used all his NHL14 moves too
- wingz4life

If there is a button on ps3 to score that 4th goal let me know

We're due.
- tomburton99

Just come in last this year and get the 2nd overall. (first goes to Edmonton by default)

We're due.
- tomburton99

I can't wait

The Sharks must think they're a baseball team, Kings of October
- cranford93

Just never May or June...

Shanahan acknowledged that, it was shoulder but he leaves his feet to make contact with his head
- cranford93

He didn't leave his feet Shanny was careful not to say he did. I believe he said he elevated his shoulder.
If this was Nash on a 3rd line scrub there would be no suspension, I defiantly think the league doesn't want stars suspended!
the Nash on Tomas Kopecky hit was an so incredibly more violent and target to the head that the NHL has no credibility in player safety.

Stuart should be out as long as Nash. If a player is going to target the head he must face the consequences
- mighty13duck

I think suspensions & fines should be heavier, when the injured player is out for an extended period. There's also the need to differentiate hits like what Stuart did to Nash - driving him/his head into the glass versus what Raffi Torres did to Hossa in the playoffs 2 yrs ago with an open ice hit. Getting your head banged into the glass has to have additional impact but even on a clean body check, with a player along the boards, sometimes their head hits the glass - it's too bad they only pay real attention after the fact and/or if the player leaves the game. It really falls on the players to reduce the # of incidents. They need to have more respect and/or the fear of losing $$$ and games if they do something purposefully, risking another person's career & livlihood. It's a privilege to play in the NHL. They should act like they understand and respect it.

The play had nothing to do with Hertl........Nobody here is calling for his suspension, what I would like is DZ get punched in the face to wake his ass up.
- tomburton99

I have DZ on my fantasy team, please wake him up

It might help to factor in it was his second shift of the season. He missed all of the pre-season and the first two games of the regular season, and looked pretty out of it until half way through the game. My take is it wouldn't have happened had he had some game time before this one.

STL vs CHI is a good game. Think STL has a chance to go very deep this year.

STL vs CHI is a good game. Think STL has a chance to go very deep this year.
- pcjr307

they just basically won. Great game though.

Shanahan acknowledged that, it was shoulder but he leaves his feet to make contact with his head
- cranford93

It is comments like this that make me wonder if anyone actually looks into the matter in question. Really?

Quote from report:

In his video explanation, Brendan Shanahan, the NHL's senior vice president of player safety, said Stuart did not charge Nash and did not extend his elbow or forearm.

But Shanahan said Stuart "unnecessarily extends the left side of his body upward, specifically his left shoulder, in a way that makes Nash's head the main point of contact, causing an injury," a violation of Rule 48.

Seriously? How about we at lest try and pretend to be informed.

It is comments like this that make me wonder if anyone actually looks into the matter in question. Really?

Quote from report:

In his video explanation, Brendan Shanahan, the NHL's senior vice president of player safety, said Stuart did not charge Nash and did not extend his elbow or forearm.

But Shanahan said Stuart "unnecessarily extends the left side of his body upward, specifically his left shoulder, in a way that makes Nash's head the main point of contact, causing an injury," a violation of Rule 48.

Seriously? How about we at lest try and pretend to be informed.
- Hockey_Logic

So it's mot a charge or elbow, but it violates rule 48. And?

Nah, I think Maggie the monkey to spin a wheel in Shanny's office.

Here is my problem with the situation. During the game they mentioned Nash left the game and I figured their would be a suspension. I did not see the hit but I assumed it was an elbow to the head as reported. I got home today and saw the 3 game suspension and I was not upset or surprised.

At the behest of a friend I looked up the video and now I am frustrated. I cannot find a video that shows anything close to an elbow to the head. I am not saying it is not there I am just saying I cannot find it. It is clear that Stuart does extend upwards into the hit but it seems the target was the chest. There is only one angle that even suggests head contact. And I agree that it seems to be the result of carelessly finishing a check. But at the end of the day, contact with the head is supposed to equal suspension... even though the NHL is never consistent with this. If they want to suspend Stuart for 3 games for that hit, fine. But carry that same scrutiny across the league.

Here is my main problem with the hit and ensuing conversation. So we have a player in Nash who has suffered from concussions before which presents two problems.

1. An elite player is now out of the game. Outrage, scrutiny and emotions are all intensified when it is a big name player. Make it a fourth liner and this may not even get reviewed. And there is the first problem, if the Stuart hit is a hit to the head and 3 games the reasonable penalty then he should get 3 games no matter who he hit, but we all know it doesn't work this way.

2. You are up to three times more likely to suffer a concussion after you have already experienced one (thank you random medical website). Granted there are other factors involved but a player is more susceptible which also means that less of an impact is needed to cause another concussion. In February of this year Nash received a concussion from Lucic. I am not aware if we have record of other such concussions. So if we make the suspension directly related to injury then we really have a problem. It is no longer about the action itself but the result. The result not being a necessary consequence of the action but perhaps the culmination of previous injuries. So on one hand we have the very real possibility of a player suffering yet another concussion off of what would have been an other wise harmless hit, does not need to be a head shot to cause a concussion, and the "offender" being suspended for a player's fragile state. What is more egregious to me however is that a hit to the head that does not cause a concussion would get a lesser penalty simply due to luck in that the player was not more injured.

So we have the same play, the same hit and two different outcomes. And so we want two different penalties handed out. Even though the play was the same, the hit was the same, the intent was the same and we want two different punishments? The only intangible is the player hit, their health, how they recover. I really cannot see how binding the punishment to the injury is by any means a fair and accurate method, but then again what the NHL has now really doesn't work either.

So it's mot a charge or elbow, but it violates rule 48. And?
- tomburton99

Just trying to show that there was no report of Stuart leaving his feet.

How many games is hertl suspended for what he did to biron?

How many games is hertl suspended for what he did to biron?
- Mentalorgasm5

Just trying to show that there was no report of Stuart leaving his feet.
- Hockey_Logic

i don't think charging is a necessary requirement to be considered a head hit or a violation of that rule.

i don't think anyone here was calling for a suspension for that hit even after it was reported nash wasn't going to return. i can understand the suspension, but i also would've understood no suspension or a shorter suspension. i'm pretty indifferent about it.

i definitely think it was a head hit in the sense that nash's head got clobbered first by stuart's shoulder and it did look like stuart did extend his shoulder kinda into nash's head but i wouldn't really call it a dirty hit and i would've been indifferent whether a suspension was handed out or wasn't.

This is what the moronic Sharks fans sound like, "Nash had a concussion before therefore Stuart is innocent", how about RESPONSIBILITY? Just for once I'd love to see objective views from the fans of the actor and a little less blaming the victim.

i don't think charging is a necessary requirement to be considered a head hit or a violation of that rule.

i don't think anyone here was calling for a suspension for that hit even after it was reported nash wasn't going to return. i can understand the suspension, but i also would've understood no suspension or a shorter suspension. i'm pretty indifferent about it.

i definitely think it was a head hit in the sense that nash's head got clobbered first by stuart's shoulder and it did look like stuart did extend his shoulder kinda into nash's head but i wouldn't really call it a dirty hit and i would've been indifferent whether a suspension was handed out or wasn't.
- rangerdanger94

You're right but if you're trying to eliminate or prevent head injuries shouldn't there just be a fine line, he made contact, Nash has a concussion no matter what his history is and if a player does have a history maybe you want to show the guy some courtesy and not help shorten his career but nevertheless he made contact and the contact caused a concussion,open and shut, end of story, these Sharks want to show how classy winning 9-2 and rubbing an injury to our top forward is.

It is comments like this that make me wonder if anyone actually looks into the matter in question. Really?

Quote from report:

In his video explanation, Brendan Shanahan, the NHL's senior vice president of player safety, said Stuart did not charge Nash and did not extend his elbow or forearm.

But Shanahan said Stuart "unnecessarily extends the left side of his body upward, specifically his left shoulder, in a way that makes Nash's head the main point of contact, causing an injury," a violation of Rule 48.

Seriously? How about we at lest try and pretend to be informed.
- Hockey_Logic

You forgot to make this bold too, I did it for you and your screen name is "hockey logic"?

Just trying to show that there was no report of Stuart leaving his feet.
- Hockey_Logic

Left side of his body upward, does he have an expandable torso because from my "logic" you need to use your legs to extend upwards hence leave your feet



I don't know maybe my eyesight is no good but he leaves his feet, not by much but he does and he made contact, Nash has a concussion so the Sharks fans get 2 wins last night, congrats now watch SJ choke yet again

- rangerdanger94

yea thats not nearly as sick as what hertl did, that was down right nasty, learn to take a joke

yea thats not nearly as sick as what hertl did, that was down right nasty, learn to take a joke
- Mentalorgasm5

i fired back at your joke with a joke of my own buddy maybe it's you that needs to learn to take a joke

3 more games than Wojtek Wolski got for chicken winging Alfredsson in the side of his head and concussing him.. #consistency