Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Video- Shanahan Explains Letang’s 2 Game Suspension

Filed in: NHL Teams, Pittsburgh Penguins, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: kris+letang

Comments

Lindas1st's avatar

A red tie, hmmm…I sense a bias.

And keep all sharpe items away from this dude ‘cause he looks like he wants to end his own life.

Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 10/18/11 at 06:23 PM ET

Avatar

How former Red Wing Brendan Shanahan can watch that video and come to the conclusion that Burmistrov made no sudden movement defies all logic.  One second, he’s facing up ice.  The next his back is to Letang as the hit happens.  Not to mention Burmistrov embellished the play.  And that gets two games?  Good job Colin Shanahan.

Posted by Mike on 10/18/11 at 06:24 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Glad they got this video out quickly, because I was taken by surprise by the two-game suspension.

The description where Shanahan calls Burmistrov’s path “predictable” is a pretty strong one, especially when combined with Shanaham pointing out that Letang took a defensive position and by that point had given up his race for the puck.

This matches up very well with my previous statements that any form of a last-second pivot here is not the issue and that the issue is Letang should have never delivered that check.

To the concerns that this teaches the players that turning your back after a puck race is the acceptable means to buffer yourself from contact and protect the puck, well yes… it does.  The onus is on Letang here. Even with Burmistrov having his back to Letang the entire time, the options were on Letang to ride him into the boards or to take a different angle. Instead, Letang chose to finish his check hard and with a pushing motion which intended to force the player hard into the boards.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/11 at 06:28 PM ET

WingsFanInBeanLand's avatar

What J.J. said.  Plus the fact that he’s a repeat offender.  I think the two games is justified.

Posted by WingsFanInBeanLand from where free agents no longer dare. on 10/18/11 at 06:31 PM ET

Avatar

I was fine with the call on the ice and the possibility of a suspension.

Have there been any one-game regular season suspensions? I remember at the start I felt there shouldn’t be any one-game suspensions this season because it’s too small a penalty.

I think this (if it must be a suspension) definitely should be a one-gamer, unless those have been done away with. Did Shanahan mention Letang’s fine in the playoffs for a similar hit? If so that’s fair.

Posted by NathanBC on 10/18/11 at 06:40 PM ET

Nicholas Lorenzi's avatar

Any word on him getting fined?

Posted by Nicholas Lorenzi on 10/18/11 at 06:55 PM ET

Paul's avatar

No fine but the suspension will cost him $37,837.84.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 10/18/11 at 06:57 PM ET

Avatar

I think the suspension is bogus and I’m a redwing fan. Shannahan is turning the NHL into a pussy league. to say the player took a “predictable’ path is stupid. in a second he goes from having his shoulder pointed at Latang to his back. I can’t stand Pittsburgh but this suspension is BOGUS. I’ve seen way worse boarding that need to be addressed.

Posted by Jason from detroit on 10/18/11 at 07:00 PM ET

Avatar

Burmistrov is at heading up ice, then decides to cut back the other direction.  If he continues up ice then Letang ends up rubbing him out along the boards… but because Burmistrov turns the other way, Letang drills him into the boards head-first. 

If this is Crosby… of course i don’t want to see him going head-first into the boards… but seriously, how the hell is Letang to know what Burmistrov is going to do?  If he does not attempt to hit the guy, then Burmistrov is off to the races. 

The best part of this video is how shanny freezes the players about 2 feet apart from each other with Letang heading towards a legal-solid check, and then un-freezes the video and shows Burmistrov turning and letang hitting him into the boards.

2 FEET AWAY!  Also, the clock is showing and it is less than 1 second between a solid check and a bad check.  How is it that he is supposed to alter his decision within 1 second?  Honestly?

Posted by gretzky_to_lemieux on 10/18/11 at 07:03 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Burmistrov is at heading up ice, then decides to cut back the other direction.  If he continues up ice then Letang ends up rubbing him out along the boards… but because Burmistrov turns the other way, Letang drills him into the boards head-first.

If this is Crosby… of course i don’t want to see him going head-first into the boards… but seriously, how the hell is Letang to know what Burmistrov is going to do?  If he does not attempt to hit the guy, then Burmistrov is off to the races.

If Burmistrov cut off his attempt to race up the boards then how does not hitting him from behind end in Burmistrov going off to the races?

Letang staying on the angle which would have rubbed him out along the boards in this situation ends in Letang being between Burmistrov and the blue line and Burmistrov with no momentum up ice. Burmistrov would have been forced to make an additional move to get around Letang to go off to the races.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/11 at 07:15 PM ET

Avatar

I just saw it again with the sound off, not listening to any explanation. What I see is Letang boarding the guy by extending his arms to propell him into the boards with his other option being just using his momentum to ride the guy into the boards - a decision between making him really feel it or just pinning him against the boards.

Posted by NathanBC on 10/18/11 at 07:23 PM ET

perfection's avatar

I have to say that whether you agree with Shanahan’s suspensions or not, whether you agree with the LEAGUE’S (not Shanahan’s) headshot crackdown or not, these videos themselves are brilliant. at least we now can debate the facts at hand because the league actually tells us the facts at hand. I knew Shanny was planning on implementing more transparency because it will inevitably lead to more consistency which is all players really want anyway, I did not realize they were going to do it so well. The way they use the video clips to display exactly what they don’t like about certain plays, it not only gives the fans some clarity but it gives the players themselves a compass of sorts. All of these videos Shanahan’s been making all year can now be compared, contrasted, replayed, and used as teaching tools.

While I actually think two games is fair on this hit (especially because there was no game misconduct), I have definitely disagreed with some of his other suspensions, but really, that’s going to happen no matter who is handing down discipline and no matter what the standards are. You absolutely cannot please everyone and in a game this fast, people are simply going to see the same play differently. But, the fact that these vids are being made is really Shanny putting his money where his mouth is. He’s actually holding himself accountable for his discipline, unlike Campbell, and it’s a enormous step forward for the league. I remained impressed every time one of these videos is released. We the paying, blogging, cheering/crying fans deserve explanations and it’s nice to see that finally recognized by the league and in such an accessible way.

Posted by perfection from LaLaLand on 10/18/11 at 07:28 PM ET

Avatar

I don’t mind it, but if he didn’t cite a prior record it’d be weaker.  The “previous fine” was last year on Spezza with pretty much the exact same hit minus the puck was more up for grabs.  The result was a boarding minor but Spezza dislocated his shoulder and missed awhile, luckily Burmistrov didn’t see a similar fate.

It’s not the worst hit but consistency is key.  If two seasons from now no one makes the hit the way Letang did, but rather rides his man into the boards or some other form of contact that isn’t so stupidly dangerous two feet off the wall, then who cares if a few players like Letang had to miss a handful while the whole league was learning what’s what.

Posted by JBM on 10/18/11 at 07:38 PM ET

DocF's avatar

Shanahan has gotten it right on all of the previous suspensions.  This one is no different.  When the guys stop running and hitting on the numbers, then the game will be safer.  I know some of you fans do not understand this.  I’ve been following my Beloved Red Wings for 65 years and I remember when this sort of stuff was not done because it brought swift, brutal retribution. 

When the players start to respect one and other, then the suspensions will stop.

Doc

Posted by DocF from Now: Lynn Haven, FL; was Reidsville, NC on 10/18/11 at 08:05 PM ET

Avatar

his matches up very well with my previous statements that any form of a last-second pivot here is not the issue and that the issue is Letang should have never delivered that check.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/11 at 04:28 PM ET

Tell that to Dan Cleary, who escaped suspension for a nearly identical hit on Philip Samuelsson in the pre-season (extension of the arms to the numbers of a player who turns into the boards at the last second). Not to suspend was the right call at the time, I thought. It’s also now just a glaring inconsistency.

And consistency is quickly becoming a grave issue for Shanahan, using one rationale to excuse a pretty forceful high hit by Corey Sarich and another to convict on a glancing high hit by Clarke MacArthur, letting Malone walk because circumstances beyond his control changed the effect of his intended actions then stapling Bouchard to the wall despite the same caveat being at play.

Hell, there’s not a ton of difference between what Kunitz did at the end of the Winnipeg game and what Wisniewski did at the end of the CBJ/Minny game. Kunitz is a repeat offender; why’s he get nothing for something similar to Wisniewski’s 8 game infraction while Letang gets 2 for something deemed not suspendable when Cleary does it?

I thought he was doing a fairly good job early on, but Shanahan’s just been all over the board since about the last week of the preseason.

Posted by steviesteve on 10/18/11 at 08:06 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

I thought he was doing a fairly good job early on, but Shanahan’s just been all over the board since about the last week of the preseason.

Posted by steviesteve on 10/18/11 at 06:06 PM ET

Really?  Beacause EVERY post I have read on here from you has indicated that you have had it out for shanny from the start.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 10/18/11 at 08:24 PM ET

Avatar

”...Dan Cleary, who escaped suspension for a nearly identical hit on Philip Samuelsson in the pre-season…”

It’s very easy to see that it was almost all Samuelsson’s fault - a rookie mistake much like De Costa cutting through the middle when Phaneuf lined him up last week. Samuelsson was skating without a care in the world, and he cut back at the very last second. He learned how to make that play properly from now on - ask him.

”...pretty forceful high hit by Corey Sarich and another to convict on a glancing high hit by Clarke MacArthur…”

Cory Sarich is 6’4” & Cooke is 5’11”, he made the hit with his back straight, and the point of contact was moreso chest than face. Cooke said he got hit in the jaw.
MacArthur’s hit was right to the guy’s head with his elbow slightly extended.

“...difference between what Kunitz did at the end of the Winnipeg game and what Wisniewski did…”

Big difference in that Tanner Glass completely sold Kunitz’s “cross-check” and Kunitz let up when he realized Glass was not offering any resistance - in order to draw a call.

Letang could’ve rode him into the boards but he pushed on him instead.

Posted by NathanBC on 10/18/11 at 08:34 PM ET

Avatar

This video should have that Cleary hit on Samuelsson. If so, it’s in the 3rd period.

Posted by NathanBC on 10/18/11 at 08:37 PM ET

bezukov's avatar

Tell that to Dan Cleary, who escaped suspension for a nearly identical hit on Philip Samuelsson in the pre-season (extension of the arms to the numbers of a player who turns into the boards at the last second). Not to suspend was the right call at the time, I thought. It’s also now just a glaring inconsistency.

Q: When was the last time Cleary was suspended or fined for overly physical play?

A: Never. 

There’s your distinction.  Just like Samuelsson, Burmistrov saw the hit coming and did nothing to brace for impact.  Instead he turned his numbers to the checker and got drilled.  Does that excuse Cleary or Letang?  No, I would say it doesn’t.  Cleary however, doesn’t have a history of throwing cheap shots, nor does the team on which he plays.  I can’t say either for Letang or the Pens, and two games is pretty light (as it should be in this instance). 

I think Shanahan has been very consistent and transparent.  Whoever it was who compared Shanahan to Colin Campbell needs to put down the Detroit Haterade and sober back to reality.

——-

Reality… that brings me to my next point.  When will the NHL finally admit that its wrong and relax the holding penalties?  If Letang is allowed to bear hug Burmistrov in this scenario and tie him up until a teammate arrives; Letang doesn’t have to hit him to separate him from the puck, and Shanahan could have given his hair stylist the day off. 

The evidence that the obstruction crack down has led to more scoring is on the dubious end if you ask me, especially if you ask yourself the question of whether or not the game has really gotten better.  Since the crack down, the game has boiled down to crowding the net for garbage goals and tip-ins.  I miss the days when the game was about getting open for shots and passes.  Who else misses Brett Hull’s famous one timers or Shanahan’s great wrist shot from the face off dot?  I know I sure do.  The style of hockey played in the eighties and nineties may have had its problems, but I’d happily go back.

Posted by bezukov from the kids are alright. on 10/18/11 at 09:03 PM ET

cs6687's avatar

It was a penalty, but not worth a suspension.

Posted by cs6687 on 10/18/11 at 09:03 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Tell that to Dan Cleary, who escaped suspension for a nearly identical hit on Philip Samuelsson in the pre-season (extension of the arms to the numbers of a player who turns into the boards at the last second)

Dan Cleary wasn’t suspended because this wasn’t a nearly identical hit.

The inconsistency is in your judgment.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/11 at 09:15 PM ET

bezukov's avatar

Dan Cleary wasn’t suspended because this wasn’t a nearly identical hit.

The inconsistency is in your judgment.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/11 at 07:15 PM ET

Seconded.  Cheers sir!

Posted by bezukov from the kids are alright. on 10/18/11 at 09:18 PM ET

Avatar

I am glad he is back to the suspension mode again. After the union squeeled about the excess suspensions things had died down. After the non suspension of Ryan Smyth for the deliberate elbow to the head I was worried things would back track. This is good news.

Posted by timbits on 10/18/11 at 11:34 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/11 at 07:15 PM ET

I seem to remember you describing a leaping shoulder into the jaw of a 40 year old man who didn’t have the puck as an ‘accident,’ so you’ll forgive me if I don’t trust your judgment when it comes to your favorite team.

For those of us who live on Earth, it’s the same hit.


There’s your distinction.  Just like Samuelsson, Burmistrov saw the hit coming and did nothing to brace for impact.

So we’re back to the suspension flowchart? He does this all the time, but we never suspend him and keep saying he’s never been suspended before? I hope not.

The same play either warrants league discipline or it doesn’t. Repeat offender is something that has no business factoring into anything other than magnitude. That Jason Blake can do thing A and face no discipline, while Jody Shelley gets suspended for the exact same thing is the worst possible outcome. That just creates a privileged class and makes the game no safer. Kopitar doesn’t get an indefinite get out of jail free card for something Wisniewski would be crucified for because he’s not on record right now. An action is punishable or it’s not.


Really?  Beacause EVERY post I have read on here from you has indicated that you have had it out for shanny from the start.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 10/18/11 at 06:24 PM ET

Right. The problem isn’t that Shanahan is setting precedents on Monday that he’s tossing on Tuesday, the problem is that I noticed.

Look, it’s good that penalties are now more severe. I’m fine with that. I think it’s great that head injuries are -finally- being taken seriously.

All that I ask is that the league decide what he wants to be legal or not, let people know, give people an idea of the penalty and stick to it. He started off fine (a board’s an in-game major; if the guy turned, you escape suspension; a headshot’s a suspension no matter how hard it is), then went completely off the rails with meaningless exceptions exercised inconsistently after the Malone hit.

If there are exceptions, such the victim changing the circumstances of the interaction just before the impact, resulting in his own injury, that’s fine, but apply them universally. Malone can walk, but so must Bouchard.

If there are no exceptions, that’s fine too, but Malone, Cleary and Kunitz all needed to sit.

This ‘it’s Monday, so Wisniewski gets 8 games, but it’s Tuesday so Kunitz can do much the same and get nothing’ will not accomplish anything other than creating confusion. You can’t successfully affect any particular change (which I hope is the point) by punishing or rewarding the same actions with different outcomes.

Posted by steviesteve on 10/19/11 at 01:09 AM ET

Avatar

I’m a Jets fan but I don’t see how that hit merits a 2 game suspension. Suspensions should be extraordinary penalties, handed out for blatant attempts to injury or reckless hits to the head. 

I agree with Don Cherry on one thing: the underlying problem is that the equipment - shoulder and elbow pads especially - have become offensive weapons. Make players wear softer, lighter pads and not only will the game be faster, it will be safer.

Losing Letang for 2 games is also going to hurt my fantasy hockey team! mad

Posted by xtoval on 10/19/11 at 01:17 AM ET

bezukov's avatar

So we’re back to the suspension flowchart? He does this all the time, but we never suspend him and keep saying he’s never been suspended before? I hope not.

He does that all the time?  Examples please.  He must have a long list of perceived offenses on other team’s message boards if he does it all the time.  Funny though when I search the words “Dan,” and “Cleary” with “suspension,” “dirty,” “hit,” “fines,” “head shot,” etc. nothing substantive seems to come up.  It doesn’t take much digging to get to Letang’s dirty laundry on the other hand. 

By the way, I’ve been in a terrestrial state my whole life, and I agree with JJ.  There is a pretty big difference between a mostly shoulder to shoulder check (Cleary on Samuelsson), and driving somebody’s head face first into the boards with your arms (Letang on Burmistrov).  There isn’t any amount of calling people Detroit fan boys with a side of pretended non-bias that is going to make you right on that count. 

I don’t mind people disliking my team or my fellow Wings fans, its part of life, and frankly it wouldn’t be any fun if people didn’t root for other teams.  I just hate it when people want to play coy and pretend they don’t have an ax to grind (p.s. it shows through anyway, just be honest).... but I digress on that point. 

The same play either warrants league discipline or it doesn’t. Repeat offender is something that has no business factoring into anything other than magnitude. That Jason Blake can do thing A and face no discipline, while Jody Shelley gets suspended for the exact same thing is the worst possible outcome. That just creates a privileged class and makes the game no safer. Kopitar doesn’t get an indefinite get out of jail free card for something Wisniewski would be crucified for because he’s not on record right now. An action is punishable or it’s not.

Not sure what Jason Blake hit your referring to there.  I did a little google search to try and find what your referring to, and the only thing I found was the Kaleta hit from last year.  I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that wasn’t what you were citing as it wouldn’t have much bearing on Shanahan’s decision process without new offenses having occurred.  I don’t seem to recall any controversy about Blake or Kopitar so far this year, and I’m on this site daily… but I’m willing to educated.  Fire away.

I agree that a player’s history should only factor in in terms of magnitude.  That would be why Letang got a suspension this time.  The Cleary hit is not equatable (I know you disagree), but I can’t agree with you that Shanahan glossed over it or applied a double standard.  And before we head down this road, a Red Wing is serving a suspension right now as well I might add.

On the star treatment angle you seemed to be hinting at in that last paragraph, doesn’t the Letang suspension sort nix that argument?  Letang has a far higher profile in the NHL than Dan Cleary.

Right. The problem isn’t that Shanahan is setting precedents on Monday that he’s tossing on Tuesday, the problem is that I noticed.

That wasn’t really what WingsfaninCO was saying dude (or dudette).  I think he/she was more worried about your ax grinding down to the handle, not Shanny’s (perceived or not) vacillation.

Posted by bezukov from the kids are alright. on 10/19/11 at 03:02 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

I seem to remember you describing a leaping shoulder into the jaw of a 40 year old man who didn’t have the puck as an ‘accident,’

You remember wrong.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/19/11 at 10:01 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

In fact, here’s what I wrote about that hit:

The jumping through contact thing has often been misconstrued as charging by Kronwall’s detractors.  The issue here is a systemic misunderstanding of what the charging rule means when it talks about jumping into players.  Penalties and suspensions have historically come as a result of leaping before contact and not through it.  Kronwall at 6-foot, 193 is average-sized for a hockey player and one of the smaller big hitters in the league (Jordin Tootoo is the smallest at 5’9”, I think).  Hitters like Kronwall have to use their legs to get as much power out of their hits as possible.

...

As far as the rulebook is concerned, Kronwall did nothing wrong.  His actions do not warrant a suspension here.  However, I need to throw one huge freakin’ caveat onto this entire article.  I do not like that Kronwall targeted Selanne’s head.  I don’t think the hit was illegal, suspendable, or more evidence that Kronwall always leaps into his checks, as the hyperbolic nitwits out there would have you believe, but I do think this hit was borderline dirty.  I don’t think Kronwall had to hit Selanne in the head and if the players want to get serious about getting dangerous head shots out of hockey, this is an example they should use.  While I stand by the previous paragraph that Kronwall’s level of deflection is beneficial when he hits to the head, I don’t want that to be misconstrued as a tacit approval of hitting players in the chin in the first place.  I would rather he not have targeted Selanne high, but I like him most when he’s making people back off through the neutral zone with his threat of big hits and I don’t want to see that disappear from his game.  If what he’s doing is a problem, then the league needs to amend or clarify their rules because, under what stands now, he’s doing everything right.

Anything else from your broken memory in regards to what I’ve said in the past to bring into this situation?

Believe what you want. You’re a homer. Letang finished a guy into the boards after skating for plenty of time on a wrong angle from a defensive positioning. Cleary actually was on an angle to wipe a guy off on the boards and that guy actually did turn at the last second to do something which made the hit boarding. Cleary didn’t finish hard and he didn’t finish on an angle to push him face-first.

The fact that you see them as the same hit makes me incredibly glad that Brendan Shanahan is in charge of player safety and you are not. You continuously want to stretch definitions and blur lines to create similarities that aren’t there.  Had the final horn sounded on Kunitz? Is slashing still illegal and are you still ultimately responsible for your stick? The Letang one is the funniest because you still seem to think that aiming at the back of the shoulders versus aiming at the numbers is what should have cleared Letang in this situation.

All this talk about going back to the flowchart and the best part is that you’re more like Colin Campbell than Shanahan has been.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/19/11 at 10:15 AM ET

Nathan's avatar

Two thoughts… first, I agree that Letang should’ve rode him into the boards. But the problem there is with the supposed obstruction crack-down and the way the refs have been instructed to call holds and hooks pretty much any time a free hand comes loose or a stick is parallel to the ice, that really hurts Letang’s options.

Doesn’t excuse hitting a guy in the numbers, but if we would allow guys to use the “bear hug” move when they go in for a body check like they did in the late ‘90s and early ‘00s, this type of play wouldn’t happen very often… just like it didn’t used to. Maybe it would’ve changed how Letang made this play, maybe not. But it would at least be one more option for players that would still allow them to play physical, rather than having to choose between “borderline dirty hit” and “playing soft.”

Second thing, let’s let guys defend themselves. It doesn’t really apply to a hit from behind, but for a lot of the face-up or side-to-side hits where guys come from across the ice like rockets to nail a guy, let the person along the boards use the lumber (err… composite). If you allow a guy like Marc Savard to use his stick to protect himself, it won’t take Matt Cooke or Jordin Tootoo many times of getting composite to the chops to learn how to tone down the charging.

One last thought. Shanahan has been at this for a couple months. Anyone that expects perfect, black and white consistency is crazy. This is still worlds more consistent and reasoned than anything Campbell ever did. Of course he has probably made a small handful of wrong decisions, but it comes with the territory, especially when this whole thing is essentially a work in progress—you know he’s had the parameters given to him by the league office, BoG, and angry GMs change subtly almost by the hour as we all feel out the best balance to keeping players safe without losing a critical part of the game. All that considered, his consistency has been remarkable, and the explanations of suspensions always logical and very fair.

It would probably benefit the league reputation as well as the education of the players if they would produce a video once a month that compared similar hits where one resulted in suspension and another didn’t, with a discussion of why the difference.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 10/19/11 at 11:34 AM ET

Avatar

Whoops, that was Mr Fluffy.

Your argument was that the Kronwall hit on Selanne was LEGAL? That there’s no rule against leaping into the face of a man without the puck? Sorry, apparently I gave you more credit than you deserved, Zach Kassian probably wishes he could have taken your post to his hearing. Might not have sat for so many games. Or maybe not, because such an argument is retarded. Should have pretended it was you that you said it was an accident.

And no, unlike some who clearly do define a suspendable play by jersey, my opinion about boarding and the difficulty of disciplining those calls hasn’t changed whether it was Letang or Jody Shelley or Dan Cleary or anyone

With boarding, though, there can be a read involved (not in the Sestito hit, but definitely the Shelley hit was a blown read by Shelley). If the expectation is that the other guy will turn left or something, then he doesn’t, you have an unintentional board take place (99 out of 100, the guy isn’t hurt, either, dangerous as this might be).

The penalty for blowing a read in that situation used to be the same as breaking the other guy’s stick by accident—just 2 minutes in the box. No big deal, really. Now it’s a 5 minute major and a 5 game suspension overnight.

This is a much bigger change than the rule 48 adjustment. Shanny’s asking players to unlearn years of knowledge on how and when to throw a hit. A dozen coaches may have to change their forechecks or, at very least, the expectation of when their players will or won’t finish a check. We’ll see more of these before we see less.

However, this is going to create a new problem: players throwing themselves into the boards to try and draw a suspension from a division rival is about to become a very popular activity.

Posted by steviesteve on 09/27/11 at 12:32 AM ET


Now that’s not what Burmistrov did. But he did change the circumstances very late and affect the outcome. If you want to say he didn’t, then go take it up with Burmistrov

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/hockey/jets/Burmistrov-feeling-good-ready-to-face-Toronto-132065688.html

Burmistrov said he might have been partially at fault for the way the play unfolded.

“That’s hockey,” he said. “I think he did not do this on purpose. He came to me and I turned back and he maybe wanted to hit me in the shoulder and I just turned and it happened.”

This is something Shanahan, not me, defined as a reason to waive suspensions on illegal plays which he has now applied whenever the Hell he feels like it, like a police force that needs to issue X speeding tickets every month. Not a very successful way to reduce speeding, is that.

Nor did suspending Letang have any effect on behavior in last night’s games. I saw two more relatively bad boards in last night’s Boston game, only one of which was called and the other caused an injury that sent the rest of the game off the rails. Since I don’t see Seidenberg’s name on my twitter feed (like Shelley, Seidenberg blew a read and crushed a guy in the digits after he changed his trajectory slightly), this crackdown on boarding just looks like a loser lottery.

There’s an exception in place for changing circumstances or there isn’t. He needs to pick one or it’s just back to the dartboards again.

Posted by steviesteve on 10/19/11 at 03:54 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Your argument was that the Kronwall hit on Selanne was LEGAL? That there’s no rule against leaping into the face of a man without the puck? Sorry, apparently I gave you more credit than you deserved

Kronwall was given an interference penalty and that was the correct call under the rules that were in effect last season.  Like it or not, hitting somebody in the face with your shoulder was not an illegal play last season. I’m glad the rule changed, but I wouldn’t have punished Kronwall the same way nobody could punish Cooke for what he did to Savard.

Apparently, you’re one of the people who still thinks having contact bring you off your feet is charging.  To use your own broken logic, please go back and find me an example of this in the rulebook or in practical application.  Over and over and over again, the distinction has been made between leaping INTO contact and leaping THROUGH contact and still you whiners go on and on about it as though parroting the same wrong idea about how the rule is written will eventually make you right.

Then again, you’re the same idiot who said there are LIKE A MILLION videos of Kronwall doing this on Youtube.  But let’s not dare impugn the integrity of a guy who claims that he’s objective when it’s clear he’s not.

However, this is going to create a new problem: players throwing themselves into the boards to try and draw a suspension from a division rival is about to become a very popular activity.

I want you to count how many times that happens the rest of the season.

It’s nice the Burmistrov is making an educated guess, but he didn’t really have a chance to see how much Letang changed his position to adjust to Burmistrov and still finish the check hard into the boards.

Perhaps because he was looking the other way when it happened?

I’ll say it again and try to communicate it more clearly because you haven’t picked up on it to this point.  The circumstances which changed that made this a boarding was that Letang adjusted his position to hit a guy in the back and then finished his check.  Burmistrov’s turn was not last-millisecond. Letang had plenty of opportunity to not hit him square and not finish him hard.

Nor did suspending Letang have any effect on behavior in last night’s games.

oH MY gOD. sHANAHAN HAS BEEN AT THIS FOR NEARLY A MONTH AND THE ENTIRE nhl HASN’T ADJUSTED YET!  tHE SYSTEM IS BROKEN! bURN IT ALL DOWN!

You’re ridiculous.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/19/11 at 04:21 PM ET

bezukov's avatar

And no, unlike some who clearly do define a suspendable play by jersey, my opinion about boarding and the difficulty of disciplining those calls hasn’t changed whether it was Letang or Jody Shelley or Dan Cleary or anyone.

I wouldn’t buy that for a dollar.  Nobody other than Pens fans made a stink about Cleary, and to me thats more telling than anything else you’ve said.  And the fact that you’re so hung up about it gives me my own thoughts about your opinion.  At the very least you evaluate the opinions of others based upon their favorite team (by your own admission), you can’t have it both ways.  At least myself and others in this discussion have been up front about their loyalties.

Posted by bezukov from the kids are alright. on 10/19/11 at 05:55 PM ET

Avatar

Nobody other than Pens fans made a stink about Cleary,

No pens fans made a stink about Cleary. In fact, personally, I mostly blamed Samuelsson.

“Saw something similar to this on Ulf Samuelsson’s kid in the Pittsburgh game.

The first thing any defenseman needs to learn is that when a forechecker has you lined up for a hit, never ever, ever slow down, show him your back and hope he doesn’t finish you anyway…

five guys and counting with majors for boarding tonight. If they’re all somewhere between this and the cleary hit, these infractions aren’t a simple predatory player issue, like elbowing, knees or headshots—all of which are usually at nothing other than the hitter’s discretion.”

Nobody made a stink about Letang, either, until Mckenzie said there was a hearing. TSN didn’t even think it important enough to put in the replay package until the league said there was a hearing.


Then again, you’re the same idiot who said there are LIKE A MILLION videos of Kronwall doing this on Youtube.  But let’s not dare impugn the integrity of a guy who claims that he’s objective when it’s clear he’s not.

There are. Since you’re willing to pen bizarre treatises explaining that leaping through contact is illegal, interference is illegal, but combining them is legal (depending on the Jersey, I would suggest) your cognitive dissonance is what keeps you from admitting it. Kronwall’s a headhunting piece of crap. Just can’t square that with this self righteousness about player safety, can you?

Good to know that what Burmistrov saw at ice level differs from what some Red Wings homer who thinks Kronwall’s clean and Philip samuellson has a shoulder growing out of the center of his spinal column. I’m sticking with Burmistrov. Don’t know what the big deal about Cleary having boarded some guy is, anyway, unlike leaping headshots, boards on turning guys like Samuelsson aren’t necessarily some blight on the infractors honor.


oH MY gOD. sHANAHAN HAS BEEN AT THIS FOR NEARLY A MONTH AND THE ENTIRE nhl HASN’T ADJUSTED YET!  tHE SYSTEM IS BROKEN! bURN IT ALL DOWN!

You’re ridiculous.

So ridiculous that I’m still waiting for that Seidenberg suspension in the interests of consistency. As is, it seems, the majority of the
NBC hockey press are too. But all these people are homers too, I take it.

But riddle me this, Mr Halo Effect: a slew foot’s illegal. Campbell fined and suspended a bunch of guys, including star players. for it in his term. Malkin’s been out for more games than Letang will miss because of a Curtis Glencross slewfoot. Malkin’s a more important player than Letang.

If my issue is homerism (like your Kronwall complex), rather than Shanahan’s inconsistent applications of punishment and exceptions, why is Curtis Glencross’ non-suspension by Shanahan a complete non-issue for me?

Posted by steviesteve on 10/20/11 at 04:45 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

explaining that leaping through contact is illegal

Leaping through contact is not illegal. Leaping into contact is illegal. This is the way that’s been called forever. This is the way the rule is written.

There are

Once again, since you apparently can’t count.

Google video results for “Kronwall dirty hit”: 20 results. A full 1/4th of those results are the Georges Laraque hit on Kronwall which injured him.

Google video results for “Orpik dirty hit”: 21 results. One of them is the hit where he broke Erik Cole’s neck.

You got it in your head somewhere along the line (probably in the 2008 finals) that Kronwall is dirty.  This has nothing to do with your supposed level of objectivity. It has more to do with you reading into the idiotic parroting that your fanbase loves to do in regards to him.

Philip samuellson has a shoulder growing out of the center of his spinal column

Straw-man argument. Next…

I’m still waiting for that Seidenberg suspension in the interests of consistency. As is, it seems, the majority of the
NBC hockey press are too. But all these people are homers too, I take it.

Moving goalposts. Next…

If my issue is homerism (like your Kronwall complex), rather than Shanahan’s inconsistent applications of punishment and exceptions, why is Curtis Glencross’ non-suspension by Shanahan a complete non-issue for me?

Probably because you realize that it was a nothing act and you’re grateful that Malkin again got away with instigating a fight in a way that should have ended in an automatic penalty he didn’t get? (since this time he didn’t have his jersey tied down).

No idea though. I didn’t see the Glencross slewfoot.  Based on what I’ve already accused you of, I’m guessing that you’re picking a non-issue that happened to one of your players as something of a sacrifice.  This is your version of “I can’t be racist, I have a black friend!”  just so you can feel morally superior.

Alternate theory: Punishing Glencross isn’t going to bring Malkin back, but letting Letang off with a slap of the wrist would have kept him in the lineup, so your comparison doesn’t work in the first place. You’re not a stupid homer, instead you’re a crafty homer.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/20/11 at 06:20 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

image