Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Participants in Canadian men's beer leagues facing charges of aggravated assault for throwing clean bodychecks, along with lifetime bans on owning weapons, so keep your head up at the blue line, eh?   (sports.yahoo.com) divider line 31
    More: Sad, Kontinental Hockey League, Drew Casterton, Ottawa Senior Men, body check, indictments, Gordon MacIsaac, hockey  
•       •       •

894 clicks; posted to Sports » on 15 Aug 2014 at 12:11 AM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



31 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-14 11:12:53 PM  
He JUMPED OFF THE ICE to check the guy in a non-contact league, knocking said guy unconscious. That has never even happened in the roughest of NHL games I've ever seen.
 
2014-08-15 12:34:55 AM  
According to TFA there was only 47 seconds left in the game too.  Nothing clean about it
 
2014-08-15 12:54:01 AM  
It'll have the opposite effect. When people know they can play friendly pickup hockey without some NHL thug wannabe almost killing them then they might lace up.
 
2014-08-15 01:09:32 AM  

doglover: He JUMPED OFF THE ICE to check the guy in a non-contact league, knocking said guy unconscious. That has never even happened in the roughest of NHL games I've ever seen.


Raffi Torres' hit on Marian Hossa begs to differ.

/though the NHL is hardly a 'no contact league'
 
2014-08-15 01:14:01 AM  
 
2014-08-15 01:33:04 AM  

germ78: Raffi Torres' hit on Marian Hossa begs to differ.


Did I see that game? Did you buy me a ticket? No.

I stand by my statement on the grounds of qualifiers.
 
2014-08-15 01:33:46 AM  

germ78: Link to the Torres-Hossa hit.


Nice hit, though.
 
2014-08-15 01:34:52 AM  
 
2014-08-15 02:01:46 AM  

doglover: germ78: Raffi Torres' hit on Marian Hossa begs to differ.

Did I see that game? Did you buy me a ticket? No.

I stand by my statement on the grounds of qualifiers.


I get what you're saying in that vicious hits involving leaving one's feet and going for the head are rare birds in the NHL, but it doesn't mean they don't exist.

/went to a Hawks-Canucks game in '09 or '11 where a line brawl broke out in the 3rd period
//first time I've been to a sporting event where something interesting like that happened
 
2014-08-15 02:20:13 AM  
Excellent troll subby.
 
2014-08-15 02:22:46 AM  
I thought that events that happen inside a sports league while in an official game setting can't be considered criminal actions as long as the sport itself has that type of event in it.  Bodychecking is a part of hockey, I don't think it can be considered criminal since its a part of the game.
 
2014-08-15 04:58:23 AM  
This is about as poorly written as an article/story can be.
 
2014-08-15 06:44:07 AM  

Warlordtrooper: I thought that events that happen inside a sports league while in an official game setting can't be considered criminal actions as long as the sport itself has that type of event in it.  Bodychecking is a part of hockey, I don't think it can be considered criminal since its a part of the game.


Bodychecking is a part of professional and semi-pro hockey.

It's NOT a part of a beer league. 

Look, I'm a guy who ends up with a roughing penalty in my beer league every couple of games or so, for checking.  Largely because I play defense (which is MUCH harder when you can't make body contact) and played in contact leagues in high school and college.  Every once in a while somebody does something unexpected, and you revert to muscle memory (for example, cutting the angle on an incoming forward and riding them into the boards, which is "technically" a check, even if it's not a hit).  The refs know who I am, and know that it happens occasionally, and while I'll get chided for it, they're aware I'm not trying to injure somebody with a given physical play.

It's entirely different when you deliberately take a run at somebody, launch yourself into the air, leading with your elbow/forearm, and make contact with their head.  That's not an attempt to bodycheck, it's an attempt to injure.  That's never supposed to be part of hockey, which is why I'm OK with the charges in this case.

What I don't want to see is somebody bringing a stick back online while they're in the middle of a power turn, accidentally clips somebody on their blind side in the face with the stick, and get charged with criminal negligence leading to the injury.  Each time we see somebody get charged for an event that happens on the playing surface, we do move closer to that point, whether we agree with that particular charge or not.  Something to keep in mind.
 
2014-08-15 06:57:46 AM  

colonel0sanders: According to TFA there was only 47 seconds left in the game too.  Nothing clean about it


Maybe they were down by 1, or the score was tied and he knew his team has a history of sucking in OT.
 
2014-08-15 07:22:27 AM  
I'm not a fan of taking things to the courts like this. I have personal insurance assuming that when I do sports there's a chance I might get hurt. I could see bans for players who play dirty like this, but taking it to the court means that little things that are part of games will eventually be legislated or just set by judges as part of a settlement. its the same stuff that got monkey bars kicked off of playgrounds. You do things, you take risks, remove the risk, you have to remove activity.
 
2014-08-15 07:28:04 AM  

ricbach229: monkey bars kicked off of playgrounds


Wait, what?

Where are there no monkey bars?
 
2014-08-15 08:25:48 AM  

FightDirector: Warlordtrooper: I thought that events that happen inside a sports league while in an official game setting can't be considered criminal actions as long as the sport itself has that type of event in it.  Bodychecking is a part of hockey, I don't think it can be considered criminal since its a part of the game.

Bodychecking is a part of professional and semi-pro hockey.

It's NOT a part of a beer league. 

Look, I'm a guy who ends up with a roughing penalty in my beer league every couple of games or so, for checking.  Largely because I play defense (which is MUCH harder when you can't make body contact) and played in contact leagues in high school and college.  Every once in a while somebody does something unexpected, and you revert to muscle memory (for example, cutting the angle on an incoming forward and riding them into the boards, which is "technically" a check, even if it's not a hit).  The refs know who I am, and know that it happens occasionally, and while I'll get chided for it, they're aware I'm not trying to injure somebody with a given physical play.

It's entirely different when you deliberately take a run at somebody, launch yourself into the air, leading with your elbow/forearm, and make contact with their head.  That's not an attempt to bodycheck, it's an attempt to injure.  That's never supposed to be part of hockey, which is why I'm OK with the charges in this case.

What I don't want to see is somebody bringing a stick back online while they're in the middle of a power turn, accidentally clips somebody on their blind side in the face with the stick, and get charged with criminal negligence leading to the injury.  Each time we see somebody get charged for an event that happens on the playing surface, we do move closer to that point, whether we agree with that particular charge or not.  Something to keep in mind.


All of this.
 
2014-08-15 09:02:04 AM  
FightDirector:

What I don't want to see is somebody bringing a stick back online while they're in the middle of a power turn, accidentally clips somebody on their blind side in the face with the stick, and get charged with criminal negligence leading to the injury.  Each time we see somebody get charged for an event that happens on the playing surface, we do move closer to that point, whether we agree with that particular charge or not.  Something to keep in mind.

Well, that wouldn't really be an issue if they are wearing a helmet with cage/full visor, which in a beer league is probably a good idea. But yeah, accidents happen. I had a friend on my beer league team who had a major accident in a championship game. He fell in the corner after getting tangled up with a guy, and that guy stepped on his thigh. Sliced it wide open, missed the vein by an inch or so - but there was still a TON of blood. I suppose he could have sued for negligence, though I doubt he could have won anything in that case.

My league requires us to have USA Hockey membership, which includes insurance in case you get injured on the ice. That being said, I have a job, kids and a wife at home to take care of, so I don't need some idiot trying to take my head off when I'm out on the ice to have fun and get some exercise.

When I played in a checking league (high school, college club hockey), it was perfectly fine. But everyone playing in these beer leagues knows that checking is against the rules - everyone. Unfortunately you still see idiots doing it nearly every week. It got to a point in the last league I played in that the hockey director instituted a rule that if you received two checking penalties in a season, you received a DQ of 1 game.

Incidental contact is ok, but if you are actively trying to put someone on their butt, or throwing flying elbows, you deserve what is coming to you if you seriously injure someone.
 
2014-08-15 09:25:51 AM  
It's time for the other team to hire John Scott.
I'm sure he'd play for a 12 pack and a pack of smokes.
 
2014-08-15 10:14:02 AM  
jeremy1897:That being said, I have a job, kids and a wife at home to take care of, so I don't need some idiot trying to take my head off when I'm out on the ice to have fun and get some exercise.

This is essentially why I stopped playing in the beer league.   

It got to a point in the last league I played in that the hockey director instituted a rule that if you received two checking penalties in a season, you received a DQ of 1 game. 

Two checking minors in a season? Seems a little tight, though I suppose that depends on how the refs call it in your league and how stern the director was about it. It can be a fine line between "illegal checking" and "acceptable body contact" in some leagues/situations. USA Hockey's done good work trying to clarify what is and isn't "a check," but still.

/Obviously I'm not talking about the incident in TFA.
//Referee
 
2014-08-15 10:34:13 AM  

ricbach229: I'm not a fan of taking things to the courts like this. I have personal insurance assuming that when I do sports there's a chance I might get hurt. I could see bans for players who play dirty like this, but taking it to the court means that little things that are part of games will eventually be legislated or just set by judges as part of a settlement. its the same stuff that got monkey bars kicked off of playgrounds. You do things, you take risks, remove the risk, you have to remove activity.


Screw that.  I've played in a lot of no-contact leagues, a nudge or a bump in the corners while battling for the puck?  That's fine, but if some farking meathead takes a run at me, leaves his feet and knocks my teeth out?  That's assault.
 
2014-08-15 10:54:00 AM  

robertus: jeremy1897: Two checking minors in a season? Seems a little tight, though I suppose that depends on how the refs call it in your league and how stern the director was about it. It can be a fine line between "illegal checking" and "acceptable body contact" in some leagues/situations. USA Hockey's done good work trying to clarify what is and isn't "a check," but still.


Sorry, should have clarified. Not checking minors. Our league had instituted a rule whereby the refs could use their discretion on awarding a 5-minute major for checking with intent to injure. It wasn't clear all the time that there was intent (sometimes thing just look bad), so the hockey director made it 2 and you're DQ'd. Some people had a problem with it, I didn't. Usually this was used on things like checking from behind, hits to the head, etc.
 
2014-08-15 10:58:34 AM  

jeremy1897: robertus: jeremy1897: Two checking minors in a season? Seems a little tight, though I suppose that depends on how the refs call it in your league and how stern the director was about it. It can be a fine line between "illegal checking" and "acceptable body contact" in some leagues/situations. USA Hockey's done good work trying to clarify what is and isn't "a check," but still.

Sorry, should have clarified. Not checking minors. Our league had instituted a rule whereby the refs could use their discretion on awarding a 5-minute major for checking with intent to injure. It wasn't clear all the time that there was intent (sometimes thing just look bad), so the hockey director made it 2 and you're DQ'd. Some people had a problem with it, I didn't. Usually this was used on things like checking from behind, hits to the head, etc.


Wait, people were annoyed that players getting majors were getting suspended after the second one in a season? That doesn't seem like an unreasonable policy.
 
2014-08-15 11:03:56 AM  
meanmutton:

Wait, people were annoyed that players getting majors were getting suspended after the second one in a season? That doesn't seem like an unreasonable policy.

My thoughts exactly. If you are playing in a men's league, you should probably get suspended for 1 major.
 
2014-08-15 11:14:19 AM  

jeremy1897: . If you are playing in a men's league, you should probably get suspended for 1 major.


Nah, accidents do happen, and allowing a single major as a buffer is a good idea.  I remember boarding the hell out of a guy once 5 or 6 years ago - we were both going for the puck in the corner from opposite directions, and nobody was trying to stop.  We both got to the puck at the same time, and he turned in towards the boards while I tried to turn out towards the faceoff dot.  I still clipped him, and because he was turning in towards the boards at top speed, his face smacked the glass and he went down.

Even he was saying that nobody did anything wrong, but the ref still pointed out that he had to call it as a boarding, which was an auto-major.  No intent to injure - just a bang/bang play.  That shouldn't get you auto-suspended.

I'm totally fine with a suspension on a 2nd major, though.  You'd have to be incredibly unlucky to end up with two "not your fault" majors inside a single season.  I think I've had two in 15 years.  (I deserved the others.)

/meanwhile, the stickless guy who dragged me down by the ponytail on a breakaway didn't even get a *penalty*.  THAT'S farking intent to injure.
 
2014-08-15 11:29:43 AM  
The leagues I've played in have a basic "we all have to work tomorrow" rule on body contact, but you still run into the 30-year-old guy who plays like it's Game 7 of the Stanley Cup and his team is down a goal. I have no problem with getting rid of those people.
 
2014-08-15 12:05:35 PM  

jeremy1897: robertus: jeremy1897: Two checking minors in a season? Seems a little tight, though I suppose that depends on how the refs call it in your league and how stern the director was about it. It can be a fine line between "illegal checking" and "acceptable body contact" in some leagues/situations. USA Hockey's done good work trying to clarify what is and isn't "a check," but still.

Sorry, should have clarified. Not checking minors. Our league had instituted a rule whereby the refs could use their discretion on awarding a 5-minute major for checking with intent to injure. It wasn't clear all the time that there was intent (sometimes thing just look bad), so the hockey director made it 2 and you're DQ'd. Some people had a problem with it, I didn't. Usually this was used on things like checking from behind, hits to the head, etc.


That makes more sense. The "with intent to injure" suggests a Match penalty, but I'm just being pedantic - "blow a guy up = major for checking, two of those and you're out a game."

This season, USA Hockey's instituting a progressive suspension for multiple "aggressive" majors in a season: Three majors in a season and you're out for 3 games; fourth major and you're out for 5 more games; five majors and it's hearing time. That's in addition to any game misconducts that go along with the majors.

Should be interesting.

/Rule 411
 
2014-08-15 12:11:37 PM  
That makes more sense. The "with intent to injure" suggests a Match penalty, but I'm just being pedantic - "blow a guy up = major for checking, two of those and you're out a game."

Yeah, the other good thing about this league is that for these rules that they instituted (in addition to USA Hockey rules), you could petition the hockey director to have them rescinded. A few times they were when the other party admitted it was an accident and/or not a penalty. Even once one was rescinded because the hockey director thought the ref made an incorrect call. So at least there was some leeway.
 
2014-08-15 03:34:08 PM  

Snowrise: The leagues I've played in have a basic "we all have to work tomorrow" rule on body contact, but you still run into the 30-year-old guy who plays like it's Game 7 of the Stanley Cup and his team is down a goal. I have no problem with getting rid of those people.


I play in a low D-level league and even here, we have those jackasses.  It's always the worst skaters, too. Maybe instead of trying to be the next Joey Kocur try learning to do a cross-over.
 
2014-08-15 03:40:51 PM  

meanmutton: Snowrise: The leagues I've played in have a basic "we all have to work tomorrow" rule on body contact, but you still run into the 30-year-old guy who plays like it's Game 7 of the Stanley Cup and his team is down a goal. I have no problem with getting rid of those people.

I play in a low D-level league and even here, we have those jackasses.   It's always the worst skaters, too. Maybe instead of trying to be the next Joey Kocur try learning to do a cross-over.


www.purehockey.com
What's goin on in here, guys?
 
2014-08-15 07:19:00 PM  
I'm on the board of our men's league. We take this shiat pretty seriously. We've bounced a few guys for the season for pulling this crap (not exactly the same thing). As was said earlier, bumping in the corners digging for a puck, no big deal. Lining someone up who's got their head down, go have a seat for a while and fark off.
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report