Derek21 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I myself am not certain. Posted a review on Battle Of New York. Which side of the fence are you on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Does clean=legal? Cause it was certainly legal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevilinLA Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Legal for sure. Not that I'm happy about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elias2600 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I voted clean. I think the hit itself was clean, the timing is what falls into a gray area. It's pretty hard to say he had time to pull out of the hit. Now whether or not he had to follow through completely is another question. Overall it's a tough call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils26 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Legal for sure. Not that I'm happy about it. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevilNurn Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Dirty. Legal, but dirty. I also wouldn't be surprised if he got a suspension for it. I only think it was dirty because it was after the play, and after a goal no less. The hit itself was legal, and clean if it's during play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubanjd305 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 It's faster to stretch to try and get the puck than going for a hit...clearly he didn't care for playing the puck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Rattlehead18 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 clean hit. The hit was pretty much the same time as the shot. Carter was coming down from the middle and went to try to take Salmela out of the play so he couldn't get a shot off. If Stevens made that hit everyone would be praising it. It was a shoulder to shoulder. The speed of it as well as a rising shoulder is what knocked Salmela into the air and he just unfortunately landed on his face. No elbow, no hit to the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamtheprodigy Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I voted dirty. I know it's probably legal by NHL rules, but I think hits to the head from the blindside like that are disgusting. Nothing good ever comes from them. Guys get injured from them all the time. I don't understand why players continue to do it and I wish the NHL would suspend players for hits like that. He could have gone shoulder-to-shoulder but unless I'm seeing it wrong, he connected almost directly to the head. It's not as if Salmela moved at the last second, he didn't even see Carter coming. Carter had plenty of time to line it up. I'm not saying I think Carter is a dirty player - out of all of the Flyers he's probably the cleanest - but I don't like that hit at all. Very similar to the Richards hit earlier this year... I just don't see how hits from the blindside like that aren't banned when they so frequently result in injury, and usually very serious injury. Looks like Salmela might have dodged a bullet if he doesn't suffer any brain problems from it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0llyR0ger Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 The biggest problem I had with it was it was from behind. Although it seems they NEVER call hits from behind. Also it was kinda sh!tty cause it was after the goal, I think Carter could have eased up. Definitely dirty, but it's Carter and wasn't HORRIBLE so no suspension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mu6atu Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 The hit was dirty. Carter hit him after the puck went into the net. and if you look at the replay carter could of easily avoided that hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils102 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I voted dirty. It was clean/dirty by NHL rules, but they should change. There is no reason that to take a guy out of the play you need to shoulder him right in the head like Carter did and like Richards did to Booth earlier this year. The needs to implement a no hitting to head rule, even if it's accidental you get 2 mins and a 10 min. misconduct. People say it would take intensity out of the game, but if you watch the OHL, which has that exact rule you know it's not true. Of course it hasn't eliminated hits to the head in the OHL either, but it's a start. And I think/hope guys are more in control of their bodies in the NHL than in the 'O' where they're playing on pure adrenaline on some nights. It was a Stevens type hit, which were also overboard in my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 So Carter hits him 0 strides after the shot is let go and less than a second after the puck is let go, even in slow motion. Come on, guys are still legal to be hit then, nobody knows the puck is going in the net. Heck, the hit is so quick it's before the goal light goes on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elias2600 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I agree that hits like that should be removed from the game, but right now it's legal so technically clean. I just don't see how a player could come out of that situation with anything but an injury. It's similar enough to boarding except it doesn't happen at the boards, that's all that's different. Carter had him lined up in situation where Salmela wasn't looking down, he was looking in front of him and he was hit at speed from behind with a follow through to the head. Anyway, a discussion for another day about whether that kind of hit should be removed since the NHL doesn't care. They say they do, but if they did then they would be ramping up the suspension lengths and fines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mu6atu Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 So Carter hits him 0 strides after the shot is let go and less than a second after the puck is let go, even in slow motion. Come on, guys are still legal to be hit then, nobody knows the puck is going in the net. Heck, the hit is so quick it's before the goal light goes on. I never said the hit was illegal i just said it was dirty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I'll say more or less clean considering that no one went after, or even jawed at, Carter later on. At that point, the Devils were up 2-0 so it wasn't like they should have been wary about taking a penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I never said the hit was illegal i just said it was dirty So then Stevens was a dirty player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mu6atu Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 So then Stevens was a dirty player? ahhh yeah, but he's the f***ing man haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 ahhh yeah, but he's the f***ing man haha If you're consistent I can't fault you, just a difference in opinion then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 It happened very fast, but Carter couldn't pull up. Legal hit, and a clean one that was ill-timed. Not happy about it, but it is what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamtheprodigy Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 So then Stevens was a dirty player? I really don't think Stevens's hits were like this. I know he hit guys to the head, but rarely if ever do you see him line up a guy's head from behind like this. Stevens would hit guys straight on, and because of his size would sometimes clock guys in the jaw. To me, Stevens's hits were more comparable to the hit that knocked out Elias, to the head perhaps, but on a clean, head-on check. The thing that bothers me about this hit is that he came up from behind Salmela on the backcheck, knowing that Salmela couldn't see him, and then chose to go up really high on the hit. I have no problem with this if it's lined up hip-to-hip and he hits Salmela hard to the shoulder. But he went out and around the outreaching Salmela to go up high on him, near the head. Again, I don't believe he's a dirty guy or intended to hurt Anssi, but he came up high on purpose and coming from the blindside like that, it's a very dangerous play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted February 9, 2010 Author Share Posted February 9, 2010 Does clean=legal? Cause it was certainly legal. I thought the hit was okay. Slowed it down to see where the puck was in relation to Carter and Salmela had just released it. Jeff was bearing down. The only thing that I didn't like was it came from blindside. Something Hasan noted in his recap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Does clean=legal? Cause it was certainly legal. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnie Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Clean. They (NJ) still should have done something about it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 (edited) Clean. They (NJ) still should have done something about it though. See, that's the thing that irks the sh!t outta me. You have the two stooges dressed- send one of them out there and make Carter answer for that hit- it was clean IMO, but he should still have to answer for it. It's been mentioned in other threads and it's spot on- what's the point of scratching Zharkov (who really might have helped tonight) if you're gonna give Peters a lousy 42 seconds all night? Peters is dressed to deal with sh!t just like that, but nothing is done about it. That boggles my fvcking mind. Edited February 9, 2010 by MadDog2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.