2013 Shanaban thread

[BOSSMANPC]

Nice Pic IPW.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

No additional discipline for Wilson.

 

[Darkstone42]

No additional discipline for Wilson.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

I can't watch the video but supposedly it is all explained in there and actually pretty reasonable.

 

[Cobiemonster]

lol Shanny is awful

 

[dash]

Appears that Xmas came early for Tom Wilson...

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

NHL VideoCenter


....interesting

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

lol Shanny is awful

He just kept the wheel that Campbell used. Nothing has changed.

 

[esls79]

Using the fact that Schenn turned at the last minute to excuse the act is preposterous. Maybe even blasphemous or something like that. (I haven't seen the video yet, but I'm guessing that is the only way he could get off the hook on this)

It's like saying I was in the process of an armed robbery at a liquor store and the clerk saw me approaching the front door, ski mask on and gun in hand, and the clerk went to lock the door, but couldn't get there quite in time - I violently swing the door open and it knocks the clerk out cold. Then I just grab the entire cash register and a fifth of Windsor and make my getaway on my three speed Huffy.

So a few blocks later I get nabbed by the fuzz as it's rather difficult to ride a bike while trying to balance a full cash register on the handle bars while swigging Windsor at the same time.

Anyways, the clerk wants to sue me for his medical bills and lost wages from the door hitting him - is my defense the clerk shouldn't have ran for the door at the last second legit? It doesn't matter that I was already involved in something illegal (armed robbery in my case, charging in Wilson's case)? If I wasn't already doing something illegal, then the whole incident wouldn't have happened, correct? Or is my logic flawed?

 

[awaz]

Mm.. OK then

Video watched. Essentially, since schenn didn't have the puck when Wilson started to line him up, there's no way he was targeting him from the blue line. Because nobody ever hits anybody the doesn't have the puck in a board battle. Plus he said he didn't target him during his hearing. So it must be true.

Bonjour shanny.

 

[dash]

Then I just grab the entire cash register and a fifth of Windsor and make my getaway on my three speed Huffy

Henry Gondorff says always drink gin with a mark, kid.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Using the fact that Schenn turned at the last minute to excuse the act is preposterous. Maybe even blasphemous or something like that. (I haven't seen the video yet, but I'm guessing that is the only way he could get off the hook on this)

It's like saying I was in the process of an armed robbery at a liquor store and the clerk saw me approaching the front door, ski mask on and gun in hand, and the clerk went to lock the door, but couldn't get there quite in time - I violently swing the door open and it knocks the clerk out cold. Then I just grab the entire cash register and a fifth of Windsor and make my getaway on my three speed Huffy.

So a few blocks later I get nabbed by the fuzz as it's rather difficult to ride a bike while trying to balance a full cash register on the handle bars while swigging Windsor at the same time.

Anyways, the clerk wants to sue me for his medical bills and lost wages from the door hitting him - is my defense the clerk shouldn't have ran for the door at the last second legit? It doesn't matter that I was already involved in something illegal (armed robbery in my case, charging in Wilson's case)? If I wasn't already doing something illegal, then the whole incident wouldn't have happened, correct? Or is my logic flawed?

It wasn't the only reason. The video is still pretty interesting. I would watch it.

 

[Vadered]

It wasn't the only reason. The video is still pretty interesting. I would watch it.

It's an interesting dissection of a typical NHL forechecking scheme.

Basically what Shanahan says is that it's not suspendable for boarding because Schenn turned. I'm okay with this - if Schenn doesn't turn, he doesn't go head first into the boards. Makes sense.

He also says it's not charging because while he skated in from the blue line, the Flyers didn't have the puck 'till he was at the faceoff circle and he didn't come in the whole way with the intent to drill Schenn. This part is bullshit. I don't care if a guy comes in at mach 5 and nails somebody because he wants to hit them or he's just going super fast and an opportunity presents itself. You have to know how fast you are going - the league penalizes you if you nail a guy with your stick even if it's intentional, and there's no way it's more difficult to keep your speed down than it is your stick. The intent is irrelevant. The outcome is that Wilson comes in way too fast to safely check an opponent - that might have hurt Schenn even if he'd not turned the wrong way. He's coming in reckless and while Schenn turning exacerbated the situation, it sure as hell wasn't the primary cause.

 

[esls79]

Now he's rewriting the rules

Rule 42 - Charging

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

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.

A minor, major or a major and a game misconduct shall be imposed on a player who charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease.

A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

42.2 Minor Penalty - The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a minor penalty, based on the degree of violence of the check, to a player guilty of charging an opponent.

42.3 Major Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a major penalty, based on the degree of violence of the check, to a player guilty of charging an opponent (see 42.5).

42.4 Match Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by charging.

42.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is imposed under this rule for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed.

42.6 Fines and Suspensions – When a major penalty and a game misconduct is assessed for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall be imposed.

If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28).

 

[puckhead]

Brown being a cheap piece of shit. big surprise.

 

[IPostedWhat]

I don't know man, that angle also suggests the possibility that Hertl is trying to trip Brown?

 

[Vadered]

I don't know man, that angle also suggests the possibility that Hertl is trying to trip Brown?

That's what I saw at first too. Hard to tell with a still like that; need to see it in motion.

 

[IPostedWhat]

That's what I saw at first too. Hard to tell with a still like that; need to see it in motion.

 

[IPostedWhat]

To me it looks like Brown goes to hit him, and then bails at the last second. Meanwhile, Hertl looks like he's attempting to brace for impact, but he also throws his leg out to trip him.

 

[Cobiemonster]

To me it looks like Brown goes to hit him, and then bails at the last second. Meanwhile, Hertl looks like he's attempting to brace for impact, but he also throws his leg out to trip him.

Agreed