What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

I have been monitoring this thread to watch this video and all I can say is wow! That was brutal. Seems to me Trouba was headhunting. I cannot believe there was no additional penalty enforced by the CCHA.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

Never mind- game was last week suspension served.

Time to move on.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

NMUFAN21 said:
T
Clearly no intent to play the puck, plus a big time follow through with the elbow. Trouba is very lucky to not have been suspeneded for this hit.
Click to expand...

I should just let it go, but this is a legitimate question. I will not comment on the elbow or intention or anything like that, it doesn't even have to be this incident.

When an opposing player has the puck, does a player have to try and play the puck? My understanding is that he can hit the player with the puck without attempting to play the puck.. It seems to me that it happens every game.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

bluevox said:
I should just let it go, but this is a legitimate question. I will not comment on the elbow or intention or anything like that, it doesn't even have to be this incident.

When an opposing player has the puck, does a player have to try and play the puck? My understanding is that he can hit the player with the puck without attempting to play the puck.. It seems to me that it happens every game.
Click to expand...

Completely legal to play the body OR play the puck. If you have control of the puck I do not need to make any effort to go for the puck if my actions (which are otherwise legal) are aimed at separating you from the puck.
 
IrishHockeyFan said:
Completely legal to play the body OR play the puck. If you have control of the puck I do not need to make any effort to go for the puck if my actions (which are otherwise legal) are aimed at separating you from the puck.
Click to expand...

That sounds correct.

This is the last time I'll comment on it. The problem I have is the Northern player isn't even in full possession of the puck, for the most part it's a few feet out, he briefly pushed it a bit. So clearly this an attempt to "head hunt" and not separate the player from the puck. He could have easily angled him off, gave a clean hit or poke check and got the puck. There was no intent to even get the puck afterwards. That's all I have to say.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

NMUFAN21 said:
That sounds correct.

This is the last time I'll comment on it. The problem I have is the Northern player isn't even in full possession of the puck, for the most part it's a few feet out, he briefly pushed it a bit. So clearly this an attempt to "head hunt" and not separate the player from the puck. He could have easily angled him off, gave a clean hit or poke check and got the puck. There was no intent to even get the puck afterwards. That's all I have to say.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the rule book also clearly states that the last player in possession of the puck is also considered to be "in possession" as far as interference rules, so even if the player is no longer moving the puck himself, he can be considered fair game for a legal check. I have no idea what happened on the play in question, having seen neither video or photos of it. Just speaking to what constitutes a legal play.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

IrishHockeyFan said:
Don't forget the rule book also clearly states that the last player in possession of the puck is also considered to be "in possession" as far as interference rules, so even if the player is no longer moving the puck himself, he can be considered fair game for a legal check. I have no idea what happened on the play in question, having seen neither video or photos of it. Just speaking to what constitutes a legal play.
Click to expand...

He got cheap-shotted all to hell, is what happened.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

Brenthoven said:
He got cheap-shotted all to hell...
Click to expand...

That's exactly what it was. You can tell, as Trouba approaches from the left, that he had Seckel lined up and was bearing in to take him out in what would have been considered a "charging" foul. Seckel was, perhaps, "almost" in possession of the puck, but I don't think that matters that much here. The officials ruled on the "intent" from what they saw. And, from what I saw as I watched the game online and from watching the video replay, there was intent to charge and because Seckel was the smaller player "contact to the head." I wonder though, if it had been another player similar in size to Seckel, if the outcome would have been different? Still a penalty for charging I would assume.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

alfablue said:
Never mind- game was last week suspension served.

Time to move on.
Click to expand...
Trouba was tossed again. Five minute CTH major and Game Misccnduct with a minute and a half to go in last night's UM loss to State. The kid either doesn't learn or doesn't care. And let's face it alfa, had that been Treais that got hit, there would have been suspension.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

SweeneyHawksHockey said:
I have been monitoring this thread to watch this video and all I can say is wow! That was brutal. Seems to me Trouba was headhunting. I cannot believe there was no additional penalty enforced by the CCHA.
Click to expand...
Look at last year. Sean Hunwick punches a player with the blocker and kicks a helmet, 5 min major and game misconduct, no DQ, then on his way off the rink, throws the goal stick and misses the linesman by inches, no additional penalty. If that liney were 2 or 3 inches taller, he'd have needed stitches.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

I'm so glad that Red Berenson is such a stand up guy where he'll sit players like Trouba to show that he won't take any bullsh*t like that.


Oh right.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

aparch said:
I'm so glad that Red Berenson is such a stand up guy where he'll sit players like Trouba to show that he won't take any bullsh*t like that.


Oh right.
Click to expand...

With regard to Trouba, I was wondering, is that how the U S National Development Team churns out players?

Or, is it just him being a freshman and trying to "prove" himself?
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

aygwm2 said:
With regard to Trouba, I was wondering, is that how the U S National Development Team churns out players?

Or, is it just him being a freshman and trying to "prove" himself?
Click to expand...

Tyler Biggs was out of control all of last season with no visible effort to reel it in. Not that two players constitute a trend, may just be neither of them are/were really suited for the college game.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

Maximize CCHA revenue at all costs. Its the final season. Lets cater to the teams that are blowing up the conference.
 
Re: Michigan at NMU: Yet Another Reason to Hate Wal-Mart....

NMU8405 said:
Maximize CCHA revenue at all costs. Its the final season. Lets cater to the teams that are blowing up the conference.
Click to expand...
And after the Big Ten teams left the CCHA with eight, guess who the next to leave the league was???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top