Status-
Besucher
| Heute: |
|
1307 |
| Gestern: |
|
921 |
| Gesamt: |
|
1929912 |
-
Benutzer & Gäste
4929 Benutzer registriert, davon online: 5997 Gäste
|
|
|
| 18575 Beiträge & 12638 Themen in 21 Foren |
Keine neuen Beiträge, seit Ihrem letzten Besuch am 23.12.2025 - 15:26.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Autor |
|
|
|
|
| 1445 Beiträge - Hardcoreposter
|
|
|
Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry Fraser wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca! Hi Kerry, You are probably being bombarded with e-mails in reference to Saturdays game between the Bruins and Canucks. As a hockey fan for the past 40 some odd years, I find myself having a great feel for the game and its rules. But Saturday, there were a couple of incidents that had me somewhat confused. During the scrum that occurred in the first period, Shawn Thornton was piled on by five or six Vancouver players during his altercation with Burrows. Is there still the rule of a third man in or has that been removed from the NHL rule book? There was not only a third man in, but also a fourth and fifth and six man in! Should Vancouver have been called for that? Not only were they not called for it but what resulted was Milan Lucic being tossed out of the game for apparently leaving the bench to join into the scrum (which the NHL later rescinded) and the Canucks ended up with a two-man advantage! This had a major turning point in the game. Please clarify to me the third man in rule. Kerry, if you could clarify this situation or provide your opinion on what happened that would be greatly appreciated. Hockey Fan Forever, Steve Cymbaluk from Oromocto, New Brunswick Steve: You are absolutely correct that there should have been a game misconduct assessed to one of the third, fourth or fifth Canuck players that entered the altercation already in progress between Alexandre Burrows and Shawn Thorton. My pick as the third man in would have been Maxim Lapierrre as the most obvious and aggressive of the entire Vancouver player contingent. While I have outlined the "third man in" rule and the definition of an "altercation" in previous columns, it obviously bears repeating because both continue to be misinterpreted and/or incorrectly assessed. Lets get something straight; while rule 46.16- "third man in" appears under the Fighting Rule, the language is very specific relative to intervening in an ALTERCATION already in progress. Some might still hold onto the old terminology or thought process of the third man to enter a "fight", and if you do, please lose it immediately! That definition was changed after Darryl Sittler squared off to fight with a Philadelphia Flyer in Maple Leaf Gardens during the Stanley Cup playoffs and was blindsided by another Broad Street Bully and knocked to the ice. (Sittler and his opponent had dropped their gloves, squared off and even though they had yet to throw a punch, they were going to be penalized.) Rule 46.3 (still under Fighting) clearly defines an "altercation" in the simplest language; "An altercation is a situation involving two players with at least one to be penalized." The third man in penalty was designed to allow for a fair fight between two willing combatants and to stop brawling when an unfair advantage was gained on an outnumbered opponent in an altercation. Rule 64.16 needs to be consistently applied by the definition in the rule book as to what constitutes an altercation. On this play, Alexandre Burrows gave either Daniel Paille a little tap with his stick as the players were retiring to their players bench for a change. Shawn Thornton was the trailer heading to his bench and, while taking exception to Burrows cheap shot, poked his stick forward making contact with Burrows. Burrows responded with a meat-tenderizing poke of his own on Thornton, which infuriated the Bruins tough guy. Thornton lunged forward with a glove punch to the face of Burrows and pressed forward to continue this roughing situation. Lets freeze frame at this point and apply our above definition of an altercation; "A situation involving two players with at least one to be penalized." We know that Burrows and Thornton received slashing minors for their stickwork on each other. Thornton also was assessed a roughing minor for his hefty, stinky glove punch to the face of Burrows. There is no doubt we have an altercation in progress! Both Manny Malhotra and Kevin Bieksa attempted to grab hold and act as peacemakers but appeared to be pretty much blocked from doing so by the lineman, who was quick to jump into the altercation. The player that threw gas on the fire by going airborne to jump into the upright pile of players and officials in the scrum was Vancouver Canuck Maxim Lapierre, who was able to inflict some punishment with a flurry of visible punches levied from over the top. Thats why Lapierre is my pick for the third man to enter the altercation (one in progress between Thornton and Burrows). Instead of receiving just the 10-minute misconduct that Lapierre was assessed, I would have given him a double minor for roughing (for number of punches thrown) in addition to a game misconduct under rule 46.16 as the third man in the altercation (as defined in rule 46.3). Milan Lucic was very aggressive in his involvement and worthy of a double minor as well but would have remained in the game since he did not leave the bench. Im good with the double minor penalty to Shawn Thornton for slashing and roughing as well as the slashing penalty to Burrows, whose first love tap on the shin pad of Paille, if detected, was worthy of a misconduct penalty which was ultimately assessed. The fight between Nathan Horton and Dale Weise stood alone (toe-to-toe) and the major penalties for fighting were appropriately assessed. To recap Steve, Maxim Lapierre of the Vancouver Canucks would have been ejected from the game in addition to a double minor for roughing. Milan Lucic would have remained in the game and received a double minor for roughing as well. Boston would have played one man short (not two men short) and the Bs would have captains choice as to which remaining minor would be served on the penalty clock; one of Shawn Thorntons or Milan Lucic. In either case Claude Julien would have to place a player in the penalty box to serve the minor. Sam Baker Jersey . -- The linebacker with 100 per cent attendance says theres a 99 per cent chance hes done. Justin Blalock . Louis Cardinals 5-3 on Friday night and tightened the top of the NL Central. The Reds moved within three games of the second-place Cardinals, who have won seven of their last nine games while staying right behind the division-leading Brewers. http://www.thefalconsproshop.com/kids-jonathan-babineaux-bla ck-jersey/ . Louis Cardinals have agreed on a four-year contract, giving the All-Star a fresh start after his Biogenesis drug suspension last summer. Kroy Biermann . The Kings were beaten on a goal by Logan Couture after the Sharks played the entire 89 seconds of overtime on the power play. The Kings were received penalties for both hooking and goaltender interference in the final minute of regulation play. Jacquizz Rodgers . An excellent start from Drew Hutchison and the return of Jose Bautista helped provide a little breathing room in the divisional race while ending a three-game losing skid at the same time. ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Sixty touchdown passes. Fifteen wins. A fifth MVP trophy. Peyton Manning is more productive than hes ever been, and whether hes deciphering defences at the line of scrimmage on game day or on his iPad during the week, his love for the game hasnt waned. The final piece of evidence that Manning is as good as ever came Monday. As expected, Manning passed the exam on his surgically repaired neck that was required by his contract with the Broncos that will pay him $20 million next season, according to a person with knowledge of the results. The person spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity Monday because results of medical checkups typically arent announced. Manning has said that if doctors tell him hes at risk physically, hed have no problem calling it a career. After his four neck procedures, including a spinal fusion that sidelined him for all of 2011 and eventually led to his release from Indianapolis, Manning has said he has steeled himself for that possibility. At the Super Bowl last month, he talked about how his older brother, Cooper, had to give up football after neck surgeries in high school and college, and how that had a big impact on his life. "I remember at the time, when Cooper got injured, they did a test on me and Eli. I would have been a junior in high school and Eli would have been a sixth-grader, or something. They said our necks werent picture perfect and didnt look ideal, but theyre stable enough to keep playing football. Cooper had to give up playing football. In some ways, when I had my neck problems, I thought maybe I had been on borrowed time this entire time," Manning said. "I was fortunate to have 20 years of health to play football. If that was going to be tthe end of it because of a neck injury, I really, believe it or not, had a peace about it.dddddddddddd" Once doctors told him his neck was secure, however, Manning said he quickly shifted his focus to seeing if he could strengthen his weakened throwing arm to the point where he could be productive again. After the Colts released him, Manning signed a five-year, $96 million deal in Denver, where hes thrown for 100 TDs, including the playoffs, while going 28-7 with two AFC titles. Manning won his fifth MVP award in 2013, when he set single-season records by passing for 5,547 yards and 55 TDs while guiding the Broncos, the highest-scoring team in NFL history, to their first Super Bowl in 15 seasons. Manning, who will be 38 next season, said during Super Bowl week that he had no intention of retiring after the Super Bowl. Although Mannings plans for 2014 became a big story line in the playoffs, the Broncos front office had proceeded as though their quarterback would be returning for another run at a title. Although his deal with Denver requires him to pass a physical every spring to make sure his neck is OK, if there were any concerns about his neck, he wouldnt have started all 16 games, plus three more in the playoffs. Not only is Manning still performing at his peak level, he said he still enjoys everything that goes into getting ready to play on game days and "when you still enjoy the preparation, I think you probably still ought to be doing that," he said at the Super Bowl. He passed his required exit physical that all players take in the days following the Broncos Super Bowl loss to Seattle. He then played in the Pebble Beach Pro-Am golf tournament just days later, another indication that his neck is fine. ' ' '
|
| Beitrag vom 11.11.2014 - 08:43 |
|
|
|
