Schenn is lucky NK didn't drop actually. Did you see Schenn's last fight?
- rockychocbill

Its irrelevant NK destroys players because he knows there arent any repercussions. If the instigator rule wasnt in place guys like him wouldnt try to decapitate other players. Its just a lack of respect.

On another note...great game Bryz!

And how about reporters that don't actually ask questions any longer and then look for players to say something...wtf? I love how Bryz looked at Boruk and said: what do you want me to say?

Ask a f'n question!

and they actually used that EXACT hit in videos and in writing reference to talk about how they were changing the rules and focusing on hits targeting the head.
- Don'tForgetTocchet

Yes they did. If the rule was ANY contact to the head will result in a disciplinary action, then there is no debating it, the fact there are shades of grey that are included in the rule, make it subjective

that's (frank)ing classless of them
- 2Real

reminds me of when cambell ko'd umberger and buffalo replayed the hit over and over.
no class at al

Its irrelevant NK destroys players because he knows there arent any repercussions. If the instigator rule wasnt in place guys like him wouldnt try to decapitate other players. Its just a lack of respect.
- joepa90

This. Someone should have dropped the gloves and made him swallow some blood for that hit. Bottom line.

you said it yourself kronwall knew he could either not hit him or hit him in the head or try a hip check
- flyerscup2011

I didn't say anything about the head. Don't put words in my mouth. I said he could have low bridged him or not hit him at all. The head was an unfortunate part of the contact. Not the primary target though imo.

according to some in this board, there is a place for it.... smh
- flyerscup2011

Some of the Flyers too.

Giroux: "It was a good hit".

Breeze: "It was a good hit".

richards' hit on boothe is one example the league used when making the new rule, so no wonder.

kronwall baited, lined up and dump trucked voracek, knowing he was going to hit nothing but head. how that can be deemed legal is extremely puzzling to me
- flyerscup2011

How can you possibly know this? I mean seriously dude.

I didn't say anything about the head. Don't put words in my mouth. I said he could have low bridged him or not hit him at all. The head was an unfortunate part of the contact. Not the primary target though imo.
- rockychocbill

How can it not be the primary target when that is what he hit?

Its irrelevant NK destroys players because he knows there arent any repercussions. If the instigator rule wasnt in place guys like him wouldnt try to decapitate other players. Its just a lack of respect.
- joepa90

Was the instigator around when Lindros and Stevens played?

reminds me of when cambell ko'd umberger and buffalo replayed the hit over and over.
no class at al
- thenighttrain17

now i'm really going to put a hole through my wall

Some of the Flyers too.

Giroux: "It was a good hit".

Breeze: "It was a good hit".
- 77rams

giroux wouldn't be saying that if it was him

Yes they did. If the rule was ANY contact to the head will result in a disciplinary action, then there is no debating it, the fact there are shades of grey that are included in the rule, make it subjective
- PLindbergh31

which makes it a stupid rule

Some of the Flyers too.

Giroux: "It was a good hit".

Breeze: "It was a good hit".
- 77rams

giroux said he didn't see it. flyers were showing class by not lobbying for suspension

now i'm really going to put a hole through my wall
- 2Real

take the anger out on berry

reminds me of when cambell ko'd umberger and buffalo replayed the hit over and over.
no class at al
- thenighttrain17

glad someone else saw that... they played it at the beginning of away feeds against the sabres for like 2 years but everybody denied that ever happened.

Was the instigator around when Lindros and Stevens played?
- rockychocbill

Yea

http://video.nhl.com/vide...mpid=nhl-hp-vidchn-safety

did turco clear waivers yet? i hope somebody takes him, just to (frank) with the bruins.

Yes they did. If the rule was ANY contact to the head will result in a disciplinary action, then there is no debating it, the fact there are shades of grey that are included in the rule, make it subjective
- PLindbergh31

sure it's subjective

but no matter what, leaving voracek flailing on the ice with no whistle was BS

and shanahan better be looking at it, with all of his new rules in mind.

Was the instigator around when Lindros and Stevens played?
- rockychocbill

Was put in place in 1992. So whats your point?

take the anger out on berry
- thenighttrain17

i think he got banned from the site

giroux said he didn't see it. flyers were showing class by not lobbying for suspension
- flyerscup2011

Oh.

So shoulder to head is legal?
I think they want to eliminate head shots, not just elbow to head shots.
- Marc D

Again, I think it comes down to whether or not the league thinks (as I do) that Kronwall had time and opportunity to avoid the head contact and still make a check or a hockey play. If they think he had time to avoid it and did not, then he should be suspended.

If they think that he could not reasonably be expected to avoid contact with the head in that situation, then he shouldn't be suspended.

I think it's a textbook example of the kind of hit the league wants to eliminate, as was the Richards hit on Booth, and the Cooke hit on Savard. They are all basically the same play in my view. A player not paying close enough attention to his surroundings, and getting hit directly in the head by the checking player. Rule 48 was allegedly created to eliminate those types of hits. Neither Cooke nor Richards had as much time to line up their hits as Kronwall did his. Both were more "bang-bang" plays than this hit. Yet they were both shown as examples of hits that should be avoided.

To me, this seems like another tailor made example of what the rule is supposed to eliminate.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=60&intcmpid=nhl-hp-vidchn-safety
- eayost

interesting