say he has a history with suspension problems and ding him for more
__________________ 2018 OHL CHAMPIONS
2022 OHL CHAMPIONS
Borderline call for sure, but I think the case can be made, as Resolute said. No need for a suspension though.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
41.1 Boarding - A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.
There is an enormous amount of judgement involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.
Checks every box for a boarding penalty. In conjunction with the ref's discretion, I totally support that being a major.
Way back in the day when I was training to be a referee we were taught that if you think the player attempted to use the boards as a weapon, then it was boarding. Not very scientific, I know, but it seemed plausible.
Looks to me like that is exactly what Watson was doing, and it looked fairly predatory to boot.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Yamer For This Useful Post:
So should players be untouchable behind the net or should players be jumping over the goalie in order to check the player looking to make an outlet pass? Silly argument IMO.
It may be silly to you because you're just not thinking it through properly. The ref clearly saw it as a penalty so try to think why. Players aren't untouchable behind the net, never have been and never will be. This kind of play happens in every game but what usually happens is that the guy goes for the puck or plays the body while the puck is still there. The player passed the puck and was turned by the time the offender hit him. Maybe "north to south" was not the perfect wording but that's why I used these "" around it. In the "north to south" argument, all it means is that the player is facing one way and is hit from the side. Dumolin was defenseless and hit into the boards extremely hard.
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
Checks every box for a boarding penalty. In conjunction with the ref's discretion, I totally support that being a major.
Way back in the day when I was training to be a referee we were taught that if you think the player attempted to use the boards as a weapon, then it was boarding. Not very scientific, I know, but it seemed plausible.
Looks to me like that is exactly what Watson was doing, and it looked fairly predatory to boot.
Based on the ruling I guess it's harder to argue that it can be a boarding call. But if you tell me that 1 second before the hit he was in a vulnerable position you would be incorrect. His back was facing the boards!
He got spun around due to being hit at the same time his momentum was shifting to make the pass. It was an unfortunate play but in no way do I put any blame on Watson. No way this is a suspension and I think 2 minutes instead of a major would of been the right call.
I think hit's like that are cause for concern. Yeah the guy getting hit could have prepared himself for the blow but why is it that the guy making contact has no responsibilities here. The guys in a vulnerable position and shouldn't be hit. What if that was done Johnny Gaudreau people would be losing their fuming minds here. I think it's about respect and the lack of respect in the league for each other is it growing out of proportion. Concussions are happening all over the league and a lot of them are preventable. Just my $0.02 even though I'm sure it's going to be an unpopular opinion
I think hit's like that are cause for concern. Yeah the guy getting hit could have prepared himself for the blow but why is it that the guy making contact has no responsibilities here. The guys in a vulnerable position and shouldn't be hit. What if that was done Johnny Gaudreau people would be losing their fuming minds here. I think it's about respect and the lack of respect in the league for each other is it growing out of proportion. Concussions are happening all over the league and a lot of them are preventable. Just my $0.02 even though I'm sure it's going to be an unpopular opinion
You are bang on here, I don't think this is an unpopular opinion.
The passer was definitely in a vulnerable position. I think there should be some onus on the passer here, this isn't all the hitter's fault. He still shouldn't have hit him though. I would consider this a blindside hit, it doesn't look like he knows that guy is coming. Doesn't even brace for the hit.
__________________
"You're worried about the team not having enough heart. I'm worried about the team not having enough brains." HFOil fan, August 12th, 2020. E=NG
I think hit's like that are cause for concern. Yeah the guy getting hit could have prepared himself for the blow but why is it that the guy making contact has no responsibilities here. The guys in a vulnerable position and shouldn't be hit. What if that was done Johnny Gaudreau people would be losing their fuming minds here. I think it's about respect and the lack of respect in the league for each other is it growing out of proportion. Concussions are happening all over the league and a lot of them are preventable. Just my $0.02 even though I'm sure it's going to be an unpopular opinion
Again, do you really think he was in a vulnerable position 1 second before he made the pass? It shouldn't be the hitters job to anticipate if the opponent is going to turn his body the same second he's about to make contact. This game happens very fast and I don't think he could of backed out even if he wanted to after committing to hitting the puck carrier.
Austin Watson hit on Brian Dumoulin: Why is this a penalty?
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
