Right. It's still a law. And a law that's unenforced is meaningless. It's a federal crime to be in possession of marijuana and there are a number of states that legalized it. The feds could come in and arrest all those people at any time but they don't enforce the law making it essentially invalid.
- Kcannon98

You can't enforce what's not happening. Murder in a small town never happens... Would that make it ok then if someone committed the first infraction in 75 years? Of course not, because it's still illegal under the law. That's the point we're trying to get through to you... Just because it's not a regular occurrence doesn't make it ok!

Do you think it was charging?
simple question
- braidan

Based on the history of the DOPS and watching hockey for 30 years, no it wasn't charging. He didn't launch himself into the player, he didn't make the head the primary point of contact, and he glided into the player from the top of the circle to the goal line.

Based on everything I've seen and DOPS history, that is not charging.

Based on every DOPS decision in the past, it wasn't charging making your "distance traveled" thing irrelevant.

And again, I'm NOT saying that DOPS won't suspend. I believe they will suspend. But that's mainly because of the team with the injured player and social pressure.
- Kcannon98

what is charging if that wasnt?

You can't enforce what's not happening. Murder in a small town never happens... Would that make it ok then if someone committed the first infraction in 75 years? Of course not, because it's still illegal under the law. That's the point we're trying to get through to you... Just because it's not a regular occurrence doesn't make it ok!
- Darksyde

So players don't "travel distance" to make a hit?

what is charging if that wasnt?
- braidan

Based on DOPS decisions in the past, when a player leaves the ice (launches) and/or makes primary contact with the head.

the people that think this hit is bad are the same liberals that are scared of cow farts
- 2Real

I was wondering how long this comment would take. I’m not even close to liberal. As I said earlier it is charging. If no injury it would
Likely have been a penalty and nothing else.

Please stop deflecting and tell me what YOUR definition of charging is.
How would you explain it to someone just starting to watch hockey

So players don't "travel distance" to make a hit?
- Kcannon98

Ok, let's compare it to traveling in basketball then...a couple steps is fine, running up half the court without dribbling is a foul. Does that make it easier for you to understand, you incredibly dense troglodyte?

what is charging if that wasnt?
- braidan

And just one last time, I'm NOT saying that DOPS won't suspend MS. They most likely will. But that will be because of the social mob (just like the criminal flags they flew for a few days in the bubble) and not because of any rule.

I believe MS will get suspended.

When was the last player to be suspended for "distance traveled?"

Hint - It's never happened.
- Kcannon98

Read further...if the check results in injury.

42.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates OR jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean that the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled (length of the ice is more than enough), shall violently check and opponent in any manner. A "charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

Please stop deflecting and tell me what YOUR definition of charging is.
How would you explain it to someone just starting to watch hockey
- braidan

This is the last time. When someone launches into another player (making the head the primary point of contact), or accelerates through a check. Now, for the person who's never watched hockey before, I learned that from watching DOPS decisions and that's what the people who enforce the rules tell me charging is. And if you (person who never watched hockey before) want to learn more about charging, you should watch every charging decision ever made by the DOPS and they will explain it perfectly to you.

This is the last time. When someone launches into another player (making the head the primary point of contact), or accelerates through a check. Now, for the person who's never watched hockey before, I learned that from watching DOPS decisions and that's what the people who enforce the rules tell me charging is. And if you (person who never watched hockey before) want to learn more about charging, you should watch every charging decision ever made by the DOPS and they will explain it perfectly to you.
- Kcannon98

Read the actual rule above.
I think the play checks off a number of boxes.
But hey it walks like a duck quacks like a duck but we dont have ducks around here....must be a cat

42.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates OR jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean that the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled (length of the ice is more than enough), shall violently check and opponent in any manner. A "charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.
- braidan

Players "travel distance" to make checks "violently" every game.

What is "distance" and what is "violent." This is why this rule is never enforced. With wording like that, it can't be enforced because if it is, every single check made is open to a charging call. Violent to you and violent to me are two different things (obviously).

This is the last time. When someone launches into another player (making the head the primary point of contact), or accelerates through a check. Now, for the person who's never watched hockey before, I learned that from watching DOPS decisions and that's what the people who enforce the rules tell me charging is. And if you (person who never watched hockey before) want to learn more about charging, you should watch every charging decision ever made by the DOPS and they will explain it perfectly to you.
- Kcannon98

Charging and hit to the head are 2 seperate rules

Read the actual rule above.
I think the play checks off a number of boxes.
But hey it walks like a duck quacks like a duck but we dont have ducks around here....must be a cat
- braidan

What boxes does it check off? Because now you seem to be changing your argument. Before it was only "distance traveled." Now it's "a number of boxes." Did he launch himself into the player? Did he target (or make primary contact) the head?

Charging and hit to the head are 2 seperate rules
- braidan

They are. But almost every DOPS decision regarding charging having something to do with head contact.

Players "travel distance" to make checks "violently" every game.

What is "distance" and what is "violent." This is why this rule is never enforced. With wording like that, it can't be enforced because if it is, every single check made is open to a charging call. Violent to you and violent to me are two different things (obviously).
- Kcannon98

OK I give up.

Stevens would be suspended today for half the hits he did back in the 90's.

You see there's a thing called science and it's shown us what happens to the brain when people (yes, players are people) get hit that way.

Maybe you have no compassion for people? You think it's ok for players to be carried off the ice on stretchers and have long-lasting brain problems? For the sake of a sport?
- Nasty_Duck

Hey Nasty,

Some people will just never get it.

I think there's a lot of CTE affected comments in this thread. Deliciously ironic.....

Donate whatever grey matter that lost it's neuro-plasticity to science now you mouth breathers living in the past.

This is the last time. When someone launches into another player (making the head the primary point of contact), or accelerates through a check. Now, for the person who's never watched hockey before, I learned that from watching DOPS decisions and that's what the people who enforce the rules tell me charging is. And if you (person who never watched hockey before) want to learn more about charging, you should watch every charging decision ever made by the DOPS and they will explain it perfectly to you.
- Kcannon98

This is and never was called charging. Those were for hits to the head moron.

OK I give up.
- braidan

Good. As a "referee" you should really brush up on previous DOPS decisions. They really help when trying to figure out what's legal and what isn't.

What boxes does it check off? Because now you seem to be changing your argument. Before it was only "distance traveled." Now it's "a number of boxes." Did he launch himself into the player? Did he target (or make primary contact) the head?
- Kcannon98

42.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates OR jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.
This box is checked

Charging shall mean that the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled (length of the ice is more than enough), shall violently check and opponent in any manner.
Hope you saw this part

A "charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.
OPen ice it is

Good. As a "referee" you should really brush up on previous DOPS decisions. They really help when trying to figure out what's legal and what isn't.
- Kcannon98

you may not have resorted directly to name calling but your arrogance and the way you ignore what others are saying for the sake of your narrative still make you a giant douche.

OK I give up.
- braidan

I don't even get how you did to last that long... He's trolling you.

Good. As a "referee" you should really brush up on previous DOPS decisions. They really help when trying to figure out what's legal and what isn't.
- Kcannon98

Do you also not understand the difference between a moderator on a hockey website and an NHL referee?