(HQ-WS) Niklas Kronwall Knocks Out Martin Havlat 5-22-2009

Niklas Kronwall knocks out Martin Havlat with a vicious hit

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• Niklas Kronwall
• Martin Havlat
• Detroit Redwings
• Chicago Blackhawks

[AftComet]

When it was Philly vs Chicago in the finals, was anyone else hoping both teams would die in a plane crash?

[GhostWalker40]

@AftComet No, just the flyers with all of their fans onboard

[Rehn92]

haha no... fuck you... clean hit

[steve0mac]

actually he didn't jump.

just the shock of him laying there was why he got a penalty

it was a legal hit, elbow in, no jumping, perfect legal hit.

learn your hockey, then make a comment.

[ILoveTorriesPuppies]

Anyone know what song starts at 2:27?

[Kartracer6]

@jimmytango7 Now don't get that comment confused. If his head is down and you can see the puck on his stick, then hit the guy, but if he is looking down and you can't figure out where the puck is or if it's been touched then odds are he has yet to gain possession. I see this call called inconsistantly I'll give you that. But in reality it's in the context of the rules and the officials called it for that reason.

[Kartracer6]

@jimmytango7 No part of the rule makes this play right. Think about it a different way. The point of the rule was to protect the player from being hit while he is waiting to gain possession of a puck. Had Havlat gained possession he could have braced, if not avoided, the hit. Kronwall even states at one point he didn't know if Havlat had the puck. A rule of thumb taught to me was if you can't see the puck look at the players head, if it's down he most likely doesn't have possession yet.

[jimmytango7]

@Kartracer6 Also, I highly, HIGHLY doubt that the rulebook goes into this kind of detail regarding possession of the puck and/or hits in this situation. it's just such a random play the way the puck acts before the hit.

[jimmytango7]

@Kartracer6 well to be honest, i cant say with any certainty that theres a specific rule defending the circumstances. im just speaking from personal experience and literally thousands of games that ive watched. all i can say is that a puck in your feet, whether it's touched first or not, is USUALLY fair game for physical contact. ya know what im trying to say? like, the puck is within his person lol. i completely get your argument as well, but from my personal experience i have to disagree.

[Kartracer6]

@jimmytango7 I'm not looking for a "pissing match". I've actually been waiting for a single person to explain to me what rule makes this hit legal? All I keep hearing is "if it's close it's legal" or "if it's under his legs it's legal" But it's like I ask for the rule and all I seem to get is people avoiding the question or making comments like "it's in the rule book but I'm not looking it up". I mean come on guys it's ok to look at this as a legal hit but at least defend your claim.

[jimmytango7]

@Kartracer6 but anyway, cheers to the best damn rivalry in sports, hopefully both teams stay competitive for many years to come!

[jimmytango7]

@Kartracer6 Alright well, I'm not gonna get into a pissing match over a hit that took place two years ago, ya know. I agree with Olcyk's analysis of the hit, so you and I will just have to agree to disagree.

[Kartracer6]

@jimmytango7 First off yes it's sad that a injury makes a difference in a call or not. But that doesn't help your case it hurts it. It just shows the other calls not called are wrong. It's not nit picking. The rule is there to keep the guy safe. The reason for the motionless and unconsciousness is because an infraction took place. If you seriously think its ok to do this there is something seriously wrong with you. The hit it's self should always result in a penalty.

[jimmytango7]

@Kartracer6 But yes, I do understand the rule you're referencing.