The latest controversial hit: Doan on Sexton Edition
I think will probably get suspended 2 games. It was a really dumb play(extremely out of character for him) and is impossible to defend. I'm glad Sexton wasn't hurt but that shouldn't reduce the consequences.
Here is the video if you haven't seen it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgaxOAGcM6w
Posted Oct 18, 2010, 5:41 PM UTC
No suspension; the hockey world needs to relax a bit. At most that's an interference penalty.
It doesn't look like Doan had any intent to injure. But since the head's the principle point of contact and it was a blindside hit, I'm happy the NHL did something under Rule 48.
It was exact hit the NHL banned this offseason
I'm sticking by my guns that these hits should be legal. Part of what makes hockey so entertaining for me is the element of danger; specifically, that in order to succeed you need to be aware of your surroundings. If we keep catering to soccer moms, we're going to kill the sport. This is a downwards slope that started with the instigator penalty and doesn't look to be slowing down.
At first glance, yeah - I'd say interference. The puck wasn't there.
The problem is Sexton is knees bent looking forward and Doan steers right into him.
Was he head-hunting? No.
Did he need to? Probably not, given his height.
But given the wording of the new rules, if we go by the book then he has to get punished.
Well, yeah, if we go by the book. But the book sucks.
I dunno I definitely prefer the new era of skilled play then dead puck trap era hockey. You can't allow the head hits from behind or the side when the game is played at today's speed
Spot on kmad, the instigator rule is directly related to the increase in cheap shots/dirty hits/"agitator" players. I've ranted about it before here, so I'll just say this. Let the players police the game again, take the handcuffs off the enforcers.
But more to the point for this case, legal hit in my opinion too.