Kronwall's check legal, Red Wings claim

I don't know why there's any controversy about the call on Kronwall. The rule (56) is pretty clear. You can't hit the man unless he possesses the puck. In every angle shown of the play it's clear Havlat was not in possession of the puck when Kronwall nailed him.

Might as well play no-touch hockey, Willie Nelson. The puck was between his legs as Kronwall delivered the clean, hard hit. All the TV commentators agree that it was a bad call by the referee. Just because Havlat had his head down and was out cold after the hit does not mean that it was an illegal hit.

That call was really lame. At nit-picky most, it was interference.
The refs knew it and tried to make up for it by handing out a couple of super-lame penalties to the Hawks afterwards.

agreed, interference maybe and even then it's only because Kronwall's timing was off by about a second but in no way was it a major. Ladd almost killed Kesler in Vancouver with an elbow to the head when the puck was nowhere near him and Eager almost has a trademark on late hits so Chicago has no business complaining about that hit on Havlat.

The puck hit Havlets skate, went between his legs and he was in the process of playing the puck. Lame call at best so a 2 minute minor is all that should have been called. Kromwell did not leave his feet. That being said, Chicago still won it O.T
I wish the zebras would let the players decide the game

gameon63 wrote:

agreed, interference maybe and even then it's only because Kronwall's timing was off by about a second but in no way was it a major. Ladd almost killed Kesler in Vancouver with an elbow to the head when the puck was nowhere near him and Eager almost has a trademark on late hits so Chicago has no business complaining about that hit on Havlat.

Led with the elbow left his feet and havlat never had possesion it all adds up. Suspension is in order You always have cheli waiting in the WINGs get it wings

clean hit.....the old adage applies here: keep your head up.

Go Wings!

eddie shore wrote:

<quoted text>Led with the elbow left his feet and havlat never had possesion it all adds up. Suspension is in order You always have cheli waiting in the WINGs get it wings

Never left his feet. Hit him with his shoulder. It was as clean a hit as you will ever see. Hockey is a contact sport and if you don't want to knocked out, may I suggest keeping your head up.

The hit wasn't necessary. And, it certainly diminished the respect I have for the Wings.
Probably in Kronwall's best interest that he was kicked out of the game. He would have been a marked man last night. It might have been interesting, but...

[QUOTE
Detroitlet sucks and a we all know it.[/QUOTE]

Maybe true but in a week the Hawks will be playing golf and the Wings will be playing in the Stanley Cup Finals. I hope you all enjoyed your little run, it was a cute story.

James wrote:

The hit wasn't necessary.

hahahaha! Whatever. By that logic, all hits in hockey aren't necessary. What a joke.

He hit the guy how was standing over the puck. It wasn't from behind, it wasn't with an elbow, and he didn't go after his head. It was a clean, hard hit. It's how hockey is supposed to be played.

Havlat should have had his head up, and he didn't.

Colin wrote:

<quoted text>
hahahaha! Whatever. By that logic, all hits in hockey aren't necessary. What a joke.
He hit the guy how was standing over the puck. It wasn't from behind, it wasn't with an elbow, and he didn't go after his head. It was a clean, hard hit. It's how hockey is supposed to be played.
Havlat should have had his head up, and he didn't.

Colin I suggest you go watch the replay on that hit to get it straight.Shame on Redwings.

Michael wrote:

the only people on earth who thing that hit was illegal are blackhawk fans who know nothing of hockey anyway. every explayer, commentator, and neutral observer has said the hit was clean, and no penalty should have been called. Havlat may return, but will never be the same. Enjoy your one win in the series Chicago.

Michael, seem like you are the one that know nothing about the hockey. Penalty on Kronwall? He is on his way of suspensions. hahaha

Yeah we enjoy our ONE win and next win will be in game 4....GO HAWKS

cbgb wrote:

clean hit.....the old adage applies here: keep your head up.
Go Wings!

DIRTY hit, didn't you see Havlet did not have the puck??????? HELLOOOOOOO

"It's a dangerous hit when you haven't touched the puck."
Got it Redwings??

Ginger wrote:

<quoted text>
Colin I suggest you go watch the replay on that hit to get it straight.Shame on Redwings.

Ginger, I have watched the replay 10 times and I see no penalty. go back to the casino and have another cocktail and get your eyes fixed. Shame on the Red Wings. Shame on you and the nhl. Chicago sports fans are the most uneducated and biased in America and always have been.

William Nelsom wrote:

I don't know why there's any controversy about the call on Kronwall. The rule (56) is pretty clear. You can't hit the man unless he possesses the puck. In every angle shown of the play it's clear Havlat was not in possession of the puck when Kronwall nailed him.

You said it straight William.

The biggest clue that this was a good, clean hit came from Eddie Olczyk. Eddie is a Blackhawk through and through. Former player. Current color commentator for the home-town Blackhawks broadcast on Comcast sports. Eddie went out of his way to say that was a good clean hit. He seemed quite upset about the penalty called on Kronwall.

The 5 minute "interference" call was ludicrous. The difference between this hit and the one on Hudler against the Ducks is that the PUCK WAS ACTUALLY IN THE FEET OF THE PLAYER WHO GOT HIT!!! If Kronwall doesn't hit Havlat, he will 100% absolutely put his stick on the puck and play it. There's no way on God's green earth that can be "interference". Otherwise, they just outlawed any physical contact in NHL hockey.

The "game misconduct" part of the penalty was especially egregious as it was purely a reaction to the extent of Havlat's injury. Penalties should NEVER be called based on the injury to a player. Just what actually happened on the ice.

Colin wrote:

<quoted text>
hahahaha! Whatever. By that logic, all hits in hockey aren't necessary. What a joke.
He hit the guy how was standing over the puck. It wasn't from behind, it wasn't with an elbow, and he didn't go after his head. It was a clean, hard hit. It's how hockey is supposed to be played.
Havlat should have had his head up, and he didn't.

You get what you give and you give what you take. I didn't hear the Hawks complaining.
In essense, you could complain about just about every call the refs make.
Kronwall is the one who will have to have his head on a swivel from here on out. Let's count the giveaways coming up in the next game in the defensive zone for the Wings.
And why don't you guys in MI just enjoy the fact that you have the best team in Hockey. We're happy to be on the same ice with you at this point. And we would be more than happy to steal this series from you. I guess then we would really hear you whining from you.

Yeah sure bud. Maybe with slow mo you could see it was between his feet, in practicality we all know he was playing the puck you pud.