Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Evening Line

“It’s been an emotional day. I saw the video for the first time this morning. You see the hit, I’ve got a fractured vertebrae, I’m in hospital and I thought the league would do something, a little something. I’m not talking a big number, I don’t know, one game, two games, three games…whatever, but something to show that it’s not right.”

-Max Pacioretty of the Montreal Canadiens.  More at TSN.

added 11:27pm, More on this topic from Bob McKenzie at TSN.

Filed in: NHL Teams, Montreal Canadiens, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: max+pacioretty, max+pacioretty

Comments

Avatar

I really like to think that Chara didn’t actually have any ill intent, but it’s got to be hard, if you’re Pacioretty, to look at it and hear Chara’s comments, which were rather…stoic.  A more heart-felt apology would have been nice.  But I don’t know, maybe that’s just not in Chara’s nature.

At first I was thinking that no penalty was appropriate, because for something of this magnitude the league has to say that A) it’s an accident, or B) it’s malicious and deserves 10 games or more, and that a couple games is just lip-service.  But Pacioretty makes a good case for a small suspension for Chara—making it clear that even if it was an accident, the league can make it clear to its players that they need to be more aware on the ice, need to watch themselves and be careful not to create any more incidents like this one.  So maybe there would have been a point to a small suspension.

Posted by nosferatu from Albany, NY on 03/10/11 at 03:08 AM ET

Avatar

Wow.  Nice job by Bob McKenzie picking up a phone and talking to Pacioretty.  It was pretty compelling testimony. 

Can someone explain to me why the NHL head office never talks to the victim before deciding on a suspension.  They spoke with Chara.  And made a decision.

Posted by CallMeJerry on 03/10/11 at 03:25 AM ET

Avatar

coleen campbell’s son play for boston. ‘nough said. mike murphy is just on of his puppet

Posted by jay from edmonton on 03/10/11 at 04:47 AM ET

Primis's avatar

Can someone explain to me why the NHL head office never talks to the victim before deciding on a suspension.  They spoke with Chara.  And made a decision.

Posted by CallMeJerry on 03/10/11 at 12:25 AM ET

Because you don’t discipline based on an injury?  You discipline based on the rules?  Maybe that’s why?

Posted by Primis on 03/10/11 at 10:37 AM ET

Avatar

Because you don’t discipline based on an injury?  You discipline based on the rules?  Maybe that’s why?

Posted by Primis on 03/10/11 at 07:37 AM ET

Unfortunately, we all know that that is not how it works. In recent history, the bigger injury, the longer the suspension. The League has been wildly inconsistent.

Posted by thatbirdguy on 03/10/11 at 11:14 AM ET

WingMan's avatar

I think the league got it right.  To say no message was sent saying it was wrong is not true.  Chara got 5 mins and a game.  Does that not say that the play was deemed inappropriate.  The real call was a 2 min interference penalty, and I thought the refs on the ice took it further and called the max penalty (within reason) on that play.

I agree with Primis, that suspensions should have nothing to do with the injury situation - and it seems that is how Murphy does it, but Campbell has even stated he takes it into consideration…  personally, I think Campbell sucks at his job and the inconsistencies are mind boggling.  Perhaps time for someone new to take over - they won’t be perfect, but be they will be better.

In the end though, despite the unfortunate result to Pacioretty, it was the proper call imo.

Posted by WingMan from The Q C on 03/10/11 at 12:27 PM ET

redxblack's avatar

Chara broke Pacioretty’s neck! There’s no way that was an accidental hit. He broke his neck and the league says “boys will be boys.” It’s an embarrassment more fitting in the KHL.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 03/10/11 at 12:44 PM ET

Avatar

Primis, I agree that they should discipline based on rules.  They should have talked to MaxPac to get his version of events - not to talk about his injuries.  From MaxPac’s point of view, Chara meant to ram him into the turnbuckle.  We all know what Chara told the NHL.  It’s like an insurance company assigning fault based on 1 driver in a 2 car accident.

Posted by CallMeJerry on 03/10/11 at 01:59 PM ET

awould's avatar

Chara broke Pacioretty’s neck! There’s no way that was an accidental hit.

Nobody anywhere ever is saying that it was an accidental hit. He hit him on purpose. And if it were 20 feet further along the boards, he’d have served a 2 minute interference call and nothing would’ve happened.  The extent of the injury is not relevant to deciding if there was intent to injure.

We all cheer for those big hits that send a player over the boards and into a team’s bench, which could easily lead to a serious injury for the player or any of the guys on the bench. So, if you’ve ever cheered for that, then you can’t complain about this. It’s not like he boarded him into the bench, Lemieux/Draper style.

Posted by awould on 03/10/11 at 02:55 PM ET

Avatar

Can someone explain to me why the NHL head office never talks to the victim before deciding on a suspension.

Because the victim has no insight into Chara’s intent.

Chara broke Pacioretty’s neck! There’s no way that was an accidental hit.

Right, because there’s never been an accidental broken bone before, right?

Unfortunately, we all know that that is not how it works. In recent history, the bigger injury, the longer the suspension.

Which explains the 0 games for Cooke’s hit on Savard exactly how?

From MaxPac’s point of view, Chara meant to ram him into the turnbuckle.

So, how does he know what Chara’s intent was?  Unless he can testify that Chara whispered “Enjoy your broken face and neck” then there’s nothing he can add.

Or does the fact that he says “I got hit, saw the stancion and thought ‘oh shit’” somehow prove that a suspension should be imposed?

Why don’t we interview Montreal fans when determining whether he should be suspended or not?

Why not interview the victim of a headshot when determining a suspension?  If he can’t remember the hit does that mean automatic suspension or automatic non-suspsension?

The victim has zero insight into what was going on in the mind of the “perp”.

He hit him on purpose.

Well, he obviously meant to hit him, the question is whether he meant to injure him.

Posted by Garth on 03/10/11 at 03:18 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com

 

image

image