Tuesday's notes: Lucic-Miller still the talk of the league
by Dirk Hoag on Nov 15, 2011 7:58 AM EST
in Nashville Predators News
Email
Print
Even though last night's Hockey Hall of Fame ceremony took center stage, talk around the NHL is still focused on the Milan Lucic-Ryan Miller incident, and Brendan Shanahan's decision not to suspend Lucic for running the Buffalo goaltender. In this morning's notes, we have writers wondering if we have a new bully rampaging their way through the league, the question of whether "on-ice justice" actually has any effect, and a whole lot more...
Take the OTF Discount to save on Nashville Predators tickets!
Nashville Predators News
Taking Out The Trash – More Rubbish From Hockey’s Future | Admirals Roundtable
I hesitated a bit over whether to include that Hockey's Future article in yesterday's notes piece, and perhaps I should have left it out altogether. Or would folks rather I include it and point out the problems? I know sometimes noses can get bent out of shape.
Nashville is a hockey town - CBC Sports
Women's hockey legend Cassie Campbell came to Nashville for Saturday's game as part of the CBC crew, and left impressed.
Nashville Predators look to fill Joel Ward's void - The Tennessean
So far I don't see anyone stepping into that role successfully.
The Predators rank tops among professional sports teams in the bang for their payroll buck | Nashville City Paper
It looks like someone may have just come across the Bloomberg article from a few weeks ago...
Also, kudos to Colin Wilson for participating in a recent anti-bullying campaign:
Around the Wide Wide World of Hockey
Mark Howe Hockey Hall of Fame speech a show stopper (w/VIDEO) - Hockey Gear HQ
The highlight of the 2011 Hockey Hall of Fame induction ceremony was Mark Howe's acceptance speech, a touch of pure class.
Shanahan on Lucic ruling, slams Buffalo’s ‘irresponsible’ comments - Puck Daddy
Was this Brendan Shanahan's most controversial ruling yet?
Are The Bruins Once Again The NHL’s Bullies? - The Hockey Writers
If the NHL can't slow them down, can anyone?
No, He Doesn’t Have a Point - CanucksCorner.com
Then again, Tom Benjamin pours water on the whole notion of on-ice justice.
Ruff foresees goalie violence; Bruins GM mocks Miller’s potty-mouth - Puck Daddy
Does the league need to do something as a result of the Lucic-Miller incident?
N.H.L. General Managers to Discuss Rule Changes - NYTimes.com
Forget this stuff, we're interested in the trade talks which will surely take place at times.
Nathan MacKinnon’s A Future NHL Superstar - The Hockey Writers
Projecting top picks for the 2013 draft? Gadzooks!
Zero Points, Zero Love for Blake Comeau - Lighthouse Hockey
They're losing patience with the Islanders' 2nd-round pick from 2004...
Technology, hockey savvy put Phoenix Coyotes video coach Steve Peters in demand - AZ Central
A key contributor to the Coyotes organization hasn't seen the team play live in years.
Bourque miffed over Hrudey's remarks - Calgary Sun
Hockey Night in Canada talking head Kelly Hrudey ripped into Calgary's Rene Bourque for basically not caring.
Why Now? - Mile High Hockey
David ponders the rather odd timing with Colorado naming Milan Hejduk captain.
Boston Bruins attacking Rangers fans among NHL's weirdest scenes - Adrian Dater - SI.com
Adrian Dater shares the wild & wacky...
Flyers vs. Hurricanes: Claude Giroux scores like 80 goals, Flyers win - Broad Street Hockey
Philadelphia pulls into the Eastern Conference lead with a 5-3 triumph at Carolina.
Sabres vs. Canadiens Recap: Enroth Still Stays Perfect On The Season - Die By The Blade
At least Buffalo got back in the win column, to help erase the memory of that stinker against Boston.
About Last Night - Jets: 5 Lighting: 2 Stamkos: Sucks. - Arctic Ice Hockey
Not as much as the headline writer here, apparently!
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Soccer
Why do I get the feeling that the league is going to expand the crease and create a goalie box like they have in Soccer. In my opinion, Lucic was still playing a live puck. Yes, Miller had possession, but is he supposed to give up at that point? Miller was looking to play the puck, not create a stoppage. By pressuring Miller, Lucic was looking for him to either mishandle the puck or even intercept the pass/clear.
But to be fair, I also hate the way the NFL is treating QBs like they’re more fragile than other players. So I may be a bit of a dinosaur in that regard….
TN Sports fan in Hoosier Country....
Yes, but in soccer
The goalie box is called the “Penalty Area” and in many way favors the offense. Many goalies have been red carded and given up penalty shots coming out at the attecker.
The uproar is only in response to the severity of suspensions that have been handed out this season. And this whole uproar has been childish and laughable. The rules clearly state how the situation should’ve been handled, and the ref handled in a perfectly appropriate manner according to those rules. I also do not believe that injury should play into a decision, just, as Shanahan noted, whether there was intent to injure or not.
So, Lucic makes a bad decision and levels a goalie. He takes him two minutes. The end.
I’m sure Lucic as well as myself hope for a swift recovery for Miller.
Puck And Punk blog: The only music with enough heart for hockey.
Follow me on twitter:@3DLink
Well, to be fair,
there are reasons that goalie people are concerned about this. It has more to do with how this is being interpreted than with the actual decision. There actually are people who believe that Shanahan “finally saw the need to limit the goaltender’s ability to move around the ice” and “finally put limits on goalies’ protection.” They see it as an intentional message from the league to goalies to stay in the crease or get creamed and they support that message. That’s very troubling.
Justin over at TGG pointed out that goalie equipment is not designed to protect the body from hits like skaters’ equipment partially is. It’s designed to dissipate impact from the puck, not protect from collision. In addition, it’s getting lighter and smaller, affording zero protection in cases like this one.
Most goalie people I’ve heard or talked to don’t think it was a suspendable offense. But we are concerned with how people are taking a broad interpretation of it as going beyond the specifics of this case and sending a message to goalies.
And believe me goalies are very very worried about the interpretation of it. Last night I saw two goalies essentially challenge the refs to draw a line on contact—Enroth and Roloson. I expect that to continue over the next couple of weeks. If a guy sees a chance to get a call, he’s gonna take it, even if it means putting himself at risk, because the need for clarification is so great.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
CA, there is a line on contact. Anything beyond incidental contact with the goalie will be penalized, as happened with Lucic. Supplementary discipline even available, by rule, if necessary.
In this instance, Lucic did not do any of the primary things that get you suspended: a) target the head, b) use his stick as a weapon, or c) intend to injure. In my eyes, he very clearly made hard contact and was penalized for it on a play where he was very clearly going hard for the puck.
What is it exactly that needs to be clarified in your mind? Are you factoring in the injury? I think it takes away from the integrity of the game to consider supplementary discipline on a play where there is no clear intent to harm the other player.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
First, I don’t think the Lucic hit was a suspendable offense. It was penalized and that’s that. Given the “code of honor” in hockey he also ought to have been bloodied up. Someone on that team needed to stand up for Miller there.
The problem as it exists right now is that a LOT of people, both fans and media, have said that this ruling decreases those protections you mention, that it makes the bubble smaller. (just go to twitter and search “Lucic” and you’ll see what I mean.) That’s clearly not in the rules (nor in the “code”) but if skaters come to believe that the rules won’t be enforced as stringently as they were before, you’re going to see more incidents. And like it or not goalies are physically more vulnerable in these collisions. The protection exists for a reason.
Some people aren’t looking at this as a specific case but as a broader message. There is a group of people saying that this ruling proves that goalies have to stay in the net and that if they don’t stay in their net and someone hits them, they were asking for it. Goalies want to know what’s going to be called, what’s going to be suspended, and how far the league is going to back them up. Is the league going to limit how and where they can play the puck, how aggressive they can be? In other words, is the league going to take aggressive goalie play out of the game (putting guys like Thomas, Miller, and Pekka out of business) by not calling the penalties and not taking a stand if the incident occurs outside the crease?
So I believe that goalies are going to force the issue and make the refs act. They’re going to test the boundaries of their protection because they aren’t sure its there anymore.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
I hear you but my problem is still that a penalty was called on this play and most of the people that you are referring to are treating this as if Lucic was not penalized because there was no suspension. That it is suddenly “open season” on goalies.
I too think you will probably see refs call some ticky-tack stuff in the near term as a reaction (and definitely some goalies demanding a call after even minor incidental contact) but I don’t see any situation where goalie contact is going to become encouraged because the precedent for “non” calls has been set as some of the alarmists are speculating.
I don’t see the league giving them a license to roam and negating the ability of an opposing player to make a play on the puck either. That play could have just as easily turned out like this.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
to add
Shanny said that a 5 minute penalty probably could have been assessed on the ice, but without an intent to injure, or even an intent to run the goalie, there was no grounds for a suspension. That doesn’t mean that intentional contact won’t be met with harsher punishment in the future.
Keys to the game: GA<GF
In addition, don’t forget about the people who are saying that the goalie should not be afforded protection and that the outcome of this case has finally broken that protection. That’s the attitude that’s worrisome.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Well, as the rules are written, the goalie is protected. Any violent collision with a goalie that isn’t caused by a direct action of the goalie is currently at least a minor penalty, no exceptions. So, in my mind, people can gripe about goalies being protected all they want but until rule 42 is rewritten, checking a goalie isn’t even a rule with a lot of grey area.
Honestly, I think this such a hot-button story because Miller got absolutely rag-dolled (it’s hard to imagine him absorbing that hit any worse than he did) and the guys on the ice did absolutely zip to Lucic afterward. Not to mention the little pity party Miller threw himself with the media post-game. They didn’t exactly come off as a group of Spartan warriors as a whole.
On a related note, I bet if Miller had been injured at the time the likelihood of a 5 minute penalty would have gone way up.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
as the rules are written, the goalie is protected
You see that and I see that and in a sense the goalies probably see that. But if I were out there on the ice, put in a position where all of a sudden I wasn’t sure that some fool wouldn’t take the risk, I’d want to be abso-damn-lutely certain that the league meant what it said. I’d push and push and push until I got a call just to test where the ref was drawing the line. Because there’s contact all the time that isn’t called, but you had some reasonable certainty that you could move without being body-checked.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
There should be a line for sure but, in my mind, deciding to race Milan Lucic for a breakaway should never be a decision that doesn’t carry any risk.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
In my mind, racing directly into Milan Lucic ’s path is one of the dumbest moves ever. Leaving your net completely undefended while you do so ranks right up there, tho.
I’m less concerned by the specifics of this case than in how it’s being played by different sides in a debate on hitting goalies. In other words, I’m worried more about the fallout than the initial explosion.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Pressure? Is that what you call Lucic’s play on Miller? I guess that is how Shanahan saw the play. Maybe I just didn’t see the real play.
by 901predfan on Nov 15, 2011 9:44 AM EST via iPhone app reply actions
Shanny gave a longer explanation that relied more on timing than possession or pressure. He says basically that Miller came out of his crease while Lucic wasn’t looking and that by the time Lucic looked up again it was too late. I tend to disagree with that interpretation of Lucic’s intentions/options, but it’s not completely unreasonable. He also said Lucic could have done more to minimize the contact, but that that’s what the penalty is for and that the hit didn’t rise to the level of supplementary discipline.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Hockey's Future Article
Dirk, I come here to find articles about the Preds and big stories throughout the league. I think it is up to us whether or not we choose to believe what people write in the articles.
With that being said, I am glad you posted a link to the HF article on the Preds. If it weren’t for you, I would have never read it. It was up to me to read it and decide if the judgement of our prospects were crap or spot on. Sadly, it was the former. But I feel like the Ads Roundtable was reaching on a few of those “disagreements”. It is pretty easy to be Jon Stewart if you take a lot of what was said out of context.
I’m beginning to think shanaban loves the attention and is the reason why he felt the need to make a ruling/comment.
If this was only a minor infraction, a 2 minute penalty, why did shanaban even make a comment? What is the point? Now, he has created a controversy and IMO, a dangerous situation for goalies. If he stayed silent, then prevailing thought would be the penalty was enough, the plYers will police the situation next time they play. No, he had to open his mouth.
My hockey team is better than your hockey team
I don't know
If any of y’all have seen Kerry Frasier’s column on the Lucic hit, but he felt the rules were not upheld correctly and Lucic should’ve been suspended 2 games, because he did not make any form of effort to avoid contact- which is what the rule states on goalies. Many of you who think that Lucic’s hit is okay would be outraged if it happened to Pekka- and it could the way he plays the puck. I hope it doesn’t become open season on goalies, but if it does, it’s Shannaban’s fault.
Frasier’s view is that Lucic took a run at Miller from a distance. He doesn’t credit Lucic with attempting to make any play on the puck. It sure doesn’t seem quite that clear to me. At full speed Miller only beat him to the puck by a fraction of a second…and what if Miller had misplayed the puck because of the oncoming pressure?
Suspending people because of the injury outcome of a play where intention is not clear is a slippery slope.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
Not to credit Lucic
But Miller did put himself in front of a skater coming in at full speed.
Not to defend Miller,
But Lucic lost control of the puck, and didn’t do everything possible to avoid/minimize contact.
and didn’t do everything possible to avoid/minimize contact
…and was penalized for it, as the rule specifies.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 3:28 PM EST up reply actions
If Lucic keeps his head, and plays his cards right, he deflects the puck and can score on a empty net, but he decided to hit Miller.
Miller hit the ice before the puck did.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 3:31 PM EST up reply actions
To me, and from a goalie-centric point of view, there’s a gray area there. You don’t suspend on the injury, you suspend when the play itself is dangerous. Shanahan could have suspended Lucic without stretching the rules at all. That’s completely within keeping with the way the game has been called in the past. There is a good rationale for suspension, depending on what you believe about Lucic’s mindset.
He decided not to suspend Lucic based on the fact that it wasn’t a head shot (which is completely irrelevant to the rule in question), that it was a shoulder-to-shoulder hit (again all intentional contact is illegal whether its shoulder, elbow, or head), and that Lucic didn’t have time to avoid contact altogether (now we’re heading toward the point of the rule but still not quite there yet). He admits that Lucic could have done more to avoid contact, and that is the point of the rule. He ends up with the timing issue and “there’s no indication of intent to injure” as the basis for his decision. It’s the “he’s not that type of player” argument, which is as slippery a slope as using injury to gauge the severity of the hit.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Shanahan could have suspended Lucic without stretching the rules at all.
Not true. Rule 42 has specific language addressing an injury to the head or the charging players attempt to deliberately injure required to penalize beyond a major infraction.
Shannahammer has set a precedent of enforcing the rules as written and giving a detailed explanation in conjunction with the specific rule broken when administering supplementary discipline. There is no way he could suspend Lucic within the rules unless he concluded that act was deliberate or Lucic admitted he was deliberately running Miller.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
That’s only for the game misconduct portion. Supplemental discipline doesn’t depend on a game misconduct being given.
Rule 42 Charging
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.
(all emphasis added by me)
Then there’s the goaltender interference, which really doesn’t count here since Miller was able to play the puck.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
That’s my point. There is no precedent for supplying supplementary discipline in any case that wouldn’t qualify for a misconduct or match penalty upon review by the league, even if the ref missed it on the ice.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 4:34 PM EST up reply actions
And all the other supplementary discipline that is applied to games where the ref either didn’t call a penalty or didn’t give a misconduct means what? No one should be suspended ever?
I think it’s a dangerous precedent to set. You could make a run at a goalie and say you were looking at the puck and didn’t see him.
No one should be suspended ever?
No. Suspensions should only be handed out in cases where intent is clear or a rule specifies suspension for the action (targeting the head).
The problem here is that you, and Kerry Frasier, clearly view this as Lucic “running” the goaltender. I don’t see it that way given that the two players were racing for the puck.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
There is plenty of precedent for that. There’s even precedent for supp disc when no penalty was assessed on the play at all.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
There is plenty of precedent for that.
You’ll have to provide an incident for me to buy that someone was suspended for an action that wouldn’t qualify for a match or misconduct penalty as written any number of places in the rule book.
There’s even precedent for supp disc when no penalty was assessed on the play at all.
Only if it is defined as an illegal action in the rulebook.
by Marcus Newman on Nov 15, 2011 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
You are confusing two issues here. Supplemental discipline is in most cases separate from on ice calls.
First there’s an argument to be made that the refs did screw up here—ergo, supplemental discipline.
Second, supp disc is also intended to deal with issues that can’t be dealt with on the ice, like detailed rules interpretation, issues that require replays, and repeat offenders. This hit falls under the first two examples I listed.
28.1 Supplementary Discipline – In addition to the automatic fines and suspensions imposed under these rules, the Commissioner may, at his discretion, investigate any incident that occurs in connection with any Pre-season, Exhibition, League or Playoff game and may assess additional fines and/or suspensions for any offense committed during the course of a game or any aftermath thereof by a player, goalkeeper, Trainer, Manager, Coach or non-playing Club personnel or Club executive, whether or not such offense has been penalized by the Referee.
R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Part Predator, part Lightning.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Agreed
But I don’t think its a suspendable hit. Maybe a major roughing, but that’s it. And why didn’t somebody from Buffalo fight Lucic later? That seemed like a sure bet at the time…
If there's no goalie, you can count on Legwand!
by Dawn Of The Pred on Nov 15, 2011 3:21 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on On the Forecheck
Related FanShots on On the Forecheck
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
About OTF
Dirk Hoag is the Forechecker, churner of NHL stats & analysis, and managing editor of On the Forecheck.
Follow @Forechecker
Got a question, a suggestion, or are interested in advertising here to reach thousands of Nashville Predators fans? Feel free to email the.forechecker@gmail.com.
Featured Stories
Are you new here? Read this first!
Check us out on iTunes!
