Those hits in the videos were not penalties last year, but this year they are. There is slight variation in situations, but Shanahan makes it pretty clear at the end (using pretty much the exact same wording) that it's the responsibility of the hitting player to avoid the head as the principal contact point. He never says those players specifically targeted the head... he says that regardless, the head can't be the principal point of contact.
- eayost

QFT

Absolutely Lindros was vulnerable. And what makes it completely different is the rules that are now in place. Kronwall didn't stand his ground. They even talked about in the post game of how Kronwall backs up for a few strides to show the player that he's retreating and then when he sees the player vulnerable, moves in for the hit. It was a predatory hit on a vulnerable player.
- MJL

Matt Cookes hit on Savard was considered a hockey hit too.
- joepa90

I'm usually on the other side of this discussion. Trust me, I hate to see guys get nailed like this. I had the pleasure of feeling a few in my day. I just don't think there was more here than Kronwall seeing an opportunity to lay a good lick on a guy. It's unfortunate the head was involved, but Jake was leaning forward, seemingly unaware of the impending contact.

Do you get the money and the donuts if you win that bet? Cause if so, that's sweet.
- wolfhounds

i have no idea how it works, just an old saying i try to keep alive.

but i'll take donuts for sure.

not now he's not. they are now rallying to him.
- Don'tForgetTocchet

I meant literally, with all the injuries...

Think about it...JVR, Jake, Jagr, Kimmo and Mesz... That's nuts.

just wondering i seriously doubt berry has the balls to try and burn my house down so i'll just sit and laugh at him
- 2Real

Yeah I think you are pretty safe.

i have no idea how it works, just an old saying i try to keep alive.

but i'll take donuts for sure.
- Don'tForgetTocchet

I'm with ya there.

not now he's not. they are now rallying to him.
- Don'tForgetTocchet

I think he meant losing them to injuries.
The team is absolutely rally around Bryz and his play.

Its fabulous to watch him turn things around.
(frank)ers on NHL radio just 2 weeks ago were going on and on about how there could be no happy ending to the story with Bryz/Flyers, how bad the contract was, etc, etc.

I'm usually on the other side of this discussion. Trust me, I hate to see guys get nailed like this. I had the pleasure of feeling a few in my day. I just don't think there was more here than Kronwall seeing an opportunity to lay a good lick on a guy. It's unfortunate the head was involved, but Jake was leaning forward, seemingly unaware of the impending contact.
- rockychocbill

thing is i don't think many people actually disagree with you, jake put himself in a vulnerable position.. but the new rules supposedly were meant to take that hit out of the game. and they have suspended several players on it. we'll see if it holds true.

I think he meant losing them to injuries.
The team is absolutely rally around Bryz and his play.

Its fabulous to watch him turn things around.
(frank)ers on NHL radio just 2 weeks ago were going on and on about how there could be no happy ending to the story with Bryz/Flyers, how bad the contract was, etc, etc.
- Marc D

oh my how things have changed shows that those clowns on the radio are wrong

Absolutely Lindros was vulnerable. And what makes it completely different is the rules that are now in place. Kronwall didn't stand his ground. They even talked about in the post game of how Kronwall backs up for a few strides to show the player that he's retreating and then when he sees the player vulnerable, moves in for the hit. It was a predatory hit on a vulnerable player.
- MJL

Lindros had the puck on his stick. His head was down. Whatever. He was my favorite player at the time, but that one was on him.

In this instance Kronwall can do whatever he wants to "bait" Jake. maybe he was truly going to retreat and then realized that Jake wasn't gaining full control of the puck and decided to pinch. That is as reasonable an argument as baiting.

I'm usually on the other side of this discussion. Trust me, I hate to see guys get nailed like this. I had the pleasure of feeling a few in my day. I just don't think there was more here than Kronwall seeing an opportunity to lay a good lick on a guy. It's unfortunate the head was involved, but Jake was leaning forward, seemingly unaware of the impending contact.
- rockychocbill

so he was vulnerable yes?

I think he meant losing them to injuries.
The team is absolutely rally around Bryz and his play.

Its fabulous to watch him turn things around.
(frank)ers on NHL radio just 2 weeks ago were going on and on about how there could be no happy ending to the story with Bryz/Flyers, how bad the contract was, etc, etc.
- Marc D

ahh gotcha

Did you even listen? Shanahan says Letang knows he should expect to be hit, but that he can't expect to be hit in the head, thus the suspension. None of the qualifiers you discuss were even talked about by Shanahan.
- eayost

I hadn't seen, was Nystrom suspended for his hit on Letang? Dan Blysma was interviewed by Pierre Mcguire soon after the hit, and he had no problem with it. He said and I quote "Kris has to keep his head up, and not reach".

I think he meant losing them to injuries.
The team is absolutely rally around Bryz and his play.

Its fabulous to watch him turn things around.
(frank)ers on NHL radio just 2 weeks ago were going on and on about how there could be no happy ending to the story with Bryz/Flyers, how bad the contract was, etc, etc.
- Marc D

What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger. If Bryz can put all this behind him, he'll be better for it during all the years of his contract that he's here. I'm sure he's learned a lot this season about himself, and hopefully it makes him that much better.

I meant literally, with all the injuries...

Think about it...JVR, Jake, Jagr, Kimmo and Mesz... That's nuts.
- wolfhounds

sorry wolfsir i misunderstood you.

I think he meant losing them to injuries.
The team is absolutely rally around Bryz and his play.

Its fabulous to watch him turn things around.
(frank)ers on NHL radio just 2 weeks ago were going on and on about how there could be no happy ending to the story with Bryz/Flyers, how bad the contract was, etc, etc.
- Marc D

Yupper

I said 'Goal' on that Filpulla (sp?) shot in the 3rd...he floated left and Bryz was still on the other pipe, but Bryz pulled out that save. F'n sweet!

the bottom line is this: was the head targeted? most likely, was the primary point of contact the head? yes, did the player being hit move suddenly prior to or simultaneous to the hit? no, was the hit avoidable? yes, could the player have let up to lessen contact? yes, did the player let up? no.

those are indisputable facts that make that hit suspendable
- flyerscup2011

100% correct from my view point.

I'm usually on the other side of this discussion. Trust me, I hate to see guys get nailed like this. I had the pleasure of feeling a few in my day. I just don't think there was more here than Kronwall seeing an opportunity to lay a good lick on a guy. It's unfortunate the head was involved, but Jake was leaning forward, seemingly unaware of the impending contact.
- rockychocbill

I understand your side of it and NK's intent might have been to lay a good lick on him. But in todays NHL rules are in place to try and eliminate head shots. Shanahan has been quoted as saying no player should have to worry about his head being the principle point of contact. I guess well just agree to disagree.

I meant literally, with all the injuries...

Think about it...JVR, Jake, Jagr, Kimmo and Mesz... That's nuts.
- wolfhounds

It is crazy.
But they seem to go through this every year with the injuries.
I thought they lost Read tonight too when he went into the boards.

Luckily, they have a pretty deep team forward wise.
The rooks have to keep stepping up.
Wellwood looks pretty good in the last two games.

thing is i don't think many people actually disagree with you, jake put himself in a vulnerable position.. but the new rules supposedly were meant to take that hit out of the game. and they have suspended several players on it. we'll see if it holds true.
- Don'tForgetTocchet

Take hitting out of the game then. Period. Full stop. It's way too easy for this "type" of hit to occur.

sorry wolfsir i misunderstood you.
- Don'tForgetTocchet

No worries at all. 3 games in a row and, at least based upon the conversation tonight and the way he skated off the ice, it looks like Jake has a rock for a skull. So that's good...

Did the skater have the puck? Yes. Was the hitter's shoulder down? Yes. Was the hit primarily a hockey hit or intent to injure? Hockey hit.
- rockychocbill

The skater having or not having the puck. The hitter's shoulder being down. None of that is in question as to why it is an illegal hit. Intent to injure is debatable. By Rule 48 it's not a hockey hit. It is an illegal hit.

I'm usually on the other side of this discussion. Trust me, I hate to see guys get nailed like this. I had the pleasure of feeling a few in my day. I just don't think there was more here than Kronwall seeing an opportunity to lay a good lick on a guy. It's unfortunate the head was involved, but Jake was leaning forward, seemingly unaware of the impending contact.
- rockychocbill

What you have described in bold is the "old" standard.

Now, supposedly, there is also a responsibility on the hitter to avoid contact to the head of the targeted player if there is a reasonable expectation that the hitter had time and opportunity to do so. That was never the case before. Not on the Richards hit, the Cooke hit, or on any of the hits by Scott Stevens and the many who came before him.

The NHL has been telling us this all season. Now they have a chance to show us if they really mean it.

I hadn't seen, was Nystrom suspended for his hit on Letang? Dan Blysma was interviewed by Pierre Mcguire soon after the hit, and he had no problem with it. He said and I quote "Kris has to keep his head up, and be aware".
- PLindbergh31

I'm sure every coach wants their players to avoid putting themselves in situations like that. It doesn't mean a play isn't against the rules though even if it takes place. If the coaches and players want to change the rule back to the way it was, that's fine. But as it is right now, the rule exists and should be enforced until it doesn't exist.