In last night’s game between the Blackhawks and the Ducks, Chicago defenceman Brent Seabrook caught Corey Perry behind the goal line with a heavy hit, knocking the winger to the ice. Perry got back up, but teammate James Wisniewski decided that a message needed to be sent.
Wisniewski was drafted by the ‘Hawks in 2002, a year before Seabrook. The two players spent four years on the same team, and even spent some time together as defence partners. Despite that shared history, Wisniewski targeted Seabrook, who didn’t have the puck, with a dangerous hit. Skating full tilt from the blue-line, Wisniewski caught Seabrook high, slamming him into the boards and knocking the young Blackhawks defenceman out of the game. Video of the incident follows:
The NHL is reviewing the incident, but Wisniewski maintains that it was a clean play:
“It probably will get looked at, but the result wasn’t because of a shot to the head. I’m 5-foot-11 and he’s 6-3. What happened was that my face hit his face. The visor came down and cut up my nose. I was shocked when I saw the result of it on the replay. I didn’t do anything wrong. The result of what happened isn’t good, but there wasn’t anything wrong that I did.”
Just in case someone out there feels compelled to take Wisniewski’s side that it was a clean hit, here are a couple of quotes from the NHL Rulebook. First, the definition of boarding:
A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.
Next up, the definition of charging:
A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.
Thirdly, selected excerpts the definition of interference:
A minor penalty shall be imposed on an attacking player who deliberately checks a defensive player, including the goalkeeper, who is not in possession of the puck.
The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a major penalty, based on the degree of violence, to a player or goalkeeper guilty of interfering with an opponent
The way I read those rules, that hit was a combination of all three: Wisniewski skated in quickly from the blue-line to throw a high hit on a player without the puck which resulted in that player being tossed into the boards with a high degree of violence. Steve Rosenbloom is harshly critical of the referee’s decision to call a two-minute minor on the play, and I think he’s right; five and a game would have been the appropriate call.
A suspension is a no-brainer here, the only question is length. Something in the five-game range seems appropriate, although I suspect the actual punishment will probably be closer to the two games he got for smacking Shane Doan earlier this year:
Naturally, the reaction is different in different cities; in Anaheim some fans are focusing on Seabrook’s hit on Perry and saying that might be a suspendable offence, while in Chicago others are calling for a minimum of five games to Wisniewski.
Not much more to say here, except that Anaheim’s homer announcers are ridiculous.
The first hit by Seabrook does not look legal by the new ‘blindside’ rule, but there is no question that Wiesniewski was simply looking to collect a head here. 7+ games might be more appropriate (though I don’t know his suspension history which is so important in deciding discipline).
Ugly looking set of plays there regardless.
And people whined and complained about the Ovechkin hit at least that was a hockey play. This is about one of the worst hits I’ve seen since Downey hit on Mc Ammond. Their was no need for this to happen what was Wisniewski thinking or trying to prove with this? The fact that he’s even trying to defend himself just makes him look even worse. Like this play makes Cooke’s hit on Savard look like a legal and a justifiable hit. If he doesn’t get more then 5 games for this then the NHL really needs to give it’s head a shake and look into replacing who are handing out suspensions.
Part of the problem is, again, inconsistent calls on the ice. I’m in no way trying to defend Wisniewski; his hit is clearly illegal for all the reasons stated above (though I’d say interference is partly incidental – it looked like Seabrook might receive the puck but it went by him). There’s not much else to say on this hit – it deserves a suspension and will certainly get one.
However, Wisniewski’s intent was to avenge a blindside hit to his team’s star player, a hit that was not penalized by the refs on the ice despite also being illegal (boarding and hitting from behind).
So maybe the players shouldn’t really police themselves, but at the same time, what happens if the league doesn’t do the policing correctly?
Same goes for Boston’s game tonight – Bruins fans are really hoping someone injures Cooke (or even Crosby, which is absolute stupidity) as payback for the Savard hit. Probably won’t happen, but if it does the league will again look bad because it again failed to police violence.
James -
Watch Seabrook’s hit on Perry again and tell me what’s really wrong with it.
Perry is playing the puck at 1:05 on the youtube counter. Seabrook hits him at 1:06 and makes first contact on Perry’s right shoulder. Perry is leaning down a bit, so the contact is to the back of the shoulder, but that’s not hitting from behind. Perry’s left skate is up against the boards at the moment he gets hit. So it’s not boarding.
Perry is off-balance and skating backwards, so it’s no surprise that he 1) makes awkward contact with the boards; and 2) hits the boards to Seabrook’s left.
It was a hard legal check against a guy who wasn’t paying attention. You can’t say that about Wisniewski.
Seems to me that because intent is so hard to read, a headshot should be a game misconduct along with a five minute major penalty and a minimum one or two game suspension; further games added based on the history of the player, viciousness of the hit, etc. I think that would keep elbows down in the playoffs.
Now what about diving? Make that a one or two game suspension too.
Verdict is in: eight games. I’m pleasantly surprised at the severity of it. Wisniewski couldn’t have helped his cause much with the totally unrepentent public comments. As for the play itself, well, it was extremely dangerous, and it’s disgraceful that it wasn’t a major penalty and a game misconduct. Charging, boarding, or interference, take your pick. There’s absolutely no way to defend the intent; there’s just no other reason why Wisniewski would suddenly decide to pinch all the way down low behind the net to hit a guy who didn’t have the puck except to hurt him. I wouldn’t have minded a longer suspension, and I expected a shorter one, which generally means it’s about the right length. Hopefully Seabrook isn’t out too long. Seeing him out on his feet like that is kind of scary.
Almost as disgraceful is Bryan Hayward’s call on that YouTube clip. I mean really, suggesting Seabrook was selling the hit to get the call, then suggesting the hit on Perry was anywhere near as bad and repeatedly calling it a headshot when the point of contact was clearly Perry’s back/shoulder and was so soft that the only reason Perry fell down at all was because he was spinning is awful.