• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

2014 NHL Playoffs: A thread full of jerk 'yoffs

I

iLLmAtlc

Member
Just saw the Seabrook suspension video and I honestly don't find it convincing. Charging has always been an extremely grey area call, especially when the guy is so close to the other. It's no where resembling Hanzal's charging suspension from this year when he skated like from across the rink to hit that guy. I'm also not sure if Seabrook could have really known whether Backes had touched the puck or not in real time. If he didn't it makes 3 games seem pretty harsh.

When I watch the video in real time, the hit does not look THAT late, if at all. I kinda question whether there would have been any penalty at all if the consequences weren't so devastating. After all, there was no call from the officials until they saw how hurt Backes was.

As for Rule 48, it was a bit weird they didn't even try to talk about that but I think it's because it's hard to say that Seabrook targeted the head given the position Backes was in.

All in all I feel like this might be one of those plays that don't really fit into any of the rules to suspend him. If that's the case, they probably made the wrong call.
 
A

Acid08

Banned
iLLmAtlc said:
Just saw the Seabrook suspension video and I honestly don't find it convincing. Charging has always been an extremely grey area call, especially when the guy is so close to the other. It's no where resembling Hanzal's charging suspension from this year when he skated like from across the rink to hit that guy. I'm also not sure if Seabrook could have really known whether Backes had touched the puck or not in real time. If he didn't it makes 3 games seem pretty harsh.

When I watch the video in real time, the hit does not look THAT late, if at all. I kinda question whether there would have been any penalty at all if the consequences weren't so devastating. After all, there was no call from the officials until they saw how hurt Backes was.

As for Rule 48, it was a bit weird they didn't even try to talk about that but I think it's because it's hard to say that Seabrook targeted the head given the position Backes was in.

All in all I feel like this might be one of those plays that don't really fit into any of the rules to suspend him. If that's the case, they probably made the wrong call.
Click to expand...
The interference/charging reasons are weird. It was a headshot and that's all that really needed to be said.
 
I

iLLmAtlc

Member
Acid08 said:
The interference/charging reasons are weird. It was a headshot and that's all that really needed to be said.
Click to expand...

Thing is I'm not sure if it fits into a headshot either. To be suspended under that they have to be convinced that Seabrook targeted the head, and they must take into account the position the other player was in and other circumstances (like Seabrook's height).

48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A hit resulting in contact with an opponent's head where the head is targeted and the principal point of contact is not permitted. However, in determining whether such a hit should have been permitted, the circumstances of the hit, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the hit or the head contact on an otherwise legal body check was avoidable, can be considered.
Click to expand...
 
L

LX_Theo

Banned
iLLmAtlc said:
Just saw the Seabrook suspension video and I honestly don't find it convincing. Charging has always been an extremely grey area call, especially when the guy is so close to the other. It's no where resembling Hanzal's charging suspension from this year when he skated like from across the rink to hit that guy. I'm also not sure if Seabrook could have really known whether Backes had touched the puck or not in real time. If he didn't it makes 3 games seem pretty harsh.

When I watch the video in real time, the hit does not look THAT late, if at all. I kinda question whether there would have been any penalty at all if the consequences weren't so devastating. After all, there was no call from the officials until they saw how hurt Backes was.

As for Rule 48, it was a bit weird they didn't even try to talk about that but I think it's because it's hard to say that Seabrook targeted the head given the position Backes was in.

All in all I feel like this might be one of those plays that don't really fit into any of the rules to suspend him. If that's the case, they probably made the wrong call.
Click to expand...

I think they didn't think they could make a strong enough argument for the headshot reason and went with what they could. Simply because they want to eliminate hits like that, that'll make them find a way to make it a suspension.
 
A

Acid08

Banned
iLLmAtlc said:
Thing is I'm not sure if it fits into a headshot either. To be suspended under that they have to be convinced that Seabrook targeted the head, and they must take into account the position the other player was in and other circumstances (like Seabrook's height).
Click to expand...
Don't see how the hit doesn't fit in that description.
 
T

Thursday War

Banned
KuGsj.gif
KuGsj.gif
KuGsj.gif


even babcock was laughing

chara looked almost maniacal when he was laughing at smith :lol
 
A

Acid08

Banned
Isotope said:
Why would anyone every want to try to pick a fight with Chara?
Click to expand...
Chara tries to bully everyone on the ice. Even if you know you're going to lose, standing up for yourself and your teammates is important. Plus, gets him off the ice for 5 minutes.
 
I

iLLmAtlc

Member
Acid08 said:
Don't see how the hit doesn't fit in that description.
Click to expand...

Well way I see it is IF Seabrook was going to make any hit given his height, and Backes' position, he probably could not have done it without making contact with Backes' head. However, I don't think that means he necessarily targeted the head -- was he was just trying to make a hit and it happened to make contact with the head because of those circumstances, or was he really targeting the head there?

It happened in a split second, could Seabrook really have known that he had no other choice but to hit Backes' head?
 
L

lamaroo

Unconfirmed Member
iLLmAtlc said:
Well way I see it is IF Seabrook was going to make any hit given his height, and Backes' position, he probably could not have done it without making contact with Backes' head. However, I don't think that means he necessarily targeted the head -- was he was just trying to make a hit and it happened to make contact with the head because of those circumstances, or was he really targeting the head there?
Click to expand...

He launched himself though. He could have made a really solid body play on Backes, instead he tried to murder him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

50 Cent & Live Nation Announce "The Final Lap" Global Tour To Celebrate Get Rich Or Die Tryin's 20th Anniversary (90 Concerts)
News
3
1K
Bloobs replied
MLB Regular Season 2018 OT – I believe in the Church of Baseball
2 3 4
153
15K
Schattenjäger replied
2020 NFL Draft: Zoom Meeting Edition
|OT| 2 3
134
8K
Moogle11 replied
30 MLB players will form and compete in a MLB The Show League.
25
2K
Vawn replied
MLB Considering Beginning a 100-Game Season in June, Realigning the League into 3 10-team divisions
44
2K
TheStruggler replied
Top Bottom