Worst Playoff Incident

[xganarchy]

I'd prefer those to what Carkner did to Boyle. Carkner "protected" his guy when he dropped Boyle with the first two punches. The SEVEN additional while Boyle was down on the ice cannot be defended...at all.

Yeah, kind of like when Adams was throwing punches at the back of Hartnell's head while he was tangled with Crosby. But I digress, Carkner did get off a bit easy but when a team is trying to take out your star, there is a real reason for sending a message. At least Carkner took it out on Boyle instead of going after, let's say, Gaborik?

[B21]

Yeah, kind of like when Adams was throwing punches at the back of Hartnell's head while he was tangled with Crosby. But I digress, Carkner did get off a bit easy but when a team is trying to take out your star, there is a real reason for sending a message. At least Carkner took it out on Boyle instead of going after, let's say, Gaborik?

Don't forget Hartnell on Ponikarovsky.

[Phillygrump]

I gotta say Weber because the intent behind it was the worst. Neal would be second because of intent. Torres would be third because that was just nasty.

[Polaris922]

@Polaris922

Do you understand the difference between a dirty play and a clean-but-illegal play? What Schenn did could be considered charging, and he did receive 2 minutes for it, but he did not stride into Martin, did not leap, kept his elbows down, and did not target the head. His feet left the ice at the point of contact, but it wasn't remotely close to what Neal or Torres did. There's a reason the league didn't take a 2nd look at that one. For you to make an equivalence in saying "(dirty play)" to both incidents betrays a complete lack of perspective.

I argue that Schenn's h it was dirty because he does leave his feet prior to contact, and leads with both elbows up into the chest. You see the timing and elbows differently than I do. Maybe you got a better video feed than the one I'm watching. I felt it was a dangerously high hit. Though I do not think there was an intent to injure, I think the elbows up made it reckless and caused an injury. I do NOT think it was the same as what Neal did, nor did I say as much. Neal got a deserved suspension for the hit on Coutourier. I do, however, feel Schenn's hit was still dirty.

[Polaris922]

You meant to say he collapsed just like LETANG does when someone looks at him wrong.............I actually kind of agree with you on the Asham high stick..Schenn whipped his head up and back to minimize the impact of Ashams stick. Asham knew exactly how hard he hit Schenn and cuffed more than punched a "letanging" Schenn while he was on the ice. Bottom line is it was meant to be a nasty hit, and because Schenn was aware of his surroundings he avoided the brunt of it. To me, the dangerous puss moves of Neal warranted more of a suspension than what Asham got.

I don't think Schenn avoided a nasty hit. I think Asham hit him in the chest as his target to do to him what he felt Schenn just did with elbows to Martin's chest. I honestly think if Asham had wanted Schenn's throat he'd have had it. Schenn doesn't even really move till the stick is in him. Who could? I don't think anybody saw that vicious of a cross check coming. Asham got what he deserved.

[Polaris922]

So are you trying to tell me Schenn's hit on Martin was worse than Neal on Couturier? At least Martin had the puck when Schenn hit him. Unbelievable.

I never said it was worse. Neal got a suspension he deserved. When I first saw it I'd hoped it was more Neal not looking where Coutourier was skating, but upon review I can't tolerate that kind of crap from anybody. It was dirty and deserved the suspension. I was simply saying I felt Schenn left his feet to make the hit and led with both elbows up. That to me was dirty too.

[Vanflyer]

@Polaris922

"Schenn doesn't even really move till the stick is in him. Who could? I don't think anybody saw that vicious of a cross check coming. Asham got what he deserved."

When I watched the replay, after Schenn delivers his hit and skates towards the circle, he immediately sees Asham coming and gets his arms up to his chest to brace himself. He knows he is going to be hit.

[Vanflyer]

@Polaris922

"I was simply saying I felt Schenn left his feet to make the hit and led with both elbows up. That to me was dirty too."

I am having a hard time understanding why it was a dirty play? He left his feet at poing of contact and his arms / elbows were chest high. A foul, I guess, but not a dirty play. He did not target Martins head.

I think allot of people (me included) have become blurred when it comes to what a charging foul is and what it is not. Earlier in the year, we had a discussion when Kornwall hit Voracek. Most if not all of us thought that was a dirty hit, while Voracek himself said it was not and that he (voracek) needed to be more responsible to know his surroundings.

During that discussion, there were two criteria that most of thought were the qualifiers for charging where a 5min major and misconduct could be assessed:

1) Taking more 3 or more stides into a player

2) Leaving your feet

In watching Shanahans explanations this year, that is not the case (at least on item 2). Shanahan has disqualified suspensions for a player when they leave their feet when there is an abscence of an upward thrust by the attacking player that targets the oppositions head.

When I watch many of Kornwalls hit, I think he does this 8 out of 10 times, but for whatever reasons excapes persecution.

Back to schenn, if you use how Shanahan views it, Schenns play was borderline charging if even that. He did not thrust upward and target martins head. Even leaving the feet was nearly at the moment of contact.

He got his two minutes and that is all that should be said about it. It was most definitely not a dirty play. To me it looked like an aggressive hockey play.

[flyercanuck]

I argue that Schenn's h it was dirty because he does leave his feet prior to contact, and leads with both elbows up into the chest. You see the timing and elbows differently than I do. Maybe you got a better video feed than the one I'm watching. I felt it was a dangerously high hit. Though I do not think there was an intent to injure, I think the elbows up made it reckless and caused an injury. I do NOT think it was the same as what Neal did, nor did I say as much. Neal got a deserved suspension for the hit on Coutourier. I do, however, feel Schenn's hit was still dirty.

Neal got nothing for his hit on Couturier. Considering he didn't have the puck, Neal charged him AND left his feet, the whole thing was a joke in the Pens favour. He didn't even get a penalty for it. He got a game, ONE game, for basically doing the exact same thing to Giroux 40 seconds later. Schenns hit was a charge. He got 2 minutes for it.

[Polaris922]

He got his two minutes and that is all that should be said about it.

Schenns hit was a charge. He got 2 minutes for it.

Agreed on both counts as far as the penalty time being reasonable. I suppose I go back to the idea that elbows up means an intent to injure, where Shanahan isn't handling it that way. And I apologize for thinking the suspension on Neal was two fold. I thought when Shanahan addressed it he indicated both hits, the Coutourier hit and the Giroux thing. Perhaps that was just in some of the talk through here. There are so many Flyers fans here, I forget what was in conversation here and what was on the video!