Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Matt Cooke Hit On Fedor Tyutin Tonight

14:42 Pittsburgh Matt Cooke: 5 minutes, charging
14:42 Pittsburgh Matt Cooke: 5 minutes, fighting
14:42 Columbus Derick Brassard: 5 minutes, fighting
14:42 Columbus Derick Brassard: 2 minutes, roughing

Filed in: NHL Teams, Columbus Blue Jackets, Pittsburgh Penguins, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: fedor+tyutin, matt+cooke

Comments

« Previous        < 1 2     

Hank1974's avatar

Is it groundhog day?
Next to Colin Campbell and his set of cotton filled testicles, Matt Cooke could be the biggest cancer in the NHL.

But why would he change anything? Look at his resume. He basically ended Savard’s career. Two nights ago he nearly destroyed Ovie’s knee and last night he made one of the most dangerous plays in sports. And how many games has he served for all 3 infractions? ZERO.

Well done NHL. In 2-3 years, when all of the top stars are on the DL with concussions, or only playing to 50% of their ability because of a head-injury, you’ll have nobody else to blame.

But hey, don’t get down about that. Afterall, when you’re trying to sell your product to ESPN you can tell them about how exciting the next Pens-Caps game will be when such superstars as Brooks Laich and Matt Cooke are playing on the top line.

Posted by Hank1974 on 02/09/11 at 11:26 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Matt Cooke like other hockey players are told to finish their check.  Tyutin had the puck and when Cooke was coming in, he was square with the guy.  At the end of the play Tyutin turned towards the boards.  Cooke may have been able to stop, but he might not have.  Without a doubt Cooke let up on the hit… it could have been a lot lot worse.

Ridiculous.  Nowhere was Cooke square with him.  Tyutin didn’t turn at the end of the play. He had his back to Cooke from the blue line.  He had his shoulders move when he turned two seconds before the hit to see the forechecking pressure, but he had his back to him the entire way.  This is not an instance of an unfortunate happenstance where a guy turns his back at the last second, this is Tyutin playing the puck, and Cooke charging the numbers.

It’s a good thing that Cooke let up on the dirty, cheap hit he laid on Tyutin that he never should have laid in the first place though.  It could have been a lot worse, so somehow we should all feel safer knowing that Matt Cooke is only going to hit you 95% dirty instead of the entire 100%.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 02/09/11 at 11:43 AM ET

Kate from Pa.-made in Detroit's avatar

it could have been a lot lot worse.

Posted by gretzky_to_lemieux on 02/09/11 at 08:23 AM ET

And that’s the best you can offer?  Marc Savard=a lot lot worse.

If Cooke had been dealt with properly we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now.

Lets Go Red Wings!!!!!

Posted by Kate from Pa.-made in Detroit on 02/09/11 at 12:02 PM ET

Avatar

The alternative to hitting a guy in the numbers is getting to the puck first. You do not have the right to hit a guy square in the back because he has better position on you. Should defenseman now skate backwards to retrive a puck so that their back is not exposed?

Why even try to defend a play like this is beyond me.  Checking used to be about seperating the man from the puck, now it is just about smashing prone players and “follow through”.  If the league cracked down on the idea that you don’t have a good three seconds to deliver a hit after a player releases the puck, this may happen less often.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 02/09/11 at 01:27 PM ET

awould's avatar

Cooke is the very definition of a dirty player.  I think if it were tallied up, the guy has as many or more cheapshot hits like that than just about anybody in the league. The trend is evident and obvious yet all his defenders love to parse each individual hit in a lame effort to act like each one isn’t SO bad. Talk about missing the forest for the trees.

Posted by awould on 02/09/11 at 02:11 PM ET

SolidTG7's avatar

Seems to me the better play for him was to time it so he hit the defenseman after he gets the puck and makes a turn.  He can still throw a massive check but it would be shoulder to shoulder instead of from behind.

Anyone who thinks this was the only possible result of the play is delusional.

Posted by SolidTG7 on 02/09/11 at 02:49 PM ET

Avatar

http://ehfactor.blogspot.com/2011/02/i-have-confession-regarding-matt-cooke.html

s/t to wyshynski’s twitter feed.

This article’s complete Boudreau logic. Dur he was clean when he played for mai team!!!1 Please. The only thing I knew about Cooke when he was on Vancouver was that he was that guy who knees people.

On topic, while Cooke should have already been suspended for trying to take out Ovechkin’s knee the other day, discipline for this boarding play doesn’t sit nearly as well with me.

Tyutin assesses the situation and chooses to put himself in a position where his opponent’s only options are to board him or let him maintain the puck. To me that’s like putting your face in the ice in the crease and expecting the other guy not to shoot the puck.

Posted by StevieSteve on 02/09/11 at 03:16 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Why do those tools on Versus actually like Cooke?

what logo is on his jersey?

wow, this thread got long.  but there’s something I have to respond to that was in one of the first few responses.

He looked over his shoulder 2 seconds before the hit and saw it coming, and still turned into the boards.

these players cover a lot of ground in 2-3 seconds.  he looked over his shoulder while he was a few feet from the faceoff dot.  he then went and got the puck which was RIGHT AT THE BOARDS.  how can you play a puck that is at the boards, without facing the boards?

and he never TURNED.  he was skating toward the corner, stopped and played the puck.  do you see him skating in backwards toward the corner, then turning around to play the puck?  no.  that would, of course, be idiotic.

it astounds me how gigantic homers like you can defend crap like this.  if it took TWO SECONDS and DOZENS OF FEET OF SKATING for Cooke to get to him to hit him, that was plenty of time for Cooke to decide NOT to crush him into the glass from behind.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 03:20 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

he gets hit as much as he dishes it out, except the refs never call penalties on the other players.  Case in point—> dirty play

if he gets hit as much as he dishes it out, why are there multiple examples of his (at the very least borderline) hits in the past week, but you had to go back over a year to find one of HIM getting hit?

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 03:56 PM ET

Nate A's avatar

he then went and got the puck which was RIGHT AT THE BOARDS.  how can you play a puck that is at the boards, without facing the boards?

It’s Tyutin’s fault for being a lefty and forced to backhand that puck.

Sarcasm aside,  you’re right. Tyutin had little choice but to face the boards to play that puck on the backhand. He didn’t “turn away from the hit a the last second.” A righty could have maybe kept momentum to play the puck and been in position to dodge the hit or take it with the shoulder.  Not possible for a lefty.

Vagabond Jim’s link up there has a good animated gif of the play.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 02/09/11 at 04:00 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

And, the reply clearly shows him leaving his feet before any contact is made.

it’s astounding to me how often people see something that isn’t there.

here is the moment contact is made.  where are his feet?  ON THE ICE.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 04:01 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

att Cooke like other hockey players are told to finish their check. 

they’re also told to be responsible and not check other players in the back.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 04:07 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Tyutin had the puck and when Cooke was coming in, he was square with the guy.  At the end of the play Tyutin turned towards the boards. 

go see a neurologist.  something is wrong with you.  seriously.

Tyutin was facing the end boards the entire time he skated through the zone to get to the corner where the puck was going to be.  at NO TIME was he ever FACING Cooke.  at NO TIME did he ever TURN MORE toward the boards.  he was facing the corner THE ENTIRE TIME, and Cooke was chasing him FROM BEHIND the ENTIRE TIME.

look at this.  it’s plain as day.  Cooke ISN’T EVEN IN THE ZONE YET, and he’s ALREADY STARING AT TYUTIN’S NUMBERS:

a little farther into the zone.  Cooke is still CHASING HIM, and still LOOKING AT HIS NUMBERS:

Cooke even has to AVOID ANOTHER PLAYER in order to crush Tyutin from behind:

look at Tyutin’s body position in the above image, and in the next one.  at what point did he TURN TOWARD THE BOARDS?  in fact, as these pics clearly show, his orientation on the ice NEVER CHANGED.

these images clearly prove that Cooke chased Tyutin FROM BEHIND for nearly ONE HUNDRED FEET before crushing him into the boards FROM BEHIND.  if you see something else here, then you need your eyes and/or brain checked.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 04:16 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

I think the fact that Cooke had to pull up a bit to avoid the other CBJ player might have saved Tyutin.  if he didn’t have to pull up, Tyutin is probably in the hospital this morning and/or eating his meals through a straw.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 04:21 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Tyutin assesses the situation and chooses to put himself in a position where his opponent’s only options are to board him or let him maintain the puck.

yeah, silly him for thinking another player would NOT attempt to injure him intentionally after skating 100 feet to do so.

To me that’s like putting your face in the ice in the crease and expecting the other guy not to shoot the puck.

this is an absurd example.  players are SUPPOSED TO shoot the puck at the crease.  players are NOT SUPPOSED TO check each other from behind.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 04:26 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Tyutin assesses the situation and chooses to put himself in a position where his opponent’s only options are to board him or let him maintain the puck.

by this justification, a player could get away with ANYTHING.  and, um, those were NOT his only two options.  why couldn’t he pin Tyutin to the boards and battle for the puck?  why couldn’t he poke the puck out as he skated by, thereby stealing the puck from Tyutin?  why couldn’t he anticipate where Tyutin was going to be with the puck, and be there first…then lay on a legal check?

there were many options.  it is clear from the replay (and the pics I posted) that Cooke had chosen his option before he even crossed the blue line.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 04:29 PM ET

Avatar

by this justification, a player could get away with ANYTHING.

I didn’t offer a justification, I said why the play happened.


and, um, those were NOT his only two options.  why couldn’t he pin Tyutin to the boards and battle for the puck?

Because that’s a 100% call on any player not named Hal Gill. Boarding, like it or not, isn’t.


why couldn’t he poke the puck out as he skated by, thereby stealing the puck from Tyutin?

Because Tyutin didn’t skate by. He stopped, facing the boards.


why couldn’t he anticipate where Tyutin was going to be with the puck, and be there first…then lay on a legal check?

He did. What most defensemen do on this play is turn one way or the other, move the puck and try to slip the check. Tyutin stopped with the puck facing the boards.


yeah, silly him for thinking another player would NOT attempt to injure him intentionally after skating 100 feet to do so.

If Tyutin thinks Matt Cooke, of all people, is going to have mercy on him because he decided to put himself in a position to get his neck broken hoping Cooke doesn’t decide to take the hit anyway, he isn’t silly, he’s a fool. Even mostly-clean players like Randy Jones have taken this hit when it’s been there.


this is an absurd example.  players are SUPPOSED TO shoot the puck at the crease.  players are NOT SUPPOSED TO check each other from behind.

Players are supposed to make body contact with defensemen on dump-ins. Tyutin decided to position himself such that this body contact could get him killed. The example is appropriate.


Did Cooke pull the trigger and is he ultimately responsible? Yeah, but Tyuitin put live ammo in a gun that should have been loaded with rubber bullets.

Posted by StevieSteve on 02/09/11 at 05:39 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

had Tyutin turned sideways, this thread wouldnt even exist.

Posted by PuckHound61 from Speckville USA on 02/09/11 at 01:16 PM ET

zomg IT’S tYUTIN’S FAULT FOR NOT TURNING HIS BODY TO ALLOW cOOKE TO HIT HIM LEGALLY.

Tyutin decided to position himself such that this body contact could get him killed

Yes, it is completely Tyutin’s fault for not assuming that a dirty sh*thead was going to hit him in a completely illegal manner.  In fact, the NHL should require that all players face all other payers at all times just so we can keep the aforementioned dirty sh*theads in the league.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 02/09/11 at 05:57 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

why couldn’t he pin Tyutin to the boards and battle for the puck?

Because that’s a 100% call on any player not named Hal Gill.

what?!  you’ve never seen players battling for the puck along the boards?  it happens 100 times a game!  I’m not talking about HOLDING.  I’m talking about BOARDPLAY.

y couldn’t he poke the puck out as he skated by, thereby stealing the puck from Tyutin?

Because Tyutin didn’t skate by. He stopped, facing the boards.

as COOKE skated by.  Tyutin is stopped with the puck, you skate by behind him, poke the puck out in the direction you’re going, and take it with you.

players do it all the time.

of course, Tyutin didn’t still have the puck when Cooke hit him.  Tyutin made the right play…skate to the puck and pass it to a teammate.

Cooke made the wrong play - skate 100 feet staring at the opponent’s back and then smash him into the boards face first when he stops.

Tyutin stopped with the puck facing the boards.

no, he moved the puck to a nearby teammate.

If Tyutin thinks Matt Cooke, of all people, is going to have mercy on him because he decided to put himself in a position to get his neck broken hoping Cooke doesn’t decide to take the hit anyway, he isn’t silly, he’s a fool. Even mostly-clean players like Randy Jones have taken this hit when it’s been there.

you are out of your mind, and 99.9% of people disagree with this kind of dangerous attitude.  Tyutin has every reasonable expectation that he will NOT get checked violently into the boards from behind - considering it’s a PENALTY to do so.

Players are supposed to make body contact with defensemen on dump-ins. Tyutin decided to position himself such that this body contact could get him killed. The example is appropriate.

so, basically, you blame Tyutin for the entire incident.  this is absolutely batshit insane.

Tyuitin put live ammo in a gun that should have been loaded with rubber bullets.

what a load of crap.  Tyutin skated into the zone and played the puck, moving it immediately to a teammate.

Cooke followed him for a LONG TIME, staring at his numbers the WHOLE TIME, avoided ANOTHER PLAYER, and blasted him IN THE BACK.  there is not a single ounce of responsibility for this on Tyutin.

are you seriously saying he should NOT play the puck, and just let Cooke have it, because Cooke is likely to commit a dangerous (and illegal) hit from behind?  that’s absurd.  if that’s the standard then players will never be able to play the puck along the boards because someone might check them in the back.  bass ackwards logic.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 06:02 PM ET

Avatar

what?!  you’ve never seen players battling for the puck along the boards?  it happens 100 times a game!  I’m not talking about HOLDING.  I’m talking about BOARDPLAY.

Didn’t have to look hard for this.

as COOKE skated by.  Tyutin is stopped with the puck, you skate by behind him, poke the puck out in the direction you’re going, and take it with you.

players do it all the time.

The players who stop facing the boards when an opponent has him lined up get boarded a lot because there’s no good play by the opposing player. I’ll refer you that article again.

of course, Tyutin didn’t still have the puck when Cooke hit him.  Tyutin made the right play…skate to the puck and pass it to a teammate.

I’ll refer you to your own most-recent picture. Cooke is less than a foot away from contact and the puck is sitting on Tyutin’s backhand. Coming to a dead stop, facing the boards when a checker has you lined up is asinine.

you are out of your mind, and 99.9% of people disagree with this kind of dangerous attitude.  Tyutin has every reasonable expectation that he will NOT get checked violently into the boards from behind - considering it’s a PENALTY to do so.

99.9% of people can agree that someone who decides to count their money in a back alley in Brazil doesn’t deserve to be robbed, too, but that doesn’t mean they have a “reasonable expectation” not to be. Tyutin saw a guy bearing down and him and put himself in a position to get killed, hoping the other guy would give up on the play.


so, basically, you blame Tyutin for the entire incident.  this is absolutely batshit insane.

Nope, I blame Tyuitin for putting himself in a position where the other guy’s only option, as stated in the article I linked, is to run him over. I blame Cooke for actually running him over.

what a load of crap.  Tyutin skated into the zone and played the puck, moving it immediately to a teammate.

No, Tyutin skated into the zone, saw a pursuer, grabbed the puck and stopped, hoping his pursuer would give up on the play. This is a suicidal play.

Cooke followed him for a LONG TIME, staring at his numbers the WHOLE TIME, avoided ANOTHER PLAYER, and blasted him IN THE BACK.  there is not a single ounce of responsibility for this on Tyutin.

The sane play by Tyutin, the play that every defenseman in the league makes 10 times per night is to take the puck, spin one way or the other, move the puck and try to slip the check. Had he done what every other defenseman does, Cooke would either have missed or hit him cleanly.

are you seriously saying he should NOT play the puck, and just let Cooke have it, because Cooke is likely to commit a dangerous (and illegal) hit from behind?

I’ve already explained what he’s supposed to do in this situation on multiple occasions. What every defenseman does on this play every single night. Tyutin put himself in harm’s way hoping Cooke would give up on the play. That Cooke took the hit is on him. But it shouldn’t have been there for the taking and Tyutin has to know what would happen if he decided to put himself in a position to get killed instead of risking taking a clean hit to make the play.

Posted by StevieSteve on 02/09/11 at 06:56 PM ET

wingycup's avatar

Watching a dirty player like Cooke makes me wish guys like Domi, Kocur, Probert , and Grimson were around.  Guys who played hard and stood up for there teammates and still had respect for the game.
I would love to watch one of them make a coward like Cooke “turtle shell”, cause you know he would.

Posted by wingycup on 02/09/11 at 07:16 PM ET

Avatar

Watching a dirty player like Cooke makes me wish guys like Domi, Kocur, Probert , and Grimson were around.  Guys who played hard and stood up for there teammates and still had respect for the game.

Probert would rape Cooke.  Literally.

Posted by RoneFace on 02/09/11 at 07:18 PM ET

Hank1974's avatar

Watching a dirty player like Cooke makes me wish guys like Domi, Kocur, Probert , and Grimson were around.  Guys who played hard and stood up for there teammates and still had respect for the game.
I would love to watch one of them make a coward like Cooke “turtle shell”, cause you know he would.

That’s what I don’t get.
Puck Daddy has a link to an article where Jody Shelly talks about ‘the code’.
In it, he talks about not going after smaller players or lesser fighters.
In my mind, that’s bunk!
If punks like Cooke and Avery knew they’d have to dance with Shelly or Boogard if they acted up, I guarantee they wouldn’t be playing so recklessly.
Cooke ruined Savard’s career and his punishment was fighting light-heavyweight Shawn Thornton. And he didn’t even do that badly in it.
Now if Chara had gotten ahold of Cooke (or a prime Probie), he wouldn’t even look at players of Savard’s ilk ever again. In fact, he’d be a model citizen out there.

Every day goons/enforcers get closer and closer to extinction. Maybe if they actually made losers like Cooke pay for being douchebags they’d be able to keep jobs.

In my age, I’ve gotten over the need to see heavyweights patrolling the ice. But I’d much, MUCH rather see every team carry a heavyweight than a league full of pests. I loathe pests! I don’t think they add anything to the game but endanger truly talented players out there.

Posted by Hank1974 on 02/09/11 at 07:23 PM ET

wingycup's avatar

I agree Hank….if guys were around to hold him accountable maybe he would think twice. NO QUESTION that he goes out of his way to make dirty plays.
Hopefully we won’t have any more star players having potentially career ending injuries because of this PEST.

Posted by wingycup on 02/09/11 at 07:31 PM ET

wingycup's avatar

BTW
“60% of the time it works everytime.”

“I’m going to be honest with you Brian, that smells like pure gasoline.”

Posted by wingycup on 02/09/11 at 07:33 PM ET

Avatar

In it, he talks about not going after smaller players or lesser fighters. “
Posted by Hank1974 on 02/09/11 at 04:23 PM ET

I haven’t seen that article, but I would think that he’s talking about during the regular course of a game, not after a dirty hit. I’m sure Shelley would love to have an uncontested punch to the face of a bunch of the gnats in the NHL, but he won’t pick a fight just to do it.

Posted by NathanBC on 02/09/11 at 07:41 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

what?!  you’ve never seen players battling for the puck along the boards?  it happens 100 times a game!  I’m not talking about HOLDING.  I’m talking about BOARDPLAY.

Didn’t have to look hard for this.

what is your point? boardplay is not illegal.  it’s a fundamental part of hockey.  do you seriously not understand what I’m talking about?

The players who stop facing the boards when an opponent has him lined up get boarded a lot because there’s no good play by the opposing player.

how about DON’T CHECK HIM?  it’s simple.  when you follow someone for 100 feet, staring at their numbers the whole way, you have PLENTY OF TIME to think “hmmm I shouldn’t smash him into the glass face first” and pull up.

in fact, Cooke had the control over his skating to slow up and avoid another CBJ player.  he could have NOT HIT Tyutin.

Coming to a dead stop, facing the boards when a checker has you lined up is asinine.

how would Tyutin know Cooke has him lined up?  the last time he saw Cooke, Cooke wasn’t even at the faceoff circle yet.  this is the POINT to rule 48 - blindside hits.

I blame Tyuitin for putting himself in a position where the other guy’s only option, as stated in the article I linked, is to run him over. I blame Cooke for actually running him over.

if Cooke had NO OTHER OPTION, then how is he to blame for anything?  because he DID have OTHER OPTIONS.  stopping and initiating boardplay would have been one of them.  there are many others, some of which I already listed.

I’m done with this.  you just don’t get it.  Cooke followed him FROM BEHIND while staring DIRECTLY AT HIS NUMBERS, for ONE HUNDRED FEET, then SMASHED HIM FACE FIRST INTO THE GLASS.

what Cooke did was dangerous, against the rules, a penalty, and worthy of suspension.  he had other options.  that is a simple fact.  he also had PLENTY OF TIME (100 feet) to consider his options.  this is a professional athlete.  if he can’t make proper decisions with that kind of time, he has no business on the ice.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 07:46 PM ET

Hank1974's avatar

BTW
“60% of the time it works everytime.”

“I’m going to be honest with you Brian, that smells like pure gasoline.”

LOL!

“Smells like bigfoots d**k!” Hahaha!

Posted by Hank1974 on 02/09/11 at 07:53 PM ET

Avatar

if Cooke had NO OTHER OPTION, then how is he to blame for anything?  because he DID have OTHER OPTIONS.  stopping and initiating boardplay would have been one of them.  there are many others, some of which I already listed.

I’ll refer you, again, to the article you couldn’t understand. Once Tyutin stops, Cooke’s options are a) hit him b) give up on the play. Your first suggestion is illegal, the other impossible. I also see that I’m not the only person to explain exactly what Tyutin’s supposed to do in this situation and why.

I’m done with this.  you just don’t get it.  Cooke followed him FROM BEHIND while staring DIRECTLY AT HIS NUMBERS, for ONE HUNDRED FEET, then SMASHED HIM FACE FIRST INTO THE GLASS.

You’re right, you don’t get it. You don’t seem to be aware that “bear-hugs” are illegal, think stopping facing the boards with the puck while a guy has you lined up is a proper play (I was taught never to do that when I was 8, by the way and spinning out of checks by forecheckers is still practiced at the NHL level, by every team, every week) and keep referring to this lining him up from “ONE HUNDRED FEET” thing. That’s something called “skating” something called a “route” on something called a “forecheck.”

I honestly don’t care that Cooke’s suspended. He abused an official the other day and nobody noticed. He also tried to take out Ovechkin’s knees which should be another five. If you want to find incidents involving Cooke where the victim is blameless, there were two this week.

But neither of those offenses changes the fact that Tyutin stupidly put himself in position to get killed yesterday or that you don’t have the first clue as to what you’re talking about.

Posted by StevieSteve on 02/09/11 at 08:08 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Your first suggestion is illegal, the other impossible

boardplay is not illegal.  do you even watch hockey?

poking the puck away and taking it with you is not impossible.  players do it all the time.

You don’t seem to be aware that “bear-hugs” are illegal

I never said to bear hug him.  I said he could have pinned him to the boards.  as long as he keeps his hands on his stick, it’s perfectly legal and happens 100 times a game.

you don’t know wtf you’re talking about.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 09:03 PM ET

Avatar

Oh please. PaulinMiamiBeach doesn’t know what a route is, thinks you can steal a puck through a guys back while he’s stopped and you’re moving, doesn’t know that “boardplay” requires initial body contact (ie boarding, if the guy shows you nothing but his back) and that facing the boards stopped when lined up for a hit is the right play on a dump-in. It’s complete ass-talkery.

Posted by StevieSteve on 02/09/11 at 09:29 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

thinks you can steal a puck through a guys back

through his back, no.  poke it through his legs or from the side, yes.  players do it all the time.

doesn’t know that “boardplay” requires initial body contact (ie boarding

wow.  you really think that?  why couldn’t Cooke pull up and initiate contact?  you know that boarding is NOT checking from behind, right?  boarding is FORCEFUL VIOLENT contact.  players skate to the boards and initiate board play without “boarding” all the time. 

you obviously don’t watch much hockey.  or you’re so invested in defending Cooke that you can’t bring yourself to admit that you’re wrong.

facing the boards stopped when lined up for a hit is the right play on a dump-in

then why do players do it ALL THE TIME?  because they’re expecting BOARDPLAY, not to get smashed face first into the boards.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 09:49 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

so Tyutin had all these other options, other things he should have done…but Cooke didn’t.  his only option was to smash Tyutin into the glass face first violently.  um ok…that makes sense.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/11 at 09:56 PM ET

Avatar

Tell me where in the rulebook does it say that a player can leap after making contact and that obviates the charging call.

Here’s the relevant text:

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.

“Jumps into, ...in manner” eliminates the need for this red herring of “he hadn’t left his feet at the time of contact.”

Notice that the timestamp indicates this is no more than a fraction of a second after the screenshot taken above claiming he hadn’t left his feet.  He was leaping.  Period.

He got a reasonable punishment.

Posted by Vagabond Jim on 02/10/11 at 04:18 AM ET

« Previous        < 1 2     

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

image