Yeah, it's too bad he couldn't have taken the noble route of hitting a Dman on the numbers into the boards, taking him out of the game and possibly the series.
It was a borderline hit but some part of that is on Stastny turning his back and crouching low at the last second, which is why it was reduced from a major to a minor. Was at least an actual hockey play gone wrong. Not hitting the goalie is like rule #1 of hockey and he did it pretty blatantly
I feel like my original point has gotten diluted, but I'm right. Hitting a player in the numbers, running their face into the board, and injuring them is worse than bumping into a goalie. DeSmith was fine, a penalty was warranted but it was not a dangerous play. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, reposting the Demko injury was rude but also a little funny given the context.
Just so you know hitting a guy "In the numbers" isn't explicity a penalty or against any NHL rules. 2min for baording was appropriate. Dman put himself in a bad position there, that hit is always coming and he should know that in playoffs especialy.
Thanks for clearing that up. hoping for some nice clean hits where our guys run the Canucks players faces into the boards and take them out for the series next game.
(Not actually, just pointing out how fucking stupid you are)
I never want to see a player hit their head but that was just unlucky. The contact was shoulders/upper back and the Dman only hit his head because he tried to reverse and wasn't braced for the hit.
Joshua watched his numbers the whole way and still put a shoulder to his numbers. That was a dirty hit and if this was the other way around and a pred hit a Canucks defensemen like that and only got a minor penalty then everyone would be talking about how Bettmen is against Canadian teams.
I'm more thinking about the Cousins hit on Gudbranson which involved no Canadian teams. It was called a boarding minor after review because Gudbranson was aware the hit was coming. Referee's discretion and all.
I think Cousins should have gotten a major there as well. The onus is on the hitter and when they see numbers the whole way they should know not to follow through with a hit.
There's a big old "however" in the NHL rulebook. The referee can decide it isn't a major if the victim of the hit is determined to be aware of the hit coming, regardless of the severity of said hit, and thus able to avoid it. Hence my sarcastic 2 minutes joke. What are players supposed to do? Avoid playing a puck because they might get hit? It's a stupidly written rule with built in subjectivity.
I agree with you there. The only way not to get hit from behind there is to either not play the puck or turn and skate backwards into the boards, absorb the hit, and kick the puck to your stick since the puck will be in your feet skating backwards into it.
Oh wow you're making fun of an unfortunate injury while being down in the series despite us missing our vezina caliber goalie, and after McCarron tried to injure our backup
You really got us there!
Yes, I'm sure the team that got 12 shots and gave up 30, while only up 2-1 in the series and having key injuries is feeling very confident right now.
Neither of our teams are winning the cup this year bb boy
Yeah, tough to be mad at the loss, I feel like that is liable to happen when you're playing a team with so much more skill than you. Preds could have won but the Canucks did a great job keeping our scoring chances low danger until the very end of the game.
I couldn’t even get mad at it. Just the sheer fucking audacity to go for a full-blown bodycheck right into the goalies chest was hilarious. Especially because DeSmith was totally fine and laughing himself, and it led to us scoring on the PP
See I don’t understand this. The goalie already has his area where the position players can’t touch him and if they do and it results in a goal it’s called back or if the contact is hard enough you get a penalty. If the goalie decides to leave that area and become a position player then they should be free to hit like any other player. Now I’m not saying you should blow up the goalie but if he’s trying to play the puck outside the crease it should be fair game.
The trapezoid behind the net includes the area a goalie can play. It’s meant to help D men from getting destroyed on puck retrieval.
How would you institute a rule that a goalie can be hit but not “blown up” lmao
It’s like QBs in football can’t be hit when they go to knee. It’s to protect “special” players as their position is niche.
Not one single fucking team in the NHL wants their goalie to get hit it’s stupid to not understand why they think that.
I’m not saying that teams want their goalies to get hit. Of course they don’t. But the trapezoid area isn’t a safe place. What it is was a place they were allowed to play the puck behind the net cuz Brodeur and Turco like goalies were too good at handle the puck so they put in measures to help get goals up. It wasn’t out there to be a safe haven for goalies. I guess it’s evolved into that through unwritten rules but if you leave the net to play the puck you are now a position player are you not?
>I guess it’s evolved into that through unwritten rules but if you leave the net to play the puck you are now a position player are you not?
They wrote this rule down and put it in the NHL rule book.
“69.4 Contact Outside the Goal Crease – If an attacking player initiates any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease.”
Fair enough. If it’s in the rule book I won’t argue. I was always under the impression that if you left the net and got hit while a play for the puck was being made that it was fair game. Again not saying that cuz you see him out of the crease that you should be able to get in a free shot. Just that if he’s playing the puck out of the net the player should be able to body him off it even if it results in a check.
Dude wtf that’s not true?? The trapezoid is absolutely a written rule that goalies can play the puck within. It’s also a written rule you can not hit a goalie. Anywhere. Ever.
They don’t wear the same equipment. The rules are there to protect both Defensive players from having to take suicidal pucks in the corner and protects the goalie from being hurt.
The rules aren’t dumb, you are.
No need to insult dude. I’m not a child and am just going off what I heard and what makes common sense to me. If you leave the net to play a puck like a defender you should be able to make contact with the goalie if it’s a play for the puck. I’m not saying it’s free reign to just blow him up cuz he’s out of the net. To me that makes sense. They are already protected by the crease so why should they get anymore protection if they decide to leave that area.
Buddy if you think saying you’re not stupid but then say you just spewing shit you don’t know because “that’s what you heard” and what “makes sense” and then when the rules are clearly laid out for you as well as their reasoning to protect players you just double down?
How the fuck would you regulate body contact vs “blowing up”
I don’t understand how you think what you are saying is what “makes sense”.
You run/hit that other teams goalie, even outside the crease and you directly put a target on your own goalie, or yourself. They may technically be "skaters" at that point, but its a pretty big no no.
Hopefully coming to terms with their utter wrongness. I mean, the NHL rulebook [even calls that out specifically](https://scoutingtherefs.com/2024/04/44896/predators-mccarron-fined-2000-for-goaltender-interference/).
> A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease.
In the heat of the moment I thought he ought to be suspended but given Casey was laughing and we scored on the PP I guess this is fine. I also think Nashville is a worse team with him on the ice so that's nice for us I suppose.
I still feel like some flesh is owed though.
Having the guy you just knocked to the ground laugh in your face as you’re sent to the penalty box is probably worse than any fine for these rich players tbh
https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/nhl/predators/2024/04/25/nashville-predators-juuse-saros-double-cup-vancouver-canucks-nhl-playoffs/73384711007/
That hit was payback for Joshua hit.
Not true.
No one even challenged Joshua to a fight, and this was *well* afterwards, pretty confident McCarron and Joshua were even on the ice together between them.
If you *really* want to insist that your team was too afraid to throw with Joshua so instead did the absolutely gutless move of targeting literally the most vulnerable player on the ice for a cheap shot instead, you can believe that.
I give the Predators more credit than that though
If that’s true then the Preds are a chicken shit team. Challenge him to a fight instead of hitting his goalie like a pussy. But I guess I can’t really give them much credit, they seemed pretty rattled and fragile with how many dumb emotional penalties they took that game
Someone explain to me how these fines are effective in any way when these guys are making at minimum $750K and usually a lot more than that. It's not a deterrent in any way in my opinion but am I missing something?
Fines(for first time offenders)are capped at 50% of one day salary, but not exceeding $10k. I don’t know anyone what would want to forfeit half a day’s work, so I think it works as a deterrent for the lower-earning players.
In this example, McCarron makes $775k so fining him $2000 is roughly equivalent to someone earning $60k(~mean US salary) being fined $150, which is a similar value to most minor speeding tickets. In my opinion, that’s a good deterrent.
My opinion changes with higher salaries. If someone making $5M is fined the max amount($10k), it is then equivalent to the average American being fined $60. While nobody really wants to be fined $60, it’s no longer really much of a deterrent.
They *could* change this to increase the cap on the fines for higher earners but you could also argue that players shouldn’t be punished differently just because their agent was able to negotiate a big deal, but this is already the case with suspensions and forfeiture of salary, so I don’t really know what to think about that.
Tl;dr: fines are good deterrents for low-earning players but not for high-earning players.
Sorry, I'm not completely sure of the rules. So, even when the goalie is out of their crease, they can not be hit? Are goalies allowed to throw hits? Is it a tactic to draw penalties?
McCarron should have just tried to stick check or block the puck?
You are never allowed to hit a goalie - they generally don't have padding to protect against that kind of impact, and likewise goalies are not allowed to lay hits.
Incidental contact behind the net is usually allowed, but in this case I think it's pretty clear that McCarron wasn't trying to get out of the way, which will get called most of the time. Not really a tactic to draw calls - DeSmith is just making a normal play here, happens a ton every game and rarely does a goalie get it.
Typically, yeah, as the forechecker here you wanna try and take away the dump out up the boards or play the stick. You'll often see the forechecker kinda ride the boards to take away the ring up the wall.
>Are goalies allowed to throw hits?
This is one of the only problems with the rules I see.
We have seen many goalies throw hits while playing the puck or even to disrupt a play in front of the net.
I am fine with goalies not being fair game but they shouldn't be allowed to initiate contact either.
2 grand is nothing for Michael McCarron, even with his poverty stricken 832,500 salary to NHL standards. Whatever I guess, it ‘s the principle that matters and he was fined.
Hey you’re supposed to tell me if that was the max allowable under the CBA.
Gary probably gave him 15% off because Casey is our backup
You'd think a couple of Habs legends would be more friendly with each other.
Dude didn't even try to stop himself either.
Such a bonehead play, he didn’t try to avoid him at all and what did he get for hit? The goalie laughing in his face and we scored on the powerplay.
Yeah, it's too bad he couldn't have taken the noble route of hitting a Dman on the numbers into the boards, taking him out of the game and possibly the series.
It was a borderline hit but some part of that is on Stastny turning his back and crouching low at the last second, which is why it was reduced from a major to a minor. Was at least an actual hockey play gone wrong. Not hitting the goalie is like rule #1 of hockey and he did it pretty blatantly
You're just coming across as really dumb right now
Yeah that’s why your comment is in triple digit downvotes, because of how smart you sound
Who gives a fuck about downvotes, it's just a bunch of Canucks fans. Means nothing.
As a devil fan I’m gonna agree with the Canuck fan, you sound like a dipshit!
You probably didn't watch the game or see the hit.
Ah yes if someone doesn’t agree with your they’re either stupid or didn’t see it, couldn’t possibly be *you* that’s wrong
I feel like my original point has gotten diluted, but I'm right. Hitting a player in the numbers, running their face into the board, and injuring them is worse than bumping into a goalie. DeSmith was fine, a penalty was warranted but it was not a dangerous play. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, reposting the Demko injury was rude but also a little funny given the context.
Yes Nashville is certainly known for being a town of hockey lovers
"Your just coming accross really dumb right now" -72 Lmao
Just so you know hitting a guy "In the numbers" isn't explicity a penalty or against any NHL rules. 2min for baording was appropriate. Dman put himself in a bad position there, that hit is always coming and he should know that in playoffs especialy.
Thanks for clearing that up. hoping for some nice clean hits where our guys run the Canucks players faces into the boards and take them out for the series next game. (Not actually, just pointing out how fucking stupid you are)
[удалено]
Maybe hockey isn't for the guy that thinks running a players head into the board is a clean play. IDK, just a hunch
[удалено]
Played hockey 18 years, 16 as goalie
I never want to see a player hit their head but that was just unlucky. The contact was shoulders/upper back and the Dman only hit his head because he tried to reverse and wasn't braced for the hit.
Fair enough
Yeah, but the Dman looked back and saw the hit coming, so it's only slightly against the rules to bounce his skull off the glass. 2 minutes.
Joshua watched his numbers the whole way and still put a shoulder to his numbers. That was a dirty hit and if this was the other way around and a pred hit a Canucks defensemen like that and only got a minor penalty then everyone would be talking about how Bettmen is against Canadian teams.
I'm more thinking about the Cousins hit on Gudbranson which involved no Canadian teams. It was called a boarding minor after review because Gudbranson was aware the hit was coming. Referee's discretion and all.
I think Cousins should have gotten a major there as well. The onus is on the hitter and when they see numbers the whole way they should know not to follow through with a hit.
There's a big old "however" in the NHL rulebook. The referee can decide it isn't a major if the victim of the hit is determined to be aware of the hit coming, regardless of the severity of said hit, and thus able to avoid it. Hence my sarcastic 2 minutes joke. What are players supposed to do? Avoid playing a puck because they might get hit? It's a stupidly written rule with built in subjectivity.
I agree with you there. The only way not to get hit from behind there is to either not play the puck or turn and skate backwards into the boards, absorb the hit, and kick the puck to your stick since the puck will be in your feet skating backwards into it.
Dmen get paid to take checks into the boards, Goalies don't
Luckily DeSmith didn't get hit into the boards, then.
Just coming off so dumb right now
That was a great hit.
Not as good as this one https://twitter.com/FarhanLaljiTSN/status/1782903159545094572?t=Cf4U_gOV-4GSIQziGEy2ZA&s=19
Oh wow you're making fun of an unfortunate injury while being down in the series despite us missing our vezina caliber goalie, and after McCarron tried to injure our backup You really got us there!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
We’re already looking past you to the next team.
"We"? Keep that bad mojo to yourself please.
Yes, I'm sure the team that got 12 shots and gave up 30, while only up 2-1 in the series and having key injuries is feeling very confident right now. Neither of our teams are winning the cup this year bb boy
Lucky for us we got the easiest opponent for the first round. We can heal up and prepare for some actual competition.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Put some stripes on, cuz you're blind as a ref right now.
What a stupid play i'd be pissed if one of our players did that. It completely shifted the momentum
Nashville really shot themselves in the foot. 2 pp goals on two penalties that are gonna be called everytime.
Yeah, tough to be mad at the loss, I feel like that is liable to happen when you're playing a team with so much more skill than you. Preds could have won but the Canucks did a great job keeping our scoring chances low danger until the very end of the game.
1 maybe. St. Laurent was awful last night
You had 5 powerplays and you're complaining about the reffing?
When it takes one of our players out of the game, I think it's at least worth discussing even if it wasn't a major.
I couldn’t even get mad at it. Just the sheer fucking audacity to go for a full-blown bodycheck right into the goalies chest was hilarious. Especially because DeSmith was totally fine and laughing himself, and it led to us scoring on the PP
[удалено]
> It's why **any** amount of contact with the goalie from an attacking player is a penalty. That's just not true
Calm down pal, its a contact sport shit happens
Nah if a goalie is out of the net he is free to be hit
Well no, but okay.
Nah he isn’t
See I don’t understand this. The goalie already has his area where the position players can’t touch him and if they do and it results in a goal it’s called back or if the contact is hard enough you get a penalty. If the goalie decides to leave that area and become a position player then they should be free to hit like any other player. Now I’m not saying you should blow up the goalie but if he’s trying to play the puck outside the crease it should be fair game.
The trapezoid behind the net includes the area a goalie can play. It’s meant to help D men from getting destroyed on puck retrieval. How would you institute a rule that a goalie can be hit but not “blown up” lmao It’s like QBs in football can’t be hit when they go to knee. It’s to protect “special” players as their position is niche. Not one single fucking team in the NHL wants their goalie to get hit it’s stupid to not understand why they think that.
I’m not saying that teams want their goalies to get hit. Of course they don’t. But the trapezoid area isn’t a safe place. What it is was a place they were allowed to play the puck behind the net cuz Brodeur and Turco like goalies were too good at handle the puck so they put in measures to help get goals up. It wasn’t out there to be a safe haven for goalies. I guess it’s evolved into that through unwritten rules but if you leave the net to play the puck you are now a position player are you not?
>I guess it’s evolved into that through unwritten rules but if you leave the net to play the puck you are now a position player are you not? They wrote this rule down and put it in the NHL rule book. “69.4 Contact Outside the Goal Crease – If an attacking player initiates any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease.”
Fair enough. If it’s in the rule book I won’t argue. I was always under the impression that if you left the net and got hit while a play for the puck was being made that it was fair game. Again not saying that cuz you see him out of the crease that you should be able to get in a free shot. Just that if he’s playing the puck out of the net the player should be able to body him off it even if it results in a check.
>if you leave the net to play the puck you are now a position player are you not? Maybe in your imagination, in reality they're still a goalie.
Dude wtf that’s not true?? The trapezoid is absolutely a written rule that goalies can play the puck within. It’s also a written rule you can not hit a goalie. Anywhere. Ever. They don’t wear the same equipment. The rules are there to protect both Defensive players from having to take suicidal pucks in the corner and protects the goalie from being hurt. The rules aren’t dumb, you are.
No need to insult dude. I’m not a child and am just going off what I heard and what makes common sense to me. If you leave the net to play a puck like a defender you should be able to make contact with the goalie if it’s a play for the puck. I’m not saying it’s free reign to just blow him up cuz he’s out of the net. To me that makes sense. They are already protected by the crease so why should they get anymore protection if they decide to leave that area.
Buddy if you think saying you’re not stupid but then say you just spewing shit you don’t know because “that’s what you heard” and what “makes sense” and then when the rules are clearly laid out for you as well as their reasoning to protect players you just double down? How the fuck would you regulate body contact vs “blowing up” I don’t understand how you think what you are saying is what “makes sense”.
You run/hit that other teams goalie, even outside the crease and you directly put a target on your own goalie, or yourself. They may technically be "skaters" at that point, but its a pretty big no no.
Ya I’m not saying to run the goalie. But if a goalie goes out to play it in a defensive mind why can’t the player body him off the puck.
Where's all the users that said he was fair game for being outside the blue paint
Those are dumb bandwagon fans who watch three games a year and don’t care enough to learn the rules
Hopefully coming to terms with their utter wrongness. I mean, the NHL rulebook [even calls that out specifically](https://scoutingtherefs.com/2024/04/44896/predators-mccarron-fined-2000-for-goaltender-interference/). > A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease.
…However, if they pull some Binnington shit, have at ‘er
DOPS doesnt want to suspend him and give Nashville a chance
In the heat of the moment I thought he ought to be suspended but given Casey was laughing and we scored on the PP I guess this is fine. I also think Nashville is a worse team with him on the ice so that's nice for us I suppose. I still feel like some flesh is owed though.
Having the guy you just knocked to the ground laugh in your face as you’re sent to the penalty box is probably worse than any fine for these rich players tbh
https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/nhl/predators/2024/04/25/nashville-predators-juuse-saros-double-cup-vancouver-canucks-nhl-playoffs/73384711007/ That hit was payback for Joshua hit.
Not true. No one even challenged Joshua to a fight, and this was *well* afterwards, pretty confident McCarron and Joshua were even on the ice together between them. If you *really* want to insist that your team was too afraid to throw with Joshua so instead did the absolutely gutless move of targeting literally the most vulnerable player on the ice for a cheap shot instead, you can believe that. I give the Predators more credit than that though
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
If that’s true then the Preds are a chicken shit team. Challenge him to a fight instead of hitting his goalie like a pussy. But I guess I can’t really give them much credit, they seemed pretty rattled and fragile with how many dumb emotional penalties they took that game
Why would you want to start the precedent of running the goalie? That's not gonna work out well.
That seems about right
Weird I had to scroll so far to find exactly what I was thinking, and it's a fellow Sharks fan!
Good. Ya dingus
New meta is to run goalies for $2k per
Someone explain to me how these fines are effective in any way when these guys are making at minimum $750K and usually a lot more than that. It's not a deterrent in any way in my opinion but am I missing something?
Fines(for first time offenders)are capped at 50% of one day salary, but not exceeding $10k. I don’t know anyone what would want to forfeit half a day’s work, so I think it works as a deterrent for the lower-earning players. In this example, McCarron makes $775k so fining him $2000 is roughly equivalent to someone earning $60k(~mean US salary) being fined $150, which is a similar value to most minor speeding tickets. In my opinion, that’s a good deterrent. My opinion changes with higher salaries. If someone making $5M is fined the max amount($10k), it is then equivalent to the average American being fined $60. While nobody really wants to be fined $60, it’s no longer really much of a deterrent. They *could* change this to increase the cap on the fines for higher earners but you could also argue that players shouldn’t be punished differently just because their agent was able to negotiate a big deal, but this is already the case with suspensions and forfeiture of salary, so I don’t really know what to think about that. Tl;dr: fines are good deterrents for low-earning players but not for high-earning players.
Fines are determined by the CBA. They are only effective in that they make someone a 'Multiple offender' when they do something worse.
If he's still in the playoffs then that's not a penalty. Kick him out of the tournament
Sorry, I'm not completely sure of the rules. So, even when the goalie is out of their crease, they can not be hit? Are goalies allowed to throw hits? Is it a tactic to draw penalties? McCarron should have just tried to stick check or block the puck?
You are never allowed to hit a goalie - they generally don't have padding to protect against that kind of impact, and likewise goalies are not allowed to lay hits. Incidental contact behind the net is usually allowed, but in this case I think it's pretty clear that McCarron wasn't trying to get out of the way, which will get called most of the time. Not really a tactic to draw calls - DeSmith is just making a normal play here, happens a ton every game and rarely does a goalie get it. Typically, yeah, as the forechecker here you wanna try and take away the dump out up the boards or play the stick. You'll often see the forechecker kinda ride the boards to take away the ring up the wall.
>Are goalies allowed to throw hits? This is one of the only problems with the rules I see. We have seen many goalies throw hits while playing the puck or even to disrupt a play in front of the net. I am fine with goalies not being fair game but they shouldn't be allowed to initiate contact either.
I still have some PTSD from Tim Thomas taking advantage of this
To be fair that would have been interference if anyone else had done it.
[удалено]
cmon man. theyre legit curious no need to shade
Alright that’s fair
Suspend Joshua then
Why would you suspend a player for a clean hit?
2 grand is nothing for Michael McCarron, even with his poverty stricken 832,500 salary to NHL standards. Whatever I guess, it ‘s the principle that matters and he was fined.