| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/21/2013 : 21:58:11
Towards the end of the Oilers/Minnesota game tonight Taylor Hall hit Call Clutterbuck low and what looked to be knee on knee. At the least, Hall's hit was low and certainly below the waist.
The score of the game was 3-1 Minny at the time and Hall has played a pretty passionate season to this point. Perhaps some frustration coming out?
What do you think will be the repercussion of this hit? I'm saying suspension. At least one game and maybe two. First time offender so he will get some credit for that. None the less, ugly hit and deserves suplimental discipline for sure.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6GRyHaPYB4A
|
| 13 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 16:18:52
I think hall decided in the moment he wanted to eviscerate the guy. I think he got in the low posture to avoid hitting his head. don cherry was right for a change |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 16:12:50
2 games for Hall. Higher than I thought for a first offense, but not unwarranted for the play. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 14:20:57
The guest doesn't understand you like some of us do Beans. What you really meant was, "If it were Burrows rather than Clutterbuck, then they'd both be suspended. Burrows for being a dbag who no doubt would have embellished, and Hall for not being even more reckless and for not doing enough damage"!  |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 12:21:20
I have a hard time seeing the intent to injure that other see. I see a frustrated player on the end of a losing game that was going to make a hit. Clutterbuck does move to avoid the hit and Hall is put to a decision. Either move to avoid the hit or make the hit that is reckless and dangerous.
Intent to injure is pre-meditated. That can't happen in a split second. I agree with Slozo, Alex, and others. Reckless and dangerous and deserves punishment
To the guest with the smart-a$$ comment, I'm rubber and you are glue pal. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 08:51:10
He'll should get a game, it was a reckless hit. He's leaning down and leading with the shoulder, but his leg comes out as well and he makes contact with his knee on Clutterbuck's knee/thigh - that is a no-no. He's lucky he didn't make contact with Clutterbuck's knee, it could have been a lot worse for both of them.
Possibly even worse was that he hit Clutterbuck - one of the most tenacious hitters in the league and a generally tough player to play against at the best of times. He'll come looking for redemption next game. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 07:16:10
I'm with Slozo and i didn't even hear it discussed on the radio. Thought it was gonna be worse. Looks to me like a similar situation as Hansen's the other night in that the original intent wasn't a cheap shot. Wreckless, yes, intentionally dirty/cheap, no. Although Shanny's much better than his predecessor, there's still some unpredictability in these decisions. I'd say 0-2 games (wouldn't be shocked at anything under 3) considering who the 2 players are.
Anyone hear what Kerry Fraser said about it (assuming he did?) They often have him comment on these hits (he did on the Hansen / Hossa one, though he was wrong in guessing 0 games.) |
| n/a |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 05:10:52
Honestly, after listening to the radio guys this morning, I thought I was going to see something a lot worse than that.
My observation?
He is coming in at a very middling speed (not fast).
Intent to check, yes; intent to injure not clear at all.
The hit is late, but not egregiously late.
It seems like an attempted hip check that ends up being lower, and Hall's leg/knee is involved in the injury. He doesn't clearly leave his knee/leg out; the stance is not exaggerrated to catch his knee; it really does appear to be an attempted hip check which ends up being imperfect.
I say 1 game suspension.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest1779 |
Posted - 02/22/2013 : 04:33:50
Beans...I think you meant to say it was just a hockey play and Clutterbuck just got unlucky and was in the wrong spot and it was 100% unintentional by Taylor Hall |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/21/2013 : 22:30:54
quote:
Originally posted by sahis34
that's not knee on knee, he tries to hit him with his shoulder but ends up using his hip to get clutterbuck above the knee. I've heard Clutterbuck hurt his hip. no intent, no suspension
On second thought that was kinda iffy. Hall readjusts his leg just slighty before the hit, but he also drops his shoulder. it was probably just a poorly aimed hit, definitely reckless. Maybe some intent, but probably not |
| Guest5267 |
Posted - 02/21/2013 : 22:25:04
yeah it looks like hall hits clutterbuck just above the knee then clutterbuck strains the inside of his hip |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/21/2013 : 22:20:32
that's not knee on knee, he tries to hit him with his shoulder but ends up using his hip to get clutterbuck above the knee. I've heard Clutterbuck hurt his hip. no intent, no suspension |
| @valanche |
Posted - 02/21/2013 : 22:10:30
By the way I really don't like how circumstantial the suspensions are.
In that I mean is the player injured, was he a star caliber player, is the player receiving the suspension a star, etc - the only one that should factor into suspension length is if he is a repeat offender give him with a longer suspension. And no more of this free bee BS (first time offender) I don't care if you're in the running to be the next pope ... That isn't a hockey play and it could very well end the career of a player. No more intent to injure. No more hits to the head. Period.
66 is > than 99 |
| @valanche |
Posted - 02/21/2013 : 22:05:43
Dirty. Intent to injure.
Because its Taylor hall I'd be surprised if he got more than two games.
If its a repeat offender doing that to a star you're looking at 10+ games IMO.
Even if its clutterbuck doing that hit to hall it's probably 3-5 games.
66 is > than 99 |
