Yesterday, the NHL announced a two-game suspension to Phoenix Coyotes forward Martin Hanzal for a charging penalty on Edmonton Oilers defenseman Jeff Petry. On the original play, Hanzal got a two-minute minor.

Here is my take: Although I am very much someone who supports physical play, it needs to be clean, physical play within the flow of play.

This was not a clean hit, pure and simple. It was not a check meant to separate Petry from the puck. It was a check meant to intimidate and cause fear. Hanzal was not deliberately trying to injure Petry, but what he did was reckless and easily could have caused injury. He's also a repeat offender, so he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt on a hit that crosses the line and needlessly jeopardizes another player.

There's an old rule of thumb on this type of hit. The puck is released...(Start the count) One Mississippi... two Miss-i. At this point, if there's a hit, it's too late. A penalty should be called. Hanzal failed the "Mississippi Test" here.

Also, just look at the distance that Hanzal traveled! He comes all the way down the slot with speed to seek out Petry. The standard here is whether the body checker goes more than two strides or seven feet. Hanzal is guilty here, too.

There are also rules about a player leaving his feet to deliver a check. While I've seen much more egregious violations of this standard -- I'm talking about YOU, Stevie Downie and Jordin Tootoo and Zac Rinaldo -- Hanzal's skates did lift off the ice before the contact.

Thus, if this were a courtroom trial, Hanzal would have been brought on three counts of "aggravated charging" and been found guilty on all three counts.

What would my own suspension ruling have been? Had there been a more egregious result of this hit -- a bad cut to Petry's face, a broken jaw or a concussion with games missed -- I would have gone up to five games. Hanzal was lucky that a) Petry was OK after the hit and b) he didn't get a three-gamer based on what actually happened here.

Now, I know that people are going to ask: Why suspend at least partially due to the result of the play? Honestly, it's not all that different from the way the law of the land treats the "attempted" versus "completed" version of a felony or, in civil cases, assesses momentary judgments and fines based on actual damages done versus damages that could have been done. It's just how it is.

As such, I agree with the penalty that was imposed by Brendan Shanahan and Brian Leetch. Let me just add this, however. I have had several discussions in recent years with players who were active during my playing and NHL refereeing careers, and we are all agreed that players today do not do nearly as effective of a job at protecting themselves as they did in years past. Many do not know the correct way to receive a hit to reduce the damage and, in case like this, they're not allowed to defend themselves the old-fashioned way.

One retired longtime NHL player said about another recent suspension case that if a forward came charging at him, he'd put his stick up to protect himself as an equalizer. The hunter would become the hunted and get dropped in his tracks if he didn't put on the brakes. This was a technique culled from the Mark Messier and Ted Lindsay School of Self-Defense and it was one hell of a deterrent to most opponents who would otherwise be dumb enough to attempt a predatory hit like the one Hanzal was guilty of here.

If Petry had done that, we'd be look at a whole different set of results and circumstances. Nowadays, players are not allowed to defend themselves that way nor do referees have the discretion to tell the guy who attempted to charge that it was his own fault he skated right into his intended victim's stick.

The game has changed and, based upon today's standards of written and unwritten rules, the correct decision was made here.



Video from NHL.com

************

My next blog will be coming on Thursday. The topic is "Good Intention, Bad Rules: Delay of Game Standards".


************

Recent Blogs by Paul Stewart

Unholy Divers and the Abominable PC Rulebook

The 'Montreal Factor' and Refereeing

Communicate, Communicate, Communicate

A Little Reffing Psychology Goes a Long Way

A Ref's View: Exuberance vs. Showboating

************

Paul Stewart holds the distinction of being the first U.S.-born person to make it to the NHL as both a player and referee. On March 15, 2003, he became the only American-born referee to officiate in 1,000 NHL games.

Today, Stewart is a judicial and league discipline consultant for the Kontinental Hockey League (KHL) and serves as director of hockey officiating for the Eastern College Athletic Conference (ECAC).

The longtime referee heads Officiating by Stewart, a consulting, training and evaluation service for officials, while also maintaining a busy schedule as a public speaker, fund raiser and master-of-ceremonies for a host of private, corporate and public events. As a non-hockey venture, he is the owner of Lest We Forget.

Stewart is currently working with a co-author on an autobiography.