| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
 Posted - 11/01/2009 : 01:32:19
|
WOW! Have a look at this if you haven't already seen it. Michael Liambas, an overager from the Erie Otters absolutely destroys a guy from the Kitchener Rangers by the name of Ben Fanelli (16yrs old) behind the net. Apparently this kid is in the hospital with a fractured skull in critical, but stable condition! From the little bit i read and a few other youtube clips i saw, this Liambas kid looks like a real badass! Don't wanna say he intended to put this other kid in the hospital, but it's not his first big hit, that's for sure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPj-kCp1rGI
Not sure when this second clip is from, but i'd def call it a cheap shot on Tavares by the same guy (Liambas). Could have easily broken Tavares' neck!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow7csCcRSKs&feature=related
|
|
|
50brent
Top Prospect
Canada
62 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 04:52:16
|
| hey i was actually at this game when it happened, it was a dirty hit and as it happened everyone in the stands started yelling and screaming and then it got silent, as we watched him lie in a pool of blood, it delayed the game 45 minutes as trainers were stunned , once the ambulance finnally got there they took him off in a stretcher with his legs flailing around everywhere, poor kid. he was air lifted to hamilton hospital and as u said he is in crtitical but stable condition with a fractured skull. But liambas was crying after the dirty hit and yes i know he has put out some dirty hits but u gotta give the kid a break hes a guy that its basically his last chance to get into the nhl so hes trying to show something to the scouts that he knows how to play physical but it was a dirty hit and never should have happened. |
 |
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 05:10:52
|
This is possibly the dirtiest hit I have seen in a long time. Liambas easily could have not done that. The kid has his back to him almost the whole time playing the puck.
I am of the opinion that Liambas should be banned from hockey everywhere!!
No i do not consider that harsh. I have watched this guy play many times, he has no purpose on the ice. He likes playing dirty and taking cheap shots. He is almost cocky about it most likely because he really cannot play hockey that well. He has no respect for the other players on the ice. The Erie management should do the right thing release this kid and no one should sign him anywhere.
Truly pathetic that this guy has likely ruined a kids life, who knows what complications the kid will have the rest of his life. |
Edited by - Porkchop73 on 11/01/2009 05:12:05 |
|
|
|
sharksfan44
Rookie
Canada
228 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 07:13:14
|
| this is acyually the first time i've seen this hit, and wow that was brutal. i agree with porkchop, that may be one of the dirtiest hits i've ever seen and has no place in the game of hockey. the way he hit him, he saw his numbers and kind of hit him in the side of the numbers and spun him around a little bit, and went head first into the boards. just a devastating hit that easily could have been prevented if liambis had any care for the other players on the ice. He may have ruined someones career. |
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 08:22:40
|
This is so close and so far from a routine play.
Countless times a night we see a defender play the puck behind his own net, and the forechecking forward come in and rub him out into the boards. It happens all the time.
Fanelli here was in a bit of an awkward position though, sort of, half turned into the boards.
Liambas on the other hand, wow. What is a charge, 5 strides? I'm not a fan of Beans and his 'ease up on the hit, make the effective play' argument, but I think this is definitely one of those situations. There is no need for that.
Did anyone else notice how hard his head hit the ice? Why is his helmet coming off? I honestly think that in all the big hits we see, the second collision of head (or even worse helmet-less head) to the ice causes just as much damage. |
|
|
|
sharksfan44
Rookie
Canada
228 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 08:54:34
|
| another thing i would like to point out in the hit liambis had on tavares. look at the score, ITS 8-1. HIS TEAM WAS COMPLETELEY OUT OF THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! when ur down by 7 goals, theres no reason to hit someone like that and possibly cause serious damage. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 09:03:37
|
Liambas should be done. Finished. Your career is now officially over, buh-bye.
That had one of the longest runs at a player I have ever seen, and the kid's back is fully faced towards him as Liambas comes in at nearly FULL SPEED and clocks the kid as he is in the danger zone - facing the boards, 1-2 feet away.
Just brutal. And, easy to get rid of with the proper discipline - as it is 100 % illegal, and has intent to injure written all over it. That, coupled with Liambas' priors, should be enough to end his career permanently.
As an aside, this is why I have always been against 16 year old kids playing with 20+ year olds . . . it is just so much more likely that injuries like this happen.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 09:10:16
|
Oh, and 50 Brent - crazy that you were actually at that game! But let me tell you something about remorse, as you mention that this Liambas was in tears . . .
Liambas just did one of the dirtiest hits I have ever seen. His tears may have been for the kid he might have killed; they might have been for himself, who realises that after this his career is done; they might be for himself because he might get criminal charges if the kid doesn't pull through; and, they could have even been tears of regret and remorse.
But his tears don't change the fact that what he did was very, very wrong. And, he has to pay the penalty.
I am reminded (talking about crying after a brutal play) of Bertuzzi talking about the Moore hit after it happened, and how easily I could see through his tears as being totally selfish (that's how I read it). He was crying over the fact that his life had been changed; that he had been criminally charged; that he might never again play in the NHL.
And now, he is back playing for a great team in the NHL, and Moore has to watch from his couch at home. Does that seem like justice to you?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest4629
( )
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 09:13:50
|
I'm not so sure it was dirty. Liambas was coasting in like a shark but Fanelli turned his back quickly to reverse the play in the last second. It looked to me like Liambas was intending to hit him straight on as he came around from the net.
Sadly the goalie screened him too, so he may not have made the right judgement in turning to reverse. I don't know Liambas's history but this hit while very unfortunate, is not dirty. Hockey is a game of micro-seconds and this injury was an accident.
My heart does feel for Ben Fanelli and I wish him a speedy recovery. |
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 09:20:35
|
An age is an age, it makes no difference when the cut off is, there will always be bad plays and dirty players. Anyone remember Chelios cross checking Toews in the back repeatedly a couple years ago? What's that, 44 year old man, 18 year old kid?
The hit of Tavares was more of a push to a very off balance player, then Tavares fell even more awkwardly. But I agree, it was a tad late, and entirely unnecessary.
Bert's tears were much later and much more rehearsed. Liambas seems more like the guy who 'gets too involved' in the game, and only realizes what he's done after, I agree its a dirty play, but I bet you he was genuinely remorseful. Remember even if he's 20, he's still a kid.
Liambas's career is probably over. Similarly to Bert's. Even now, playing for a good team, Bert is still a shadow of the player he was.
On another note, Slozo, I really highly doubt Liambas will be charged criminally. The circumstances surrounding this case and Bert's seem similar at first (unnecessarily dirty hit on unsuspecting player) but from a legal perspective, the two plays are entirely different. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 10:13:08
|
I agree completely with Slozo, this kid should be done in any hockey league. Never play again. Mistake or not, he should be done. That would a start to clean stuff like this up. Until all hockey leagues are stiff and swift on their punishments, this will continue to happen.
You teach what you allow.
Where do kids learn this stuff??? I grew up in sport learning to respect your opponent. |
|
|
|
Guest6011
( )
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 10:20:45
|
| ok yes i agree with u slozo maybe his tears were for another reason, and they probably were so yup totally agree with u. |
|
|
|
50brent
Top Prospect
Canada
62 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 10:21:35
|
| srry last post wuz mine toatally agree with u slozo |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 10:36:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Where do kids learn this stuff??? I grew up in sport learning to respect your opponent.
I'm 39 years old and lived through a few generations of hockey now and I can tell you that every generation says this, but the foundation of the game hasn't changed that much (I'm assuming that you are talking about hockey beans) The difference now is with the internet and national and international broadcasts being so prevalent we are able to see this stuff everyday...it has always happened we just didn't get exposed to it as much. Hockey is a passionate, contact sport and a split second can change the outcome. I know that like most people who have played hockey through their teens and twenties, I have been in situations where I have given and received - we're all just lucky that we've never been in a situation where the result was this. Tragic.
Someone above said that they thought it was charging...it looked like Liambas coasted from the bottom of the circle. He never left his feet and Fanelli was right against the boards. So I don't think charing is the case here.
The two questions I have are:
1) Did he hit him in the back?
2) And if Fanelli did indeed turn at the last second, was there time for Liambas to let off or avoid hitting Fanelli?
I hope Ben is back on his feet soon...and has a nice long hockey career. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 12:53:37
|
This one's tough for me, but i kinda have to agree with guest4629. I don't know much this Liambas guy, but the little i have read seems to lead me to believe he's one of those reckless kinda guys who plays "on the edge"? Now, and i know i'm gonna hear from most of you, especially Beans, on this particular hit, was he trying to destroy the guy like he did? Prob, but intentionally dirty? It's hard to explain my view. I mean, can it be a dirty hit, but unintentional? If so, that's what i think happened here. I believe he wanted to crush the guy, but i'm not so sure he went in there with the intent to hit him illegally or dirty. Fact is, the dman looked as though he was gonna pick up the puck and continue around the net (towards Liambas). Instead, assuming he saw Liambas coming, he spun to put the puck out the other way (the way he'd come from). This motion, of putting the puck out the other way on his forehand rather than just backhanding it and absorbing the hit, is what caused the hit to be from behind from a player who had already committed to throwing a hit.
Now, before everyone goes off on me about this, have another look at it and for the purpose of disecting this play, pretend it was someone who had no history of bad hits. Okay, now do you agree or not with me, that Liambas had already committed to the hit (he's already over the red end line when the guy turns) when Fanelli turned? How many hits do we see nowadays, usually nowhere near as devastating as this particular one mind you, where a guy with the puck knowing he's gonna get hit, turns to face the glass? I'm not saying that's what Fanelli did, i just think his choice to spin and go forehand is what resulted in him being plastered like he was.
Someone mentioned the helmut coming off. I think that's very importand here. Firstly, i didn't think it appeared as though after the helmut came off that his head hit the ice? Likely, he was out cold before that. It looked to me as though his head hit the metal support between the panes of glass? Obviously there, the glass doesn't give as much. I also am interested to know where the fracture or crack to the skull is? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to hear it was near or on the forehead where it could possibly miss the protection of the helmut?
Please understand before you jump all over me, i'm not of the attitude of "serves him right" or "it's his own fault". I feel for the kid, his teammates, family, friends, etc. My prayers are with him for a full recovery and i hope he can make his way back into hockey. More importanly though, i hope he can recover enough to lead a normal life.
As for Liambas, i won't comment on his style of play as i've only read very little, but i don't think for a second that the tears he shed were selfish. As in, i don't believe the tears were inspired by his thoughts of his career possibly being over. Let's not forget, he's only 20 yrs old, pretty much still a kid. |
|
|
|
MSC
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
601 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 13:35:55
|
| I must be crazy because I see a different hit then everyone is commenting on. They way I look at it is Liambas had him lined up for clean hit to the chest when Fanelli turned and offered his back to him at the last second. I really don't think he had enough time to stop what he was doing. Tragic result of the hit though. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 13:43:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by MSC
I must be crazy because I see a different hit then everyone is commenting on. They way I look at it is Liambas had him lined up for clean hit to the chest when Fanelli turned and offered his back to him at the last second. I really don't think he had enough time to stop what he was doing. Tragic result of the hit though.
That's pretty much exactly what i was trying to say, you just said it in a few lot less words  |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 17:24:08
|
It does appear that the kid turned his back, however the player who did the hitting still took a run that started before the face off circle.
Pretty good chance the kid would have been hurt regardless of turning his back. However, I think the injury would have been less. Can't argue that.
And I agree with Leigh, however the one thing I think is that there is far less respect in the sport, at all levels. And that is also the fault of the media, internet, etc. As well as the fact that each generation appears to show less respect for themselves and others and the previous. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 00:30:38
|
Okay...where to start? I've been waiting all day to post on this as I wanted to be sure of what I saw first.
I've gone to the clip(Thanks Alex16), I'll bet 50 times and kept watching it over and over, as the 1st clip I saw was on Saturday night, watching HNIC, and all it showed was the impact, not the few seconds before, greatly changing the perception of what actually happened.
Now, If I offend anyone, I am sorry but WTF? Brutal hit, yes, very much so.
Illegal and dirty hit? I am not so sure. I can appreciate peoples passion for not having players get injured, but for the love of common sense, can we please get off the high horses of self-righteousness here for a second and actually look at the play?
What I saw, and maybe I'm blind, but I don't think so, like Leigh, I've been there on both sides of a play like that, many times, and this could have been a normal, finish the check, no one gets hurt, dump and chase, like happens numerous times every game.
There was NO charge...the skater was gliding, albeit at high speed, from the face-off circle, and setting up for the hit.
The goalie, after playing the puck?, was lollygagging back into the net, providing the perfect screen for the checking player, effectively blinding the defenceman and apparently not verbalizing that there was a man coming, as a heads up goalie probably should have done, especially knowing the player coming is a hard nosed checker.( Not to fault the goalie, but others are quick to point fingers, so I am just pointing one in another direction).
The defenceman was on his forehand, carrying the puck behind the net, and instead of shoveling the puck up the boards on his forehand, decided to reverse the play and send it back to his players who where cycling to the side of the zone that he was reversing to.
To do this, he had to turn 180 degrees to stay on his forehand, leaving his back exposed and facing the glass. Then the trouble happens. He did this a micro second before the checking player made impact. A micro second. Would he have still tried this play had he seen or been warned a man was on him?
If you've played, a micro second when preparing to throw a bodycheck is NOT enough time to make the adjustment...period.
I wish people could see the play for what it was, instead of being so quick to pass judgement, incorrectly. These plays happen, and much like the recent rash of hits in the NHL, are part of the game, a very unpleasant part, but still part of it.
If we begin to over-react to every injury, I greatly fear for what the game will become, those who are the most vocal, claim to be some of the game's biggest fans but yet, would be the first to start penalizing and suspending and banning, again WTF? ANY sport with body contact is going to have injuries, some severe...period.period.period!
Now, with all that being said, of course a devastating injury of this level is tragic and I feel for the family of the injured kid as much as anyone, but it doesn't change the play as it stands, nor will it change similar occurences in the future, that is the game, if you want to hate, hate the game.
If you want to react, ask why, as someone metioned in another thread, can't the game look at better head protection for players, instead of ignoring the fact that the hockey helmet, as it stands, has been inadequate protection for years now.
And to those who claim that Liambas was crying crocodile tears, give your heads a shake, you can't possibly know what he was thinking, and to comment as some did, just puts the ass in assume. This was a tragic ACCIDENT for hockey, don't belittle it by pontificating.
Again, if I offend anyone, I apologize, it is not my intent, but these rashes of hits, and the resulting outcry from us armchair athletes is just getting to be too much for me to not comment, I've been concussed, I've concussed others, I've broken bones and had bones broken, and I wouldn't have changed a second of it as that was, and is, the game. |
|
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 00:51:55
|
Thank you Fat Elvis, Now I dont have to right a huge response which would have been pretty much what you said. I actually feel kind of bad for Liambas, He is clearly coming in for a routine hit on the guy and Fanelli (after looking back a Liambus twice) definatly new the hit was coming and still turned at the last second.
Now Liambus is going to have to hear comments like the ones being made on this site for the rest of his life. He did not leave his feet. He did not elbow. He did not charge. He simply did what he was supposed to do. I definatly do not like seeing anyone get hurt but lets keep this real, the hit was not dirty.
CANUCKS RULE!!!
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 07:59:53
|
I wonder how many people would consider this a "good, clean hit" if it was their 16 yr old kid in the hospital right now?
Although it is only opinion, and I have not facts to back it up, I believe that this hit would have caused injury regardless if the defensemen turned his back or not.
And gliding from the face off circle after skating hard well before that is irrelevant. Sure, no rules were broken. But does that make it right??
Both players have equal responsibility in this.
That being said, I also agree that the kid who got hurt turned his back and THAT is definately something that coaches at all levels should be doing everything they can to stop. For some reason, in the past 5-10 years it has become common for players to 'protect themselves' by turning away from potential hits. It's possibly the most dangerous play in hockey and something has to be done about that.
That starts at the grass roots coaching. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 08:52:57
|
Beans, I hear you, and I never said 'good, clean hit', I said I wasn't sure if it was an illegal hit....huge difference.
Please don't use the cop out of what if it was your kid, as that is not a fair statement and cheapens the concern that all parents are feeling. I have children and would never want to see them injured that severely, ever.
I can only reiterate what I have already stated a few times, in contact sports the risk for injury is always there, the only way to avoid that aspect is to remove the contact. Until then, these incidnets will continue and like you said, when the movement is started at the grass roots level, then we may see changes.
This poor kid is only 16, and as such is only about 3 or 4 years into playing the game with the full contact that is acceptable at the higher age levels, that in itself is part of what is wrong.
From what I understand, hitting isn't allowed at the younger levels and this may be a direct result of one thing that is wrong with the grass roots level of the game. Players are not learning from the inception, that protecting yourself is the most important part of any game that involves contact.. If you play your first 5-8 years not having to be aware of the impending bodycheck, then one relapse at the wrong time, and this is the result.
Just my thoughts. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 09:48:11
|
Just some more fodder for thought......
Maybe the movement to change needs to include changes to Junior Hockey eligibility....
Should a 16 year old be playing in a league with 19 and 20 year olds?
The physical differences can be huge, as well as the experience with the physical aspect that the older player brings.
Maybe if the bosses of the hockey world could worry a bit less about how to make dineros from these kids and more about being sure they can develop properley both physically and mentally, we could see some positive change. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 10:08:36
|
Fat Elvis: This may be one of the first times I have disagreed with you . . . and I disagree strongly. A few points:
1. The play is clearly illegal - at the very least, a charge (from the red line!). That kind of an illegal play, a charge, that results in the near death of a player, should be dealt with very, very severely, so that we don't have people charging like this.
From nhl.com: "Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "Charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice."
In terms of distance travelled, doesn't get much longer than that!
2. You are responsible for your actions, period. If the player you are checking turns suddenly so that you are now checking him illegally . . . well, I guess you were coming in too fast now, weren't you? It's called RECKLESSNESS. Just like if a skater comes up behind another as he winds up for a slapshot and gets a stick in the face . . . is it his fault for getting in the way of the other player's stick? Hell no. Should he have been making noise that he's coming up from behind? No. It might be incidental, but it's still careless, and should be penalised as such.
But we are talking about a play that is ALREADY ILLEGAL - CHARGING. So, instead of using caution, he decides to glide in at full speed to obliterate someone, and the illegal play was compounded further by the checked player turning towards the boards (which seems to me as if he is actually turning to avoid the check, just too late as it were).
3. No one is arguing about nitpicking every single body check out there - I love hitting, and like you say, there is always a danger element, even with 100% legal plays. (don't you remember that I was arguing against Beans on the Okposo hit?)But this was not a legal play in any sense of the word . . . so we are talking about policing the game properly - not about taking out hitting.
You are presenting a false argument here - keep legal hitting, take out charging from the red line at full speed to hit a player.
4. Don't even get me started on having hitting earlier in the game . . . hockey's policy on this is brutal, and supports more young kids getting more concussions at an earlier age. Some good links were provided last time we had a discussion about hitting.
5. The goalie? What does he have to do with an illegal charge?
NOTHING.
6. And the whole point you make about "he only had a micro-second" falls on the ridiculous, as he was COMING IN TOO FAST, THAT'S WHY HE ONLY HAD A MICRO-SECOND!!! Seriously, give your head a shake, man! You are blaming the victim for turning too quickly to show his back, when the player coming in is doing a charge from the red line . . . it is simply bad decision making on Liambas' part.
And, he has a history of dirty hits, of course.
My opinion: only one player has FULL responsibility for a kid being in the hospital, and that is Liambas.
Of course, he won't get that much, because hockey refuses to properly police this kind of crap.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 11:55:02
|
I would like to think my opinion is a little inbetween Slozo's and Fat Elvis, and both have validity to them.
I agree with Slozo that the hit was illegal in regards to the rules of charging.
I agree with Fat Elvis that the kid getting hit turned away from the hit and that is a dangerous play.
I think that my questions about 'if it was your kid' is far from a cop out. It is more a clarity to people's being wishy washy(not personally towards anyone) as it is surprising how many people would call this a 'legal, clean hit' until it happened to them or someone they knew.
In the end, the most concerning thing about this is that this was a 100% AVOIDABLE injury. We are not talking about a couple of players who get tangled up and one gets hurt. We are not talking about a player losing an edge and falling into the boards. Those are the plays that everyone who plays hockey is at risk of getting injured by.
One player skating with speed from the red line and striking another players (back turned or not) behind the netis NOT one of those normally, in the course of the game type plays that might result in injury. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 12:48:59
|
Slozo, thanks for defining the charging rule, i had no idea it was worded that way and had always thought it had more to do with "leaving the ice", as in jumping into a player, than just with "distance travelled". I can't say i like the way it's worded mind you as it's completely open to judgement. What is considered a "violent check to an opponent in any manner"? Who determine's what is violent? And, when you think about it, "ANY" is a key word here. If this is the rule, then i change my mind about the other hits we've discussed. Willie Mitchell's on Toews was charging, Mike Richards on Booth, charging, etc..... I mean, these hits were "violent". Both hits were to do with "distance travelled" whether or not it was from as far as Liambas'? Get what i'm saying? I really think that rule is poorly worded and isn't regularly enforced as such.
Either way, it's 100% clear to me that this Liambas guy did not leave his feet whatsoever. In fact, i had to watch it 10 times because i couldn't believe he never left the ground, even on impact!
I too slide in somewhere between Slozo and Fat Elvis, but moreso to the Fat Elvis side if i interpret the charging rule as i beleive the refs do. If you interpret it as it's stated, then pretty much ANY hit could be considered a charge. Hitting is violent, and guys are moving 99% of the time a hit is thrown. Therefore, as it's written in the book, there's a lot of charging going on..... |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 13:45:26
|
Okay...you've lost me on a couple points, I'll try and address my concerns with your position.
- how do you know he was charging, at full speed, from the red line? The clip shows him taking 3 strides from the top of the faceoff circle and gliding after that. I doesn't show him fully striding in from the red line. You are making an assumption.
- you use the analogy of someone winding up for a slap shot, clipping a checking player? in the face as recklessness. Do you really think that if that was the actual circumstance, the offending player attempting to shoot would/should be severely punished if an unfortunate accident occurred because of it?
- was Liambas at full speed? We don't know, the clip doesn't give enough evidence to make that sort of determination.
- have you played at any higher level of hockey where the tempo is exponentially that much faster? I have and it is indeed a game of micro seconds. The whole point of a dump and chase, if that's what this play started as, is to put pressure on the defenceman and you can't do that at half-speed, or gentler speed or wherever your point is going, about him coming in too fast.
- in no way in my post did I infer that it was the defenceman's fault for this, in no way, your assumption, I was simply stating observations based on the clip Alex116 provided. I tried to do so in a detached manner instead of the knee-jerk responses that have been the most boisterous to date.
- I don't think my head needs shaking, I just called it as I saw. I don't think he was turning to avoid the check, I just don't think he even saw it coming, Tragic for sure.
Do I think the check was excessive, probably, do I think it was a check intended to be thrown with malice, yes, as I've stated in other posts, at times that is the intent of a bodycheck.
Do I hope the kid recovers and continues his career?, of course, to assume otherwise would be assinine.
Do I think Liambas intended to almost kill someone? Emphatically not.
Again, watch the clip, the game is not only one of micro seconds, but of inches as well, had the impact been 2 more inches to either side of the glass supports, where the Fanelli's head contacted, the outcome may have been completely different.
I am NOT condoning that kind of physical play, only stating that FROM WHAT THE CLIP SHOWS, there is not enough evidence to conclude that this was an intended outcome. |
|
|
|
tbar
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
376 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 14:05:07
|
Ok now I am going to give you the ac tual definition that is used for Charging as per Hockey Canada Referee's Case Book/Rule Combination 2008-2010.
Page 80.
Rule 6.3 Charging
(a) A Minor penalty or, at the discretion of the referee, a Major penalty and Game Misconduct penalty shall be assessed to any other player who RUNS or JUMPS into or charges an oppnent. If injury results, a Major penalty and a Game Misconduct shall be assessed.
Note: if more then two steps or strides are taken, it shall be considered a charge.
(b) a Major penalty and a game misconduct penalty shall be assessed any player who charges a goaltender while the goaltender is in his crease or who injures a player as a result of a charge.
As a 20 + year player a 5th year referee and a 3rd year coach to me this is an unfortunate injury where the hitter had no chance to stop his forward motion. He is not skating when he hits the player he did not jump this is not a charge. Now as a referee I am still assesing a 5 minute Major and ill call a high hit or a chaarge whatever but only because the player is injured and that is what a ref is supposed to call in that situation.
Now I am agreeing with those of you who say grass roots hockey may be to blame for this injurie because alot of coaches are teaching theyre players to turn in the same fashion as this d-man did on this play. This is just stupid!! Dont get me wrong I hope the kids alright and can get back to doing what he loves and I also hope that the hitter can bounce back mentally after this incident.
Also anybody that says his tears were for himself, please find the nearest highway and well you get the point.
|
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 14:41:22
|
I also very rarely disagree with Fat Elvis as well. However this time I do disagree.
You make the point of asking if one has played at a higher level with speed of the game being exponentially quicker. I can answer yes and I still say after watching this hit several times that Liambas had plenty of time to a)slow down and b)alter his course.
It is a game of split seconds, I agree to that, but in this case the hitter had read the play and had his mind made up to throw the hit. Not only to throw the hit but to carry excessive speed into the hit. Also when he reached the bottom of the circle Fanelli already had his back to him.
Do I still think this was a dirty, unacceptable hit? Emphatically YES! Do I think Liambas intended to drill the kid through the end of the rink. Absolutely. He has an extensive history of dirty plays and hits throughout his career.
This might seem cold but I really don't care that he was crying while standing there on the ice. All that shows is that he knows what he did was incredibly wrong. If he felt it was just plain accidental or a clean hit then he would not be crying. He is lucky that he is even on the ice with the way he plays? I hope that if he is still playing after this that every player runs him everytime he steps on the ice! Eye for an Eye is what I say. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 15:03:06
|
Every time a new post comes up I go back to the clip.
He did not have his back turned to Liambas until the very last second. Liambas is past the goal line before Fanelli begins to turn to reverse the play...past the goal line. Please, watch the clip it shows very clearly the sequence of events.
And again, I am not condoning anything, I am in full agreement that this shouldn't happen, but call it as it happened. I understand the outrage and outcry as no one wants to see that severe of an injury ever happen, but this is a blameless tragedy, both doing what is part of the game. I am only defending my position that this is an instance of terrible circumstance moreso than the attempted murder that some see it as.
Yes he was looking to paste Fanelli, but had he hit Fanelli square on, face to face, it may have still been excessive, but most likely not as tragic.
I think back to a similar hit about 20 years ago, very similar, Wendel Clark lines up Bruce Bell almost exactly the same way and crushes him coming around the net, only difference is it was shoulder to chest as Bell wasn't turned awkwardly. That particular hit is on every list as one of the biggest checks of all time. If anyone has that clip, please post it..the circumstances aren't much different..only the outcome. |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 11/02/2009 15:12:41 |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 15:08:48
|
Here is the clip I was referring to, AND Clark left his feet to deliver the shot...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGRheKlGbq0
He still went on to be one of the games respected players... |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 19:52:03
|
Good comments all around, even with the people I am disagreeing with.
Some more observations and comments as I continue to watch the replay slo-mo:
1. I didn't watch the clip enough, just watching Liambas' feet, to realise that he didn't glide . . . he continued to skate so that he had that near top-flite speed right up until just before he prepares his right shoulder to nail him in the head. Watch it again now, count the strides . . .
2. There is no thought of letting up. The microseconds you are talking about, Fat Elvis? He had enough of them to stick his right shoulder and arm out a bit so that he could catch all of his head as he turned his back just before impact.
And what is his stance, posture and expression saying afterward? It's not "s***, I caught that guy too flush . . . it's the tough guy stance you make after a crushing blow that will make the replays and get you a bit of fame for a night, maybe even a week. Except, this one backfired, it was too good . . . watch again, see his face afterward, his posture. Does that say "I didn't have the microseconds to not stick out my shoulder and arm"?
3. The Wendel Clark hit is not that close at all to this hit, sorry. Let's stick to this hit, ok? And scratch my high stick analogy then.
4. tbar - you are a ref, and you can't say that this was a charge?!? You don't see his legs pumping? That's the RUNNING they are referring to . . . the distance is certainly there . . . the intent to injure is certainly there (see: raised shoulder and elbow at a player in extremely prone position). I am utterly astounded you have the opinion you do.
I really think some of you have become toobrainwashed by the current hockey rulings and standards - which are all out of whack, I contend - because of the fact that a few of you were decent players. I wasn't, and in fact I never played organised hockey except for on dry land . . . but that certainly doesn't make me less qualified to judge a dirty hit or not.
My eyes are good, I've watched a helluva lot of hockey, and I know what's what.
That's a bloody dirty hit, meant to injure - and it did.
As an aside, Fat Elvis, I never meant to get too personal with the head shake comment, I take that back . . . I am just perplexed that you keep repeating the line about watching the clip, and yet you still see this in a totally different light than I do . . . and I keep watching the clip, and thinking it looks worse and worse for Liambas.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 20:29:32
|
I, like Fat Elvis(who by the way is my favorite all time PUH Poster) have to watch the clip again each time someone posts something.
Just wondering if it's not a charging call if the guy turns his back???
Nope, didn't think so.
The guy turning his back makes the injury worse. However, the hit is still a charge and an injury still happens(although not as severe) if the kid doesn't turn his back.
I see that every time I watch the play. Over and over. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 00:00:56
|
I am not sure how to continue. I am accused of not seeing the clip the way it is, yet I go back and I go back and I look for flaws in my assesments and I still see what I see.
By pausing and playing the clip repeatedly, I am still finding that in that late 6, early 7 second mark, Fanelli is still facing the oncoming Liambas, and Liambas is PAST the goal line, I try to see it differently, but I cannot, that is what the clip shows.
Liambas is in a ready stance, GLIDING, not pumping his legs, before he reaches the goal line.
The raising of the elbow and shoulder to direct the impact to Fanelli's head, must be another Kennedy magic bullet thing, I don't see it.
The 'micro seconds' that seem to have become Slozo's favorite mock, are indeed just that, as the whole sequence in real time takes less than a second from Liambas' start of his glide to deliver the hit, to when Fanelli is falling to the ice unconscious, not my guesstimate, but what the video counter shows.
I am taking no offence whatsoever to any rebuttals, but I am finding it difficult to understand what is debateable in regards to what the video is showing.
Again, a brutal viscious check, let's agree on that, I will even be willing to accept that it was a charging major, not due to the extra strides, but due to the excessive amount of force, but I am still unwilling to accept that Liambas planned the outcome as such.
To speculate on his posture and attitude has naught to do with my part of the discussion, the fact I am trying to point out, is that at that particular point of impact, the whole dynamic changed and changed within a second, that, is what made the contact so tragic.
Let me throw out an analogy based on one of your previous posts on another thread.
You are at the net, ready to spike the volleyball, and as your arm starts to move forward, the blocker's arms begin to part. Do you continue to follow through with the spike, knowing full well you are going to most likely break the blockers nose or worse?
You are fully committed to spike and as I mentioned your arm is already in motion, you have a 'micro second'  , to adjust, do you? Can you? Should you?
Before you say the analogy has no relation, I say wait, I am talking a timing issue, not an intent issue.
I most certainly can understand any poster's animosity to Liambas for laying out such a viscious hit, but, I am not arguing anyones emotions, simply WHAT THE CLIP SHOWS.
No suppostions, no assumptions, no dime- store psychological assessments(unless, of course it's actually Dr. Slozo, in which case I apologize), only the clip. Go to that 6 - 7 second mark and pause it, see if I am blind or not. I do not doubt anyone's knowledge or analytical ability(maybe Hanley's at times), I am only debating what is there in the clip.
Whew, time for bed after that windbaggy diatribe I just pulled out of my....nevermind. I look forward to further reparte' on this later. |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 11/03/2009 00:03:58 |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 00:37:24
|
Fat Elvis, BTW, love that name, i won't get into it now as it's my bedtime too and i'd prefer to be thinking a little more clearly than i am at this moment if i'm gonna comment. I will say, i'm watching the same clip you are! Over and over and over.
Please, Slozo, or someone else, tell me...how do you view it in slo-mo? I'd really like to see it that way?
I will comment more tomorrow on the actual topic, although i know most of you prob don't wanna hear it anyway... |
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 08:56:10
|
I've watched this clip too many times.
I see Liambas pump his legs at the bottom of the circle. Then, as he passes over the goal line, he moves his legs again. I think the debate here is whether that last movement of his legs over the goal line, is another skating pump, or just him shifting his balance.
Fat Elvis, watch it again, his feet do shift at the goal line.
Other people, watch it again, his feet move a LOT less than the last time he pumps his legs for speed, at the bottom of the circle.
Personally, I think its a dirty hit, I think its charging regardless of that last pump or not. Along the lines of the Downie one from a couple years back preseason. It should probably be dealt with similarily. Fanelli turning and spinning in the last minute certainly makes the hit a lot worse.
But its very hard to remember here, that the injury shouldn't dictate the punishment, you can only punish Lambias's actions. The injury suffered, although tragic, should not come into the discipline action, if any.
Here's another Youtube link, showing a collection of footage. I'll let you judge if it shows anything new, but check out the 1:50s or so mark, for a reverse camera angle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz9B3aLBW14 |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 10:42:04
|
First off, as i said before, if the charging penalty is defined as Slozo quoted it, then this is a charge, therefore illegal and i guess in that case, dirty? If it's as tbar quoted it, then i think the hit was legal, albeit, a little excessive. I'd say that's the debate here really. Was it legal or illegal? Clean, or dirty? Etc.... The other debate, even if it's proven to be clean and legal will be the one we've debated on other threads, is it necessary and should these sort of hits be taken out of the game.
Before anyone comments further, please consider this: Would we be discussing this hit at all, if Fanelli went uninjured? I'd say not. And again, this is one of those hits where because of the injury, many see it as being worse than perhaps it was. Let's say Booth or Toews ended up with fractured skulls on the hits they took. I'd bet we'd still be debating those two.
Now, i've watched the clip some more, including the new link from guest2121 (thanks for adding that) and first off (to guest2120) i have to say, the foot movement after he's crossed the goal line is anything but more skating "pumps". From my view, i'd say he's adjusting to make the hit he intended to in the first place, basically lining up the check. I can't see how anyone could possibly claim he's trying to gain more speed for the hit with that slight shift of his feet.
Slozo, while i haven't been around here as long as many of you, i've not really disagreed with you on much, until now. My takes on your points:
1. Liambas was coming in on the forecheck with speed to begin with. Yes, he did somewhat take some strides at the faceoff dot but most of his speed looked as though it was from his skating from nearer to the middle of the ice (cross over strides as he was on a turn). There is one last stride/crossover after the dot. By the time he reaches the bottom of the faceoff circle, he takes no more "power strides" and any movement in the feet after that were simple directional adjustments which really would slow him down (ever so slightly) moreso than gain him speed. I believe if anyone can see this in slow motion, it'd help clear this up, but that's what i see.
2. Agree wholeheartedly that there was no intent to let up. The rest of your statement here clearly implies that he intended to nail Fanelli in the head with his shoulder. I disagree. He keeps his arm in at his side until the hit and unfortunately, much like the other hits we've discussed (especially Richards on Booth), his shoulder catches the back/side of Fanelli's head which is slightly lowered due to his spinning motion to go forehand and reverse the play. Look closely at the clip i'll put in below and at the 44sec mark (try to pause it) , you can see Liambas' feet are both on the ice, his stick is far from the targetted player and most importantly, his arm is completely at his side.
As for his reaction post hit, which clip did you see such "posture and expression"? I just don't see what you're seeing. You make it seem like he pulled a Jeff Kugel after the hit (assuming we all remember that idiot?). I see a kid who knows he's just injured a guy, but has no idea to what extent. I see a guy who's keeping an eye out for the inevitable opposing player who is likely to jump him. I see no cockiness in his expression, i see no intent to go after any of the guys wanting a piece of him and i see a guy who willingly leaves the ice with the official.
3. The Clark hit, and many others like it, while not exactly the same, should be considered. Why? Because of the speed involved. If Liambas' was charging, then so too was Wendel's by the definition you provided. If Bell had fallen to the ice and cracked his skull, would it be any different? I'm not even taking into consideration whether or not Clark left his feet (it looks kinda like he did, but it's tough to say if it was just from the impact?).
4. Again, this comes back to what really is the definition of a charge. Like i said before Slozo, if your definition is correct (and i did look up and find what you found on NHL.com) then yes, it's a charge. I will say though, if that's the case, there's hundreds of charging calls a year (maybe more) that go uncalled. Simply put, the refs don't call charging the way the rule you quoted states! As for the "raised shoulder and elbow....", i couldn't disagree more.
Here's another clip, prob the best one i've seen yet. Have a look at it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1a12G5xWYE&feature=related
Like i mentioneed above, at the 44 second mark, take a close look. The only evidence i see of his elbow leaving the side of his body is after contact. This would be due to momentum and balance loss. There certainly isn't any "raised" elbow before the hit, at least not one my two eyes have seen?
Slozo, i know you're frustrated with Fat Elvis and likely myself too but let's face it, we're all watching the same clip, we just have different opinions on it. You can't see how FE (sorry, don't wanna abbreviate his name to Fat) can't see it in the same light as you, and we're thinking the same thing back. Neither of us likes what happened to this poor kid, AND, like i've said, i've read that this Liambas kid is a bit of a reckless player so i see how it'd be easy to throw him under the bus. However, i can't get it outta my head that the extent of injury is playing into peoples opinions of what should happen to Liambas. If Fanelli bounced right back up from the hit, NO ONE would be saying "ban Liambas for good" or anything along those lines. If this hit was so bad, those saying he should be done for good should still have that opinion and be saying "ban him because IT COULD have seriously or fatally hurt that Fanelli kid".
Lastly, i wanna re-iterate that i really believe the answer to whether or not this hit was clean lies in the definition and the ways of calling the charging penalty.
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 10:44:48
|
Fat Elvis, I'll try to be brief:
1. Whether the kid is facing Liambas or not, it is still a charge. I never said that it was an easy boarding call, but it certainly could be called that if a referee thought that because the player was coming in so fast that no one could have avoided a punishing hit at that point.
2. How can he begliding when he is moving his legs? Gliding means that the legs are like pylons, basically still, as your forward momentum carries you forward. What he is doing is continuing to skate so that he still comes in at the same reckless speed! He may not be accelerating, but he is at the very least maintaining his speed, which is clearly way to fast (you can't reach this speed for a legal check against the boards - otherwise, it's a charge).
3. It's YOUR microseconds, not mine - and I was not mocking. I was pointing out that it is not in the slightest a mitigating factor, since it was in fact created by Liambas himself! HE is the one charging in for a hit at nearly full speed, so HE is the one that gave himself no time - literally, as you say, microseconds - to change course. A reckless, thoughtless decision.
4. And to your hijacking of my volleyball analogy . . . you can't compare a charge (illegal play) to a spike (always legal except as first hit on a serve). So, again - whether I could change my course of action or not (I probably couldn't, to answer your question) is pointless to the discussion - as the person doing the illegal play (charging) is ALREADY IN THE WRONG, and has put himself in the position where he might cause serious damage if the right circumstances occur. And by right, as in this case, I mean horribly wrong.
And lastly, no, it's not Dr. Slozo . . . I've been a security manager, teacher, private tutor, bar manager, bartender, bouncer, security guard, private investigator, property manager, salesman, painter, and a bunch of forgettable jobs I'd rather not mention. Never doctor, though.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 10:51:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
And lastly, no, it's not Dr. Slozo . . . I've been a security manager, teacher, private tutor, bar manager, bartender, bouncer, security guard, private investigator, property manager, salesman, painter, and a bunch of forgettable jobs I'd rather not mention. Never doctor, though.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
You forgot, FORUM MODERATOR |
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 11:18:04
|
Alex, in regards to your post hit reaction comment..
I can't remember if the complilation link I posted had it in there, but I watched a few clips this am. One of them showed Liambas continue skating behind the goal, shove to the ground the second defenseman(who rushed in), give the goalie a knock(in retaliation to the goalie wacking him with his stick) then skate towards his own bench. When he got to his bench the linesman pulls him away.
After skating with the linesman for a bit, Liambas is directed off the ice, by the zamboni entrance. As he leaves the ice, Fanelli is still down for the count.
I'm not sure what you want to make of his actions. To me it seems fairly typical after a play like this and I don't think too much can be made of it.
That being said, I couldn't find any clip of him crying? I know the person who mentioned that said he was at the game...but it seems like Liambas was escorted off the ice fairly quickly. |
|
|
|
Guest0924
( )
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 11:57:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
WOW! Have a look at this if you haven't already seen it. Michael Liambas, an overager from the Erie Otters absolutely destroys a guy from the Kitchener Rangers by the name of Ben Fanelli (16yrs old) behind the net. Apparently this kid is in the hospital with a fractured skull in critical, but stable condition! From the little bit i read and a few other youtube clips i saw, this Liambas kid looks like a real badass! Don't wanna say he intended to put this other kid in the hospital, but it's not his first big hit, that's for sure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPj-kCp1rGI
Not sure when this second clip is from, but i'd def call it a cheap shot on Tavares by the same guy (Liambas). Could have easily broken Tavares' neck!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow7csCcRSKs&feature=related
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Brutal OHL hit! 
