I know it was, because there are replays of the hit, where it is obvious, that it was a hit to the head. My opinion of the play, is based on what actually happened, and not what someone else has said.

I do not know if it was intentional or not, but that doesn't really matter. I do think calling it a match penalty was a reach, but definitely a 5 minute major and worthy of a suspension.

Ferraro's comments were offered in rebuttal to your post of "The same thing others were looking at, including the NBC team, so obviously what you observed wasn't the overwhelming take on the issue."

What evidence can you offer that it was not a direct head shot?
- MJL

The same evidence as those like you offer that it wasn't.

We can argue this for hours (well actually we can't because I'm done so here's your opportunity to get the last word in as usual), but the real answer as to whether this was a "targeted" head shot (one of the two criteria for the rule) is known only by White.

So it seems the intent is an element and does matter. And unless you have an admission from White, and not an opinion from Ray Ferraro, its all conjecture at this point.

No argument as to the vulnerability of it.

So anytime a player is "unsuspecting of a hit, they shouldnt be allowed to be hit"?

I saw White looking at a guy carrying the puck, and trying to separate the guy from the puck. Unfortunately the guy got the shot of literally a half a second prior to the hit. Now... go out, skate on the ice and try to make a decision about hitting or not hitting in .56 seconds. Big hits are gonna happen. Sometimes bad things will be the result.
- jak521

If a player is vulnerable, let up on the guy. I agree there are times where things happen quick, but this is one of those situations where I think White could've let up.

So anytime a player is "unsuspecting of a hit, they shouldnt be allowed to be hit"?

I saw White looking at a guy carrying the puck, and trying to separate the guy from the puck. Unfortunately the guy got the shot of literally a half a second prior to the hit. Now... go out, skate on the ice and try to make a decision about hitting or not hitting in .56 seconds. Big hits are gonna happen. Sometimes bad things will be the result.
- jak521

It's OK. We disagree about the intent -- those guys know exactly how a back-pressure hit is lining up -- but at the end of it, he got the five and a major, no supplemental.

I disagree with that, you're cool with it.

I agree, there have been hits by players like Kronwall that have been bad hits. Jurco's jaw clearly takes the overwhelming majority of the contact from White.
- MJL

I can tell you that you are wrong by looking at how displaced Jurko's shoulder pads get at the initial contact. That proves without a doubt that there was also shoulder to chest contact.

We are seeing it differently. I think it was still a high hit, and that at the time the right call was made. Gotta call what you think when it happens.

However, in the link you provided earlier, the angle at Jurko's back (I think the :20 second mark) you can see how much of the impact actually went into his shoulders...

Was the head hit as well.. Yes. Im not denying that, but I dont think as much contact went into the jaw as you think. Agree, disagree.. I just see it differently.

The same evidence as those like you offer that it wasn't.

We can argue this for hours (well actually we can't because I'm done so here's your opportunity to get the last word in as usual), but the real answer as to whether this was a "targeted" head shot (one of the two criteria for the rule) is known only by White.

So it seems the intent is an element and does matter. And unless you have an admission from White, and not an opinion from Ray Ferraro, its all conjecture at this point.

No argument as to the vulnerability of it.
- 77rams

Neither Ferraro in his comments, nor myself in the comments I offered, were in any way stating or insinuating, that White intentionally tried to hit Jurco in the head.
There's more than two criteria for the rule.

So last night I'm three rows from the ice, right of the Red Wings penalty box. Brayden Schenn takes a hit that puts him 6 feet into the air on open ice, about 12 feet infront of me. When I heard the sound that his body made and the way he landed, I thought he broke his arm or his shoulder. To my surprise the kid never left the bench and he returned to the game.

This leaves me to my question.

If Brayden Schenn brings a "soft game" against Toronto on Tuesday, so we forget about this hit, explain he's inconsistent and demand for his trade?

Now, I have no desire to alienate anyone by getting into the argument that I was there, you weren't, bluh bluh bluh. We all saw it. It's midseason. I think an argument can be made that nobody is 100% and that these guys probably wear ice bags as if they are the newest, hottest fashion. Again I ask, if Brayden Schenn doesn't bring a physical game against Toronto, will he be deemed useless and would it be fair by us to do so?

And Yes, I do believe Schenn sort of an undersized guy who cannot bring the same physical game every night. Much bigger guys like Simmonds or Hartnell, I don't think they are capable of physically flying that high into the air.

Of course as always, I could be wrong.

It's OK. We disagree about the intent -- those guys know exactly how a back-pressure hit is lining up -- but at the end of it, he got the five and a major, no supplemental.

I disagree with that, you're cool with it.
- AllInForFlyers

It wasnt a blind side hit. He made sure to circle forward (part of the new rules), he hit the guy a fraction of a second after the puck was released and the hit was high. I had/have no problem with the call.

But at the same time.. the hit he threw was not a suspendable hit. His body went through Jurko's. It was a huge hit, but I dont think it was a head shot by rule.

I can tell you that you are wrong by looking at how displaced Jurko's shoulder pads get at the initial contact. That proves without a doubt that there was also shoulder to chest contact.

We are seeing it differently. I think it was still a high hit, and that at the time the right call was made. Gotta call what you think when it happens.

However, in the link you provided earlier, the angle at Jurko's back (I think the :20 second mark) you can see how much of the impact actually went into his shoulders...

Was the head hit as well.. Yes. Im not denying that, but I dont think as much contact went into the jaw as you think. Agree, disagree.. I just see it differently.
- jak521

At the 28 second mark of the video, and again at the 48 second mark you can clearly see at the initial impact, how Jurco's head is contorted by the direct hit to the jaw. His jaw was the primary point of contact, while the shoulder, mainly the shoulder positioned on the opposite side of White, took some contact on the momentum and the follow through of the hit.

It's OK. We disagree about the intent -- those guys know exactly how a back-pressure hit is lining up -- but at the end of it, he got the five and a major, no supplemental.

I disagree with that, you're cool with it.
- AllInForFlyers

The NHLl obviously agrees with us who think the head wasn't "targeted" or intentionally hit.

I don't agree that a suspension shouldn't have been doled out. There seemingly was a vulnerability issue there that they should have sent another strong message for.

It wasnt a blind side hit. He made sure to circle forward (part of the new rules), he hit the guy a fraction of a second after the puck was released and the hit was high. I had/have no problem with the call.

But at the same time.. the hit he threw was not a suspendable hit. His body went through Jurko's. It was a huge hit, but I dont think it was a head shot by rule.
- jak521

Wow. We REALLY disagree on what we saw. If it wasn't blindside, why didn't Jurco do anything, anything, to avoid the hit?

Because he couldn't see him coming from the blindside angle White took

If a player is vulnerable, let up on the guy. I agree there are times where things happen quick, but this is one of those situations where I think White could've let up.
- MJL

I can agree to a certain extent. What if Jurko fakes the shot there and White already decommits to the hit? We are all yelling, WTF why did just go right by the guy, blah blah blah. Its that gray area of hits.

Wasnt all to the head. Wasnt completely late. Guy didnt get hurt. Didnt leave his feet but absolutely lunged into the hit to maximize impact.

I agree with the way it was handled (and what I had hoped for did happen), but I also wouldnt have been surprised if he had been suspended.

Its a poopty spot really.

The NHLl obviously agrees with us who think the head wasn't "targeted" or intentionally hit.

I don't agree that a suspension shouldn't have been doled out. There seemingly was a vulnerability issue there that they should have sent another strong message for.
- 77rams

I don't think he targeted the head, but the head WAS hit first. I think that's why he wasn't suspended. It was a little dirty as far as timing and the awareness of the player he hit, but I don't think I'd call it a hit where he went after the guys head.

Agree 100%. That kind of predatory hit, on a vulnerable player, is the kind of hit that needs to be removed. If you see a player in that situation, need to let up. It's hard because these players have played this way all their lives. If you see that opportunity, you lay the guy out. It's the culture change that I've posted about many times, that needs to happen.
- MJL

Listening to Matthew Barnaby talk about it on NHL Radio at noon was comical. He was calling for a suspension saying even he knew that hit was late and predatory. Dude that was all you did your whole (frank)ing career.

I can agree to a certain extent. What if Jurko fakes the shot there and White already decommits to the hit? We are all yelling, WTF why did just go right by the guy, blah blah blah. Its that gray area of hits.

Wasnt all to the head. Wasnt completely late. Guy didnt get hurt. Didnt leave his feet but absolutely lunged into the hit to maximize impact.

I agree with the way it was handled (and what I had hoped for did happen), but I also wouldnt have been surprised if he had been suspended.

Its a poopty spot really.
- jak521

You don't have to go for the kill shot, to eliminate a vulnerable player from a play.

Wow. We REALLY disagree on what we saw. If it wasn't blindside, why didn't Jurco do anything, anything, to avoid the hit?

Because he couldn't see him coming from the blindside angle White took
- AllInForFlyers

So then we get into the topic of blindside hits. What constitutes a blind side hit? Not seeing the guy? Having the guy hit you as you turn? Being hit from behind?

White went from behind him, to parallel with him, to in front of him before delivering the hit. He didnt Matt Cooke him. He didnt run him directly from behind. He established himself in front of Jurko and then hit him from the front side.

What do you consider a blind side hit?

You don't have to go for the kill shot, to eliminate a vulnerable player from a play.
- MJL

I get it... but then we open another can of worms. When is it okay to throw a big hit and when is it not okay? Gudas runs guys all the time... should a hard hit be penalized?

So then we get into the topic of blindside hits. What constitutes a blind side hit? Not seeing the guy? Having the guy hit you as you turn? Being hit from behind?

White went from behind him, to parallel with him, to in front of him before delivering the hit. He didnt Matt Cooke him. He didnt run him directly from behind. He established himself in front of Jurko and then hit him from the front side.

What do you consider a blind side hit?
- jak521

Do you think Jurco saw the hit coming?

I get it... but then we open another can of worms. When is it okay to throw a big hit and when is it not okay? Gudas runs guys all the time... should a hard hit be penalized?
- jak521

Gudas is another guy who is a predatory hitter. You play the game and have watched enough hockey. I know that you know the difference between a hit where the purpose is to separate the player from the puck, and a hit that is meant to lay a guy out.

I'm in agreement with most on here about the quality of the broadcast team from last night, but didn't anyone else get a little sick when they compared Gudas to Ulf Samuelsson and Darius Kasparitis?

Great win last night. I've really enjoyed watching them pretty much since Thanksgiving.
- bgratch

I nodded my head in agreement with Ulf...Nastyritis on the other hand I'd say was worse.

Do you think Jurco saw the hit coming?
- MJL

I dont think that matters by rule. What if a guy was skating up the ice looking for a pass and took a hit like Jake did a couple years ago against Detroit? He was making a hockey play and got a guy launching himself right into his head. Hailed as a clean hard nosed hockey hit. Unfortunate that he got hurt, but a clean hit.

Jurko needs to know that by driving between the circles there is an absolute possibility he will be hit. You know that going to that area and dragging a shot. It happens a lot there.. Historically. So, did he see it? Obviously he didnt, but should he expect to be hit? Absolutely.

I dont think that matters by rule. What if a guy was skating up the ice looking for a pass and took a hit like Jake did a couple years ago against Detroit? He was making a hockey play and got a guy launching himself right into his head. Hailed as a clean hard nosed hockey hit. Unfortunate that he got hurt, but a clean hit.

Jurko needs to know that by driving between the circles there is an absolute possibility he will be hit. You know that going to that area and dragging a shot. It happens a lot there.. Historically. So, did he see it? Obviously he didnt, but should he expect to be hit? Absolutely.
- jak521

I agree with all of that. Just trying to explain what a blindside predatory hit is. This is more of a discussion not on what the current rules are, but how things need to change.
Jurco is certainly guilty of admiring his shot, doesn't mean he needs to take a shoulder to the chin for it.

I dont think that matters by rule. What if a guy was skating up the ice looking for a pass and took a hit like Jake did a couple years ago against Detroit? He was making a hockey play and got a guy launching himself right into his head. Hailed as a clean hard nosed hockey hit. Unfortunate that he got hurt, but a clean hit.

Jurko needs to know that by driving between the circles there is an absolute possibility he will be hit. You know that going to that area and dragging a shot. It happens a lot there.. Historically. So, did he see it? Obviously he didnt, but should he expect to be hit? Absolutely.
- jak521

With respect to the hit you mentioned, Kronwall has made that same hit at least a half dozen times. The playoff hit on Havlat is probably the best known. How he (and White) didn't get suspended is beyond me. You make a dangerous hit on a player where you hit the head, you get suspended.

Weal is not happy.
- BiggE

Nor am I. Now White goes back on the PK unit to huff and puff and fail to do his job some more.

Gudas is another guy who is a predatory hitter. You play the game and have watched enough hockey. I know that you know the difference between a hit where the purpose is to separate the player from the puck, and a hit that is meant to lay a guy out.
- MJL

I wouldn't label gudas as a predatory hitter. Most of his hits players are coming straight at him through the neutral zone. He is a bowling ball. Guys like him, kronwall, emelin, are solid low Gravity players. They do hit with an intent to eliminate the player from the puck and send a message that it's going to be physical when he's on the ice. The sheer number of clean hard hits that are also effective doesn't make it fair to label him a predatory hitter

Nor am I. Now White goes back on the PK unit to huff and puff and fail to do his job some more.
- Feanor

I'd like to see the Flyers play Laughton more, and add Raffl to the PK rotation.