James Tanner: Ekman-Larsson Injured On Dirty Hit A discussion of the hit on Larsson, the Yandle fight and the loss to the Blue Jackets.

Dirty hit. I see I'm not the only with a raging erection of dislike towards don cherry as well.

As a long-time Fan, I' m sensing that deterrence will become the focus in dealing with dangerous hits like the one on OEL, as you correctly point out that the current low number of suspended games as supplementary discipline is not having the desired effect. So, the League must make a joint statement along with the NHLPA that effective next season there will be a mandatory first offence suspension for dangerous hits of 10 or even more games; 2nd offence 20 games and third time, 40 games, etc.
That would be a good start.

As a long-time Fan, I' m sensing that deterrence will become the focus in dealing with dangerous hits like the one on OEL, as you correctly point out that the current low number of suspended games as supplementary discipline is not having the desired effect. So, the League must make a joint statement along with the NHLPA that effective next season there will be a mandatory first offence suspension for dangerous hits of 10 or even more games; 2nd offence 20 games and third time, 40 games, etc.
That would be a good start.
- haymac

Lol if we go by this there would be no one left! haha. I mean I do agree with you but yeah it would be like AHL matchups every night since so many players would be sitting. Lets just say the game is becoming faster then the safety precautions that are being set.

I hate to say it, but it was only a matter of time before some hack took OEL out of a game. On a night when Bissonnette was in civvies... coincidence? Had Doan been healthy this wasn't going to happen either.

What was frustrating, aside from OEL getting hurt, is the Coyotes outplayed the Jackets, but a couple of penalties (one for shooting the puck over the glass, the other for Smitty playing the puck in the trapezoid) a couple of rebounds right to the open man and its a 2-0 victory for CBJ. (acronym goes here)

I mean at one point the Yotes were outshooting them 11-1 in the 3rd.

Oel is the most underrated Dman in the league, that's a tough loss

I hate to say it, but it was only a matter of time before some hack took OEL out of a game. On a night when Bissonnette was in civvies... coincidence? Had Doan been healthy this wasn't going to happen either.

What was frustrating, aside from OEL getting hurt, is the Coyotes outplayed the Jackets, but a couple of penalties (one for shooting the puck over the glass, the other for Smitty playing the puck in the trapezoid) a couple of rebounds right to the open man and its a 2-0 victory for CBJ. (acronym goes here)

I mean at one point the Yotes were outshooting them 11-1 in the 3rd.
- Desert_Dog

Yeah, lets keep putting even more pussified rules in to keep the protectors/fighters out of the lineup/game. The league is turning into a joke, pretty much soccer.

As a long-time Fan, I' m sensing that deterrence will become the focus in dealing with dangerous hits like the one on OEL, as you correctly point out that the current low number of suspended games as supplementary discipline is not having the desired effect. So, the League must make a joint statement along with the NHLPA that effective next season there will be a mandatory first offence suspension for dangerous hits of 10 or even more games; 2nd offence 20 games and third time, 40 games, etc.
That would be a good start.
- haymac

I don't get the 1st offence, 2nd offence thing. A dirty hit that deems a suspension should happen whether it is a players 1st or 10th. The mentality of stepped punishment needs to go away. Penalize the hit, not the player. But we all know that the Players Union would never agree to it, so maybe having someone die on the ice (or get paralyzed) will be needed for change to happen.

I don't get the 1st offence, 2nd offence thing. A dirty hit that deems a suspension should happen whether it is a players 1st or 10th. The mentality of stepped punishment needs to go away. Penalize the hit, not the player. But we all know that the Players Union would never agree to it, so maybe having someone die on the ice (or get paralyzed) will be needed for change to happen.
- powerenforcer

Ironically, someone did get paralyzed on the ice but it was a direct result of allowing players to fight...not from disallowing them to fight.

Dirty hit. I see I'm not the only with a raging erection of dislike towards don cherry as well.
- Zmloste

Just for the record, I love Don Cherry. Sorry, but you misunderstood. This blog is 100% Pro Cherry.

I don't get the 1st offence, 2nd offence thing. A dirty hit that deems a suspension should happen whether it is a players 1st or 10th. The mentality of stepped punishment needs to go away. Penalize the hit, not the player. But we all know that the Players Union would never agree to it, so maybe having someone die on the ice (or get paralyzed) will be needed for change to happen.
- powerenforcer

It doesn't help when on ice officials seem to be hesitant to make a call on a hit like that nowadays. Just let the league "review" it. They used to call Match penalties for that kind of stuff. (Does that penalty even exist anymore?)

Then you have the review and a spin of the "how many games suspension" wheel, for like you said, a first or an umpteenth time offender.

I don't get the 1st offence, 2nd offence thing. A dirty hit that deems a suspension should happen whether it is a players 1st or 10th. The mentality of stepped punishment needs to go away. Penalize the hit, not the player. But we all know that the Players Union would never agree to it, so maybe having someone die on the ice (or get paralyzed) will be needed for change to happen.
- powerenforcer

I agree. Penalize the hit, not the player, not the injury.

It doesn't help when on ice officials seem to be hesitant to make a call on a hit like that nowadays. Just let the league "review" it. They used to call Match penalties for that kind of stuff. (Does that penalty even exist anymore?)

Then you have the review and a spin of the "how many games suspension" wheel, for like you said, a first or an umpteenth time offender.
- Desert_Dog

Yeah its a terrible system. I think as soon as guys start getting 20 games for any hit that's from behind though, they will stop happening, especially if its a star player. There really needs to stop being two sets of rules. Does anyone think Marchand would only have got five games if he kneed James Neal in the head?

This is getting ridiculous, when are we going to stop crying every-time a player gets hurt because he wants to turn and face to boards when someone is coming in to make a hit. If the guy wants to turn and face to boards instead of taking the hit properly like your taught growing up, then if they get hurt it looks good on them. We need to start making the puck carriers responsible for their actions as well. There have been to many times when a player is coming in to make the hit, the puck carrier turns last minute and now its a suspend-able offence. I don't agree, i think if you want to change the amount of injuries then start telling guys when they get hurt to stop turning away from the hit.

This is getting ridiculous, when are we going to stop crying every-time a player gets hurt because he wants to turn and face to boards when someone is coming in to make a hit. If the guy wants to turn and face to boards instead of taking the hit properly like your taught growing up, then if they get hurt it looks good on them. We need to start making the puck carriers responsible for their actions as well. There have been to many times when a player is coming in to make the hit, the puck carrier turns last minute and now its a suspend-able offence. I don't agree, i think if you want to change the amount of injuries then start telling guys when they get hurt to stop turning away from the hit.
- viperxt

Sounds like you've never played the game. The last thing I'd do when I see I'm going to get hit is "turn and face the boards".

Sounds like you've never played the game. The last thing I'd do when I see I'm going to get hit is "turn and face the boards".

- Desert_Dog

One of either you, or I, read his quote wrong. Because, to me at least, what he was saying is players need to stop turning to face the boards when they see a hit coming. He even says they teach you in minor hockey not to do that.

So, presuming I am right, I would suggest you try reading comprehension once in a while, and lay off the 's in the future.

One of either you, or I, read his quote wrong. Because, to me at least, what he was saying is players need to stop turning to face the boards when they see a hit coming. He even says they teach you in minor hockey not to do that.

So, presuming I am right, I would suggest you try reading comprehension once in a while, and lay off the 's in the future.


- IRON.MAIDEN

Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. If I read him correctly, he is stating players deliberately turn to face the boards to avoid getting hit.

Using his statement, do you think for one minute, someone is deliberately going to risk serious injury on the assumption that turning their back is going to avert the oncoming hit? That's some seriously flawed logic right there.

Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. If I read him correctly, he is stating players deliberately turn to face the boards to avoid getting hit.

Using his statement, do you think for one minute, someone is deliberately going to risk serious injury on the assumption that turning their back is going to avert the oncoming hit? That's some seriously flawed logic right there.
- Desert_Dog

I've seen players do it quite regularly, so yes, I do believe players do it deliberately.

It is the belief that if you turn your back to the play, that you can't be hit. Players are finding out at an alarming rate that turning your back to the play doesn't make the pokearoo go away.

Sounds like you've never played the game. The last thing I'd do when I see I'm going to get hit is "turn and face the boards".

- Desert_Dog

Players are turning to try and get away from the hit and keep the puck, or turning thinking they wont get hit, instead of taking the hit from the side and tight to the boards like you are taught growing up. That is what i'm saying. It sucks in this case because i do believe that the Columbus player should have been able to avoid OEL but didn't. I'm just saying it happens a lot now where players are turning away from a hit, making it a worse hit and the guys coming in to make the hit don't have time to avoid it.

This is getting ridiculous, when are we going to stop crying every-time a player gets hurt because he wants to turn and face to boards when someone is coming in to make a hit. If the guy wants to turn and face to boards instead of taking the hit properly like your taught growing up, then if they get hurt it looks good on them. We need to start making the puck carriers responsible for their actions as well. There have been to many times when a player is coming in to make the hit, the puck carrier turns last minute and now its a suspend-able offence. I don't agree, i think if you want to change the amount of injuries then start telling guys when they get hurt to stop turning away from the hit.
- viperxt

When it happens to kessel are you not going to be upset?

When it happens to kessel are you not going to be upset?
- twotoekenn

i think if it happens to any player people are going to be upset but i think its time to change how the player thinks with the puck instead of putting all the responsibility on the guy making the hit, it's a two way street in my opinion. With that said though if it's Kessel who turns into the boards and gets plastered because of it, and the player making the hit could not avoid him, well he shouldn't be turning away from the hit like that, it too dangerous.

This is getting ridiculous, when are we going to stop crying every-time a player gets hurt because he wants to turn and face to boards when someone is coming in to make a hit. If the guy wants to turn and face to boards instead of taking the hit properly like your taught growing up, then if they get hurt it looks good on them. We need to start making the puck carriers responsible for their actions as well. There have been to many times when a player is coming in to make the hit, the puck carrier turns last minute and now its a suspend-able offence. I don't agree, i think if you want to change the amount of injuries then start telling guys when they get hurt to stop turning away from the hit.
- viperxt

Do you think OEL did this before this hit? Doesn't look to be the case if you have watched the video of it. NHL even says so on their explanation of the suspension.

IF a player sees a guy coming and then turns his back just to either draw a penalty or make the guy not hit him, then I do tend to agree with you. However, the hitters have to be aware that this might happen and do their best not to put their team in a bad spot (Example:getting a penalty or getting themselves suspended). Not to mention doing their best not to injure a fellow hockey player. My two cents.

Edit: I think the suspension was pretty much right. Not too long but not too lenient. Rare for them to get one right...

Oel is the most underrated Dman in the league, that's a tough loss
- Danformo

He's far from underrated. The league knows who he is. Everyone knows he a stud.

Hope hes 100%. Kids a treat.

Sounds like you've never played the game. The last thing I'd do when I see I'm going to get hit is "turn and face the boards".

- Desert_Dog

Players do indeed purposely turn theyre backs to other guys. Its a way to draw penalties. And sometimes they get hurt. I dont think guys are trying to get themselves hurt. But this goes back to putting some onus on the players. I however didnt see the hit on OEL. But it is a thing that his happening alot.

Do you think OEL did this before this hit? Doesn't look to be the case if you have watched the video of it. NHL even says so on their explanation of the suspension.

IF a player sees a guy coming and then turns his back just to either draw a penalty or make the guy not hit him, then I do tend to agree with you. However, the hitters have to be aware that this might happen and do their best not to put their team in a bad spot (Example:getting a penalty or getting themselves suspended). Not to mention doing their best not to injure a fellow hockey player. My two cents.

Edit: I think the suspension was pretty much right. Not too long but not too lenient. Rare for them to get one right...
- Howling_Coyote

I think some of the point here is, All of these suspensions are to short. Not a single player will adjust what theyre doing if they get a 3 game suspension. For me im caught in a weird spot. Because I want players to be more responsible. But I still want hard hits. Legal ones though. But I also want bigger suspensions for any hit deemed illegal. But adding this will decrease physicality in the league. You can see it in some players who have been suspended that they dont hit as much. Or as hard.