Tim Panaccio: Does Wilson Deserve a Suspension?

Tim Panaccio: Does Wilson Deserve a Suspension?
- tpanaccio

I'd say he deserves 4 or 5 games. If this was say Rinaldo hitting Backstrom, there wouldn't even be a discussion on whether or not to suspend. The masses would be calling to revoke the franchise..

An even better question. Should Wilson be eligible to receive Christmas gifts this year?

Hey Tim. Last night Garth had a replay that showed the reverse angel. Almost from Schenn's perspective and I'm not so sure he saw him coming at all. When Brayden turned his head to look he appeared to be looking up the boards for the wrap around and at the same time Wilson had to swoop around the Flyer player to make the hit keeping him in Brayden' s "Blind spot". I dont think he saw him at all and everyone say he turned towards the boards putting himself in the vulnerable position but, if he didn't see him and his intent was to wrap the puck around the boards it would be natural for him to do just what he did...... What do you think? Have you seen that replay? Wilson definitely gets a couple games, it was a clear cut charge. I dont think he gets much more though, hes young, new to the big leagues and i dont think he has any suspension history. But man that was a dirty hit. I assume it was payback because Brayden was throwing the body himself all game.

The thing that concerns me in this situation is the fact the Schenn turned his back to avoid Wilson. If I'm Schenn and I see a 6'4 204Ibs guy coming at me, I'm going to dish the puck around the boards to Simmons (who was in the slot and available to retrieve a puck thrown to the weak side boards) and brace for the hit. Instead, Schenn tried to carry the puck for too long and gets demolished because of it. The NHL has to understand that Wilson is coming into the play on a heavy forecheck with high speed and Schenn could have avoided turning, resulting in less of an impact. This hit look so terrible because Schenn is in the "Danger Zone" which is around 3-4 feet from the boards; this means that Schenn will endure two impacts: the initial hit and the impact with the boards. A hit in the "danger zone" which results in the player falling violently, head first into the boards almost always results in the attacking player receiving an automatic game misconduct. But under the circumstances of the hit, I would be shocked to see if the NHL acts to suspend Wilson for any future games.

It was charging without a doubt. Wilson came from the blue line at full stride and hit him. I can't say he "hunted" him down like others have because there was a battle for the puck along the boards where it was one capital against three flyers and Wilson was going in for support. That turn at the last second really is hard to put a judgement on.

When Schenn turned, Wilson was already in the process of giving the hit. It's hard to stop at that point. I don't know if Schenn saw him coming or not but he used his body to protect the puck 3 feet from the boards. At lower levels they're taught to do that by the boards cause they'll just bounce right off and be ok. But that far out, that's when you go head first into the boards.

I can say charging was the right call, which was the call on the ice (not a hit from behind). Deserved a penalty for it, not sure a match penalty was "Deserved" unless it was to either protect Wilson from any other incidents in the game or for the refs to remain in control of the game.

We'll see how Shanny deals with it, optically it looked bad which is what the NHL seems to be concerned about.

Suspension... no doubt in my mind at all...
I'm guessing 2-3 games. (first offence)

2 games is probably the most he will get.

You guys talking about Schenn seeing Wilson and turning need to rewatch the hit, especially the two angles that starts around 1:10, because it isn't clear he saw Wilson, and he barely moved.

You guys talking about Schenn seeing Wilson and turning need to rewatch the hit, especially the two angles that starts around 1:10, because it isn't clear he saw Wilson, and he barely moved.


- wolfhounds

I think he saw him, but it was a dangerous hit.

I'm thinking 2-3 games. It is his first, so he isn't on the "watch list" for repeat offenders. That being said, while Schenn may have turned into it, Wilson was accelerating from the blue line and hit min in the danger zone. Had it been Rinaldo, there would have been the legion of Flyer haters calling for his head. If you remove the fan emotion, the league is trying to remove these types of hits regardless of who hit who. For that reason, I think he will be suspended for a few. Just an opinion...

Rule 42 - Charging http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26331

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.

Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

A minor, major or a major and a game misconduct shall be imposed on a player who charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease.

A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

42.2 Minor Penalty - The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a minor penalty, based on the degree of violence of the check, to a player guilty of charging an opponent.

42.3 Major Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a major penalty, based on the degree of violence of the check, to a player guilty of charging an opponent (see 42.5).

42.4 Match Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by charging.

42.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is imposed under this rule for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed.

42.6 Fines and Suspensions – When a major penalty and a game misconduct is assessed for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall be imposed.

If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28).

Ref called a Major for Charging and a Game Misconduct.

Looks like its automatically $100 which is basically a single ticket in the cheap seats, parking and 2 beers in Philly. That fine is a joke, basically = $5 for you and me.

It doesn't look like he targeted Schenn's head but he clearly ran him and he caused the injury. If Wilson takes some speed off the check to make a legal hit then Schenn doesn't reach the boards.

I say 2 game suspension because it wasn't clearly an intent to injure but it falls under the same premise of emanating reckless play.

I'd say it's in the 2-3 game suspension range.

There was a time when players would get their sticks up when they saw a guy coming like Wilson was -- Mark Messier was renowned for it.

It's not that players shouldn't hit or get hit. It's a physical sport, and players should expect some level of contact when they have the puck, especially along the boards.

What Wilson did should've been met with a stick to the face, maybe the butt end.

Maybe Schenn gets a penalty for doing so, and it would be deserved.

But two other things would happen: Schenn wouldn't have been knocked senseless, and Wilson would maybe think twice about running the next guy.

1-2 games. Reckless charge near the boards.

There was a time when players would get their sticks up when they saw a guy coming like Wilson was -- Mark Messier was renowned for it.

It's not that players shouldn't hit or get hit. It's a physical sport, and players should expect some level of contact when they have the puck, especially along the boards.

What Wilson did should've been met with a stick to the face, maybe the butt end.

Maybe Schenn gets a penalty for doing so, and it would be deserved.

But two other things would happen: Schenn wouldn't have been knocked senseless, and Wilson would maybe think twice about running the next guy.
- AllInForFlyers

That's the issue. People always talk about players protecting themselves or not putting themselves in vulnerable positions, but they would have called a penalty if Schenn got his stick or elbow up and into position for Wilson to slam into.

It's a crapshoot. All depends on where the arrow lands on Banahan's Random Punishment Board!

Today's hockey 2 games. He definitely charged him, but if Schenn does not turn, it's just a solid hit. Players today are taught to turn and face the boards because if you get hit it's a penalty. Players need to ask themselves is the 2 or 5 worth the concussion.

Today's hockey 2 games. He definitely charged him, but if Schenn does not turn, it's just a solid hit. Players today are taught to turn and face the boards because if you get hit it's a penalty. Players need to ask themselves is the 2 or 5 worth the concussion.
- Champ

If Schenn doesn't turn the result would have been exactly the same except maybe Schenn hits the back of his head against the boards.

Rule 42 - Charging http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26331

- JGHawley

I think Boarding could have been an option for the Ref as well. Many people comment on whether it was a hit in the back or whether Schenn turned, etc... That really doesn't matter in either charge or boarding. Wilson did not try at all to limit the hit Blaming Schenn, is kind of like the old argument that the girl deserve to be raped because she dressed sexy.

Rule 41 - Boarding

41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize the contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

Any unnecessary contact with a player playing the puck on an obvious “icing” or “off-side” play which results in that player hitting or impacting the boards is “boarding” and must be penalized as such. In other instances where there is no contact with the boards, it should be treated as “charging.”

Thanks "Leon neon" for putting up the boarding rule. I should have referenced that too.

No supplemental discipline at all for Biff the Bully.

Anyone want to place bets on the discipline that will be required for whatever Flyer will take action the next time the Flyers and Caps play? Have we learned nothing from Steve Moore? If he had been reprimanded for his actions would Bertuzzi be in court again next month?

When is Bettman going to fire Shannahan or get him under control. If this would have been a Flyers player hitting Ovechan, that player would have been suspended on Wednesday because of their jersey color and logo on the front. If memory serves me correctly didn't a Flyers player get a suspension during the preseason for a less invasive hit and subsequent Boarding Call!