**BREAKING NEWS** - No Fine Or Suspension For Chara

[mooger_35]

Did anyone really think he would be suspended?

NHL star = 0 games every time (unless you are Chris Pronger and that is only because of the sheer volume of incidents)

Personally I was on the fence whether or not it was actually worthy of a suspension so you have to know that if there was any question the NHL was going to do nothing.

 

[TiLoBrown]

I'm not going to get into cooke,campbell or any conspiracy stuff.I'm just going off facts and experience and as far as I'm conscerned players are responsable for knowing their surroundings and when to use restraint.You don't lay into A guy when certain dangers are involved.And in the final seconds of a period....

Yea, I was just skimming through all 7 pages, but someone compared this to a Cooke hit and I just dont see it. BTW, its pretty bad that I have to say "A" Cooke hit instead of "THE" Cooke hit.

During the game I love seeing Parise's drive but I can tell you this I would hate to see Zach get drilled on A dump in at the end of the second period.

I'd hate to see it, but if he got taken out by someone thats playing balls out hockey until the whistle blows then I'm fine with it. I'd hate the guy, but I wouldnt call it dirty.

 

[Dacks]

The Cooke and Chara hits are definitely comparable, people. They were similar in the following respects:

Both were slightly late hits on a player who had already gotten rid of the puck. Both were technically legal, according to the rulebook. (In Chara's case, I know it was late, but there is no rule regarding hitting people into the partition.) Both resulted in a very serious injury.

However, they differ in the following respects:

It's fairly obvious Cooke meant to hit Savard in the head. It's less obvious whether Chara meant to shove Max face-first into the partition. (I think he did, considering the history between the teams and those two players in particular, the timing of the play, and the head-on angle.) Cooke has a history and reputation for wanting to hurt players; not so with Chara.

 

[TiLoBrown]

Are we talking about Cooke's knee on knee hit or the one he actually got suspended for? Doesn't really matter, I respectfully disagree with you.

 

[beantownmaniac]

It's about time the league made a respectable decision!!!

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Yea, I was just skimming through all 7 pages, but someone compared this to a Cooke hit and I just dont see it. BTW, its pretty bad that I have to say "A" Cooke hit instead of "THE" Cooke hit.



I'd hate to see it, but if he got taken out by someone thats playing balls out hockey until the whistle blows then I'm fine with it. I'd hate the guy, but I wouldnt call it dirty.

To be honest the time it happened was just part of my big picture up 4-0 at the end of the second I expect the habs to want to dump the puck and get to the locker. The lack of restraint while A player was in A dangerous position is the most disturbing part of it for me.Playing balls out hockey is all fine and good but you have to be responsable for your surroundings and the position players are before you throw a big hit.

 

[TiLoBrown]

To me, that reads as a player shouldnt hit near the boards. I know thats what what you're saying, but thats how it reads to me.

 

[sTyLnK]

Chara said he didn't intend to hit him, but he did anyways. That doesn't excuse his actions. The puck was so far past the player and he still hit him in a vulnerable position. I think it's a complete joke that he wasn't suspended at least a few games. But he's a star player so he wasn't. JMO.

 

[ELYEAH82]

Are we talking about Cooke's knee on knee hit or the one he actually got suspended for? Doesn't really matter, I respectfully disagree with you.

Neither, we are talking about hit on Savard.

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

I like this Cooke hit:

 

[TheRobotDevil]

To me, that reads as a player shouldnt hit near the boards. I know thats what what you're saying, but thats how it reads to me.

by dead play I meant the puck was already played and the hit was late pac didn't have the puck hence the interference call.And I'm not saying a player shouldn't hit another player by the boards but theirs a certain amount of judgement and responsibility involved when play is involved in certain areas.Like boarding where players are held accountable for restraint.Chara may or may not have intended to injure Pac but there are several things that he should have considered during the process that should have avoided the whole incident.Very poor judgement and lack of responsibility on both Chara and the way the league dealt with it.

 

[SLY]

Who the fuck is Character? lol

 

[IPostedWhat]

What I want to know is how did the guy who's only been a fan of the team for a few months get to be the spokeperson for the Bruins on the board?

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Who the fuck is Character? lol

Apparently my phones name for Chara

 

[SLY]

I am not even going to pay any mind to that post, I guarantee I have been a Bruins fan longer than 99.99% of the Penguins fan base.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

What I want to know is how did the guy who's only been a fan of the team for a few months get to be the spokeperson for the Bruins on the board?

He wasn't paying attention when they were electing a chief.

 

[Darkstone42]

Chara didn't deserve a suspension. He finished his check in what proved to be a bad spot, but how many times do we see this exact same type of hit in that same location not turn out badly at all? On the same night as the Chara hit, Ben Lovejoy hit a guy into the scansion with no consequence. I don't think serious injuries like this happen often enough on this sort of play for players to really keep it in the forefront of their minds while they're playing.

We can sit here and say that he was irresponsible for hitting a guy in that spot because hindsight is 20/20 and we're not making decisions at that speed. When I played hockey and hit a guy along the benches, the though never occurred to me that they could get seriously injured on the scansion. It's just not something you see enough. How irresponsible can we say Chara is when most players in the league probably never think about the consequences of where along the boards they're hitting someone?

I personally think it's an unreasonable expectation.

The league on the other hand, has records and documentation of all these sorts of plays throughout the history of the league and the resources to do something about it, like, for example, changing the engineering of the rink in some way to make it safer. They haven't done that, and are therefore, in my mind, the ones who were irresponsible. Suspending Chara would be using him as their own personal scapegoat.

So in my mind, step one for the league is complete by absolving the player of blame here. It remains to be seen if they will engage in step 2: doing something about the engineering of the rinks to make it safer for the players without detracting from the game itself.

EDIT: I would also like to point out a significant difference between this hit and boarding: the NHL hasn't specified to players that they can't do this. Players have been told that checking guys in the back near the glass is dangerous and not allowed, and they have a nice obvious giveaway in the form of the numbers on the back of the other guy's jersey. That's like a stop sign. That doesn't exist for hitting guys near the scansion. There is no league mandate, no rule in place, no automatic stop sign that should be going up in players' minds.

 

[elocomotive]

I am not even going to pay any mind to that post, I guarantee I have been a Bruins fan longer than 99.99% of the Penguins fan base.

Maybe, but I'll guarantee 99.99% of them weren't Blue Jackets fans at mid-season.

 

[IPostedWhat]

I am not even going to pay any mind to that post, I guarantee I have been a Bruins fan longer than 99.99% of the Penguins fan base.

Maybe, but I'll guarantee 99.99% of them weren't Blue Jackets fans at mid-season.

 

[SLY]

Why so serious...