You Make the Call: Scuderi on Chimera
by gotsparkly on Oct 26, 2009 9:25 AM EDT
Email
PrintLast night, Rob Scuderi sent Jason Chimera skates-over-teakettle during the Kings-Jackets game. Video of the hit is available on Puck Daddy, and I won't steal his hit counter from him, so go here and watch. That's okay, I'll wait till you get back.
Scuderi was not called for a penalty, but the Jackets were outraged and Derek Dorsett jumped off the bench and went after Scuderi; Chimera ended up pulling two officials to the ice trying to get to him. Chimera ended up with a 10 minute misconduct, Dorsett with a too-many-men-on-the-ice bench minor and a game misconduct for leaving the bench.
Per the NHL rulebook, rule #45:
45.1 Clipping - Clipping is the act of throwing the body, from any direction, across or below the knees of an opponent.
A player or goalkeeper may not deliver a check in a “clipping” manner, nor lower his own body position to deliver a check on or below an opponent’s knees.
An illegal “low hit” is a check that is delivered by a player or goalkeeper who may or may not have both skates on the ice, with his sole intent to check the opponent in the area of his knees. A player or goalkeeper may not lower his body position to deliver a check to an opponent’s knees.
Moreover, because Chimera was injured - he was lucky it wasn't worse AFAIC - if this rule is invoked, Scuderi hits the showers.
45.3 Major Penalty - If an injury occurs as a result of this “clipping” check, the player or goalkeeper must be assessed a major penalty (see 45.5).
45.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - A game misconduct penalty must be assessed anytime a major penalty is applied for injuring an opponent by clipping.
I doubt intent to injure - I'm not sure Scuderi fully had his balance on this one. But, all the same....
UPDATE 10/27/09 - NHL.com reports that Scuderi has been fined for the hit, but doesn't say the exact fine.
If this FanPost is written by someone other than one of the blog's editors, the opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect those of this blog or SB Nation.
48 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah, I saw that hit. It should have been a 2 minute penalty on Scuderi. Minor-worthy, but no attempt to injure. I don’t blame Chimera for picking up the misconduct, but Dorsett coming off the bench was a bone headed move.
I have as many wins in a Capitals uniform as Michael Belhumeur does.
Agree with this. Dorsett should have played this a little cooler.
Never lie, steal, cheat, or drink. But, if you must lie, lie in the arms of the one you love. If you must steal, steal away from bad company. If you must cheat, cheat death. If you must drink, drink in the moments that take your breath away.
can I vote “Scuderi is a dirty little shit with a history of doing this exact same thing”? Sure as hell looked like he was going for the knees.
If you’re going to say he has a history of this please provide an example. I have never heard anyone say he has a dirty reputation.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
here you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mI-n-p2dUQ&feature=video_response
Zubrus does stupidly attempt to jump over Scuderi; however, Scuderi sets himself extremely low, in what looks to be an attempt to place as much of his body mass as possible right at Zubrus’ knees.
The optics are bad, but Zubrus’ jump makes it impossible to tell how it was lined up. In the slow-mo shot Zubrus is already in the air when you see it. What you need to see is where Zubrus’ thighs are when he’s in a normal skating stride. The low point of Scuderi’s approach was definitely low but as he approaches the boards he rises; this is pretty common on a hip check (of course he continues to stand after he makes contact to try to flip Zuburs, also common, if a dick move). It could have been a low hit if Zubrus had just taken it, but I don’t think it would have been as bad as the hit on Chimera.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
oh, I’d like to note with Ryan Lambert’s writings at PD are generally a waste of space, this is gold, from today’s “What We learned: Dirty Plays Edition!”:
And on to the last one we go: It’s Rob Scuderi practically lying down to “hipcheck” Jason Chimera like it’s his job.
Was it bad?: Oh my yes.
Should you be mad?: No doubt about it.
What’s the grad(e)?: A+ for sure.
Granted the blood and the faceplant make it bad, but Scuderi saw Ott’s kinda-sorta low-bridge and said, “Oh I can get a whole lot lower than that.” That’s some Hunt for Red October work right there. The best part, though, is that Scuderi didn’t get a penalty, Chimera got a misconduct, and the Kings got a power play out of this mess.
Too Low
It would have been a fine hit if Scuderi hadn’t dropped himself so low, thereby putting Chimera’s knees in danger. I love a good hip-check as much as the next guy, but this wasn’t a clean hip check.
I'm trying to work out a deal with a club in Europe
by D'ohboy on Oct 26, 2009 10:13 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I don’t call it a hip-check at all, personally – I call it a clip.
Never lie, steal, cheat, or drink. But, if you must lie, lie in the arms of the one you love. If you must steal, steal away from bad company. If you must cheat, cheat death. If you must drink, drink in the moments that take your breath away.
My thought was “Low Bridged”, but the league defines it as clipping. That was some kind of dirty, in my eyes.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on Oct 28, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
To me, this looks accidental, like Scuderi was having balance problems, struggling hard to stay on his blades as he came into the check. Nevertheless, regardless of intent, he should have been called, by the book, for a Major and a Game Misconduct.
If you mess up and cut somebody’s face open with your stick by accident, it’s a high sticking major. If you lose your balance and clip somebody, it should also be a penalty. Spastic play is penalized all the time. Part of the game.
Technically
If you cut someone open with a high stick, it’s a double-minor. There are also instances in which an “accidental” high stick will not be assessed a penalty.
I'm trying to work out a deal with a club in Europe
The point is that accidental infractions are and should be whistled all the time, because they are infractions. Especially those that result in injury. Because that’s the primary purpose of the rule book – to protect the players.
Intent, exactly because it’s impossible to prove, should be less relevant than the details and effects of the infraction itself.
That’s not to say the refs always get it right – not by a long shot. That why we yell at them so much.
I think that apparent intent affects supplementary discipline more than anything else – it should be whistled, accidental or not, and should be a penalty, but whether they get a fine or suspension is another question.
Never lie, steal, cheat, or drink. But, if you must lie, lie in the arms of the one you love. If you must steal, steal away from bad company. If you must cheat, cheat death. If you must drink, drink in the moments that take your breath away.
the problem with intent to injury is that it’s amazingly subjective.
Take a penguins fan and any hit that Ovie’s done. They’ll say that he always intends to injure, particularly on hits like the gonchar one in the playoffs that injured his knee. We look at it and say that it was clearly an accident based on his body position and because we think Ovie’s a stand-up sportsman.
They look at it and say that he injured his knee that was already injured and they consider him a head hunter.
The NHL looks at it and says, tripping.
Look at when Kunitz cross-checked Varly in the neck. We say that he was trying to paralyze our goaltender. They say he was going for the puck. NHL says, play on. Later they say it should have been a penalty and give him a $2,500 slap bracelet.
Unless the gloves are off (even then fighting is hockey, right? Just some boxing, nobody wants to get hurt…), or the puck is no where near the action, it’s nearly impossible to claim that there is intent to injure. You’re getting into the same grey-areas that are ruining football for me.
by snowburnt on Oct 27, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well said. Considering the subjectiveness of officiating in a fluid sport like this, whistling someone for what they appeared to do instead of what they did is both futile and a slippery slope.
"I'm just doing karate and trying to get females pregnant."
by Bald Pollack on Oct 27, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Which is why I prefer supplemental discipline for hits that are hard to tell at live speed. Let the ref make the call they think is right, and keep the game moving. Then let the NHL go look at the video and see that Richards clearly targeted Booths head and Scuderi clearly went too low on Chimera and hand out suspensions.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
Except that's not always the case
To wit – if a player’s stick is lifted by an opponent and hits another opponent in the face, he should not receive a high-sticking call. Similar exceptions are made on “reasonable” follow-throughs after shots.
They’re both “accidental” and both are typically not called, and shouldn’t be called according to the way the rulebook is written/interpreted.
I'm trying to work out a deal with a club in Europe
They’re both "accidental" and both are typically not called, and shouldn’t be called according to the way the rulebook is written/interpreted.
That’s because they’re not infractions, but because refs choose to ignore them.
I think the exception for a follow-through is statutory. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen the exception for the stick-lift, though. I know for a fact guys get high sticks for attempting to stick-lift all the time.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
But when someone else is the cause? I.e. you lift my stick and it hits J.P. in the face (sorry, J.P.)?
Yeah that’s what D’ohboy was suggesting. That play rarely happens though so I don’t know that there is even a set policy. I’ve seen it a couple times and I’ve seen it called and not called, but I don’t think it’s based on an interpretation in the rules as much as it is based on the ref trying to figure out what he saw.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
It sure is. From rule #60 of the NHL rulebook:
60.1 High-sticking – A "high stick" is one which is carried above the height of the opponent’s shoulders. Players and goalkeepers must be in control and responsible for their stick. However, a player or goalkeeper is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly.
Never lie, steal, cheat, or drink. But, if you must lie, lie in the arms of the one you love. If you must steal, steal away from bad company. If you must cheat, cheat death. If you must drink, drink in the moments that take your breath away.
What is a Game Misconduct, exactly? If you collect enough of them, does something bad happen to your career?
IS PAЯTY NOW
A game misconduct penalty means that you get an early shower. As for long-term effects, I’m not sure.
Never lie, steal, cheat, or drink. But, if you must lie, lie in the arms of the one you love. If you must steal, steal away from bad company. If you must cheat, cheat death. If you must drink, drink in the moments that take your breath away.
Three Game Misconducts in a season = one game suspension.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Dangerous, way too low. Frankly, I’m surprised Chimera got away from that without serious injury.
by Knee high to a duck on Oct 26, 2009 11:19 AM EDT reply actions
Rec’d. Good use of a FanPost.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I'm Torn
One the one hand, Scuderi is from Long Island and I’m bound to unquestioningly support LI players. On the other hand, it was a dirty hit.
Before Pens fans start pointing at the Ballard on Malkin hip check I just want to point out the major important difference: Malkin tried to jump over the hit and thus made it much worse than it would have been. Chimera didn’t jump at all; that hit was a result of Scuderi going far too low.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
What about Ott’s hip check the other day on Colaiacovo?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
That was pretty bad, although I think Scuderi got a little lower (but the angles in the LA feed are better than in the STL replay). The worst thing is it wasn’t even Ott’s most dangerous hit in that link. Crombeen is lucky he didn’t get hurt.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Oct 26, 2009 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I dislike Steve Ott even more than I dislike Sean Avery, which is saying something.
by Knee high to a duck on Oct 26, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Caps could definitely use an Ott. But I really have no respect for him at all, and I think he’s as dirty as they come.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
(Though I’d add that he’s willing to answer the bell, unlike some of his colleagues in the game’s dark arts.)
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Meh. He’s sure selective about it. I’ve seen him back down his fair share. He didn’t drop ‘em with Crombeen until it was clear he was going to have to. He initially tries to duck out of the way and was holding his stick. If he was ready to fight he would have seen Crombeen coming and just squared up. That whole infamous game v. BOS he was a chickenshit and wouldn’t answer for his garbage. Freaking Sean Avery took his fight.
Then again, he did teach Ruslan Salei a lesson. And he’s definitely not the worst offender of shirking his fights.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
I guess Matt Cooke’s my definition of a guy who won’t answer the bell for his borderline play, and by that standard…
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
The Caps could use Cooke, Ott, or Avery, I’m certainly not disputing that. However, I find such alliances distasteful and I would continue to dislike Steve Ott if he dressed for the Caps.
He doesn’t play enthusiastically and go too far, a la Ovechkin. Ott plays with intentional malice, even if he’s not trying to injure someone outright he’s trying to walk the line between hurting them and injuring them just to make it unpleasant to play against his squad. It’s effective, but it’s not part of the game I like.
by Knee high to a duck on Oct 26, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
My take on that hit, and all similar hits (Ott v. BOS, Tucker v. Peca, etc.) is that it should be illegal to hit a guy low like that if you are skating forward. That’s not really a hip check; it’s a shoulder check to the thigh/knee and it’s extremely dangerous. Hip checks should be executed skating backwards.
This particular hit doesn’t surprise me much. It’s not even the worst low-bridge Ott has thrown and Colaiacovo tried to jump it so he made it worse (when will guys figure out that jumping hits doesn’t work?). I thought the Crombeen hit was more evil. To me it looks like he meant to get him with his leg. If you watch the slow-mo version you see his knee pop out ever so slightly during the final approach. That doesn’t happen when you are just planting your feet and bracing for impact. The only excuse would be that he changed his direction; but he didn’t change direction. His shoulders went basically straight and his feet didn’t move. Also, unlike when AO hit Gooch, Crombeen didn’t make any lateral move. Ott could have picked his angle from 10’ away and timed it to hit him solid. I know DAL fans are going to give him the benefit of the doubt, and that’s fine. But that hit is evil from my perspective. I’m not even going to bother explaining this on DBD; I nearly wore out my welcome there last time I discussed Steve Ott there, and I’m still rehabbing my image.
If consequences dictate the course of action, then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate the course of action, then I should play God...
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Florida
|
53 | 25 | 17 | 11 | 61 |
|
Washington
|
54 | 28 | 21 | 5 | 61 |
|
Winnipeg
|
56 | 26 | 24 | 6 | 58 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
53 | 23 | 24 | 6 | 52 |
|
Carolina
|
55 | 20 | 25 | 10 | 50 |
(updated 2.10.2012 at 3:26 AM EST)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Thursday’s Three Stars: Max Pac hat trick; Chris Phillips’ memorable 1,000th game
- It’s over: Montreal’s Scott Gomez finally ends goalless streak (Video)
- Scott Hartnell’s goal celebration now includes fighting Dion Phaneuf (Video)
- Puck Previews: Leafs meet Flyers; Steve Yzerman not playing in Winter Classic Alumni Game?
- Three theories on why Hurricanes might pull Tuomo Ruutu off trading block
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
