Kronwall injures Havlat with dangerous hit - 5-22-09

I thought it was a good call.  Kind of surprised Colin Campell didn't call the rink and rescind the game misconduct though.  =)

That aside, the Blackhawks have to be smarter there.  I know you want to guy after the guy that just knocked out your teammate, but they can't start pushing and shoving guys over top of him.  He was out cold.  At least one skate was dangerously close to part of Havlat's wrist, which was exposed between his glove and elbow pad.  Having a bunch of razor sharp skates all around his prone, defenseless body isn't a good idea.  If someone had stepped on Havlat's wrist he'd have been in real trouble.

On a completely unrelated note, I just saw a "preview" of FanArchy during intermission.  I guess its some new show on Versus.  One fat, loud, obnoxious Yankee fan on a webcam yelling at/arguing with two fat, loud, obnoxious Red Sox fans on a webcam.  Blech.  I long for the day this kind of garbage isn't on TV, or at least doesn't invade my hockey viewing.  Take a page from TSN and CBC, let the game speak for itself and don't dilute the broadcast with cross-promotion.

This is the biggest problem with the NHL, because Kronwall has a history of dirty hits he will probably get punished for a clean hit... The puck was right under Havlat, if you watch closely Kronwall does not leave his feet until well after contact and is more of a falling down, when initial contact is made his feet are on the ground... As much as i dislike Kronwall, and think he can be fairly dirty, this was a legit hit...

I dunno, I've always been confused on the rule regarding when someone technically has the puck and is available to be hit. I thought it was you had to touch the puck, so even if everything about the play says a player is going to touch the puck but he doesn't and gets hit, then it's interference. But as I learned tonight between here and the announcers, I guess it's ok if they're engaging in the puck somehow? I've seen plays like that get called for interference, other times no issue. So confused.

Regarding the jumping, I want to say I see a number of plays like that in each game where players take a little skip before the hit. It's a league wide thing, not just Kronwall and a few others.

Right...no telling what Campbell will do. My guess is no suspension...but the refs made the right call.

Yes, putting your head down while playing puck = stupid. But that shouldn't give the right for an opposing player to recklessly charge and leave his feet on the hit, taking full advantage of a player in a vulnerable position. Tough hockey shouldn't be a license to be gladiators. Players should respect the difference. After all, it is a sport. These guys have families. Think about it, what does it really take to effectively remove a guy from the play in that situation? Not much.

What do you guys think? Or is it like boxing (or MMA)...you enter the ring knowing you may leave on a stretcher?

Anyways...I really don't like the Wings. I smell a Finals rematch.

Hey Seth,

Someone was talking smack about u in the Puck Daddy Blog. Empty Netter's must be making a name for itself;

17. Posted by Scott B Fri May 22, 2009 10:21 pm EDT Report Abuse

CLEAN hit. That was NOT interference - Havlat motioned to play the puck with his stick and missed. Any defender pinching in could have hit him. The only reason Kronwall left his feet in any way was because Havlat fell and Kronwall had no boards or body to balance himself on. If the NHL suspends for this hit then the NHL is now a joke. Seth Rorabaugh obviously has no clue what he's talking about and appears to simply love to whine. I'm sorry Havlat had to leave the game from a LEGAL and CLEAN hit; but, maybe he'll keep his head up from now on.

You're missing one key point,  Kronwall's feet were off the ice AFTER the hit.

When Kronwall actually hit Havlat, his skates are on the ice.

Keeping your head down in that situation = target, there's no question about that!

In terms of leaving your feet, it really is a question of intent, not about technicalities about whether at least one skate is still "on the ice at contact".

A great, and legal, hit is one where you'll see a player with both skates firmly planted on the ice to make himself an unmovable (and a lot of times moving) wall - this is a clear example of a player charging another with the clear intent of throwing the full force of his body into the air and throw the other player - you don't get that kind of air time from a solid collision, you get it from propelling yourself into the air... it's simple really - look at the leg extension on Kronwall before contact...

I just hope Havlat knows what planet he's on right now!

And we are all forgetting that Havlat has a reputation of being excessively soft

This is exactly the type of hit the NHL needs to eliminate.  Whether or not he left his feet, in my mind, doesn't matter at this point.

His intent is VERY clear.  He's hitting to injure.  He's not hitting to rough up a guy, he's not hitting to knock him down, he's not hitting to disengage Havlat from the puck.  He's hitting to take him out of the game, maybe the series, playoffs, career...

I don't care if Havlat's head is down, there's no reason to go in so hard with your shoulder (which is basically armed with a weapon, considering the shoulder pads these days), directly at the player's head.  Guys are bigger, stronger, and faster than ever now, and it's time for the NHL to stop this nonsense.  This game is about playing hockey, not trying to injure people.

Another point which I saw made in a forum, was regarding Kronwall leaving his feet AFTER impact.  That just shows where his momentum and force is going.  If he leaves his feet, it shows his intent is clearly to hit high, and direct all of his force as high as possible.

yeah that was a good hit bad call! only reason Kronwall got kicked out of the game is because Havlat didn't get up.  Kronwall didn't leave his feet and the puck was right there no charge no interference no roughing good hit!

"43.1 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."

The key words in there are "jumps into", Kronwall has never left his feet BEFORE the hit...the way he finishes his open ice hits usually end with him falling towards the player being hit.

Which is what is being shown in the diagram above, which was a frame from after initial contact was made.

If Havlat would have gotten right up after the hit, there would not have been a penalty at all, the puck was in his feet, and Kronwall stepped in on him.

Patrick Sharp's goal with just under two minutes left in the first overtime gave the Blackhawks a

I think it's possible to jump into a hit, but still have your skates on the ice at the point of impact and that's what I saw with this hit.  Kronwall does it a lot.  So does Ovie.  So did Kasparaitis.

When I see the hit, I see Kronwall come in crouched a bit.  When he goes to deliver the hit, he comes up.  If he does the exact same motion but has no one to run into, he's going to jump into the air.  With that being the case, whether he's airborne at the point of impact doesn't matter IMO.  I don't know whether that matters to the rulebook or not.

The main problem I have with this one though is that the Kronwall planted his shoulder into Havlat's head.  The league keeps talking about wanting to get rid of headshots, but something tells me they will miss another opportunity to back up that talk.

Trying to propel your shoulder UP through someone's skull, is intent to injure.  His momentum is clearly upwards and towards his head.  

Seth. It was ridiculous to post the picture and claim it showed Kronwall left his feet. That picture is clearly after the hit and it is grossly irresponsible to imply that it was teh moment of the hit.

The video called you out and showed how wrong you were.

Before you hastily condemned Kronwall you should have taken some time first to look at the video

The video clearly shows he didn't leave his feet and all of the announcers on every network said it was clean.

By your last post, I detect some cya.

In your last post, you said. "Kronwall's feet are just being to leave the ice"

What does that mean?

You were wrong and the videos show his feet were on the ice.

I'm looking forward to Kronwall doing the same to Crosby and I'm not even a Red Wings fan.  

I say here here for throwing Kronwall out of the game.  Havlat didn't do himself any favors by allowing himself to be in such a prone position, but Kronwall has gotten away with far too many illegal and reckless hits the last few years.  I don't remember who he did it to, but last year in Game 1 of the Finals he took a full on leap and shoulder blocked a Penguin and nothing got called.  I think the refs reacted more to the violence of the hit(Havlat being outcold) then they did the actual hit.  But, like I said I have no problem with Kronwall getting the gate, as he has more then earned it over the years.

Seth it amazes me that you actually got referenced on a major site like yahoo when its obvious your only agenda is to rail on Kronwall. Seems obvious to me that you are going to bend the facts in the direction of convicting the guy based on his history rather than looking at the video objectively. He clearly did not leave his skates to DELIVER the hit he became airborne after impact because of the force with which he hit Havlat. I bet after this, assuming Havlat is cleared to play again in what appears to be shaping up to be a short series, he will skate with his head up which is of course THE CARDINAL RULE in hockey. Quit following the rest of the sheep by being a Wing hater and try to be at least a little bit objective.

I don't care if his feet were off the ground (which they were), but the guy took a 10 yd running start. Now if this was someone from the Hawks going after Hossa, I'd be cheering the whole way. He won't get suspended. I do like that the WIngs lost and I want this series to go a full seven games. The WIngs are so old, any long series will take it's tool.

Anyone at the Penguins especially good at charging?

If not, GMRS should draft specifically to address this skill.

Any team that wants to win the Cup should at least one--and preferably as many guys as possible--who can do what Kronwall and Ovechkin do so "well."

It really is a great advantage to be able to intimidate your opposition AND then selectively hunt heads and knock key players out--at least for your series.

Detroit will have a much easier time w/ Havlat in the press box.

That Kronwell is the essence of greatness.

To Buckles and others who think Kronwall should have been penalized because he previously delivered a hard hit on a Penguin or someone else:

Go watch something else. You know nothing about hockey.

Every expert on each network said the hit was clean. The video shows it was clean.

If this hit had been done by a Penguin, you would be cheering.

Then, again, maybe you are right and there is something to penalizing someone for something that happened in prior games and prior years.

From now on, each time Sidney Crosby falls to the ice, it has to be a dive and he should be penalized.  

I agree the only reason Kronwell is in the air is because he is moving upward to hit Havlat, however this is not to injure it is to deliver a clean hit.  That was one of the best hits I have seen in a long time.  Most hits now-a-days the player is leading with his fists or elbow or stick which the NHL has given a good bit of leeway (which i don't understand).  Kronwell should not be suspended and hopefully wont even be fined.  Amazing hit and great game excitement and good hockey to the end!  

i've never commented here before... so, go ahead and dismiss me too if you want.

but, i live here in chicago and NOBODY here but Quenneville thinks that was even a penalty let alone a match penalty. and Quenneville hasn't gotten the memo yet that the argument is that it was actually a charge... he's still claiming that Havlat didn't "have" the puck (you may want to email him).

I'm sorry... i love Marty Havlat and all, but the man got bested by a hockey play - plain and simple. You can split hairs all you want (ie. his blades were off the ice by a paper thin margin... get real!), but the facts are pretty evident... he was on the ice at the point of impact (whether you disagree or not... there's a consensus amongst the rest of the world, including the Hawks, the fans at the game and the refs), the elbow was down and the puck was between Havlat's feet. He absolutely didn't "charge" in the sense that he did not take a long run at him... he simply stepped up, like defenders do 20 times a game. It was unfortunate, but clearly NOT an "attempt to injure" - like Kronwall's supposed to know Marty is going to stare down for one second too long. If Havlat sees him coming... this is whole thing never happens.

sorry. while I want to hate on Kronwall for this, there's a million dirtier plays EVERY SINGLE GAME in the playoffs... this was a hockey play that ended unfortunately. that penalty call definitely altered the trajectory of the entire game.  

oh, and about this argument that Kronwall was going "UP" - even while he's still on the ice - it's absurd. Sure he leaves the ice, but if your going forward with all of that momentum and you go through something - your natural motion is UP AND OUT. Your legs are where your power is coming from and you are not being stopped by a cushion (or a tougher hockey player, or at least a wuss like Havlat protecting himself), any of these cushions would absorb enough of the power that he stays on the ice. when Havlat melts in front of him, that lower body power, plus the forward momentum, and loss of balance combine in him shooting up, out, and down on top of the player. It's SCIENCE not this silly "attempt to injure" crap.

i can't believe i'm going to this length to defend this guy, but as a pure hockey lover, it's pathetic to see this kind of reaction when FOR ONCE, it actually WASN'T an illegal action that knocked someone out. It was a monstrous body check. The Hawks should have still defended their teammate, but the refs should go with the facts... that video above is actually pretty embarrassing for the league IMO that no official reacts to the hit at the moment. They decide AFTER THE FACT that it HAD to be penalty. "After all, it's Kronwall... and the guys knocked out". Embarrassing officiating... which is followed by a period of makeup calls. WHAT A JOKE!

Pingback from  Video: Kronwall’s devastating hit on Havlat in Game 3 | Lancilo USA

I still disagree with the comments in support of Kronwall.

Specifically for the reasons I stated prior in this post.

Yes, that was conceivable to be a legal hit in NHL terms. I believe if his feet hadn't left the ice at point of launch, they certainly were heading that way and with full intent. But the key is it was a complete disrespect for the opposing player's vulnerability, with no regard for player safety whatsoever. How can that not be intent to injure?

I know this has been a regular occurrence in the NHL. My point is to reconsider the discipline for blatant attempts to injure without letup on a vulnerable opponent. This was a blatant attempt. There are many of them and they have to go.

Why? Because this is the fastest, most brutal game in team sports. Rugby? NFL? No...nothing comes close to the speed of these athletes skating on sharpened blades on sheets of ice...with basically armor covering their bodies. But not their face.

Yes, the "intent" may have been there, but I'm not a psychiatrist so I won't try and read Kronwall's mind.

Yes, he has had MANY a hit dished out in his past that were worthy of both a penalty and suspension...

However, I don't believe this is one of them.  

If given the chance on this play do I think he MAYBE would've left his feet... Absolutely.

But I didn't think it was as dirty as some others I've seen in these playoffs.

Penalty?  Yes.  Charging.  Hands down.

Interference? No.

Match penalty? Not a chance.

(Again, in the past... you could give him countless match penalties for hits... just not this one)

@Those that think Seth is bias.... get real.  Honestly.  I read this blog every day and the dude nearly made me vomit for a week and a half straight with articles showing how some of the Flyers players were actually half-decent(puppy-drowning) human beings. (Not to say that it didn't make me vomit Seth.)

And finally... at this comment:

"Every expert on each network said the hit was clean. The video shows it was clean."

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!

"Every expert on each network..."

That isn't saying a lot.  Most "experts on each network" at this stage in the Stanley Cup Playoffs are complete morons.  PAH-LEASE tell me that the crews at ESPN & Versus weren't involved in this study of yours. (Both of whom thought that the Ovie & Cooke hits were clean.)

exactly!!! it is that very SPEED that makes it impossible to stop yourself as your realizing "hey, the guy's STILL looking down. he's not going to see me coming"

Kronwall probably had the realization that Havlat was "vulnerable" just as Havlat was having the realization that "hey, something is crashing into my head right now".

it's not an "attempt to injure" it's an "attempt to hit really really hard". it just so happens the puck was put in an tough spot and he kept his head down a second too long. if you watch the video, Havlat looks up quickly a second before he goes to retrieve the puck - he knows Kronwall is there... he just loses track. It's unfortunate, but you really can't fault a player for not knowing as he lays a shoulder whether the player is seeing it coming or not... precisely because the game is happening at such incredible speeds.

I really don't get all the comments saying he didn't have time to realize Havlat was vulnerable. If Havlat wasn't vulnerable, what reason does Kronwall have to attempt that hit? If Havlat sees him coming, he dodges and it's a 2-on-1 because Kronwall's now a defenseman caught up-ice.

Kronwall intentionally makes suicide hits on guys with their head down. It's absolutely headhunting, it's dangerous, and it's charging whether he leaves his feet or not at that speed.

He's a defenseman. He should play his position and get back on defense. Instead he's out headhunting in the offensive zone.

BigBill's comment about Kronwall getting a 10-yard head start is hilarious. I suggest watching the video at 3:48.

As for this hit argument, if a defenseman can't hit with his shoulder, what can he hit with? Havlat's head was down, the puck's in his feet; what else is Kronwall supposed to do? He deserves no further punishment.

I have a lot of respect for the blog, and you've sparked a dialogue. Props to you, Mr. Rorabaugh.

I've only really scanned the posts, but unconsciousness aside, the more long-term worry I have is the call made AFTER play and not during.  No penalty was called.  Dangerous precedent if you ask me.

That said, it could easily be a charging penalty, but nothing else.  Otherwise, it looked like a well-timed hit, regardless of who did it.  When Colby Armstrong was running around knocking people into next Tuesday (relatively often), they didn't go making calls against him after play stopped.  Is it just because he was likeable and Kronwall isn't?  

Okay, this is just precious...

A poster wrote  "......oh, and about this argument that Kronwall was going "UP" - even while he's still on the ice - it's absurd. Sure he leaves the ice, but if your going forward with all of that momentum and you go through something - your natural motion is UP AND OUT. Your legs are where your power is coming from and you are not being stopped by a cushion (or a tougher hockey player, or at least a wuss like Havlat protecting himself), any of these cushions would absorb enough of the power that he stays on the ice. when Havlat melts in front of him, that lower body power, plus the forward momentum, and loss of balance combine in him shooting up, out, and down on top of the player. It's SCIENCE not this silly "attempt to injure" crap...."

Where'd you take Physics?  If you're traveling level and hit a guy, you're gonna keep going level and deaccelerate.  If you leave the ice during the hit, you intentionally supplied some upward force, face the truth, okay.  Kornwall charged and meant to injure.  This "before the hit" vs "after the hit". debate is a bit silly since he actually left the ice "during" the hit.  The hit is not instantaneous, they are in contact for sometime.  And yes, lots of players skates leave the ice after a hit if they're falling over the guy they hit, but if you look at the frame, Kornwall started under Havlat and knocks him UP, yes UP, and back meaning that he definitely propelled his shoulder pads, straight up into Havlats skull.  He carries Havlat up and off the ice, so what magical force, other than Kornwall's quads, made that happen.

More of a charge than anything.  But definitely intent to injure.  

I used to coach boxing.  There's before, after and DURING  a hit.  If you lift up and into a guys chin DURING the hit, you're gonna hurt him (it's okay there though).  So don't try this, "he magically took flight after the hit with Havlat's weight over him", that's a load of horse product.

Sorry Seth, but you are dead wrong on this.  If Havlat gets up and skates away there isn't a penalty called and everyone today is saying what a good clean hit it was.  Which it absoultely was.  Elbows and sticks down, nothing came up to aim at his head.  He doesn't leave his feet until after impact, not before.  And the puck not only was in Havlat's skates, if you watch the replay he is trying to kick it up to his stick but missed.  

There are plenty of dirty hits in the NHL that go unpunished as it is. Now to see a perfectly clean check penalized because the home team has a star player knocked silly?  

The only penalty here was a veteran player skating up the boards with his head down.  In the Wings Columbus series, Umberger was hit every bid as hard and every bit as clean by Stuart.  Virtually the same play.  Take a look a the replays and there is no difference.  

Do you really want to take clean hitting out of the game and replace it with what we see in the all star game every year?

If you're throwing a shoulder, you're going to travel in an upward motion. especially if you're putting your legs into it. Anyone who's played hockey and thrown a check knows that. I don't like Kronwall, but it wasn't an illegal hit. Chicago's reaction to it afterward pretty much said as much. They made a half hearted attempt at getting to Kronwall. If they really felt that it was an attempt to injure Havlat, there would've been a brawl breaking out on the ice. I know Havlat was laying there and all were concerned, etc. But if the Hawks felt it was dirty, it would've been adressed then and there. Definitely wasn't "interference" in any sense of the word.

For those of you who keep forgetting what a dirty hit is....

Gary Roberts skating up from behind at the end of the game in last year finals and elbowing Franzen in the head, knowing full well Franzen was recently back from a head injury.

Oh yea - the NHL didn't even issue a suspension for that.  

Everyone interested in this hit should check out Kukla's Korner and the link is: www.kuklaskorner.com/.../before_you_suspend_kronwall

It's clear that a couple things hold up.  The puck "traveled" in the same direction as Havlat in that he makes the turn and is skating along with the puck as it is in his feet and Kronwall hit him with a shoulder while on the ice.  When Kronwall ended up in the air was after contact.  Further, Kronwall was at the blueline and took only one or two steps and coasted into Havlat, not an excessive distance to travel and he certainly was not coming on at full speed.

That all said, I would like to see if the NHL can find a way to maintain hitting but cut down on some of the danger that is posed in scenarios like this.  According to the rulebooks, Kronwall broke no rules (again, view the link and you'll see his feet are on the ice and it's not a charge).  And for the first 20 seconds, seeing a bone-crushing hit is a fan favorite.  But the aftermath, the residue of such a hit is the dreaded concussion and post-concussion symptoms.  At what cost could the league attempt to eliminate the big hit? Do we want a game far less physical than it is now? Would eliminating high hits result in overcompensation to hit low, creating a whole new set of problems?

Lastly, I'm calling out the author of the article for posting a still frame that was long after the initial contact that shows Kronwall in the air when the initial contact shown in the still frame I posted shows otherwise.  Posting such a misleading still frame makes it seem like the author was motivated to say something against the Red Wings or Nik Kronwall.  Finally, let's think about physics: when a car crashes head-on in a crash test, the car will often "jump" off the ground due to impact.  It's the same concept here.

Wow, now here's something stronger than my coffee to wake me up this morning!

Havlat head down = dumb

Suspending Kronwall = no

It seems we're mostly all in agreement at this point.

Right call made = not quite -- My spouse and I saw more of an elbow than anything!  Most will probably say he lead with his "shoulder" but it seems the Scott Stevens definition of shoulder has become the norm in the NHL which is a crying shame.  It should have been a 5 minute elbow. Forgive me if an elbow can't be 5 minutes...if not then it should have been roughing, but certainly not interference (which is the most bogus penalty in the NHL rulebook but I'd need a shot of JD in my coffee to discuss that).  

QUESTION:

IF the play had been exactly the same EXCEPT that Havlet got up and skated away, would there have been a basis to call Kronwall for any penalties?

2nd Question:

AND would there in fact have been any penalties called on that basis?

No....not in the least. There was no call prior to the hit.

You're all a bunch of whiners.

Had a Pen delivered that hit, you would be defending the game misconduct.

Anyone who knows the game knows what a bs call this was. Monitor all the announcers from CBC to Versus to ESPN and they are all in disagreement and point the blame at the officials (and Havlat for not keeping his head up).

Sounds like Cup envy from all the lame comments suggesting that this was a dirty hit. Get a clue.

I don't think Kronwall will be suspended, nor do I think he should.  Even if it was a suspension worthy offense, the NHL is totally gutless when it comes to suspending players, whoever they are or past histories unless your name is Sean Avery.

Kramhill....what?? Havlat keeping his head up? All the commentators in "disagreement?" Cup envy? I'd be worried about Chicago before you start spouting Detroit crap around here. If you look up even one post, I agreed that it was a legal hit.

Ok - I gotta jump in on this - and with all respect I disagree with you on this one Seth.  The hit was legal - good or bad, legal.  Hit was no different than Hines Ward on the rookie from the Bengals when he broke his jaw.  I feel bad for Havlat - and in no way support Kronwall.  But this is typical of a head down, bad situation (think Darius Kaspiritis on Eric Lindross).

BTW - Kramhill, I think we have a clue or we wouldn't be discussing it.

WTF guys! It's not a HIT at the photo. The moment of the hit is here:

images49.fotki.com/.../KronwallhitsHavlat-vi.jpg

And we can see - both legs are on the ice. So, please, shut up guys!!!

Shut up and be ready to PAIN in the finals!!!

@ Lexa23

Thank you.

IMHO, the picture speaks for itself: legal hockey check!

Pingback from  Reviewing the Niklas Kronwall Penalty » Sports Lives

Pingback from  Reviewing the Niklas Kronwall Penalty | InjuredList.com

It cannot get much more conclusive than this shot of the hit.

blog.mlive.com/.../zapruder.jpg

Seth: Next time get your facts straight before you wrongfully accuse. Your accusations were bush.

Seth: I didn't think the point of this blog would suddenly be that I made a flippant comment about Kronwall hitting someone.  I thought it was about your allegation that Kronwall left his feet when he hit Havlat.

I guess when you have no facts to support your allegations,  you change the subject.

If it gets us back on subject, I'll say I'm sorry.

So how about you "revise" and admit you were flat out wrong about the Kronwall hit. The pictures provided to you by more than one poster here are proof you were not only wrong, but maliciously wrong.

I also notice in you most recent blog that you said Kronwall left his feet again trying to hit one of the Penguins.  

Care to provide proof of that?

Nevermind, you're proven you can't do that honestly.

You're dismissed.