The "Rinaldo wasn't suspended" thread.

[doom88]

You've got to be kidding me. No way this is the same ruling if he's a Flyer. I really hate the nhl sometimes. All I ask for is fairness.

[WordsOfWisdom]

Gary B. or Bill D.? Is that you? Can you explain how all this "legal" contact was made after the puck was not even in the same time zone when Rinaldo decides to initiate his hit? I stand by the he gets 20 games if he makes the same hit in a Flyers Jersey instead of against it. I hope they take their collective frustrations out on Bergeron with the same "legal" contact..........

 

Now that I didn't consider. I was only looking at the hit, not whether it was late. 

[icehole]

@ruxpin

I've made it apparent many times that I dont like him. The only way it has factored into my opinion is by making me try to find all the evidence I need to say it wasnt a suspendable offense. If that evidence didnt exist, I would just move on. The facts are this though.

No elbow

No charge

Slight contact to the head but the head wasnt targeted

Close to being interference.

So why should he be suspended if he didnt break the rules?

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

Wow.  Just wow.

 

Here is the NHL's explanation.

 

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=60&id=853176〈=en&navid=nhl:topheads

[ruxpin]

There is an elbow.

He targets the head. The claim he didn't is crap as is the claim that it's a "slight" hit to the head.

The league states it supports the charging call on the ice. So is it a charge or isn't it? If it's called a charge on the ice and they support the call, then it's a charge.

Somehow you are able to discern between your player prejudice and your version of a video and the rest of us can't.

Got it. That's crap.

[RonJeremy]

The NHL is turning into a real joke, Rinaldo's hit was totally clean. He is a very good skater has a low center of gravity, a solidly built guy who hits like a wrecking ball. When he hits people they go flying like a bowling ball hitting the pins. He has been called for charging so many times, when it was a totally clean hit, because the impact of his hits sends guys flying. The only thing he was guilty of was not showing restraint when he could have eased up, same scenario when Stevens saw Lindros with his head down, he showed no mercy and devastated shell head.

"Mercy is for the weak, this is a karate dojo not a knitting class....."

[OccamsRazor]

Hard to say that this isn't to the head...looks like it to me...

 

 

 

...if he was wearing Orange and Black he would sit for no less than 10 games...

[PhilsFanDrew]

The only thing that bugs me is the fact that it makes sense when Rinaldo isnt a flyer but if he was a flyer, I feel like the rules would have changed.

In the past 2 seasons there were 74 suspensions (31 last year and 43 the year before).  Two of those suspensions happened to be a Flyer (coincidentally it was Rinaldo on both occasions).  I'm just tired of this baseless argument that the league unfairly scrutinizes Flyers players as opposed to other teams.  I'm sure there were plenty of those 74 suspensions in the past two years where a legitimate argument against suspension could have been made but the league dealt the penalty anyway.  Its not a perfect system but a perfect system is impossible because many reasonable people can view the same video and draw vastly different conclusions.   

[icehole]

In the past 2 seasons there were 74 suspensions (31 last year and 43 the year before). Two of those suspensions happened to be a Flyer (coincidentally it was Rinaldo on both occasions). I'm just tired of this baseless argument that the league unfairly scrutinizes Flyers players as opposed to other teams. I'm sure there were plenty of those 74 suspensions in the past two years where a legitimate argument against suspension could have been made but the league dealt the penalty anyway. Its not a perfect system but a perfect system is impossible because many reasonable people can view the same video and draw vastly different conclusions.

I dont disagree with you. I havent seen the reasoning for all of those other suspensions but Im sure they werent all fair. In the past 5 or so years though, there's been a few times that I thought a flyer should get nothing and he ends up getting screwed. Thats probably me looking through orange glasses.

[icehole]

Hard to say that this isn't to the head...looks like it to me...

 

 

 

...if he was wearing Orange and Black he would sit for no less than 10 games...

I believe the DOS said there was head contact but he didnt target the head.

So for those who dont like the non-suspension, is Rinaldo allowed (legally) to make a hit at all in that situation? The reason I ask is because if he is allowed to, Im not sure what he should have done differently not to hit the head at all.

If you look at this picture, he looks somewhat far away but at full speed, that is still a microsecond from impact. Couturier is a little more upright and paralell to the boards. At impact, his head is down and toward the middle of the ice more. Was Rinaldo supposed to react in the microsecond, crouch down, and try to get under the leaning head? The old rule to keep your head up wouldnt apply anymore. If guys skated with their heads paralell to the ice, they could never get hit legally.

[icehole]

This is what i meant to post.

[OccamsRazor]

I believe the DOS said there was head contact but he didnt target the head.

So for those who dont like the non-suspension, is Rinaldo allowed (legally) to make a hit at all in that situation? The reason I ask is because if he is allowed to, Im not sure what he should have done differently not to hit the head at all.

If you look at this picture, he looks somewhat far away but at full speed, that is still a microsecond from impact. Couturier is a little more upright and paralell to the boards. At impact, his head is down and toward the middle of the ice more. Was Rinaldo supposed to react in the microsecond, crouch down, and try to get under the leaning head? The old rule to keep your head up wouldnt apply anymore. If guys skated with their heads paralell to the ice, they could never get hit legally.

 

 

Yeah there was 1.1 seconds left in the period....you don't make that hit....why risk it...like it said change the uniform on the guy getting hit and the guy would be sitting.

[icehole]

Yeah there was 1.1 seconds left in the period....you don't make that hit....why risk it...like it said change the uniform on the guy getting hit and the guy would be sitting.

Yeah, I posted that somewhere earlier. It's one of those things where I hate it when it happens to my team, but if the roles were reversed, I'd be happy that my guy played to the horn. Also, Julien throws him out there in the last minute of the period after not playing too well...what do you think he told Rinaldo to do?

[SpikeDDS]

Rinaldo got 8 games in his last suspension, this hit on Couturier looks like he leaves his feet as he launches himself into Couturier's face.

https://youtu.be/81xBgxr02EY

As someone who is neither a Flyers nor a Bruins fan, this is a legitimate hockey hit.

You claim his skates left the ice, but not before contact. In fact, I question whether his left skate EVER left the ice.

You are suggesting this was a head shot. While I agree that the head was the initial point of contact, the way the league has enforced the "targeting of the head" rule is similar to how I do, and that is that if you were to remove the head and neck from the target player's body, would there still have been a significant body check. If so, it is (properly) deemed a legitimate body check where a player's head was in the way, usually because it is down. If you remove the head and the neck and the hit would be more of a miss, that is targeting the head, because you are not really hitting anything else, and that kind of hit does not belong in this game. This was the former, not the latter. To say it a different way, the head can be the initial point of contact so long as it is not the principal point of contact. There is a difference.

This was not charging. Rinaldo only took two strides, and IF he left his feet, he only did so AFTER the point of contact. I really don't think he did.

It was not interference. The puck was there.

The elbow was not up significantly. Replay shows it is pretty well tucked.

If Couturier had a winged wheel on his chest, I'd still say the same thing. Hit was legit.

If we start to disallow these kinds of hits, then all players with the puck will be able to defend themselves from being hit by anyone directly in front of them by simply keeping their head down. This would be horrible for the game. If you can't hit someone with the puck from the front anymore with their head down, might as well put flags on player's belts and play flag hockey I.e. It's not hockey anymore.

What makes this hit a little bit different than many of these questionable quasi-head-targeting shots was that Couturier's head wasn't down so much as it was looking back to the player checking him from behind. But while this puts less of the onus on Couturier as far as putting himself in a compromised position I.e. his head wasn't down focusing on the puck while ignoring his surroundings, the nature of the hit still makes this one legitimate for the reasons stated above. The fact that a player is unaware that a hit is coming should not disallow a hit so long as the hit is delivered with proper technique and where the player's body is checked along with the head, and not primarily the head without much of the body. This hit fits that, and thus there should be no supplemental discipline here.

[flyerrod]

Now that I didn't consider. I was only looking at the hit, not whether it was late. 

First off, I want to apologize for making such a slanderous comment( accusing you of being one of those two "fine" hockey individuals) . I am glad you took it as humorous as that is how it was intended. It just looked a whole lot  more derogatory when I read it this am. Kerry Fraser summed it up pretty well in his discourse on the hit. Someone had the link up yesterday and I should have pasted it into this thread then.

[ruxpin]

You are suggesting this was a head shot. While I agree that the head was the initial point of contact, the way the league has enforced the "targeting of the head" rule is similar to how I do, and that is that if you were to remove the head and neck from the target player's body, would there still have been a significant body check. If so, it is (properly) deemed a legitimate body check where a player's head was in the way, usually because it is down. If you remove the head and the neck and the hit would be more of a miss, that is targeting the head, because you are not really hitting anything else, and that kind of hit does not belong in this game. This was the former, not the latter. To say it a different way, the head can be the initial point of contact so long as it is not the principal point of contact. There is a difference.

 

That seems like that's what Rinaldo was trying to do.  

 

I get your point, though.  It has merit.   It just sounds really funny (as in odd).  

[OccamsRazor]

but if the roles were reversed, I'd be happy that my guy played to the horn

There is a difference in playing till the whistle and take unnecessary hits that could seriously hurt someone...

[icehole]

There is a difference in playing till the whistle and take unnecessary hits that could seriously hurt someone...

Very true but as of now, that's not a suspendable offense.

[SpikeDDS]

Wow I'm surprised by this ruling. I was sure he'd get 5 games minimum just because it's Rinaldo, being a repeat offender. OTOH I don't think the hit was a tremendously dirty or even much worse than a thousand other hits we've all seen over the years.

Oh well whatever. The more important question is "How is Couturier feeling today?"

I get what you are saying about different players being treated differently based upon their star I.e. league marketing status, and I agree that this remains a problem.

But the principle which SHOULD be at work in determining discipline for these kinds of hits should be:

1. Make the determination of whether the hit is one worthy of discipline AT ALL without regard for who is making the hit.

2. If the hit, on its own merits, is deemed to be one worthy of discipline, you MUST take into consideration who did the hitting and their history, but NOT their team or their star/marketing status.

In the case of this hit, the question of Rinaldo's history should not have and did not come into play, because the hit was deemed (correctly IMO) a legitimate one. There is NOTHING wrong with a guy--even one with a history of making bad hits--making a good one. This is that.

[icehole]

There is an elbow.

He targets the head. The claim he didn't is crap as is the claim that it's a "slight" hit to the head.

The league states it supports the charging call on the ice. So is it a charge or isn't it? If it's called a charge on the ice and they support the call, then it's a charge.

Somehow you are able to discern between your player prejudice and your version of a video and the rest of us can't.

Got it. That's crap.

You can't just say there was an elbow and not have proof. Although I may be prejudice against couturier, I provide evidence to support my claim. I couldnt get any closer to contact without hiding rinaldo's arm. As you should be able to see, rinaldo's arm is tucked tight to his side. That elbow will hit couturier's lower chest in a microsecond at the point of contact. The elbow is the joint between the upper arm and forearm right? I didnt go to med school so maybe I dont know that the elbow is the joint that connects the arm to the torso next to the head.

[WordsOfWisdom]

First off, I want to apologize for making such a slanderous comment( accusing you of being one of those two "fine" hockey individuals) . I am glad you took it as humorous as that is how it was intended. It just looked a whole lot  more derogatory when I read it this am. Kerry Fraser summed it up pretty well in his discourse on the hit. Someone had the link up yesterday and I should have pasted it into this thread then.

 

Thanks.

 

I think if the NHL were to ban such hits, there would be no hitting left in the NHL. I looked at the clip several times and I kept thinking to myself: "Everyone on here is talking 10-15 game suspension and I think he gets off clean. What are they seeing that I'm not seeing?". 

 

In any event, now when you guys play Boston, you can look forward to crushing one of their players -- legally of course! 

[radoran]

It's interesting that the player got a 5 minute major for charging and a game misconduct; that the league "supports" the call of charging; - and there are still people who are insisting that it "wasn't charging" and "was a good hockey hit".

 

It wasn't about "finishing a check" and it wasn't "a legitimate hockey hit" - this is exactly the type of play the league has been saying they want to get out of the game. And it was a penalty. It can't be a penalty and a "legitimate hockey hit."

 

The player didn't have the puck, was in a vulnerable position by the boards and the reckless play of a multiple-time offender caused serious injury.

 

Those are the "facts" of the situation - and I don't care what color the jersey is or what crest was on the front. This could have been the Bridgeport Sound Tigers against the Utica Comets - that's still a penalty.

 

If someone wants to argue - as the league did - that it wasn't worthy of suspension then, fine. We can agree to differ.

 

But it was a penalty - not a "legitimate hockey hit."

[radoran]

Thanks.

 

I think if the NHL were to ban such hits, there would be no hitting left in the NHL. I looked at the clip several times and I kept thinking to myself: "Everyone on here is talking 10-15 game suspension and I think he gets off clean. What are they seeing that I'm not seeing?". 

 

In any event, now when you guys play Boston, you can look forward to crushing one of their players -- legally of course! 

 

Ban hits of a player who doesn't have the puck and "there would be no hitting left"?

 

That's just ridiculous. As in "worthy of ridicule".

 

There was plenty of hitting in that game that had nothing at all to do with hitting defenseless players who didn't have the puck.

 

Which is why it was a penalty and a game misconduct.

 

And the only reason people were talking lengthy suspensions is that Rinaldo does this kind of stupid-ass #### all the damn time.

[icehole]

I totally missed this view. It looks like the elbow was up...and rinaldo had his glove off...and his hand is really tiny. It also looks like couturier is sad.

[icehole]

It's interesting that the player got a 5 minute major for charging and a game misconduct; that the league "supports" the call of charging; - and there are still people who are insisting that it "wasn't charging" and "was a good hockey hit".

 

It wasn't about "finishing a check" and it wasn't "a legitimate hockey hit" - this is exactly the type of play the league has been saying they want to get out of the game. And it was a penalty. It can't be a penalty and a "legitimate hockey hit."

 

The player didn't have the puck, was in a vulnerable position by the boards and the reckless play of a multiple-time offender caused serious injury.

 

Those are the "facts" of the situation - and I don't care what color the jersey is or what crest was on the front. This could have been the Bridgeport Sound Tigers against the Utica Comets - that's still a penalty.

 

If someone wants to argue - as the league did - that it wasn't worthy of suspension then, fine. We can agree to differ.

 

But it was a penalty - not a "legitimate hockey hit."

I dont think it was charging but I do agree that the league has to have some consistancy in these situations. You can't call a suspendable offense on the ice and then go back and say that you agree with the call but arent going to suspend him.