Kukla's Korner Hockey
No Punishment For Chara
by Paul on 03/09/11 at 03:28 PM ET
Comments (44)
via BostonBruins tweet,
The NHL has informed the Bruins that there will be no fine and no suspension for Chara
From the NHL:
TORONTO – National Hockey League Senior Vice President of Hockey Operations Mike Murphy today issued the following statement on Boston Bruins defenseman Zdeno Chara’s hit in NHL game #996 last night against the Montreal Canadiens:
“I conducted a hearing with Boston Bruins’ defenseman Zdeno Chara with respect to the major penalty for interference and game misconduct that he was assessed at 19:44 of the second period for a hit on Max Pacioretty of the Montreal Canadiens.
“After a thorough review of the video I can find no basis to impose supplemental discipline. This hit resulted from a play that evolved and then happened very quickly—with both players skating in the same direction and with Chara attempting to angle his opponent into the boards. I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent, left his feet or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous.
“This was a hockey play that resulted in an injury because of the player colliding with the stanchion and then the ice surface. In reviewing this play, I also took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career.”
Filed in: NHL Teams, Boston Bruins | KK Hockey | Permalink
Tags: Zdeno+Chara,
Comments
incredible, at least bettman is keeping with his track record, if your a star u can do anything.
Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 03/09/11 at 04:42 PM ET
I think this is a call they got right. Look, it’s a fast game. People get hit hard. Accidents happen. You can’t suspend someone every time another player suffers an injury. This is hockey not figure skating.
Posted by Wings_in_NYC on 03/09/11 at 04:44 PM ET
While I’m not surprised by the lack of supplemental discipline, I think one question worth keeping in mind is what the fine/suspension situation would have been had it been Trevor Gillies in Chara’s situation? Can’t imagine Gillies would have escaped further discipline even with the same exact circumstances.
Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 03/09/11 at 04:48 PM ET
“I also took into consideration that Chara has not been involved in a supplemental discipline incident during his 13-year NHL career.”
“...or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous.”
He rode the guy along the boards, he could have hit/pushed/thrown him into the boards. He rode the guy in front of the bench, and there is glass between the benches/stanchions in all arenas. I must believe that he noticed his teammates were right there, and he was aware that they were coming toward centre ice. Not to mention his follow through.
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 04:49 PM ET
I don’t know why I didn’t check first. His 2005 suspension was an automatic for instigating in the last 5:00 of a game - it wasn’t supplemental.
http://blackandgold.hockeyjournal.com/2010/04/chara-out-for-game-6/#
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 04:53 PM ET
Ok he was suspended 1 game in 2005. For what? The guy’s not a dirty player. I think people automatically cry for suspension if the other player gets hurt. I don’t think there was any intent on this play. Are we going to suspend players every time they make a check??
Posted by Wings_in_NYC on 03/09/11 at 04:54 PM ET
“I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent…”
Boy, if only we had some way of capturing a moment in time, for review and remembrance.
Posted by schmotze on 03/09/11 at 04:56 PM ET
He rode the guy along the boards, he could have hit/pushed/thrown him into the boards. He rode the guy in front of the bench, and there is glass between the benches/stanchions in all arenas. I must believe that he noticed his teammates were right there, and he was aware that they were coming toward centre ice. Not to mention his follow through.
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 03:49 PM
That is exactly what I saw on the replay while watching it at full speed. Chara knew where he was on the ice and slamming Pacioretty’s head into the stanchion was intentional.
A Richard Riot would never happen in today’s NHL because the league refuses to suspend star players even when they deserve it.
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 04:57 PM ET
Here come all the crying habs fans. If you actually believe chara meant to do that to him, your an idiot. It was an unfortunate accident resulting from a hockey play, all the best to Max and his family.
Posted by pat on 03/09/11 at 04:59 PM ET
“I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent…”
Boy, if only we had some way of capturing a moment in time, for review and remembrance.
Yeah…
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 05:02 PM ET
In slow motion it may look like he rode the guy down the boards, or pushed him.
I invite you to watch the play at regular speed - the whole transaction is half a steamboat.
Maybe he gives him an extra rub as players sometimes do - but to say he intended to drive him into the stanchion? I don’t even think there’s time for such an intention to form!
Posted by Da lil Guy from Ottawa on 03/09/11 at 05:03 PM ET
Let’s face it, when it’s a player that gets injured on our favourite team, we all scream bloody murder. When it’s our player that doles out a questionable hit, we tend to say take the opposite approach.
IMO, the fact that everyone uses slow-motion replay when evalutaing these hits is somewhat misleading. When you look at the hit at normal speed, I don’t think you can make any argument to the fact that it was a normal play gone wrong. There is always a few of these kinds of hits every year. I am pretty sure Tyler Ennis got nailed last night as well, but he got up and kept playing.
I can see exactly where the NHL is coming from. I am a Flames fan. I really don’t have any rooting interest for either team. The Flames have been involved in suspensions this year. I personally feel they got off light on all occasions (still don’t know how Kostopoulos did not get 10 games). I still see it as a hockey play gone wrong. I don’t think it is suspension worthy.
The only reason anyone is talking about it was because Pacioretty got injured. Which brings me to the my next point. I think we are all missing the point on this whole topic. Instead of being concerned about a suspension for Chara, how about we all get concerned for Pacioretty’s well being and future playing career.
Posted by lordhogie from Calgary on 03/09/11 at 05:10 PM ET
I think people automatically cry for suspension if the other player gets hurt. I don’t think there was any intent on this play. Are we going to suspend players every time they make a check??
Posted by Wings_in_NYC on 03/09/11 at 03:54 PM ET
Umm, you do realize that Pacioretty did not have the puck and that Chara was penalized and kicked out of the game?
Chara’s excuse that he didn’t know they were near the bench is BS. Chara’s head was up looking at the Bruins bench as he initiated the hit. And I don’t know about you, but my elbow doesn’t naturally come up like that, I have to intentionally raise my elbow. Chara is a star, so in the NHL the rules don’t apply to him.
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 05:13 PM ET
Posted by schmotze on 03/09/11 at 03:56 PM ET
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 04:02 PM ET
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 05:13 PM ET
It’s not a hockey play. It was deemed a penalty on the ice. If someone hurts someone else with a high stick or a hook there would be supplemental discipline. I don’t see how this is any different.
Posted by Sullyhfx from Halifax on 03/09/11 at 05:16 PM ET
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 04:13 PM ET
I have to admit that I don’t know the history behind that picture.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 05:18 PM ET
I have to admit that I don’t know the history behind that picture.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 04:18 PM ET
From PulitzerPrize.org:
South Vietnamese National Police Chief Brig Gen. Nguyen Ngoc Loan executes a Viet Cong officer with a single pistol shot in the head in Saigon, Vietnam on Feb. 1, 1968. The photo, by photojournalist Eddie Adams, became one of the Vietnam’s War’s most indelible images, winning a Pultizer Prize in 1969
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 05:22 PM ET
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 04:13 PM ET
Did I say it wasn’t an interference penalty? I reread all of my posts on this subject and didn’t see once where I said that.
Posted by Wings_in_NYC on 03/09/11 at 05:23 PM ET
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 04:22 PM ET
I know the history behind the one I posted, but not the one he posted in response.
I posted the Vietnam War one to show that one still photograph is not complete evidence. People felt horrible for the “victim” of that gunshot, completely glossing over the fact that they had just caught him with the bodies of 34 people he and his Vietcong buddies had just murdered, all members or Vietnam’s police force or their families.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 05:26 PM ET
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 04:22 PM ET
“I know the history behind the one I posted…”
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 04:26 PM ET
Hahahahaha!!
A Filipino politician’s photograph
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 05:34 PM ET
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 04:26 PM ET
Sorry. Here is the story on that photo. I remembered seeing it on the news. The guy taking the pic was murdered miliseconds after the pic was taken by the guy in the pic pointing the gun.
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 05:35 PM ET
He rode the guy along the boards, he could have hit/pushed/thrown him into the boards. He rode the guy in front of the bench, and there is glass between the benches/stanchions in all arenas.
No.
And no.
There’s a difference between riding a guy along the boards and throwing yourself out there to try and stop a guy who’s speeding past you.
Nothing happens in a vaccuum, this isn’t a case where Chara picked up him and slammed him into the partition, this was a desperate defenseman trying to keep someone from passing him.
It’s not a hockey play. It was deemed a penalty on the ice.
So anythign that is deemed a penalty isn’t a hockey play?
“Not a hockey play” is Trevor Gillies taking a run at Cal Clutterbuck when there is nothing happening near them.
“A hockey play” is when a defenseman gets beat by a forward and interferes with him so that the forward can’t get to the puck.
Is it not a hockey play when a defenseman hooks a forward going in on a breakaway as well?
Is it not a hockey play when a forward “shoots” the “puck” into the “net” as well?
Honestly, if you don’t think what Chara did is a hockey play then you seriously don’t know what a hockey play is and you should stop pretending that you like hockey.
Posted by Garth on 03/09/11 at 05:37 PM ET
The NHL has a thought police policy on suspensions, they cannot measure intent and yet they determine suspension based on whether a player intended to injure a player or not. They also don’t grasp the differences between manslaughter and murder.
I don’t think that Chara “intended” to injure Paciorety, but it was an illegal play that lead to an injury. Chara doesn’t have a history and never will because regardless of outcome the NHL doesn’t suspend some players and then uses it as evidence that they are clean. Chara is still responsible for his actions and I think that a pair of games would have at least established for the record that just because you don’t mean to do something, you are still going to be held accountable.
Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 03/09/11 at 05:41 PM ET
Did I say it wasn’t an interference penalty? I reread all of my posts on this subject and didn’t see once where I said that.
Posted by Wings_in_NYC on 03/09/11 at 04:23 PM ET
You called it a check. Checking is legal. This was not even close to being a check. Pacioretty was no where near the puck. This was a penalty. Chara got caught up ice and Pacioretty had gotten ahead of him. This is no different than a two-handed high stick to the head or a trip where victim’s head slammed to the ice.
For the record, I’m neither a Bruins or Habs fan.
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 05:43 PM ET
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 04:43 PM ET
Oh lord. Yeah, it was an interference penalty. And, yeah he checked him into the scansion. But, hey, watch every collision in sports in slo-mo and get all teary eyed about how the person on the receiving end got wronged.
Ugh.
I have my opinion about this and you have yours. We aren’t going to change each others minds. Case closed. There’s nothing left to say.
Posted by Wings_in_NYC on 03/09/11 at 05:47 PM ET
This is no different than a two-handed high stick to the head or a trip where victim’s head slammed to the ice.
Exactly. It’s a minor infraction with an unfortunate result.
If a defenseman goes down to block a shot and he get his in the face, breaking his orbital bone, do you suspend the guy who took a shot?
Posted by Garth on 03/09/11 at 05:48 PM ET
So when a Players ends up a vegetable on the ice or dead from a “Hockey Play” don’t change the rules OK garage league
Posted by Evilpens on 03/09/11 at 05:56 PM ET
If a defenseman goes down to block a shot and he get his in the face, breaking his orbital bone, do you suspend the guy who took a shot?
C’mon Garth I know you aren’t seriously comparing the two. Slapshots are legal and so there is no penalty involved. Chara’s hit was reckless because he didn’t take into account where he was driving the opposing player. I don’t think what he did was predatory, but it wasn’t legal. This is why I hate the whole “intent” argument when issuing suspensions. If Paciorety didn’t get hurt it probably doesn’t get the attention of the NHL, but you can’t avoid the fact that he did. If it weren’t for that iceberg it would have been just another maiden voyage for the Titanic too.
Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 03/09/11 at 05:58 PM ET
If a defenseman goes down to block a shot and he get his in the face, breaking his orbital bone, do you suspend the guy who took a shot?
Posted by Garth on 03/09/11 at 04:48 PM
You should stop pretending you like hockey. Taking a shot is a legal play. High sticking and tripping are illegal.
So based on your statements, you must believe that Marty McSorely didn’t deserve any supplemental discipline because it was a simple high sticking play and Brashear just fell ackwardly. Congratulations, Garth! You’re qualified to work for the new NHL.
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 06:05 PM ET
“It’s stanchion.”
Posted by MOWingsfan19 on 03/09/11 at 05:10 PM ET
Thankyou. It’s gone way too far when “scansion” is used.
Posted by NathanBC on 03/09/11 at 06:34 PM ET
I agree wholeheartedly that if you can infer intent to injure into what Chara did, then expecting a suspension is completely logical.
I disagree at the point of intent.
I think It was an interference penalty and that it was a horrible thing that happened, but I don’t want to suspend players for what I believe to be freak accidents. That’s the crux of my disagreement with those who say he should be suspended.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/11 at 06:35 PM ET
maybe i am old fashioned, but Chara needed to be disciplined. It was his hit that resulted in the injury. If you get into a car accident, whether or not yo intended to, you still have to deal with the consequences. This is no different. A 4 game suspension would have been enough.
As to the Gillies comment, yes Gillies would have deserved more, seeing that he is a dirty dirty player.
Posted by bsalamon on 03/09/11 at 07:23 PM ET
I’m with Cap’n DP on this, but it’s clear none of us are going to convince the other to change our stances, so I’ll leave it be and agree to disagree.
But Garth, I haven’t once accused you or anyone else of pretending to be a hockey fan just because you disagree with me. So you can take your holier-than-thou attitude and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
Posted by Alzy from Innisfail, Alberta, Canada on 03/09/11 at 07:47 PM ET
I think It was an interference penalty and that it was a horrible thing that happened, but I don’t want to suspend players for what I believe to be freak accidents. That’s the crux of my disagreement with those who say he should be suspended.
I haven’t had a bone to pick in this all day but I agree with what J.J. wrote. Also, Matt Cooke can eat a richard.
Posted by WingsFanInBeanLand from Lidstrom's head telling him 1 more year on 03/09/11 at 08:06 PM ET
you are still going to be held accountable.
5, 10 and a game misconduct.
For interference.
If Paciorety didn’t get hurt it probably doesn’t get the attention of the NHL, but you can’t avoid the fact that he did.
Yes you can, because it wasn’t a predatory hit. It was an unfortunate result (which is the point I was trying to make with the slapshot) that wasn’t forseeable.
If Pacioretty was going in on a breakway and and Chara tripped him, causing him to fall forward, sliding hard into the post and breaking his collarbone, does that mean Chara should be suspended?
High sticking and tripping are illegal.
So based on your statements, you must believe that Marty McSorely didn’t deserve any supplemental discipline because it was a simple high sticking play and Brashear just fell ackwardly.
Are you sincerely saying that checking a guy who is rushing past you to get a puck is the same as taking a swing at his head when neither one of them was involved in the play?
Because if so, again, stop pretending you like hockey.
Countless players have been hit into the stanchions during hockey plays and 999 out of 1000 times there’s no adverse effect besides maybe a bruise. Just because there was an injury this time does NOT make it a dirty play.
Posted by Alzy from Innisfail, Alberta, Canada on 03/09/11 at 06:47 PM ET
OK, I’ll do that and you can go watch six year olds play in a non-contact league instead of trying to ban players for icing.
Because, you know, icing is illegal and therefore if you ice the puck you should forfeit your right to play professional hockey.
If you get into a car accident, whether or not yo intended to, you still have to deal with the consequences.
Absolutely, but you don’t simply get sent to jail automatically because you were in a car accident. They have investigations and decide if you should be charged or not and that is EXACTLY what happened here. There was a car crash, the police investigated and they decided that nobody should be charged.
Posted by Garth on 03/09/11 at 10:51 PM ET
A rare good call by the NHL.
* There was no headshot.
* There was no hit from behind.
* Chara did not “drive” him in any way, shape, or form, or even push. He bumped him, side to side.
It was called interference, and even that is debatable since that play happens 10-12 times a game and goes without being called. I watched it happens a good 7 or 8 tonight in the Wings-Kings game and it never got called.
You can’t use the “have to know where he was” argument against Chara, because then you have to cast that on Max as well for not knowing where he was and the risks involved.
If Pacioretty happened to play for the Florida Panthers, the idea of Chara being suspended would have been laughable to everyone. But no… he’s a precious Hab, so the hockey media has to make a huge deal out of it.
Stupid Montreal is at fault for playing in an arena with a glass partition right there. Otherwise it’s an unfortunate accident. Not Chara, not Max, not anyone. You don’t suspend Chara because the morons who run a visiting arena don’t know how to make it safe,
Posted by Primis on 03/09/11 at 11:10 PM ET
I don’t care about the Habs or Bruins. This was a dirty hit on someone Chara had beef with. I’m shocked that so many are okay with this. Chara broke Pacioretty’s neck on a dirty hit for which Chara was penalized. Chara routinely brutalizes people (due to his size hitting them into the boards) and people excuse it. I get that to some extent. This crossed any line of sportsmanship, decorum or hockey. He ran a guy’s head into a perpendicular surface, BREAKING HIS NECK!
This is the worst “hockey play” I can remember ever seeing, and replaced turtle Lemeiux’s hit on Draper as the previous worst in memory.
Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 03/10/11 at 10:56 AM ET
So is it Murphy or Campbell that issues the suspensions? If Murphy is issuing the suspension because Campbell’s son is playing for the Bruins we have a built in NHL system that gaurantees there is inconistency and that the man repsonsible for making these decisions isn’t the one making them. I don’t even care about the length of the suspension or lack of it, but I want ot know how much longer this conflict of interest and shirking of responsibilities can go on. You can’t pass the buck to an underling on one of the most contentious hits of the year and just hide behind a conflict of interest clause. If that’s the case, find someone that isn’t conflicted.
PS
Still waiting on that Lucic crosscheck to the head phonecall.
Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 03/10/11 at 11:07 AM ET
Dear Mr Penis or excuse-me Primis,
your jalousy of da Montreal Canadien club (24 Stanley cups so-far) is so out of proportion dat it explains your lack of objectivity.
1- No head shots: No need for head shot, da head was moving towards da stanchion full speed. Duhhhhhhh!
2-No hit from behind: No just lift him up off his skates sideways and shove him and his head on da nearest obstacle THAT I,M (Chara) LOOKING AT. See da replay or maybe you,re on da wrong game. Duhhhhhhhh!!!
3:Chara didn,t drive him in any way: I give up. There is medical help for you somewhere i,m sure.
Hockey game and beer: 15$
Pair of glasses: 400$
Having the ability to distort da real picture: Priceless.
Yes I am a CH fan , can you blame me? Hockey is almost a religion here, we love our team, what,s wrong with that?
True, people here are ticked-off about it but beyond that, don,t you feel this is getting a bit out of control and has been for a good while?
It so happens that it happened in our backyard this time and this is probably why I,m talking on this forum but nevertheless, this exagerated violence has to diminish somehow, I,m not saying don,t play rough, but only to try to have some respect for the life and safety of the person playing next to you and the sport will only get more interresting.
Posted by Frenchie from Montreal on 03/10/11 at 11:31 AM ET
We all cheer for those big hits that send a player over the boards and into a team’s bench, which could easily lead to a serious injury for the player or any of the guys on the bench. So, if you’ve ever cheered for that, then you can’t complain about this. It’s not like he boarded him from behind into the bench, Lemieux/Draper style.
Posted by awould on 03/10/11 at 12:53 PM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Video- The Relationship Between Brodeur And Kovalchuk
Video- “Lof Of Good Guys In Hockey”
It Will Be The New Jersey Devils Against The Los Angeles Kings In The 2012 Stanley Cup Final
Open Post- Rangers/Devils Game 6 Eastern Conference Finals
About KK Hockey
Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.
From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.
Email Paul anytime at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Make extra cash while playing online poker. Rakeback is free and comes with rake races.
Kukla’s Korner is always a free service for readers, but it costs some money to maintain. If you’re ever in a position to donate a few dollars to help out, we’d be very appreciative.
Bullsh!t
Posted by CaptainDennisPolonich from Warm and sunny SoCal on 03/09/11 at 04:39 PM ET