Фактическая температура воздуха в Находке on-line. Прогноз погоды в Находке  

is also of significance. Had he delay

Поиск друзей, знакомства форумчан.

is also of significance. Had he delay

Сообщение lw789 » Ср дек 06, 2017 4:47 pm

On Wednesday, Wild forward Matt Cooke had a disciplinary hearing with the NHL after his knee-on-knee hit on Avalanche defenceman Tyson Barrie. As a result of the hit, Colorado has lost its top offensive defenseman for 4 to 6 weeks with an MCL injury. The CBA sets out the procedure for supplementary discipline. Its found at Article 18 of the CBA and is called "Supplementary Discipline For On-Ice Conduct". Article 18.2 of the CBA provides a list of the factors the league will consider when determining supplementary discipline. They are as follows: (a) The type of conduct involved: conduct outside of NHL rules; excessive force in contact otherwise permitted by NHL rules; and careless or accidental conduct. Players are responsible for the consequences of their actions. (b) Injury to the opposing Player(s) involved in the incident. (c) The status of the offender and, specifically, whether the Player has a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct. Players who repeatedly violate League Playing Rules will be more severely punished for each new violation. (d) The situation of the game in which the incident occurred: late in the game, lopsided score, prior events in the game. (e) Such other factors as may be appropriate in the circumstances. So the league will look at all these factors when determining the length of Cookes suspension. One factor that will be the focus will be Article 18.2(c) – Cookes history of violating league rules. To say the least, Cooke has quite the NHL rap sheet. Since 2009, hes been suspended a total of 25 games for hits on Scott Walker, Artem Anisimov, Fedor Tyutin and Ryan McDonagh. Hes also injured other guys with reckless hits, like Sam Gagner, Valeri Nichushkin, Adam McQuaid, Alex Ovechkin, Steve Montador, Evander Kane, Keith Yandle, Erik Karlsson and Rick DiPietro. And of course he ended Marc Savards career. By the way, the bolded language at 18.(c) is not my doing; the NHL CBA has it bolded so you know its important. The talk about being a repeat offender doesnt apply to the length of the suspension. A repeat offender refers to someone that commits a violation of the league rules within 18 months of another violation. A player that was a repeat offender could get a tougher punishment. Under the old 2005 CBA, repeat offenders were treated more harshly as far as length of a suspension goes. However, the new CBA has some changes in it, including doing away with the repeat offender consideration when assessing length of a suspension (its still around when dealing with suspension compensation – see Article 18.5). Presumably, the NHLPA and NHL were in agreement that the "repeat offender" provision did not capture players who spaced out their transgressions by more than 18 months but were still a threat to player health and safety. On that basis, they agreed to amend the CBA. You have to wonder if this change should be dedicated to Raffi Torres and Matt Cooke as they were likely part of the inspiration for the amendment. As far as length of Cookes suspension, its tough to know since past suspensions have not always been predictable. That being said, given Cookes history of violence, a suspension of at least 15 games would not be a surprise. Frankly, it could easily be more given the reckless and dangerous manner in which he plays the game. Indeed, he may get a high suspension given that Cooke Fatigue has undoubtedly set in. San Francisco 49ers Jerseys .com) - Novak Djokovic captured a mens Open Era-record fifth Australian Open title on Sunday by defeating rival Andy Murray in the final in Melbourne. Brandon Fusco Jersey .J. -- The New Jersey Devils are so bad in shootouts, coach Pete DeBoer doesnt mind seeing his team take chances in the five-minute overtime. http://www.thesf49ersshoponline.com/You ... ersey/.com) - Troy Brouwer scored the game-winning goal with just 12. Patrick Willis Jersey . With Van Osch out with a flu bug that has been rampaging through the tournament, Knezevic stepped in to lead B.C. (4-3) to a pair of victories on Tuesday before 1,131 at the Maurice Richard Arena. Marquise Goodwin Jersey .Cameron sustained his third concussion in three seasons last week on a hit by Oakland safety Brandion Ross, who was fined $22,050 by the NFL for the helmet-to-helmet blow.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Hi Kerry, "Goalie interference, no goal" http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/consol ... 020977-X-h Devils defenceman bumps/trips Flyer towards the net, both touch goalie. "Good goal" http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/consol ... 020984-X-h (the Burns goal) The goalie was being held on the ice by an attacking player - isnt that textbook goaltender interference? Brian Hi Kerry, I have a question about the Sharks 2nd goal tonite. The ref blew his whistle and waived off the goal, seemingly indicating there was a reason why it wasnt a goal. If he only believed the puck had not entered the net, wouldnt the play go on as the puck was still live? Seems to me that was a give-back for the blown call minutes earlier where San Jose was robbed of a goal by the refs quick whistle. Love to hear your perspective. ThanksDavid Brian and David: Thank you very much for submitting your questions as to why contact with the goalkeeper in Philadelphia resulted in a crucial disallowed goal, yet in San Jose the Sharks second goal was allowed to stand. This is not an example of inconsistency, as some might suggest, but the referees correct decision on both plays is supported in the language and interpretation found in Rule 69. With the Flyers net empty for an extra attacker, the puck was kicked out of a high scrum of players and thrown across ice by Kimmo Timonen to Jacub Voracek. Scott Hartnell broke for the net with Anton Volchenchov in close pursuit from behind. There was some minor contact exerted by Volchenkov on Hartnell as the Flyer extended to redirect Voraceks pass at Martin Brodeur from outside the crease. Brodeur made the initial save but offered up a rebound as Volchenkov lost his balance and fell to the ice with a slide toward the goal. There was no push, shove or check delivered by Volchenkov on Hartnell and their contact was incidental in nature. Scott Hartnell remained on his skates in a path that took him into the goal crease. Hartnell repositioned his body and began to throw snow in a stopping motion. It appears at this point that Scotts skate contacted the puck and directed it back into Brodeurs stacked pads. Scott Hartnells forward momentum then took him deep into the goal crease. Hartnell initiated a hip bump at the point of contact with Martin Brodeur that knocked both the goalie and the puck into the net. Referee Tom Kowal, with very good position to see the contact, utilized Rule 69.6 to immediately wave off the potential goal. (69.6: In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed.) Kowal correctly ruled that the contact by Hartnell was "incidental" as opposed to deliberate thereby resulting in no goal and no penalty on the play. This is not a reviewable play. The deciision made by the Toronto Situation Room to initiate a review and the subsequent announcement the referee was forced to make did not bring clarity or support the decision made on the ice by referee Kowal.dddddddddddd The delay in getting the game resumed quickly, in addition to the announcement, "Following video review its confirmed its not a good hockey goal. Its no goal" further infuriated Flyers fans in the building for no useful purpose since video review could not overturn the referees decision. Bottom line is that in the judgment of the referee, Martin Brodeur and the puck were knocked into the net through incidental contact exerted by Scott Hartnell. The call made on the ice by the referee was both correct and courageous - end of story! In San Jose, Joe Thornton was positioned to the side and above the goal crease when Tim Gleason of the Leafs checked Thornton from behind with solid contact. The hit caused Thornton to lurch forward into Dion Phaneuf positioned at the top, middle of the crease. Phaneuf pushed back on Thornton, causing Jumbo Joe to enter the blue paint. Thornton was conscious of avoiding contact with Leafs goalkeeper James Reimer, as demonstrated by his effort to straddle Reimer with a wide stance. Thorntons forward momentum from the Phaneuf push, combined with Joes wide stance, caused his upper body to veer forward with a loss of balance. In an effort to regain his balance, Joe had no alternative but to place his hands on the back of James Reimer. Thornton quickly pushed himself up and off Reimer and then immediately exited the goal crease prior to the shot entering the net. The referees decision is supported by Rule 69.1; (If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved or fouled by a defending player so as to cause him to come into contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.) Joe Thornton made more than a reasonable attempt to avoid James Reimer after being body checked by two Leaf players at the edge of the goal crease. The speed with which Thornton exited the crease is also of significance. Had he delayed his departure and remained in contact with the goalkeeper a different decision by the referee would most likely have been rendered. The referee waved the goal off because he thought the puck hit the crossbar on the shot by Brent Burns. Video review subsequently confirmed that the puck did enter the net on the shot. The refs initial decision on this play had nothing to do with the previously disallowed goal when he ruled the puck was covered and play dead prior to Scott Hannan jamming the puck from under James Reimer. In Philadelphia and San Jose, two distinctly different plays involved contact with the goalkeeper and resulted in the correct decision being rendered by both refs based on two separate rule applications contained in Rule 69. Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Jerseys From China Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Cheap Jerseys ' ' '
lw789
Горожанин
 
Сообщения: 390
Зарегистрирован: Сб ноя 04, 2017 4:18 pm

Кто сейчас на конференции

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 1

cron