HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Rowe, Thomas" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Rowe, Thomas
Date:
Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:37:48 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
OK, FWIW
 
 
> why shouldn't the hit from behind have been a 5-minute major and a
> misconduct?
>
The 5 min major was put into effect to emphasize a penalty that was
dangerous in terms of the injury in might cause.  Hitting from behind, as I
understand it, implies the person did NOT know they were about to be hit.
 
> Sure, the BC player looked around and saw that an OSU player was skating
> towards him--he was about 50 feet away at the time--but the BC player
> didn't
> draw the penalty by turning his back at the last minute. The BC player was
> facing the boards the entire time, and all the OSU player had to do was to
> not hit him in the back and drive him into the boards.
>
Ah - and this may be the crux of the matter.  The stick was actually in
cross-checking position, but the BC guy was not facing directly into the
boards, and was driven down and at an angle to the boards.  It looked like
he only grazed the boards with his right shoulder on the way down and the
big boom was the OSU guy hitting the glass.
 
> Instead, the OSU player skates towards the BC player at full speed in a
> straight line and nails him, fluch on the back. If that isn't five
> minutes, then your saying that hitting from behind is a minor penalty
> unless a major injury occurs, .....
>
Well, I wouldn't say that.  However, both announcers, after watching slo-mo,
and most people writing ot the list seem to agree that while it was a
definite penalty, quite possibly worth a double, it was more akin to
charging than boarding or hitting from behind.  For me the key was not so
much the BC player knowing a hit was eminent (though that plays a small
role) but the angle at which the hit actually took place.  Had the OSU guy
wanted to injure, a relatively easy adjustment in the cross-check position
would have made the hit much worse and, IMO, he would have deserved the 5.
But I don't think the replay holds up to scrutiny for a 5.
 
> Tom Rowe                                          [log in to unmask]
> ====================================
> Home of Division 3 National Champion Pointers
> 89, 90, 91 & 93 and National Runners Up 92 & 98
> ====================================
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2