Suspension for Ladd?
The NHL likely will review Andrew Ladd’s high hit on Montreal’s Matt D'Agostini for a possible suspension.
Ladd received a five-minute major and game misconduct for elbowing early in the first period of the Hawks’ 3-2 win from referees Stephane Auger and Dan O’Halloran, who told coach Joel Quenneville Ladd was ejected because D’Agostini was hurt.
D’Agostini left the game and didn’t return.
“I thought it was a good hit,” Quenneville said. “I thought it was a clean hit, that’s my view of it.”
Replays showed Ladd did not leave his feet until AFTER the impact with D’Agostini. It was also questionable as to whether he hit D'Agostini with his elbow or shoulder.
It will be interesting to see how the NHL rules in light of all the recent talk about hits to the head.
But if the NHL did not suspend Philadelphia’s Mike Richards for last week’s hit to the head of Florida’s David Booth, how could a suspension for Ladd be justified?
Richards sent Booth to the hospital with a concussion and received a major penalty and game misconduct for interference with intent to injure.
The Hawks should have a big beef if Ladd gets suspended, but when it comes to discipline in the NHL, you can always expect a decision that doesn’t make sense.
How big of an impact do you think this has been? Seems like the increased speed, head down, or looking back has contributed some to this problem.
Chico my man...your post above is the sanest and most logical of them all.
To the rest, of course it was dirty. Don't rationalize it to make you feel better about your own bloodlust.
The debate about whether he left his feet is secondary to the flying elbow/forearm.
He went for the head, he got the head, he followed through on the head.
Of course it was dirty. It was Dion Phaneuf dirty.
Keep the arm down and just hit the guy, he is seeing stars anyhow.
Run your padded elbow through his head, its dirty.
See...? Simple
I highly doubt he went for the head and you should not make them assertions.
Most likely he was going for a solid body shot with his shoulder. Ladd was also preparing for a violent collision. Ladd was most likely trying to hit him in the upper body and where else do you deliver a solid hit. Ladd miscalculated and made a mistake. It is a fast pace game.
Dirty? Hockey is full of techniques and plays that can be considered dirty.
The bottom line is that if the player did not get injured or go down in a heap there would be no call. Period. The refs said as much.
What happened to right or wrong?
Does this mean anytime someone is injured the other guy is going to get a penalty or suspended whether it was clean or not?
The NHL has to be really careful about blurring the lines. A penalty is a penalty (or not) regardless of the outcome.
The same goes for that BS logic of not calling a penalty based on the game situation. It is a penalty or it isn't regardless of the time on the clock or the score.
Dude...he got 5 minutes and a game.
Like to get access to the refs like you must have.
No doubt you support your team...but the refs never said that...jeez
Quote from Tim Sassone's column titled 'Sharp scores winner, Blackhawks beat Canadiens' on 10/30: "I thought it was a good hit," Quenneville said. "I asked the referee why it was a major and he said because the guy was injured on the play"
If you don't believe me, look it up. I have no reason to believe Quenneville is lying.
You made some snide comments when you could have asked where I sourced my information from.
Finally, my comments were about the NHL in general and not specific to that game. All I am saying is that the refs need to be objective. What's wrong with that?
Hey YP1, don't argue with Dan! If you don't stop, he'll taunt you a second time!
I don't see much in the way of the players/coachs respecting the game and their fellow players. I understand we have a very physical game here - but I think the players can control this better than anyone. They all say they don't want to hurt the other guy .... well they all know what type of hits cause most of these bad injuries. Have a little respect... what goes around comes around. If the League makes changes because the players won't - I don't think that is good for the game. I think if you look at all the hits in the past couple of weeks that are in question - most could have been good hockey checks (seperating the guy from the puck) without the headshots.
There should be no suspension. Look at the hits by Kronwell,Mitchell and Richards. Was Ladd's hit worse than those three? There were no suspensions for those hits. Now if the NHL wants to change the rules give the players a heads up (pun intended) and decide what is legal and what is not. Then, send league reps to meet the teams and explain the change but this changing things as they go bit needs to stop so everyone can get on the same page and serious injuries like the ones that two of our players suffered can be avoided.
if anyone listened to xm 204 this afternoon on the nhl channel they covered this very subject, back in the 80's you wouldn't think of hitting from behind or any of the other crap that goes on in todays politically correct ladies skate nhl, why ,because they didn't have the instigator rule, they "let the players play and the policing and respect of the game took care of itself! who was the best open ice hitter in the 80's? doug wilson!every team needs that protection , we have the guys to do it but unfortunantly they won't, dustin byfuglien has all the tools to be an al secord type, maybe not get 50, but fore sure a 20 and 200 player, cam barker has the size and strength of a gary nylund or dave manson type player,but these 2 won't,brent seabrooke could be rob blake if he wanted to, but won't. i for 1 wish adam burrish and ben eager a healthy and speedy return, but if it isn't in the cards then we need to address it since our in house guys "will have none of that!", i have been touting colton orr or boogard, someone else mentioned daniel carcillo! i would love that because that kid could play also. like i said when teams know you have an edge they think twice about it. ladds hit was clean ,so was mitchell's,as far as richards, the panthers should have addressed that right away instead of looking to hide behind the rule book of "the new nhl". once again just my opinion, but ti doen't mean it is law! good day!
What was egregious about XM's news items was the description of Ladd's hit as a "flying elbow" which simply shows that the XM people never bothered to watch the film.
Best open ice hitter of the 80's was Doug Wilson? Ever hear of a guy named Scott Stevens?
Ol' jostlin' Jocelyn Lemieux knocked a few skaters onto their keesters, too!!!
I like Roenicks hits. Really enjoyed those Hawk years with Roenick.
I liked the way Troy Murray would shoulder-check guys in open ice.
Wont' be a surprise if Ladd get's a suspension. He's not a superstar like Ovechkin, who can repeatedly make borderline and clearly dirty plays--slew footing is in no way a hockey play--and get a slap on the wrist at worst.
If Laddy gets another chance to check someone in the same situation, I say take it. I'm all for the Hawks sending messages that they will hit, and hit hard, at any place on the ice. Please don't turn the NHL into the NFL, where the fouls are harder to distinguish than which which one's Mary-Kate and which one's Ashley.
>The Richards hit on Booth was really, really late
>A blind-sided cheap-shot with clear intent to injure
>Booth did not have the puck, and hadn't had it for several seconds
>Hard to understand why Richards was not suspended for 5-10 games
>Letting that hit be legal allows open season on all players
>The NHL is clearly uncertain what kind of hitting is legal and what isn't
>I've seen good old-fashioned hip checks this year draw penalties -- huh?
>The constant hits from behind -- drilling players face-first into the boards is ridiculous -- someone's neck is gonna snap
>The NHL needs to make a clear set of rules -- the players will adjust
>It's just plain wrong that Colin Campbell makes these decisions -- the rules should be clear enough so that the action speaks for itself
It's not about if the league should or should not suspend Ladd based on morals, it's about the rules. I don't think any of us enjoy seeing bodychecks to the head in the game, but we don't make the rules. Bottom line is, Ladd's hit was clean according to the rules and the league shouldn't suspend him for that. This topic has been around for so many years, and the league has failed to find a solution, but there isn't a contact sport on the planet where nobody gets hurt. They probably need to make a few more changes, but they can't ruin the game. Things even happen in non-contact sports where dangerous plays can happen. These players enter the league knowing, the might put themselves in a vunerable position, but they hit the ice and perform for the pride and entertainment.
Maybe, I wrong and they should take hitting out of the game. They can also play in a rubber room, with glass protecting all the fans, while wearing slippers and with a tennis ball and foam padded plastic sticks. I'm pretty sure there would be much fewer injuries.
Dirty hit, plain and simple. Left his feet. Aimed high. NHL will make an example of him, and I have no problem with it.
The high head shots are an issue. Anyone who doesn't see that as the case would probably have been in the same camp that told goalies they were chicken for wanting to wear a mask.
NHL has a bit of an Neanderthal issue, if you follow.
Like Ladd a lot. Great player. Super trade by Tallon. But he should sit for that hit.
the point of impact shouldn't be the focus.
The facts are he intended & did "explode" UP into the hit and make impact high on the player - and if he wasn't intentionally targetting the head, he should have known that if that was the main point of contact/impact, he would put himself at risk for a penalty & possible suspension.
sorry, but you have to be clueless (or an unadulterated homer which is also cluelessness) to think otherwise.
Mitchell never left his feet when he hit Toews - that is the definition of clean.
Ladd clearly left his feet on D'Agositini - and he didn't fall backwards as a result of the impact, but exploded up & forwards on the follow-thru - making the impact & location of the hit more devastating and giving evidence as to intent.
the league & its players need to respect the head area much more than they do - the speed of hockey & the confined playing area (boards & glass) make head hits/concussions more devastating than in football or other sports - too many hockey careers have been cut short from concussion.
i'm all for clean, hard hits where impact to the head is incidental, and given the speed & unpredictability of the game, serious head injuries are going to happen - its the nature of the game, but direct shots to the head, whether intentional or not, should not be tolerated and should be eliminated. period.
ladd's hit falls in the latter category - it was unecessary and undisciplined & could have cost his team, not to mention D'Agostini. if he had simply stood his ground (like Mitchell did), i think it still is a huge hit, but clean without the questions of whether it was legal or suspendable.
Since when is exploding into someone illegal. Should players coast into each other. In the NFL, should a safety not hammer a receiver on a crossing route. There's a reason some parts of the ice are tougher to play in than others. Dags cornered himself along the boards. You go there, bad things might happen, as in gettting your block knocked off by Laddy. Chico sounds like he might like figure skating better. Please don't watch rugby, water polo, or team handball because these are some of the most brutal sports on Earth.
Looked like intent to injure. I just wish the league would get really clear on what the criteria are for a suspendable hit.
Every hard hit can be considered an attempt to injure.
I think Chico said it best. The follow-thru is probably where the most damage is done.
I can see it both ways. Like probably most of the guys here, I played the game for years and played hard. I ran many guys open ice with my shoulder, not elbow or stick. And I fought a bunch of guys too. But the guys are so bigger, faster, stronger and the equipment is such that it's getting ridiculous and more dangerous than it should be. And these guys today are playing on the equivalent of a much smaller ice surface than even the guys from 20 years ago as a result of their size & speed. The only solution other than to outlaw the head hits is to give them more room and therefore more time to see it coming. And the owners retro-fitting the rinks to the olympic size is not very likely. I love the contact, fights, everything. You have to have played the game to understand when a player says " sure I was trying to hit him, but I wasn't trying to hurt him". I think it's time to take a little responsibility and make a little effort to make as sure as they can that they don't hurt another player seriously. Bruising a guy is one thing, but scrambling his eggs is another. I don't think we need NHL guys walking around after their playing days are over having the afflictions that the former NFL guys have.
this is a reply to coachal:
Ladd was engaged immediately after the hit and started throwing punches. He did great. I don't know where you get off saying Ladd couldn't take care of himself in a fight. He would have finished the guy off too if the zebras hadn't interveened.
As for the hit, there was nothing dirty, cheap, or illegal about it. It was a bad call by the zebras, like many of the other bad calls during the game. That was a bad outing by that crew, one of the linesman got hit with the puck during play 7 times! And in all refs or linesman got in the way of at least 5 plays and changed the dynamic of the play.
There was no elbow, and there is no rule that says if the other player was 'hurt' after a big hit that the hitter should receive a misconduct.
Hits happen. This was nothing like the Mitchell on Toews hit either. Except in that D'Ago had his head down while Ladd lined him up. That part of hits in hockey, I do not appreciate. You are taking advantage of someone in a vulnerable position, which usually leads to injury. Case in point the Toews hit, and this hit too. That is what the league needs to figure out how to address.
Wow - this is an endless debate and totally worthless until a new rule is instituted. Ladd's hit was within the rules and a great hit. Honestly, I don't like hits to the head. Hits to the head should be outlawed - accident or not. One game suspension is fine. But basically Ladd did serve a one game suspension as he missed basically the entire game.
Also, the canadian player saw Ladd at the last second and did make a move to avoid the hit and thus 1. Ladd did not hit him square (Ladd was off balance). 2. the dramatic Ladd leg activity, and 3. the resulting head hit. Ladd was commited to the hit and had to hit the canadian player some how, otherwise the Canadians were off and running the other way. It was an unfortunate event.
By the way, i see no difference if it is an elbow or forearm or upper arm that smashes an oppenents head. I guess you can include shoulder too. Just like i think Cleary's hit on Kane was not right as well as Kronwalls hit on Havlat or Staffords on Keith. It is part of the game and within the rules at this time. I like open ice hits and checks and it is part of the game and right now head shots are allowed.
Now the intent to injure is another gray area within the rules. What a joke. Every check and especially a check when the players head is down is an intent to hurt or injure. The player dealing out the hit is saying: "I didn't intend to hurt the player" but really what they are saying "I didn't intend to end the players career" or "I didn't intend to kill the guy". Because you know when you are checking some one - you are trying to hurt him physically and mentally. You are trying to gain an advantage for your team.
Also i am not in favor of hockey teams policing this activity on the ice with goons, but if there is any policing - how about returning with some good solid checks within the rules.
Coachal, review the tape, Ladd clearly didn't leave the ice until AFTER the collision. Nothing "Homer" about pointing out what the tape shows as obvious.
But I do agree in principle about letting the players settle scores old-skool style. Although I do wonder, I don't think anyone would confuse Ladd w/the likes of Domi, Probie, etc but he seemed to mix it up pretty well after the whistle. It would certainly be interesting to see what would happen, eh?
there isn't anything suspendable about this hit. This is almost exactly what Kronwall did to Havlat, with the exception of Havlat not playing or touching the puck, hence the interference penalty. Richard's hit was worse, because he came across the ice and blindsided Booth. Kinda like when Toews was hit, he was blindsided, but mostly his fault because he was looking backwards. In this case, Ladd and D'Agostini were skating right towards each other and D'Agostini wasn't looking where he was skating. He saw Ladd at the last minute, but failed to protect himself by bracing for the impact. Instead he tried to skate around it and he got nailed because he was crouched down. It was worse because Ladd has about 2-3 inches of height on him as well. Anyway, I don't think the NHL can justify a suspension on this one and their judgement hasn't been all that bad this season. It's no different than the shoulders to the head the Hawks stars have recieved and it is a part of the game until the rules change. If it was an elbow to the head, then by all means, Ladd would deserve 15 games to think about it, but it wasn't.
Let the players take care of it! Ladd wouldn't stand a chance in a fight. That would take care of him, not a suspension.
And if you're really paying attention, his skates were OFF the ice. Quit the homer stuff and man up!
They've taken fighting away from the game and this is what you get for it.
Grow a pair!
Look, I'm all for protecting the players. No one should have their career/health jeopardized. But at what point do you just let the players PLAY HOCKEY??
D'Agostini skates into the neutral zone with his head down, sorry - that's on him, he deserved to get drilled. Just like Toews did - how is this any different than that hit?
Plus, at the last moment, D'Agostini lifts his head, sees Ladd bearing down on him and made a quick move to try and avoid the hit. This may have contributed to the severity of the collision.
Ladd should have never been taken off the ice, let alone be considered for a suspension. Sorry, NHL... this isn't Disney on Ice - or is it??
Tim is so right, with the NHL you never know what you'll get. This is clear cut case where it's a clean open ice hit, with his shoulder not an elbow. Toews is still not playing, but Willie Mitchell hasn't missed a minute for that hit. Since that's what should happen to Ladd, the NHL will probably give him 1 game. Then again, this was a Montreal player, not a Maple Leaf. But ANY suspension in this case should be automatically appealed. Ladd only left his feet after impact, in addition the hit was head on. This was no blindside hit like Mitchell-Toews, the Montreal player could see Ladd coming.
Unfortunately I missed the game last night but when we got home my son turned to the NHL network for the highlights. After the game highlights, the panel took issue with Ladd's hit particularly with his leaving his feet. I can see where Ladd did not leave his feet until after contact but that was never mentioned. The announcers (I believe Mark Osborne was one of the two ex-players) considered it to be a dirty hit that should be met with suspension. I hope the NHL head office does not share their view but our Hawks seem to get a raw deal more often than not in thesse types of decisions. It was great to see the Hawks beat the Habs which is my most hated rival. Let's keep our fingers crossed that Ladd does not get any time off.
If this hit happened 3 weeks ago, it would have been a 5 min. major, but yes I agree with "6628", guys are targeting the head. Reminds me of the late 90's Stevens hits that shortened the career of Lindros. Lafontaine retired due to concussions and Patrick Stefan missed a ton of time early on in his career due to head shots. The league always waits until the 3rd or 4th stretcher is out there on the ice and I really think Ladd will pay for other guys getting injured, + he's Andrew Ladd and not Ryan Getzlaf. He'll buy more time than and NHL "A-lister"
Believe me at first, I had the typical home team fan reaction that suddenly we inflict the pain and the gavel comes down super hard when my team applies the body with equal abandon.
The refs did not have the benefit of a re[play to see Ladd didn't elbow and only left his feet after the play. I really do not think those were the factors in the call.
I think after recent fast vicious "within the rule checks" had laid out so many lately, the league office told the officials to call a body-check a penalty.
Why? Because Ladd "could" have let up.
Further eliminate one of the most exciting parts of our game?
We graybeards still think "head down, your the clown" is the way of the day, but I think those days is gone.
Today all players are weight room strong, fast, and the ice still is the same regulation size, allowing the spaces to a guy to creep in and bury you.
I wonder with 4 officials and the post original six training regimes, if the game would have less of these occurrences if the owners took out the first three rows on each side of their ice surfaces?
Like that is gonna happen.
and while I am at it, how long before enough fans watch their team play a strong game for sixty minutes and go home angry because a shoot-out caused a "loss"?
If the body check goes, take the OT with it!
Personally, I think a suspension is warranted when the hit is embellished in some way— charging, leaving the feet or raising the elbow/arm— in order to injure the other player. I do think Ladd's is supendable. But it's also why I thought Kron-Turtle's hit on Havlat was arguably worse.
Welcome to Gary Bettman and Colin Campbell's NHL, where the rules are made up on the fly and gimmicks (not to mention over-expansion) abound.
Although I will weigh in here and say I like 4 on 4 in OT. But I HATE the shooutout. If the game is tied after 4 on 4. Call it a tie and give each team a point.
Equal footing all the time, no one gets hurt and the sun always shines. It's infected our society for decades.
just like kids' rec leagues where EVERYONE gets a trophy, even those finishing in last place, all levels of sport are faced with the, "let's make sure everyone has equal footing".
The worst thing about this type of situation is it comes from the same "voices" as those wanting to rid the sport of fighting, the best policing method of any sport ever in North America.
On Ladd's hit, it looks like he could have come in with the elbow, at least how I saw it real-time. He did leave hit feet only after the collision but you're right, the "voices" out there are talking. They want the stars out on the ice always. They are selling the players ahead of the sport. In this case, it wasn't a star player getting level but WAS an answer to guys like JT getting leveled on 10/21.
Just like the NBA (no coincidence NHL's reject of an commish was from the NBA), it's been the MAGIC and the Lakers, BIRD and the Celtics, JORDAN and the Bulls. Where it should have been LAKERS, CELTICS & BULLS...or the modern version LEBRON and the Cavs.
The Winter Classic this year? They sold out, not tickets but the game. They're selling Ovechkin at Fenway, when WE ALL know that should be a Canadiens - Bruins tilt. Two of the original six (they do get credit however for this past year when they actually did get it right @ Wrigley) and one of sports great rivalries. But no, Bettman goes for the big name player. One player who could get hurt sometime before the game and not even appear. Now how would the game's TV attraction go? No TEAM emphasis, no long-term goals, no ability to sell the SPORT.
They had a chance for THREE great glorious years in a row: Wings vs 'Hawks @ Wrigley, Habs vs B's @ Fenway followed by Leafs vs Rangers @ Yankee Stadium. Let's see if they can get it right for 1/1/11.
When a league puts individuals over the teams and the sport, it's reducing its ceiling of success.
Making the ice surfaces bigger will open it up, you got that right. But it'll open it up for more open ice hits. And yes, that'll never happen anyway. Look at the UC prices in just rows 1 & 2.
OT? I'd like to see 4-4 for 5 minutes, then 3-3 until the game ends. Power plays starting when at 3-3 will go 4-3 until a score or stop in play, then revert to 3-3. Two points to the winner, none for the loser. This is yet another BS PC thing. Give a team a point for losing. That's crap! I want to see W's and L's. No T's, No OT's, No OTL's, No SOL's.
Hockey is a contact sport.... that was a clean open ice hit. Kids remember to learn to skate with your head up. Also Ladd is not Brian Marchmont! Interesting watching the replay with Sharpe drilling a guy with several shots on the boards in the scrum after the hit
Nice victory at home.. 2 points
I don't know if Andrew has any "priors", but doesn't the League take into account the alleged offender's rapsheet?
The league is so unpredictable with stuff like this that there's no way to guess what they'll do or what their reasoning will be. Ladd knocked the guy silly with a blow to the head and logically he'd get suspended but logic and the NHL league office do not mix too well at times. As Tim mentions, they didn't do squat with the evil elbow that Richards gave Booth last weekend. Richards got the "intent to injure" penalty from the ref on top of it and still didn't get suspended.
Ladd could have buried his shoulder in the guys chest but instead went for the head. You don't have to remove the guys head to stop the play. Someone is going to wind up a vegetable, what with the equipment & speed of the game today.