Zdeno Chara Hits Max Pacioretty

[Pepperkorn]

You know, you guys with your "no suspension -- these things happen" take on it think you're being tough, as if you're all battle tested hockey warriors -- but you're just being stupid - deliberately obtuse.

Par - that was not at you -- you did qualify that there should be one

Edited March 9, 2011 by Pepperkorn

[Quinn01]

IMO it wasnt a dirty hit. One way it looks like Chara just sent him up into the bench and he hit the molding of the glass right there. Another view shows Chara watching as he was skating Max into the molding.

I dont think it is suspension worthy. Not sure if that falls under what is worth a suspension.

[halfsharkalligatorhalfman]

It was not a "clean" hit, because Pacioretty was no where near the puck. It was obviously interference. Now as to whether Chara intended to launch Pacioretty into the wall and crack his head open, or just slow him down and let his teammate get the puck without pressure...

I don't think Chara wanted to do that to Pacioretty and it's a terrible "accident", but since it was an illegal hit on a player without the puck, Chara is in trouble. Any suspension longer than 5 games I think is ludicrous though, I hope Pac can recover.

[devilsfan26]

You know, you guys with your "no suspension -- these things happen" take on it think you're being tough, as if you're all battle tested hockey warriors -- but you're just being stupid - deliberately obtuse.

Par - that was not at you -- you did qualify that there should be one

That's not my take on it at all, it has nothing to do with trying to sound tough. I just think there's no way Chara was trying to make Pacioretty slam his head into the glass. You can make the case that Chara was or should have been aware of his surroundings, but a similar hit happened in the Buffalo game last night, except without the severe result because the player that got hit happened to fall differently. Should whoever it was that threw that hit be suspended too? Also, what should Chara have done in that situation, just let Pacioretty blow right by him? And why does Chara need to be the one cautious of the surroundings and not Pacioretty? Pacioretty knew he was in danger of being hit by Chara in a bad spot, but likewise what else should he have done--given up on the play? Pacioretty was right in continuing to go after the puck like that and Chara was right in stopping him with a clean hit. He could have thrown that hit five times and maybe two or three of them Pacioretty just hits his shoulder into the glass and gets right back up and Chara gets no game misconduct and play continues.

Based on the severity of this hit though, I won't complain if he gets a couple of games but it is certainly not worthy of more than five, definitely nowhere near a suspension for the rest of the season like the Habs fans want.

[halfsharkalligatorhalfman]

This image has me rethinking whether or not it was intentional actually. At the very least it was incredibly negligent on Chara's part and I think a longer suspension than 5 games is warranted. You don't hit a guy without the puck like that in that area. It should be punished.

[squishyx]

You know, you guys with your "no suspension -- these things happen" take on it think you're being tough, as if you're all battle tested hockey warriors -- but you're just being stupid - deliberately obtuse.

Par - that was not at you -- you did qualify that there should be one

I don't think thats a fair assessment at all, but seriously why do you have to resort to name calling with people who disagree with you?

Look Chara is a hockey player, if he doesn't finish his check Pacioretty blows right past him and who knows what happens. If Chara lets up just a bit and tries to obstructs him then he gets an interference penalty. Either way he would have been scrutinized for not doing the right thing which at that point was to finish his check.

If he gets suspended then everyone who ever checks anyone ever again into that partition needs to get the same suspension regardless if the player being hit gets hurt or not, regardless if it's a strong impact or not. Lets face it another issue here is Chara dwarfs this guy so any hit is going to look viscous.

[squishyx]

This image has me rethinking whether or not it was intentional actually. At the very least it was incredibly negligent on Chara's part and I think a longer suspension than 5 games is warranted. You don't hit a guy without the puck like that in that area. It should be punished.

But he did have the puck, and the contact was made well withing any reasonable margin of time that players get hit within.

You can't take a single snapshot and go "look!" for proof. Context matters, speed matters. That pic makes it look like Chara is pushing his face into the partition, in reality it's Max's velocity that rides him down the boards. The whole scenario can not be encapsulated with a single shot.

[halfsharkalligatorhalfman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow1cw8l_rm8

Chara expressed substantial annoyance at Pacioretty two months ago after he scored the game winner in OT.

[newarkdev01]

I think they have to give him 3 games given the result and the history between them and the teams.

[halfsharkalligatorhalfman]

But he did have the puck, and the contact was made well withing any reasonable margin of time that players get hit within.

You can't take a single snapshot and go "look!" for proof. Context matters, speed matters. That pic makes it look like Chara is pushing his face into the partition, in reality it's Max's velocity that rides him down the boards. The whole scenario can not be encapsulated with a single shot.

He did not have the puck. Pacioretty pushes it up the ice and then Chara squeezes him out and into the support. Under the rules Chara isn't allowed to hit Pacioretty there. It happens in games a lot, but it's against the rules.

[squishyx]

It was not a "clean" hit, because Pacioretty was no where near the puck. It was obviously interference. Now as to whether Chara intended to launch Pacioretty into the wall and crack his head open, or just slow him down and let his teammate get the puck without pressure...

No where near it?? he hit the puck down into the Bruins zone. How is that "no where near it"? By the time he falls sure he is far away, but that's not what makes you eligible to be hit or not.

[squishyx]

He did not have the puck. Pacioretty pushes it up the ice and then Chara squeezes him out and into the support. Under the rules Chara isn't allowed to hit Pacioretty there. It happens in games a lot, but it's against the rules.

I'm sorry I disagree with you, from the NHL rule book

"Possession of the Puck: The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession. The player deemed in possession of the puck may be checked legally, provided the check is rendered immediately following his loss of possession."

[Par9]

Again, Chara does have to realize that the Max is in a dangerous position...that being said players need to know even if the hit is going to be clean that it could hurt the player, therefore in a way its malicious.

[halfsharkalligatorhalfman]

It's not clear cut. I suppose you can think he's eligible to be hit there, it's not unreasonable. I don't think he is. The 5 minute interference call from the refs was probably a knee jerk reaction to the devastation of the hit, but they called it because it could be called according to the rule book. It could be called because it was an illegal hit.

But sure, hits like that happen all the time in games and do not get called. I get that.

[squishyx]

Again, Chara does have to realize that the Max is in a dangerous position...that being said players need to know even if the hit is going to be clean that it could hurt the player, therefore in a way its malicious.

I don't understand why Pacioretty is in any more or less of a dangerous position then anyone else skating at full speed with the puck. Are we going to make a rule banning hit's on players going more then 20mph? Are you suggesting that players can't make clean legit hits or plays that may end with the other player getting hurt?

[DaneykoIsGod]

I don't understand why Pacioretty is in any more or less of a dangerous position then anyone else skating at full speed with the puck. Are we going to make a rule banning hit's on players going more then 20mph? Are you suggesting that players can't make clean legit hits or plays that may end with the other player getting hurt?

I think it's the glass divide that made it a dangerous position. Players should be aware of where they are on the rink when throwing hits. I don't think that's too much to ask.

[squishyx]

I think it's the glass divide that made it a dangerous position. Players should be aware of where they are on the rink when throwing hits. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Ok, but then you need to be consistent. You need to argue that Lucic should be suspended as long as Chara for this hit http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20102011,2,957&event=BOS202

And every other hit where a player is sent into the partition, regardless if they are injured or not.

[Niaure]

It was simply an accident, nothing dirty... Just unlucky. God, I hope he's alright

[jim777]

It's a hit to the head and it warrants a suspension. You get extra time in the bin if your unintentional high stick draws blood, you should get a little extra time if your hit breaks someone's neck and causes a severe concussion (IMHO).

And coming on the heels of a 300+ something penalty minute game, Bettman and Campbell and the rest of the top brass better be in Boston when the Habs come to town on the 24th. Whatever is going on between these two teams needs to be calmed down a bit; this is getting more like a blood feud now than a 'storied rivalry'.

[SterioDesign]

no suspension oh we're gonna hear about it from Habs from until the end of time lol

[jim777]

TORONTO – National Hockey League Senior Vice President of Hockey Operations Mike Murphy today issued the following statement on Boston Bruins defenseman Zdeno Chara's hit in NHL game #996 last night against the Montreal Canadiens:

"I conducted a hearing with Boston Bruins' defenseman Zdeno Chara with respect to the major penalty for interference and game misconduct that he was assessed at 19:44 of the second period for a hit on Max Pacioretty of the Montreal Canadiens.

"After a thorough review of the video I can find no basis to impose supplemental discipline. This hit resulted from a play that evolved and then happened very quickly -- with both players skating in the same direction and with Chara attempting to angle his opponent into the boards. I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent, left his feet or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous.

"This was a hockey play that resulted in an injury because of the player colliding with the stanchion and then the ice surface. In reviewing this play, I also took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career."

[ghdi]

lol dammit totally missed the post above

Edited March 9, 2011 by ghdi

[MadDog2020]

For once, the league made the right decision. This hit was as bad as it was because of where it took place on the ice, and not for any other reason.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Ok, but then you need to be consistent. You need to argue that Lucic should be suspended as long as Chara for this hit http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20102011,2,957&event=BOS202

And every other hit where a player is sent into the partition, regardless if they are injured or not.

I'd have no problem with that. It's a dangerous play. If the league is serious about cracking down on head injuries, it would be something worth exploring IMO.

I like jim777's comparision to high-sticking. Following through on a shot isn't illegal, and neither is throwing a hit. But if your follow-through hits someone up high, intentional or not, it's a high-sticking. If your hit drives someone into a partition, intentional or not, it should be a penalty. And since the severity of high-sticking penalties depends on the severity of the damage caused, I wouldn't mind the same principle applied to hits into a partition.

Be aware of where your stick is at all times. Be aware of where you are on the ice before throwing a hit. Do this because not being aware puts other players in danger. Seems fair.

But it isn't in the rulebook like that now, so I guess the league's ruling is correct.

[squishyx]

I'd have no problem with that. It's a dangerous play. If the league is serious about cracking down on head injuries, it would be something worth exploring IMO.

I like jim777's comparision to high-sticking. Following through on a shot isn't illegal, and neither is throwing a hit. But if your follow-through hits someone up high, intentional or not, it's a high-sticking. If your hit drives someone into a partition, intentional or not, it should be a penalty. And since the severity of high-sticking penalties depends on the severity of the damage caused, I wouldn't mind the same principle applied to hits into a partition.

Be aware of where your stick is at all times. Be aware of where you are on the ice before throwing a hit. Do this because not being aware puts other players in danger. Seems fair.

But it isn't in the rulebook like that now, so I guess the league's ruling is correct.

I must have missed Jim777's argument, but I disagree with that as well. According to the rules:

edit, full rule:

"60.1 High-sticking - A “high stick” is one which is carried above the height of the opponent’s shoulders. Players and goalkeepers must be in control and responsible for their stick. However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly."

Thats the way it should be, and that's the way it is. Same with these types of hit. Intentional I would agree with you, regular hit that accidentally concusses someone I don't. We shouldn't be punishing people based on the level of injury.

Edited March 9, 2011 by squishyx