Should Marian Hossa be suspended for his hit on Dan Hamhuis?

Two games would be very fair. Yes Hossa isn’t a repeat offender, but IMO it was a more dangerous play than the Ovechkin hit because where Ovechkin did appear to try to be finishing a hit and was in more of a battle for the puck than Hossa who knew very well that there was no way he was catching Hamhuis.

Looks like the same type of hit. Should get the same punishment.

If you call one, you have to call the other.

Definitley. sure, the shove wasn’t nearly as bad (Hossa isn’t nearly as strong as Ovie), but the result was the same. Hossa should get a suspension

But my guess is wheel of discipline is letting this pass Go

the MAJOR difference is the following:

You can clearly see that Campbell cleanly payed the puck and the hit happened well after

The Hossa hit was not executed after a clean play on the puck by hamhuis, neither player (or team for that matter) demonstrated clear control of the puck or control of the play. It was a foot race

Major worthy, absolutely. I think 1 game at the MAXIMUM. Definitely major worthy

The Hossa hit was more of a play to the puck (you can tell by the angle he was taking to attack behind the net) than a play on the man (like the Campbell play) in my mind, definitely a difference.

You did a good lawyer job of making two hits that were different, seem the same. I’ll be back later on, prob tomorrow (Avatar is on TV right now) and explain in depth (if required).

I know their will be those amongst you saying this and that about the stance I have made, but let me make the points after I can get them written down correctly (as Chris did on his).

I agree it was a bad hit, as do the majority of regular posters on SCH.

I don’t completely agree with Chris on your difference/similarities list. I felt like the hit on Campbell was late, given that he had already dished the puck away, while Hamhuis & Hossa are both skating hard toward the puck. And Hossa didn’t seem to use the same amount of force as Ovie (whether or not he’s big & strong notwithstanding) although the outcome was similar. I felt that Hossa’s hit was more a play for the puck that Ovie’s hit was.

Regarding recklessness – I felt that Ovie didn’t need to make that hit, especially so early in the 1st. Hossa made a stupid hit while playing desperate/frustrated/stupid down by one in the 3rd period, so I don’t consider it a reckless hit so much as a stupid hit.

Overall, I thought it was bad hit, but there was no intent & with no history, I think he’ll get suspended for at least a game. Hope Hamhuis is alright.

but that made it 5-5. If the option had been available, I would have voted maybe. I do think the ovie hit was worse, the contact was basically a crosscheck into the boards, and the puck had been played. With the Hossa hit, one hand stayed on the stick, and the puck was in the feet of Hammer.
I understand that some may feel I am looking at them with Hawk colored glasses, but if Hossa does get suspended, I won’t bit… uh, complain. It was an ugly play, but ovies was dirty.
I know it looks like a Hawk invasion in here, but we were invited in, really!

but I don’t know if the league will actually do it.

I honestly don’t trust anyone on either side of the issue—that is, Preds or Hawks fans alike—to be able to see the hit without bias coloring their judgment, so I’ll leave the similarities and differences debate alone. I would like to be objective, but I know I probably can’t be.

where they thought that Hamhuis lost an edge. On replay, I could see it, but I’m wondering what everyone else thinks. I suppose this is actually the same as the whole “toepick” issue with Campbell…

They said, Ovie’s was a hit, Hossa’s was a push. I agree.

(They also went into great detail about the rule and how there is a bunch of leeway with regard to the ref’s judgment in such cases. I “think” they quoted a further rule that agreed with the call made on the ice today. They all agreed that 5 was appropriate and a game would have been too much. Whatever. They’re the “experts.”)

My take is that Hossa was trying to “leverage” himself toward the puck and hold off
Hammer at the same time. Hammer turns and the one hand on his shoulder puts him off balance. Hossa is clearly angling for the puck. It looks like Hammer’s also looking down at the puck, which is what makes him go off balance.

It was a dangerous play because of the boards. (At center ice, this move isn’t even noticed.) “Dangerous” warrants the major it got. Ovie’s was more of a cross check. And totally unnecessary since the puck was away from both players. (Why didn’t Ovie turn toward the puck instead of going another step and nailing Campbell?)

I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a game suspension, but I don’t think the play warrants it. I do sincerely hope Hammer is OK.

right after the hit, i youtubed the ovechkin hit on campbell.. they looked extremely similar. ovie seemed to use more body/shoulder, whereas hossa’s looked more like a push. i wouldn’t argue either way. if he’s suspended, i can see a 1 game (hossa doesn’t have the reputation and its playoffs). great game, great series guys.

Burton,Aditya T, and Hoag, hell of a blog you got here. This is the way its done. Props.

“What a relief,” said Hossa, who hit Preds defenseman Dan Hamhuis from behind with 1:03 left in the third period. “It was one of the longest I’ve ever sat in the penalty box, especially in a big game like this. Luckily the rebound came to me, so I just put it in. The guys on the PK deserve lots of credit. I was jumping in the box like a little kid when I saw there were only a few seconds left (in the penalty). I couldn’t think of a better ending than this.”

anyone watching this Sharks v Avs game?

Is Hamhuis OK? I haven’t seen an injury report on him. I am hoping of course that everything is fine, I was just curious if any information had been released yet.

Barry Melrose:

``That’s a really tough call for the Nash vi lle Pre da tors. I think he should get one game. Because Hossa sco red the goal, I think you can punish him. That’s exactly what Ovech kin did as far as I’m con cer ned. I agree with Matthew. Ovech kin is a repeat offen der so it’s a little dif fe­rent sce na rio. But because it’s a push from behind and because there’s a chance of really inju­ring a pla yer, I think he should get at least a game because they’ve already set the pre ce dent with the Ovech kin hit.’’

Matthew Barnaby:
``I think he should have been kic ked out of the game when you look back at the check. He wasn’t trying to mali ciously hurt Hamhuis on the play, but he did push him from behind and did take him into the boards very hard.

``He was not trying to hurt him, but it doesn’t mat ter. He gets the five-minute major, but now the ref has to decide `Is this an intent to injure or is he trying to hurt?’ … A cou ple months ago, this is Alex Ovech kin in the same buil ding on Brian Camp bell. Brian Camp bell just came back and star ted pla ying in the pla yoffs. Ovech kin gets sus pen ded two games.

``There is a little dif fe rence. With Ovech kin, he is a repeat offen der. He has had that chance where he’s done it a few times before. But I think this is a pre ce dent. The NHL has to look at it. Hossa doesn’t leave the game. He gets a five-minute major, comes back and sco res the win ning goal. To me the NHL has to sus pend him for one game. I know it’s only one game, but it’s still worth three or four in the regu lar season.’’

I realize I have my own biases, but I am fond on the Hawks and for what it’s worth, here are my thoughts on the matter:

The hits are very similar. I don’t know if it much matters that one is more a hit and the other is a push since the end result was the same. With hits like these, the player’s own momentum and gravity are what cause the most trouble. What’s more, I’ve watched Ovechkin lay hits his whole career, and it’s pretty obvious that he wasn’t trying to flatten Campbell.

The differences in the hits are largely pretty minor. Ovechkin’s hit was after the puck was away, but seemed to just be finishing a check. Campbell also gets pushed harder, but a little more from the side than Hossa’s push. Ultimately there isn’t enough different enough about the hits to ignore the stupidity of the action itself.

The only differences that matter are this: Ovechkin has a record and it’s the playoffs. Neither of those things excuse Hossa’s actions, though. He wasn’t thinking and ended up hurting a player who couldn’t protect himself. Neither hit implies intent (to claim to know what a player is thinking is arrogant, but neither player puts everything they can into the hit so much as they are looking to make the next play).

What it comes down to for me is that Hossa should see 1 game. Hits in that area in the ice cause too much damage to be taken lightly, but his lack of record and the fact that it’s the playoffs should give him a bit of a break from the precedent set by Ovie’s suspension.

That said? Chances are it gets nothing knowing the NHL.

The NHL for right or wrong has to suspend him at least one game, if for no other reason than the precedent has been set by the Ovie hit and subsequent punishment. However, like others have said with it being the playoffs I don’t think anything will come from it other than a fine maybe. It sure would be different had it been Hammer that ran Ho$$a into the boards and not the other way around.

SHOULD Hossa be suspended? No. WILL Hossa be suspended? Probably. If you actually look at the two hits, you can see several differences.
1: Ovechkin shows no interest in the puck. If he did, he would have noticed that it was moving in the opposite direction a full two seconds before he made contact with Campbell, let alone “finished his check.” Hossa gave a light shove with his left hand while staring directly at the puck and trying to get it with his stick. Someone will try and say this doesnt matter, but it shows intent. Ovie got beat and punished Campbell, Hossa was fighting for the play.
2: The nature of the hit. Ovie put his forearm and shoulder into Campbell’s numbers and drove him, intentionally, forward and down into the boards. This constitutes the game misconduct that Ovie received. Hossa shoved forward with one hand, which at that speed and angle caused Hamhuis to lose his edge. This constitutes the 5 minute major that Hossa received.
3. Ovie was a repeat offender and has showed a constant disregard for the safety of other players. This was a major factor in the decision to suspend him.

Ovechkin got suspended because he is a goon that can shoot the puck. He continually pulls crap that would make Sean Avery blush and gets away with it. If he takes his pride out of the equation he has the potential to be one of the greats in the history of the NHL. As it is, I think he will be an interesting side note who never accomplished anything.

Chris the only thing I can do for you here is tell you why the two calls were different and why if the calls end up being the same the punishments will still be different.

Any unnecessary contact with a player playing the puck on an obvious "icing" or "off-side" play which results in that player being knocked into the boards is "boarding" .

• There are no rules lessening penalties because of toe picks. So let’s just ignore that.

• To the best of my knowledge, Players are suspended for Game Misconducts or Match Penalties, not Majors. And you have to have multiple Game Misconducts (3?).

Ovie was given a Major Penalty and a Game Misconduct but not a Match
Hossa was given a Major Penalty only so NO GM or Match

• Match Penalties are given for intent to injure.

Since Ovie wasn’t given one and nobody is claiming Hossa should, MP’s are not in play here.

Which Major was called

Rule 42 – Boarding
42.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

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

Rule 44 – Checking from Behind
44.1 Checking from Behind – A check from behind is a check delivered on a player who is not aware of the impending hit, therefore unable to protect or defend himself, and contact is made on the back part of the
body. When a player intentionally turns his body to create contact with his back, no penalty shall be assessed.

44.2 Minor Penalty – There is no provision for a minor penalty for checking from behind.

Now here is the reason the calls were different. Ovie was penalized on Rule 44 not rule 42, a hit from behind. If you look at your replay, one of Ovies hands is clearly on the back letters of Campbell’s back.

If you look about a minute and twelve seconds into the Hossa video you will see that neither of Hossa’s hands were on the letters on Hamhuis’ back (visualize where two numbers would be). So Hossa was penalized for boarding rule 42 not rule 44 because his hit was called a check from the side.

You said they were both hit from behind but that is NOT the case or the calls.

Getting a GM

Rule 44 – Checking from Behind
44.5 Game Misconduct – A game misconduct penalty must be assessed anytime a major penalty is applied for checking from behind.

So Ovie was disqualified automatically because of the different rule.

Just for your information Campbell ended up with a concussion and broken collarbone from the hit since he went into the boards head and shoulder first. People only remember that he broke his collarbone because that took longer to heal. Anyway, it didn’t matter in Ovie’s case because the call was boarding from Behind which meant "where Campbell was hit didn’t matter."

Rule 42 – Boarding
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.

So for a boarding call it is the discretion of the Ref’s to determine the Game Misconduct. In my opinion the reason Hossa wasn’t given the GM was because Hamhuis upper body was physically turned sideways from the boards. When he hit the boards he hit them on his side. Like I said it looked like he was able to protect himself at least a little bit there. Since he didn’t look like he hit head first you didn’t get the GM you just got the Major.

Suspensions

Ovie was suspended by the league for the GM and having multiple outstanding Game Misconducts. And as was stated the length of Ovies suspension was based on him being a repeat offender.

Hossa was not given a Game Misconduct or a Match. Now if Hamhuis does have a concussion they might change the referee call and give him a GM. However you need multiple GM’s in a period of time to get suspended for Game Misconducts. Ovie had them, Hossa doesn’t so the punishments are going to be different even if the calls for these incidents end up being the same.

So there you have it. You may not like it, I know you don’t agree with it but that is why, imo, the calls were called so differently and why I don’t think Hossa will be suspended

First, the penalty was called wrong. Hossa’s hands were on Hamhuis back, correct?

44.1 Checking from Behind – A check from behind is a check delivered on a player who is not aware of the impending hit, therefore unable to protect or defend himself, and contact is made on the back part of the body. When a player intentionally turns his body to create contact with his back, no penalty shall be assessed.

It doesn’t matter if Hamhuis was playing the puck. It doesn’t matter that it wasn’t a very hard check. It was a check on a defenseless player from behind.

44.2 Minor Penalty – There is no provision for a minor penalty for checking from behind.

So it has to be a major…

44.5 Game Misconduct – A game misconduct penalty must be assessed anytime a major penalty is applied for checking from behind.

Hossa should have been thrown out if the referee’s made the right call.

Now as to the suspension? This is the 2nd game in a row that we’ve had a Blackhawks player irresponsibly (and yes it was irresponsible: this doesn’t mean that it was intentional) check a Predators player into the boards. What kind of message does that send to players if nothing is done about this?

The reason why I think this hit is worse than the Ovechkin hit is the direction in which the players are skating. Campbell is already turning and is skating closer to parallel than perpendicular to the boards. Meanwhile, Hamhuis is skating almost directly at the boards.

Hossa pushes clearly from the side. Ovechkin’s hit was more to the back than Hossa’s. But then again, Hossa pushes Hamhuis before he plays the puck. I guess that’s more legal with regards to something like interference, but it also means Hamhuis is less prepared, considering what he’s doing, to defend himself from a hit.

It’s the playoffs, so I don’t think it’ll be penalized with suspension. But I think one or two games is appropriate. Probably the one because he’s not a repeat offender.

especially since the whole Ove / Campbell hit.

When it happened, I was thinking they might just give the major. And they did.

My seconds thought was there was zero intent to injure. I’ve never seen Hossa act dirty, not in PIt, not in Det, not wearing the indianhead.

That said, the action does probably warrant a 1 game suspension. I think the NHL would look worse not giving him 1 game. This would probably setup a massive (knock on wood) game 7 Wednesday.

I never like to see players get hurt. And honestly, the 1 issue that was briefly mentioned but quickly forgotten is that :

THE TRAPEZOID NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE GAME

It’s putting players in danger, and I think the post lockout NHL has increased scoring by eliminating the clutch and grab and the removal of the trapezoid will not significantly decrease scoring.

Maybe it wouldnt have made a difference in this situtation, but before another defender is exposed, this needs to be changed before the 2010-2011 season

Marian Hossa has disciplinary hearing with NHL this afternoon. Keep in mind Matt Cooke (on Savard) had one too.

Milbury shockingly calling for one game. Good on him.

And here’s why…

If you look at the two plays in a vacuum, yes…they’re the same…

But look at them in context…

Ovechkin: Third non-fighting major of the season. It was his second suspension. His reckless play was becoming a problem. Developing rep as dirty/reckless player. Do you know how rare it is for a player to have three non-fighting majors in their career…much less in a single season?

Hossa: It was the first non-fighting major of his career (and only the fifth major of his career). He’s not a dirty player, he doesn’t have the rep…I think if Ovechkin had made the same play without the previous majors and suspension behind him, there would not have been a suspension.

but he wasn’t.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=527001

http://predators.nhl.tv/team/console.jsp?catid=737&id=67583

Such a classy guy, as always. Not only is he so good-looking (an aside; female fan here), but he’s outspoken about his faith, and has young men and women with mental challenges as his guests on game nights.

So glad he’s doing okay! Could easily have turned out otherwise.