No suspension for Chara

[TheBostonKid]

The NHL has just released that there will be no suspension or fine for the Chara hit on Max Pac.

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."

 

[TheBostonKid]

I would have thought at least one game, but this backs up my original post last night. A bad bad hit, a bad bad accident, but no intent to injure.

 

[Kharlamov17]

Correct decision IMHO.

 

[maasxjon]

Disgusting.

 

[The Germinator]

No surprise. NHL has no guts.

 

[DredJAw]

Perhaps there was no intent, but I still can't get over where Charas left hand is. It's clearly on Pacioretty's head. Whether he meant to drive him into the partition or not, he's got it in a place it shouldn't be, and the result of that was a severe injury.

At the VERY least Chara can be called for interference right? Is that considered breaking the rules? Yes. Does this instance of breaking the rules result in a serious injury? Yes. So that alone says there has to be some supplemental discipline. This wasn't a 'clean' body check that just happened to injure a player. It was a careless play.

 

[sprague11]

Another chance for the NHL to send a mesage, and the message still is: Open season on our players. I don't think Chara had the intent to injure, but he should be getting something for it - Pac may never recover from this.

 

[dburzyn]

Perhaps there was no intent, but I still can't get over where Charas left hand is. It's clearly on Pacioretty's head. Whether he meant to drive him into the partition or not, he's got it in a place it shouldn't be, and the result of that was a severe injury.

I agreed it was the correct decision (NO suspension) until you posted that picture... that looks pretty bad....

 

[DredJAw]

I agreed it was the correct decision (NO suspension) until you posted that picture... that looks pretty bad....

When you watch it in reply, and when you see it in 'real time' I agree... it's very tough to see anything wrong with it other than interference (it was clearly interference, no if ands or buts).

But when you see this picture there is absolutely no denying his hand shouldn't be there. It's not a head shot in the general definition but his hand is certainly in a place it doesn't belong. Especially considering how vulnerable a position his target is.

 

[cremona71]

I think its the right call. Its VERY VERY unfourtunate. This type of hit happens once a decade. With todays players im surprised it doesnt happen more. It was an unfortunate event. Im sure Chara feels horrible

 

[maasxjon]

Let's pretend for a second that there was no intent to shove Patches into the stanchion - it was still an illegal play that resulted in a very serious injury. That's usually enough to warrant at least a 2 game suspension.

 

[stajan55]

The picture is pretty useless because it doesn't show what happened before or after that exact point in time. You can only make a call by looking at the whole video and the NHL made the right call.

James

 

[str8jkt]

I'm of the opinion that it was an unfortunate accident. There is a lot of people posting how it wasn't intentional but because the person got hurt there should be a suspension.

That doesn't make any sense to me. A suspension should be made if there was intent behind the play to injure or harm the other person.

There would have been 0 talk of suspension had there been solid boards there. Pacioretty would have rubbed off them a bit with Chara "maybe" getting an interference call.

The picture with his hand on his head again to me is most likely unintentional. They are both scrambling up the boards towards the puck with Pacioretty leaning down. Everything happened so quick I can't see Chara actually having the time to intentionally try to drive him into the divider..


Either way here's hoping he has a full recovery. Was and still is a very scary hit to watch.

 

[Metrags]

You cannot get suspended for interference.

 

[plubers]

I am glad there was no suspension because Chara never deserved one. Nhl gets this one right! :giggity:

 

[nucks4cup]

I believe the NHL got it right. now fix the arenas.... why are there 90 degree angles of glass? make them at a 45 or something not so severe. that way players will glance of and deflect there energy. something needs to be done because the boards and glass like that are dangerous. and no amount of padding will help

 

[maasxjon]

IThere is a lot of people posting how it wasn't intentional but because the person got hurt there should be a suspension.

That doesn't make any sense to me. A suspension should be made if there was intent behind the play to injure or harm the other person.

.

That's all fine and dandy, but the NHL has proven time and time again that that isn't how they operate. Why the sudden change in the way they go about handing out suspensions?

I'd also disagree about only suspending people if there's intent to injure. You don't believe that someone should be suspended in plays where a player is injured due to recklessness? Ovechkin recklessly flies into a player from behind into the boards causing a concussion. No suspension should be handed out, because there wasn't intent to injure? C'mon, man.

An illegal play causing an injury should result in a small suspension every time. Whether that illegal play be a highstick, slash, interference, whatever. In this case, a few more games should have been added on due to the context of the incident.

 

[rudy2262]

I can see both sides of the arguement. But imagine if this was matt cooke or trevor gillies or avery. i doubt they would be off without a suspension

 

[S4Kh4r0v]

"I swear your honnor, I was swirling my fist around, minding my own business, and the guy threw himself at it. My fist tried all it could to avoid him, but there was nothing it could do. He should have looked where he was going."

Chara did an action, it ended badly, he should be responsible for his act... I don't care how legal or not the hit was; he chose to hit him and injured him severely, he should have been punished for it.

I don't say that as a Habs fan, I would have said the same thing if Subban had done the same thing to let's say Bergeron...

But the fact that reality doesn't exist in the context of a hockey game sickens me. If I hit someone with my car I'll still be guilty even if "I didn't intend to injure, and didn't do it on purpose".

 

[str8jkt]

That's all fine and dandy, but the NHL has proven time and time again that that isn't how they operate. Why the sudden change in the way they go about handing out suspensions?

I'd also disagree about only suspending people if there's intent to injure. You don't believe that someone should be suspended in plays where a player is injured due to recklessness? Ovechkin recklessly flies into a player from behind into the boards causing a concussion. No suspension should be handed out, because there wasn't intent to injure? C'mon, man.

An illegal play causing an injury should result in a small suspension every time. Whether that illegal play be a highstick, slash, interference, whatever. In this case, a few more games should have been added on due to the context of the incident.

Ok, but by your argument where do you draw the line the other way? Marginal calls can then end up being suspensions? Player B steps on Player A's stick in a race for the puck, and bails into the boards hurting themselves. Penalty is called for tripping, but even being completely accidental Player A is suspended?

Its a slippery slope on both sides of the argument.