The right decision.

Posted by Garth on 09/18/09 at 02:34 PM ET

Stevens’ like, hard & clean

Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 09/18/09 at 02:53 PM ET

Another case of NHL favoritism for preferred players.

Dion clearly left his feet: He couldn’t even land on his own after the hit.  It’s really too bad the league having double standards.  Besides, Dion still could have crushed Okposo with a clean hit there.  Jumping up for a head shot really wasn’t even necessary.

Posted by Chris on 09/18/09 at 03:26 PM ET

The right decision.

Posted by Garth on 09/18/09 at 03:34 PM ET

I agree. The hit (even if I don’t think he should’ve done it) shouldn’t have even had to come before a review.

Posted by mrfluffy from Long Beach on 09/18/09 at 03:42 PM ET

It’s the right decision under the current rules.

The current rules are wrong.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 09/18/09 at 03:42 PM ET

The current rules are wrong.

What changes would you make?

Posted by Garth on 09/18/09 at 03:59 PM ET

They should change the rule.  There’s no excuse for a player to leave his feet during or after the collision, or other type of upward movement of the body/arm/shoulder.  The only reason is to cause an injury.  These high-aiming hits should be banned, period.  They are too dangerous and not relevant to hockey play.

Posted by Kel on 09/18/09 at 04:36 PM ET

There’s no excuse for a player to leave his feet during or after the collision,

They have a rule similar to that in womens’ hockey, it’s called the no-checking rule and it ultimately isn’t very popular there.  If you start punishing people for leaving their feet after a check, you’re going to get guys who change the way they check to make sure people leave their feet.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 09/18/09 at 04:55 PM ET

There’s a big difference between not checking and not checking with a jump/launching motion.  My proposed rule change should be about aiming upward, so if a player didn’t aim upward in delivering his check, his hit would be legal, even if his feet left the ice as a result of, say, the receiver lowering his body.  Plus there is only one checker in each collision (the guy whose team has no puck possession), so you’re saying that the receiver of a bodycheck has control over where the checker’s feet are position (to draw a penalty)?  I highly doubt that.

Posted by Kel on 09/18/09 at 05:14 PM ET

With how fast those 2 guys were moving, I doubt it would be possible for Phaeuf to not leave his feet *after* the hit.  People always misunderstand that rule.  You can leave your feet during/after a hit.  You just can’t jump up to hit someone high.  If you hit a player who is bent over (like this, or like Kronwall v. Havlat) your momentum is going to carry you up the in air.  And these guys are pushing off with their legs as they hit so they dont end up getting knocked over themselves.  That sometimes makes it look like they are jumping.

Posted by Nick on 09/18/09 at 05:18 PM ET

I think it should be legal if the player doesn’t launch himself upward.  Having the feet off the ice before the collision is pretty clear evidence, but I don’t think we should stop at that.  If the part of body that made contact (instead of the feet) is higher after the collision, it’s pretty clear that the checker aims upward and I think that should be penalized.

Posted by Kel on 09/18/09 at 05:33 PM ET

My proposed rule change should be about aiming upward, so if a player didn’t aim upward in delivering his check, his hit would be legal, even if his feet left the ice as a result of, say, the receiver lowering his body.

Perhaps wording it like that at first instead of saying “there’s no excuse for a player to leave his feet during or after the collision”, we might have avoided this misunderstanding.

However, I still disagree.  Nick has it right.  Players aren’t lifting on hits like these to increase damage on the other guy, they’re doing it to decrease it on themselves and the player they’re hitting.  Phaneuf would have hurt Okposo more if he didn’t deflect part of the collision upward.  That’s not what hurt the guy in the first place anyway. If Phaneuf stays down through contact, it acts like two sacks of bricks smashing into each other head on.

First, I believe that the job of handing out suspensions should be up to a panel instead of one guy. The panel should be made of people nominated from the league office, the players’ union, the referees’ union, and the media.  The short version of the rule would be that a suspendable hit is an avoidable hit to the head.  I want it intentionally vague in that area, as I don’t view Phaneuf’s hit on Okposo as avoidable, but accept that it is up to varying interpretations. I don’t want intent mentioned in the rule either.  Very few people intentionally commit acts of high-sticking, but it happens and it should be penalized.  Eight total panel members reviewing every hit, regardless of whether it was penalized.  Any five members vote for suspension and it happens.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 09/18/09 at 05:38 PM ET

did not launch or leave feet before collision

How in god’s name could they have possibly seen the hit and come to that conclusion?

You can’t come to any conclusion BUT that!  He not only left his feet, he lunged forward right before going airborne as well!  It is as blatant and clear-cut of a call of a dirty hit as you’ll likely ever find.  There’s nothing to question about it!  He’s not only airborne, but at a 45-degree angle lunging at Okposo!

League is a bunch of pansy-ass, two-faced, sh*t-for-brains cowards with no concept of right or wrong anymore.  If that exact hit were thrown by a random 4th-liner against say, oh, Sidney Crosby, the league would have gone ABSOLUTELY BONKERS trying to punish the guy.

The league is a joke, and the game is becoming a joke.  Miss the All-Star Game because you’re F*CKING INJURED and you get suspended, but by god feel free to try and decapitate anyone you may find on the ice, the league will just look the other way…

Posted by Primis on 09/18/09 at 05:56 PM ET

How in god’s name could they have possibly seen the hit and come to that conclusion?

I ask the same question to you.  There is NO angle that shows him leaving his feet BEFORE the hit.

You’re out of your mind.

Posted by Garth on 09/18/09 at 06:43 PM ET