Hockey Wilderness: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Network Message: 50% Off: CBS/SB Nation Fantasy Baseball

So... I'm Wrong, and Apparently, a Liar

Washington Capitals' Alex Ovechkin, right, from Russia, breaks his stick as he is defended by Buffalo Sabres' Patrick Kaleta in the second period of an NHL hockey game in Washington Friday, April 3, 2009. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

More photos » Alex Brandon - AP

11 months ago: Washington Capitals' Alex Ovechkin, right, from Russia, breaks his stick as he is defended by Buffalo Sabres' Patrick Kaleta in the second period of an NHL hockey game in Washington Friday, April 3, 2009. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

So the apparent conclusion from my post about Alex Ovechkin needing to be suspended for his hit against Patrick Kaleta the other night is that I am 1) wrong and 2) a liar. Seems I cannot possibly be a fan of AO's and still call him out for being involved in a dirty hit. Now, however, I am even more confused about the entire situation, since Kaleta was just suspended for a hit that seems to me to be no where near as bad as Ovechkin's.

I am now in the unenviable position of defending my opinion of the Ovechkin hit while questioning the suspension of a dirty player (Kaleta) for a hit I agree is a bad one.

Let's see where this takes us, after the jump.

Star-divide

Still with me? Probably not, but here I go anyway.

Here is the video of Kaleta's hit last night (about the 1:15 mark):

 

Now, as a refresher, here is Ovechkin's hit on Kaleta (about the 40 second mark):

 

Which is worse, and why? Kaleta has a history of dirty hits. Not going to defend him in any way. Kaleta, however, hit a player who was standing against the boards. Not sure why that is even boarding. Maybe I need an explanation of the two rules, but it looks to me like Ovechkin's is boarding, and Kaleta's is charging, but either way, they are both bad hits.

After being told I am a liar about being a fan of Ovechkin's, all because I questioned his hit, his past, and his ability to rise above the law, maybe I am not the best one to continue the debate. No one else seems to see the irony in this, though. Am I really the only one?

Puck Daddy's Greg Wyshynski tells me I am right that AO is above the law, but wrong that he should have been suspended for this latest hit. I am OK with that, I respect Wysh and his opinion a great deal. But if AO does not get suspended, why does Kaleta?

Please, I am begging. Explain it to me.

-Buddha

0 recs  |  Comment 9 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Hockey Wilderness

No Comment

Nov 2009 by BReynolds - 23 comments

Is Florida a "Hockey Market?"

Nov 2009 by BReynolds - 45 comments

Comments

Display:

I’m back (you had to expect it right?). I don’t think either hit should be suspended, so let’s get that out first. I think there are two things that make the Kaleta hit marginally worse than the AO hit. First, I’m not positive Ross saw Kaleta coming. I think he might have but after watching a few times it looks like he may have been more preoccupied looking at the other forechecker. Kaleta definitely saw AO coming so there’s no disputing that he couldn have defended himself better.

Second, Kaleta hit Ross square in the back. AO didn’t hit Kaleta square in the back. I maintain that AO hit Kaleta on the shoulder. I know you disagree with that but even if you thought AO got Kaleta’s back I don’t think you could say that he got Kaleta more squarely in the back than Kaleta got Ross. The result of the square back shot was that Ross’ head was driven right into the glass. Kaleta hit his head on the boards because of how he was spinning when he got hit.

Again, I don’t think either hit should have been suspended but if one hit is worse than the other the hit Kaleta gave was worse than the one he received. I’d guess Kaleta was probably suspended because of his reputation, though that’s not an entirely satisfactory answer to me either. Both hits deserved 2 or 4 minutes, that’s all.

(Thanks for switching feeds in this post, and keeping a good discussion going on the merits.)

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...

by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 29, 2009 12:05 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Cool.

I am glad you came along for the debate. I like you guys. I would not have linked the post to AO and the Caps if I wanted to try to hide it.

I don’t think I disagree that AO hit Kaleta it the shoulder, but I think Kaleta was far enough out from the boards that AO should have been able to see that and not make the hit. Maybe it is an inertia thing, but I think he could have done it. After all he’s AO, right? (That was sarcasm, before anyone jumps on me too hard.)

The Kaleta hit on Ross was bad. I don’t like it. Not trying to defend it. You and I seem to be on opposite sides, but pretty close to agreement. I think both were bad. I don’t know what constitutes a suspension and what doesn’t, nor does anyone else apparently. But if Kaleta’s is suspend-able, so is AO’s.

They are different hits, but both are bad hits. So it comes back to, did AO not get suspended because he is AO, and did Kaleta get suspended because he is Kaleta?

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Nov 29, 2009 12:39 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Suspension?

Nobody knows what constitutes a suspension. Hence the flowchart a the wheel of justice. You’re better off not even trying to guess.

Proprietor of Hockey Wilderness - We take Minnesota hockey WAY too seriously.

by nathaneide on Nov 29, 2009 8:02 AM CST via mobile up reply actions   0 recs

It’s fine that you want to treat both hits the same, so do I. We just come down on the opposite side of how those hits should be treated. I think both could get 2 for boarding/charging but a suspension is tough for me. The only thing that changes the analysis for me is whether Ross saw the hit coming. If not, it’s much worse.

I also think we have different definitions of “dirty.” I think of dirty as a play when you’re going out to end a guy’s career or seriously injure him. There is an intent factor with dirty in my mind, and it’s a stain that can’t easily be erased. Claude Lemieux is dirty. Ryan Hollweg is dirty. AO isn’t dirty. It was a PIM but he wasn’t trying to do serious damage to Kaleta I don’t think. Maybe that is the definition of dirty you are using but if so I don’t think it’s fair to call the AO hit dirty at all. It happened so fast and a slightly different move by Kaleta makes that hit entirely fine and nobody is talking about it.

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...

by Fehr and Balanced on Nov 29, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh...

And glad to switch feeds. The one posted in the comments section was clearer and gives a better look. To be honest, I have not listened to the audio on either of them.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Nov 29, 2009 12:40 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I knew this was going to happen

Regardless of which hit was worse they are esentially the same hit. Suspend both or neither other them.

I don’t even think it’s so much that the NHL loves their star players and refuses to suspend them but perhaps that the NHL HATES their “bad boys” (Sean Avery as an example) and suspends them whenever they can.

Either way you can’t deny that the NHL has an agenda on suspensions.

Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers the only NHL team with three home arenas.

by Joe Fortunato on Nov 29, 2009 9:16 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

It's not the same hit..

Ross is facing the play (the puck) when he gets hit from behind and Kaleta is turning away from the play (the puck) when Ovechkin hits him. It’s as simple as one guy cowering away from the play while the other guy is in the process of making a play.

by blokeyhighlander on Nov 30, 2009 1:23 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

I am 1) wrong and 2) a liar

1) Yes – You still maintain that OV is a dirty player. He is not, reckless maybe but definitely not dirty. The Kaleta hit did not deserve a game misconduct let alone a suspension. The Gleason hit however does deserve a suspension but again it was not a dirty hit.

and

2) Yes- I still don’t buy that you can be a fan of a player that you think is so dirty that you go out of your way to write several posts about it. And if you do, well that says a lot more about you as a person than anything else.

Lobbies: Green, Carlson

by CapsFan2020 on Dec 1, 2009 1:01 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Several?

1.When you started you mind numbing attack, it was one. One post. The follow ups were to follow the story. No sense bringing it up, and as soon as there is more information, to just let it go. That would just make some of the knuckleheads posting that I should shut up feel all special.

2. You still have yet to disprove me being a fan of Ovechkin in anyway. The respect level for your opinion does not grow simply because you repeat it over and over. You also have yet to tell me how it is I can prove to you that I am a fan.

A question for you. How is a hit suspend-able, but not dirty? If a guy deserves a suspension for something they did, does it not, by definition, make it dirty? Nice that you use the word reckless, which was used by the Caps coach and beat writers, rather than coming up with your own, original, argument.

So. Thank you so much for your non-contribution to the debate. It means so much that you continue to visit. Please, come again.

http://www.hockeywilderness.com

by BReynolds on Dec 1, 2009 1:58 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Minnesota Wild Hockey!
Start posting about the Wild »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
So what exactly is the definition of a "charley horse"?
Small
Time is ticking away, but then what?
Cartoons_yogi_bear_small
How productive is Backstrom? Stats say not very.
Dscf0075-edit2_small
want Boys high school hockey section playoff broadcast info?
Cepedachronicles_small
Posted some photos from VAN @ MIN.
Small
Three point games are squeezing the Wild out
Peter_griffin_small
Three Points? I say how about 12?
Small
How I dealt with my angry Blackhawks fan roommate
Dscf0075-edit2_small
FSN Exec cancels FSN hockey night broadcasts
2_small
Blues fan needs help from the Wilderness

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Twitter_profile_small nathaneide

Authors

Hockey_small mbennett

Misconduct2_small HockeyJoe

Picture_058_small BReynolds

N1282200019_30083840_3437_small elisebutler