Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Cowboys Draft 2012: The Big Board Version 3.0

Niklas Kronwall: Sinner or Saint?

Let me preface this entire article by saying part of what I love about being a Red Wings fan is that I'm not often forced to rectify my own soap box dialogues with my blatant Red Wings homerism.  Seems every day there is talk about certain hits and whether the newest one should result in a suspension.  Fortunately, the Wings are rarely involved as the the defendants when it comes to this discussion.  Unfortunately, whenever they are, it seems to be Niklas Kronwall's name on the docket.

This time, Kronwall's being called a dirty cheater for his hit on Teemu Selanne during the first period of Saturday's Red Wings/Ducks game.  I'll post video under the jump, but here's what appears to have happened from the television angle: Selanne received the puck on a hard-around in the zone after a Ducks faceoff win.  Kronwall steps up on Selanne at the half board; Teemu sees him coming, but tries to play the puck back and gets leveled when Kronwall plants a shoulder into his face.  Selanne is left woozy by the hit, but eventually gets up and skates to the bench; he comes back to finish the game later, scoring the Ducks' fourth goal on the night after catching Kronwall flat-footed on a turnover by Dan Cleary.

Selanne responded after the game by vaguely threatening Kronwall, saying "That guy is dangerous out there. One of these days somebody's going to get him, for sure." and talking about how he's positive it was an elbow that hit him.  Ducks coach Randy Carlyle chimed in with "Kronwall clearly jumped and shouldered him in the jaw, went for his head."  The rest of the linked article has both Carlyle's and Selanne's comments devolving into a bitch-fest about how the refs are biased against the most-penalized team in hockey being run by a goon coach who makes excuses for his players.

Anyway, I digress.  The question at hand is whether this hit was illegal, dirty, supendable, and another in a long line.  Join me after the jump for the discussion.

Star-divide

First, the video.  This replay shows three different angles over 26 seconds:

 

First off, the replay clearly shows that Kronwall's shoulder is what makes contact.  He finishes by extending his arms, but his elbow does not make contact.  Historically, punishment has been levied in cases where a player leads with his elbow.  There is a litany of big hockey hits videos out there that show extending one's arms through contact is legal. 

The second argument against Kronwall is that it's a hit targeting the head.  I can't disagree with this statement, as Kronwall did aim high and I wish he hadn't.  However, we got to have this discussion last season with the Matt Cooke blindside hit on Marc Savard; by itself, a check to the head is not illegal.  The new rule implemented late last season which makes hits to the head punishable clearly states it has to be blind-side or back pressure.  Selanne saw Kronwall coming from the front the entire time.  There is nothing illegal about where contact was made between Selanne's square face and Kronwall's even-squarer shoulder.

The most damning argument against Kronwall is that he is guilty of charging, by virtue of appearing to jump at Selanne.  The replay above shows the best angle for this starting at the 20-second mark.  Here's where it gets a little fuzzy.  Kronwall's left skate is on the ice when his shoulder makes contact, but he definitely explodes upwards through the contact, powering through the hit with his legs.  The charging rule is written as such:

42.1 Charging – A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean the actions of a player 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.

The semantics of the argument here is that the second sentence says "as a result of distance traveled" as being important to the definition of charging; The rule is written like this to keep players from getting a "running start" at the people they're checking.  Kronwall does not take a running start at Selanne; they are both engaged at going after the puck.  The part about jumping into is even more pedantic than the distance traveled argument.  The spirit here is that players are not supposed to jump at other players to make contact.  Kronwall's shoulder and Selanne's face have already become one by the time Kronwall uses his legs to finish the check.  He isn't jumping into Selanne, he's jumping through him. 

The jumping through contact thing has often been misconstrued as charging by Kronwall's detractors.  The issue here is a systemic misunderstanding of what the charging rule means when it talks about jumping into players.  Penalties and suspensions have historically come as a result of leaping before contact and not through it.  Kronwall at 6-foot, 193 is average-sized for a hockey player and one of the smaller big hitters in the league (Jordin Tootoo is the smallest at 5'9", I think).  Hitters like Kronwall have to use their legs to get as much power out of their hits as possible. 

The interesting part is that I believe the thing that earns Kronwall the most scorn might be the best thing he can be doing for his prey when these high hits get made (aside from not hitting them in the first place).  Diffusing the contact through an upward angle allows the skull to do its best job at moving the force of the contact away from the brain.  Hitting lower in this situation and from a forward angle causes just as much force to enter the head, but also causes whiplash effects, which can shake the brain in its casing, especially badly if the victim is knocked back by the force of the hit so as to land on his shoulders, his head whipping downward into contact with the ice.  The human body is built to withstand significantly more force along the vertical axis in alignment with the spine than the horizontal axis running through the chest.  Kronwall's hit is not perfectly vertically aligned, but I believe the angle of deflection helps minimize the trauma. 

As far as the rulebook is concerned, Kronwall did nothing wrong.  His actions do not warrant a suspension here.  However, I need to throw one huge freakin' caveat onto this entire article.  I do not like that Kronwall targeted Selanne's head.  I don't think the hit was illegal, suspendable, or more evidence that Kronwall always leaps into his checks, as the hyperbolic nitwits out there would have you believe, but I do think this hit was borderline dirty.  I don't think Kronwall had to hit Selanne in the head and if the players want to get serious about getting dangerous head shots out of hockey, this is an example they should use.  While I stand by the previous paragraph that Kronwall's level of deflection is beneficial when he hits to the head, I don't want that to be misconstrued as a tacit approval of hitting players in the chin in the first place.  I would rather he not have targeted Selanne high, but  I like him most when he's making people back off through the neutral zone with his threat of big hits and I don't want to see that disappear from his game.  If what he's doing is a problem, then the league needs to amend or clarify their rules because, under what stands now, he's doing everything right.

Comment 59 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

In my biased Wings opinion

I think it was a good hit… however kronners has to start adjusting his hits. In the long run this is going to hurt the wings, becasue eventually he will be getting penalized regardless of clean or not. When he leaves his skates, 95% of the time it is after the initial point of contact…. so I think its perfectly legal.

by bond021 on Oct 25, 2010 11:37 AM CDT reply actions  

Great write-up

I agree that Kronwall is often portrayed as a “dirty” player because of the way he explodes through a check. For non-Wing fans, they see him leap off the ice after making contact and assume that he has left his feet to make a hit. In certain circumstances he does, but as you point out, he’s a smaller guy, and he hits with such explosive force that often it’s the momentum that drives him off his skates.

I know that some people believe that Kronwall will be suspended, either due to the interpretation of the rule or because he’s a Wing. I won’t acknowledge the second part because I refuse to believe he would lose time simply because of the logo on his jersey (that’s another discussion for another day). However, you are correct in pointing out that this was not a blindside hit, not from back pressure, not an elbow, and he did not leave his feet to make the check: in short, it was a “clean” hit. However, you can’t ignore the fact that the point of contact is Selanne’s head.

The NHL is in a real bind here: on the one hand, the players’ safety has to be the number one consideration. But big hits like the one Kronwall put on Selanne bring people out of their seats, get shown on highlight packages, and elevate a guy’s status in the eyes of fans. In essence, they bring the NHL exposure, and as long as the hit is “clean”, the NHL is happy. Much like the NFL, the NHL does not want to turn this into a non-contact league, so the focus should be on changing the culture in the game and teaching guys not to target the head at all.

With Kronwall, I don’t want to see him change the way he plays. History has shown he is most effective when he is engaged physically, and the prospect of being put flat on your ass as you cross the blueline on his side of the ice can cause the other team to hesitate, giving the Wings an advantage. As long as the current rules are in place, I hope that Kronwall just aims a little lower, but still delivers devastating (legal) hits.

Like to keep your communication short and to the point? Follow me on Twitter

by Amerinadian on Oct 25, 2010 11:41 AM CDT reply actions  

yeah, I think the only way Kronwall gets suspended is on the nebulous head-shot issue, but it would be weird to see them doing it now.

Maybe if Selanne were still the star he was ten years ago…

by J.J. from Kansas on Oct 25, 2010 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions  

Do that to Crosby...

and watch the suspension pile up….hell he’d probably get a personal call from Bettman if that happened.

Smitty

by Kendal on Oct 25, 2010 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions  

I think this is a case of Selanne being partly at fault, the same as if he had just turned his back to a check an instant before impact.

He had a choice, blindly dump the puck and brace for impact, or make himself vulnerable and attempt to make a play.

Is Kronwall (or any other defender) supposed to let up because the guy with the puck decides to make a play rather than protect himself?

Kronner is borderline with some of his hits. And it only makes it worse when the bandwagon fans who have been following hockey for all of 5 minutes point to the “jumps into” portion of the charging rule and automatically assume that you can’t leave your feet at all during a check. Thankfully, the NHL doesn’t have a “process of a hit” where you must keep your feet all the way to the ground.

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

Kronwalls confidence is at its highest when his physical game is on point.

I feel like it was a legal hit and yes, Selanne’s head was the point of impact but hey, shit happens.And I will be the first to admit that I am extremely biased on this incident. But over the years I have observed a kind of mutual dislike for one another between Selanne and Kronwall. I don’t know if it stems from the overplayed Swede vs. Finn or it’s more personal. Having said that, other teams need to realize that the Wings are not going to let them take the liberties that I feel were taken against them last season. Whether it’s Pav and Stewie punching a douchebag in the face or Bert defending Mules honor or whatever I think the bottom line is KEEP YOUR HEAD UP.

"Would you like to come in for a cupcake and a glass of wine?" - Mr. Herbert.

by Wings3_26_97 on Oct 25, 2010 12:03 PM CDT reply actions  

Great breakdown of the hit. You even got all anatomical on us. I think you’re right about the leaping through the hit thing, its more like he’s tackling with his shoulder which i think is less painful than stopping him completely.

Oh, and…

by Casey Richey on Oct 25, 2010 12:28 PM CDT reply actions   1 recs

Ok, where can I get that shirt?

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

Thanks.

And always good to hear of donations going to Children’s.

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions  

that is freakin awesome

LETS GO RED WINGS!

2011 will be the year....better be....

Troy Tulowitzki: "When people think of the Rockies, I want them to think of a winning organization."

by TuLoRocks2008 on Oct 25, 2010 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

You hit the biggest knock on Kronner right on the head

Far too often have I seen people call him out for “charging”. If you watch his youtube videos, every hit he makes is like this – contact is made, then an explosion through the hit resulting in his feet leaving the ice. The key thought is that his feet, or at least one of them, in this case, are on the ice when contact is made. I think the overriding factor here is the fact that the Wings never get hit with suspensions for anything because, well, we don’t play dirty, and supporters of other teams just want to see us suffer. I love Kronwall when he’s on. He’s a sneaky big hitter. I think that’s the best thing about him. Opposing players have to always be wary of him out there because you never know when he’s gonna Kronwall’d someone. Legal hit, the Ducks and everyone else are just bitching to hear themselves talk.

by Dubie on Oct 25, 2010 12:34 PM CDT reply actions  

Great write up, J.J. All of these points cover what I was wondering about the other night.

On the targeting of the head: I’m not entirely sure. If he’s going to hit him straight-on, he’s going to aim for the middle of Selanne’s body as to not go knee-on-knee (or close to it), which can result in contact with the head. I don’t know that he’s necessarily aiming for Selanne’s square face as much as he is the middle of his body; and given the way he has to square up his shoulder for the hit + the height of the two players, it ended up as a head shot. But as you pointed out, a legal one under these cloudy rules.

by TDTyler on Oct 25, 2010 12:43 PM CDT reply actions  

Nice dissection of the incident.

The question that is lingering now is …Had Selanne sustained some sort of physical injury or concussion as a result of the hit would the NHL have penalized Kronwall?

We all can associate the phrase ‘double standards’ with NHL considering previous incidents….

by bharatwaj5 on Oct 25, 2010 1:21 PM CDT reply actions  

It's hard to say.

Especially if you use the equation

Miming “Blowjob” < “Sloppy Seconds” = Grabbing a fan.

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions  

Fantastic

One of the best reads I’ve come by concerning rules and their application to a particular situation.

I agree with you, J.J. While I don’t like seeing the concussed players leaving the game due to hits to the head, this hit does not break the rules set concerning charging. My question is this: What the heck is Selanne doing? He put himself in a vulnerable position by a) engaging Kronwall without support from the boards, and b) he leans into the shoulder of Kronwall, causing his face to be at shoulder height.

If Selanne moves to the boards to try to cut off a dump-in by Kronwall he’s at most hit on the right shoulder and impedes Kronwall’s ability to move/move the puck up the boards.
IMO, Selanne is trying for the home run by attempting to bank the puck off the boards beside Kronwall and moving around him to open ice. Simply put, Selanne gambled, put himself in a bad situation, and lost.

by InJimWeTrust on Oct 25, 2010 1:32 PM CDT reply actions  

Ok, about the hit

I don’t know about you guys, but when I played hockey, that was a perfect hit. He used his shoulder to create impact and hit a guy hard. Hard hits are part of hockey.

Does it suck that Selanne got his clock cleaned when Kronner’s shoulder hit hit chin? For him, yeah. But hitting especially when using the shoulder should never be illegal, I don’t care where it hits. It doesn’t make the hit even close to borderline dirty, it was a good solid hockey hit, end of story. He didn’t even put his hands up in the guys face like so many guys hit nowadays. He kept his arm at his side and extended through impact, perfect hit. That’s how you are taught to do it when you first play peewee hockey.

Look, have some of Kronner’s hits in the past been borderline dirty, maybe, probably, yeah. But not this one, this was just a perfect hit, textbook. Head shots happen, the key is to get rid of contact made by elbows, arms, hands, other heads, etc… but a good shoulder check to the chin, is just that, a good shoulder check to the chin.

As the Mullet, Berry Melrose once said, “I never want to see the day when cowards can play our game.” Enough said.

by eshad15 on Oct 25, 2010 1:39 PM CDT reply actions  

Agreed

We’re not saying that his hit was illegal or dirty. In terms of the letter of the law, the hit was a good one: he connected with his shoulder in a face-to-face hit. The only real issue is the targeting of the head, and with my apologies to Chris Pronger, that can be chalked up to physics. But this particular hit is part of a larger epidemic of head shots that need to be curtailed to ensure the players are safe out there. I don’t ever want the NHL to have the issues that former NFL players do with early Alzheimers and other psychological disorders because of all the head injuries.

With Kronwall, his reputation as a big hitter will work against him in situations like this, much in the same way they used to work against Scott Stevens (the most devastating hitter I’ve ever seen). 95% of hits are textbook, clean hits, but because it’s that 5% that will dog him throughout his entire career.

Like to keep your communication short and to the point? Follow me on Twitter

by Amerinadian on Oct 25, 2010 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions  

See I disagree

I don’t see an epidemic at all. These hits have always been there, we’re just talking about them now. The players are safer from concussions than they have ever been with the blindside hits rule being put into place, not even mentioning the quality of helmets. The NHL will never have the same issue as football, no sport ever will, because there just isn’t the sort of blind bludgeoning of people over and over again. I actually think the lack of a full face mask ensures that.

As far as Kronwall, agreed. But I also think that Stevens will be going to the HoF if he isn’t there already, let’s hope Kronner has similar success.

by eshad15 on Oct 25, 2010 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

That's just it

The awareness of concussions and head injuries is far more prevalent than it was 10 or 20 years ago. Back then, getting hit in the noggin was just “getting your bell rung”, and after you shook out the cobwebs you went back out there. The culture surrounding concussions is different, which is why we hear more about it.

I agree with you on the NFL/NHL comparison today, as my point was more of a “worst-case scenario” issue.

Long story short on the whole thing: it was a clean hit both in terms of the rules and in terms of hockey itself. Selanne needs to remember what all of us were taught in our very first day of hockey school: keep your head up.

Like to keep your communication short and to the point? Follow me on Twitter

by Amerinadian on Oct 25, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

Exactly

I think too many players nowadays forget that mantra. Which is a problem I have with some of these so called blindside hit calls. Some not all mind you. But some of them are just guys who got blindsided because they didn’t have their heads up so as to protect themselves.

Looking at the NHL too, who knows maybe they will suspend Kronner, Cambell has done dumber things. I actually wrote an article about that here :
http://haildc.com/2010/10/17/what-is-two-games-worth/

by eshad15 on Oct 25, 2010 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

Nice write up

Agree with your article completely. Every single player on the ice has the obligation to protect themselves at all times. While Kronwall should not (and did not) intentionally attempt to injure Selanne, Selanne also has to ensure that he is not putting himself in a position to be hit like that. There’s a reason why guys like Gretzky, Yzerman, Lemieux, Datsyuk and even Crosby are not one the receiving end of hits like that: they play smart and never allow themselves to be put in that position. Gretzky was hit like that once, and he said it was a career-defining moment because it taught him to play with his head up.

I severely doubt that they will suspend him: chances are we would have heard something by now.

Like to keep your communication short and to the point? Follow me on Twitter

by Amerinadian on Oct 25, 2010 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions  

Looking at the video again...

Here’s what I see happen.

Ducks win the draw.
Ducks D-man gets it behind the net and plays it around the boards, but out of Selanne’s reach.
Selanne chases after the puck, but Kronner get’s there first.
Kronner plays puck back in, and then braces for impact.
Selanne, unsure how to hit (thanks to Finnish hockey training) doesn’t brace for impact.
KRONWALLED

The more times I watch it, the more it looks like Selanne just forgot how to either throw a hit or brace for one, and got himself caught in a bad place. Something that you just can’t blame Kronwall for.

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 1:47 PM CDT reply actions  

exactly

1)Selanne started out lining up Kronner for a hit as Kronner plays the puck.
2) Selanne realizes who he has lined up and thinks second guesses his previous decision.
2) The hunter becomes the hunted and I’m sure that if you could see Selanne’s face, at this point, it would look a lot like “deer caught in the headlights.”
3) Selanne’s brain stops working out of fear and he just slows down a little, rather than full-out stopping or changing direction to go around Kronner.
4) in the event of slowing down, Selanne’s body gets lowered, because his legs are no longer vertical, bringing his head to roughly the same height as Kronner’s shoulder.
5) Kronner, being Kronner, finishes the check with some “oomph,” his body exploding through the point of contact, which just happens to be Selanne’s head.

I don’t think Kronner was targetting the head, just due to the positioning of the 2 players, that was the point of contact. Selanne was the one to initiate contact. So Selanne, see that bed you made? Now lie in it.

by Red, White and a Mile high on Oct 25, 2010 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions  

Looking at the review the only reason Kronwall hits Selanne in the head is that Selanne is stooped over and leads with his head, there is no way for Kronwall to hit without making contact with the head first unless Kronwall bends down so far he will end up head butting Selanne in the stomache.

Kronwall comes straight on, he is not in a blind angle and he is coming from the direction you have to expect someone to come from, Selanne in that situation puts his head out knowing that there is a risk someone comes from that direction. Nothing dirty about that hit. If Kronwall had come from the side, it would have been dirty because he would have had the option of hitting either the body or the head, but as it stands the heads was blocking his way to the body.

It is also clear he doesn’t follow through the check until after contact is made, that is his MO when delivering these hits.

The intent of the new head hitting rules is not to allow players to duck their heads so they can’t be hit legally, it is so prevent situations like the Shane Doan hit where a player goes directly for the head from a blind angle when the option of a body check is there.

I have seen other Kronwall hits that were more disputable than this one.

by gyldenlove on Oct 25, 2010 2:15 PM CDT reply actions  

Seems like a double standard
Looking at the review the only reason Kronwall hits Selanne in the head is that Selanne is stooped over and leads with his head, there is no way for Kronwall to hit without making contact with the head

This was the same argument I heard in defense of the hit to Franzen’s jaw earlier this season.

I know I’m supposed to be a blind homer and just side with my team here, but I didn’t like how the hit was made. I’m fine with the idea of making a hit there, as many people have pointed out – it was head-on and Selanne saw where he was, and it wasn’t like Kronwall lined him up from 30yrds away and got a head of steam going. Having said that, there was no reason for “exploding through” the hit, not if you can’t spare the head. Selanne had his head down in the sense that he was skating forward – it wasn’t abnormally low and he didn’t lower it at the last second.

I have seen other Kronwall hits that were more disputable than this one.

That can’t really be part of your defense of the hit, can it? “I’ve seen worse”? I’ll admit I used to be a huge fan of the original “Kronwalled”, but now I’d like to see Kronwall find a way to be physical without going so high. I understand that the letter of the law only deals in blindside hits to the head, but I don’t like any hit to the head. I don’t think Kronwall is a dirty player, per se…but he’s been glorified for hits like this, and sooner or later I think he will badly hurt somebody, or vice-versa. Its needless, and regardless of whether or not people here think taking headshots out of the league is pussifying the game, the league is clearly headed in that direction and I think its the right direction. I have no interest in watching star players having the careers ended because they “didn’t protect themselves” from hits that don’t need to be made.

by André Boillot on Oct 25, 2010 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions  

So your saying

if a guy either has his head down or is lower than the defender coming into him, he is untouchable? There is a reason why we learned in Pee Wees to keep our heads up… Im not for watching guys getting craddled because they dont know hockey basics.. there is a reason they are in the big leagues. You can tell the difference between deliberate and laziness on the puck carrier. If its going to lead to getting scored on because our defender is afraid to take the body… i will be sick.

Dont get me wrong… intentional heads shots shold be cracked down on.. but kronners on saturday was a no look shoulder to the head.

by bond021 on Oct 25, 2010 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great writeup J.J.

I agree completely with your assessment…clean by the books, but one of those hits that I wish Kronwall doesn’t make in that way…in the sense that he aimed high on Selanne.

However, we have to go back to the main counterargument to the whole headshot debate…in that players being hit have to be held as accountable as the hitter. That’s hockey. Keep your damn head up. It wasn’t a blindside hit, not even close…it wasn’t elbowing, not even close.

Selanne doesn’t appear to protect himself at all from Kronner, kept his head down. The only thing he appeared to do was lean away in a very poor effort of evading Kronwall…which obviously didn’t work. How could he not know that hit was coming? Selanne is more at fault here for being hit in the head than Kronwall is…had Kronwall used his elbow, completely different story and I would say a suspension is warranted. However he did not.

If hockey wants to eliminate every single headshot in the game, it would have done so. But it didn’t. And its because the league feels that the person being hit has to be held equally accountable as the hitter. It was an attempt to maintain integrity of the game, and I’m glad they did it.

In short, Teemu, stop whining. IN fact, eff you and you whiny goons over in Anaheim. Sit there and cry when someone doesn’t play nice against you, even though your team has a reputation for thugging it up. Eff you.

by tehGOALIE on Oct 25, 2010 2:27 PM CDT reply actions  

There is certainly an undercurrent here

I mentioned that I feel it’s on the players to eliminate these hits if they so choose and I do agree that Selanne also made a bad decision in the tactic he chose when he saw Kronwall coming.

This is where the area gets very gray. I could definitely see if they institute a rock-solid NO HEAD SHOTS rule in the NHL, we fans are going to have something just as bad to discuss, the concept of whether a player intentionally put his head in the path of a guy’s shoulder to draw a penalty. Nobody can tell me there aren’t a few clowns in the league who would do that.

by J.J. from Kansas on Oct 25, 2010 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions  

And that would just fall into the same “checking from behind” discussion that happens a couple times a season.

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

Exactly, and I hate having that discussion.

by J.J. from Kansas on Oct 25, 2010 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

Over Analysis?

If you take a look at the video, Kronwall isn’t even looking at Selanne. The moment he commits to the check, he turns his head. You may say it’s careless but to me it’s just a simple hockey play that is more than OK.

One more thing to note, I don’t think that the NHL will come down on him. Nothing has happened so far and he was actually a featured video on NHL.com and it was in a positive light to boot.

by MTL_WINGS on Oct 25, 2010 3:33 PM CDT reply actions  

Legal, but still illegal.

Legal in the way that it’s north/south so it doesn’t fall within the realm of blindside hits the NHL is cracking down on. However, if Kronner keeps giving the NHL reason to look at his feet leaving the ice over and over again, he could have problems from time to time.

by Elfuego51 on Oct 25, 2010 3:39 PM CDT reply actions  

There’s no doubt he’s close. But I have yet to see one video of him jumping into a check. He is on his feet through impact and only leaves them when his momentum carries him through the hit.

by Robocop on Oct 25, 2010 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions  

Agreed.....

there has only been 1 where i seen he left his feet before intial impact,… however Elfuego is right. The league will eventually will “crack down on it” (aka getting tired of the crying), and everything kronners touches will result in a penalty.

by bond021 on Oct 25, 2010 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions  

It's simply physics really

I think Colin Campbell should have to take a class before Kronwall is ever suspended. The forces can’t go through each other and it’s unlikely the opposing forces parallel to the ice would be co-linear. So Kronwall goes up while the Kronwalledee goes down.

by Elfuego51 on Oct 25, 2010 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions  

Man, small guys are going to have it rough if the rule book keeps changing. Though I doubt it will in this case.

I was a small kid playing hockey. Even at 17, I bounced off opposing players regardless if I or they applied the check. So my feet left the ice almost every time after a hit due to the physics of the game. Kronwall is on the small side of the NHL so he can’t bull over opponents like Pronger through weight alone. Kronner applying leverage with his legs pushing toward the ice to make up for his lack of size explodes through his checks. We know this is checking 101. Too bad the homers don’t.

by Idle Drifter on Oct 25, 2010 5:04 PM CDT reply actions  

I don't think that's the issue
So my feet left the ice almost every time after a hit due to the physics of the game.

Most of us will agree that he doesn’t tend to leave his feet until after first-contact. But to the larger point you seem to be making – that exploding through a player with his legs is the only way Kronwall can effectively hit – I disagree. I’ve never played/don’t have a physics degree, but I don’t think that exploding through checks necessitates high-hits. However, if the only way for him to be effective is to hit high in such a way that the opponents head bears a good deal of the force, then I think he shouldn’t make those hits.

Small guys are going to have it rough

I’d rather this be the case than “normal” or “big” guys getting head-shot (oh the irony) because the only way for small players to have an impact is making high-hits. Lets just get Kronwall some heels, shall we?

by André Boillot on Oct 25, 2010 5:22 PM CDT reply actions  

There's more than one way to make a clean check.

Kronwall’s checks are text book shoulder checks. Also he makes better use of his energy when he uses his legs to push into his check after contact. Leaping into a check is charging and small guys don’t need leap into larger opponents to make an effective check. The issue is that everyone outside of Detroit making noise that Kronwall leaves his feet. I was making the point even after or during a check people tend to leave their feet because of the forces involved in a check. Kronwall leaves his feet at times but way more often than not it’s a result of the impact and not the intent to make impact by leaping into the check.

by Idle Drifter on Oct 25, 2010 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions  

haha i love that guy's expression

right next to the kid in the 1st row…he knows pwnage is going on

LETS GO RED WINGS!

2011 will be the year....better be....

Troy Tulowitzki: "When people think of the Rockies, I want them to think of a winning organization."

by TuLoRocks2008 on Oct 25, 2010 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions  

Definitely a clean hit. Selanne needed to keep his head up. He put himself in danger. The hit came from directly in front of him so it’s not a blindside head shot and his skates were on the ice when he hit him so it wasn’t a charge. It was legal.

by marcness52 on Oct 25, 2010 6:04 PM CDT reply actions  

I can’t believe Randy Carlyle would have the balls to say that Kronwall intentionally went for Selanne’s head. That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. Especially coming from a guy that coaches the most thug filled team in the league. What’s that saying about complaining about the sliver in your neighbor’s eye, but ignoring the log in your own eye?

It’s funny how everyone knocks the Red Wings for being a passive, non-physical team… but when they hit back they are dirty.

Now I don’t like the excuse “keep your head up” in most cases, but in this case it absolutely rings true. You know Kronwall is there, you lower your head right into him. That’s an incredibly dumb thing to do. Of course Kronwall is going to lay a hit on you, so be ready for it. Kronwall was right, it looked as if Selanne was going to hit Kronwall… so Kronwall stepped into him. good hockey play.

by dewman8810 on Oct 25, 2010 9:13 PM CDT reply actions  

I will have to say Selanne should have seen Kronwall and protected himself. It wasn’t like he came out of nowhere as soon as he picked the puck up. I can’t believe that he didn’t know he was comming. Selanne looked like he was looking at Kronwall but thought it was the All-Star Game. Smaller players are going to get hit in the head when getting checked, just the way it is. Someone with Selanne’s talent should be able to avoid a check which developed very slowly. I do think Carlyle’s rant is a bit much, seeing that when Detroit played them in the playoffs they had seemed to start a fight when the game ended 5 times, usually started with somone leading with an elbow. I do know that he is protecting his player.

by Quince on Oct 26, 2010 4:20 AM CDT reply actions  

A few links

I’m not going to repost what I posted in the postgame thread, so I’ll link it here:
I’m not sure if it was legal (talking about him going up early and explaining that the league cannot impose supplemental discipline in this case without completely ignoring the rules)
Most of the time… (talking about how this hit was different from most of his other “big hits” and how the charging rule is not clear with regard to jumping)

Diffusing the contact through an upward angle allows the skull to do its best job at moving the force of the contact away from the brain. Hitting lower in this situation and from a forward angle causes just as much force to enter the head, but also causes whiplash effects, which can shake the brain in its casing, especially badly if the victim is knocked back by the force of the hit so as to land on his shoulders, his head whipping downward into contact with the ice. The human body is built to withstand significantly more force along the vertical axis in alignment with the spine than the horizontal axis running through the chest.

Instead of picking on specific issues, I’ll focus on the argument itself: this is a case where you need citations including analysis of hits resulting in concussions compared with hits not resulting in concussions (minus cherry picking). Any hit to the head had the potential to result in serious injury, regardless of the orientation of body B with regard to force f. Obviously that does play a role, but lacking exhaustive study focusing on the angle of impact wrt injury, your diatribe is lacking in merit.

(Mention of whiplash was improper, since whiplash is a head/neck injury that is not considered a brain injury.)

by bleep bloop on Oct 26, 2010 4:45 AM CDT reply actions  

unrelated smufathing

Someone elsewhere mentioned that they don’t quite get why hits to the head are a big target of argument today in sports. Often you see something along the lines of “even five years ago, nobody made a big deal, but today…”

My theory on this is that, as opposed to most head injuries, those occurring in sport tend to be well documented. This can result in better head trauma research, which can have wide ranging positive effects. So I don’t mind the obsession.

by bleep bloop on Oct 26, 2010 5:06 AM CDT up reply actions  

(Mention of whiplash was improper, since whiplash is a head/neck injury that is not considered a brain injury.)

My mention of whiplash was proper, since I mentioned that whiplash effects shake the brain in its casing.

The abstract of this study pretty clearly covers why I spoke of whiplash and diffuse angles (which cause significantly less head rotation:

Preliminary analysis of our data support a hypothesis that approximately half of the potential for brain injury during impact to the unprotected movable head is related to head rotation, the remaining brain injury potential of the blow is related to the contact phenomena of the impact.

I would always urge readers to do individual research when they doubt one of my assertions, instead of dismissing it off-hand because I haven’t met the research-paper requirements of citation and discussion. If what I’ve said is wrong, I welcome citations and analysis (minus cherry-picking, of course) which states that, rather than a complete dismissal.

Here’s an article about another study. I’m sure I could find you plenty more which link the two. As for the argument about force along the vertical alignment of the spine versus force along the horizontal axis through the chest, I would recommend a self-experiment if you doubt my statement there. Stand up straight and place a 200-pound weight on your shoulders to see how much you have to move to adjust to the force. Next, try attaching a bungee cord around your chest with 200 pounds of pull and see how easily you can remain in an unchanged standing position.

by J.J. from Kansas on Oct 26, 2010 7:16 AM CDT up reply actions  

Thank you for responding to this. I’ll go into details below, but I want to address why I specifically picked on that first.

I would always urge readers to do individual research when they doubt one of my assertions, instead of dismissing it off-hand because I haven’t met the research-paper requirements of citation and discussion. If what I’ve said is wrong, I welcome citations and analysis (minus cherry-picking, of course) which states that, rather than a complete dismissal.

It is good that you “urge readers to do individual research”, however there was only an apparent statement of fact. The reason I specifically responded to that is because you made unobvious statements without supporting them or even indicating where you came up with them. In that case, the onus should be on you to support your claims, not on your reader to verify them. (There are exceptions to that of course, and I suppose this being a blog, you could claim it was in your opinion and therefore you had no obligations.)

Unfortunately, people are far too willing to believe whatever they were told or read; unfortunately there is far too much misinformation out there. In general, I recommend that people should be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims.

I’ll assume that the reason that you responded to a minor point first was because it was the last thing I mentioned and therefore the freshest on your mind. Unfortunately I cannot well respond to the first paper you linked to since the publisher charges money to access it (31.50 USD for a digital copy of an 8 page article from 1971?! I found the same thing from another source for 16.00 USD, but that’s still rather steep). The abstract does make an apparent connection between whiplash and concussion: “Predictions are made that the levels of head rotation during whiplash, in excess of 1800 rad./sec2, will probably result in cerebral concussion in man.” Based on other sources, it seems that the use of the word “whiplash” here is referring to the rapid movement of the head and not whiplash in the medical sense. (Consider that “whiplash” here refers an event as opposed to a class of injuries.)

Preliminary analysis of our data support a hypothesis that approximately half of the potential for brain injury during impact to the unprotected movable head is related to head rotation

(The grammar makes me cringe.) In fact, not everyone accepts that angular acceleration is a component of mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI). If it is a primary component, then it is very concerning that helmets “[do] not appreciably decrease angular acceleration” (see Impact Biomechanics below).

The second article you linked is a very interesting read and indicates that there is a case for rotational impact resulting in MTBI as well as whiplash, but its primary conclusion is that brain injury may be overlooked in whiplash patients, not that whiplash causes brain injury or is a brain injury. (Also, the study that was mentioned had a very small sample size and was only designed to test correlation between whiplash symptoms and brain injury symptoms. It’s hard to find any information about further research since I did not see mention of what study the article was about.)

I highly recommend an article titled simply Impact Biomechanics. It was written in 2004 by Albert King, a professor and chair of the department of biomedical engineering at Wayne State University. He does a good job of describing the field of impact biomechanics and talks about various components of impact injuries, including sports injuries, and also whiplash.

As for the argument about force along the vertical alignment of the spine versus force along the horizontal axis through the chest…

I’m pretty sure that the only cases where a player reported a concussion after being hit to the chest would be if he also hit his head on the boards or ice. Not many hockey players get spinal injuries and rib injuries tend to be relatively minor and do not prevent players from returning. Unlike concussions, which players have received from hits to the head.

by bleep bloop on Oct 26, 2010 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions  

Why is it only important to back up physiological claims (especially when I say things like “believe” and “might”)?

I also said that historically, extending arms through contact does not lead to punishment and that historically, the way that Kronwall leaps through contact is not punished as much as players leaping into contact, yet you’ve not chosen to ask me for further study in a blog discussion about this. If I’m to be held to the absolute highest standards of research-paper efficacy, then why have you ignored the need for me to link to longitudinal studies of the punishment habits of the NHL and the referees’ association vis-a-vis these types of hits? Do you just not want to pile on?

This is a big problem I have with the concept of talks about human physiological reaction. When I’m talking about anything else, I can be pretty much as wild as I want to be, but when it comes to the conclusion, which has been discussed through multiple studies, that rotational forces (such as caused by whiplash) lead to brain injury, I’m forced to write a peer-reviewable and scientific journal-publishable magnum opus.

This is a blog for discussion. If you don’t think I’m right about this, then prove me wrong, rather than nit-picking the definition of what “whiplash” truly is or pedantically placing a straw-man argument about whether horizontal forces are indeed easier to take than vertical forces. I didn’t argue that Kronwall is saving lives by deflecting upward, I argued it MIGHT be the case. The article you post does make a good distinction between linear acceleration and angular accelaration, citing that angular acceleration is more dangerous, but only reading that at face value doesn’t realize it actually argues my point. The angular acceleration is the whiplash effect I was referring to (because it’s angular acceleration of the brain, not the body). The point I made was that deflecting the angle upward reduces angular acceleration of the head. It doesn’t reduce force generated, just where the force goes. I realize that’s only a very small part taken out of a very large article, but that’s just the point. Nothing in the article you linked does anything to disprove what I said I believe might be the case up top. It is a very complex matter about which I could write two hundred pages and still not come to an outright conclusion, yet it’s so important to have proof one way or another here. If you disagree with my post, that’s fine, but this is ridiculous.

What it all boils down to is a form of lazy and egocentric contrarianism. I understand a person’s need to separate themselves from the pack, especially in internet comment forums, where individuality is easy to lose, but picking against the pack for the sole reason of nit-picking is a dick move.

by J.J. from Kansas on Oct 26, 2010 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

Are you really complaining that I took issue with your statements about the least deleterious hits in an article resulting from a hit?

Why is it only important to back up physiological claims
The excerpt was an apparent statement of fact, as background information useful to understand a complex issue. Like the charging rule. (The difference being that it is relatively easy for any hockey fan to find the text of the rule on their own).

when it comes to the conclusion, which has been discussed through multiple studies

In the one case that you provided the most informative information, you neglected to provide so much as a link to a wikipedia article or dictionary definition.

If you don’t think I’m right about this, then prove me wrong

It is ironic that you want me to “prove” something but refrained from providing supporting evidence for your premise.

Where it focused on head impact in Impact Biomechanics, angular acceleration was not found to be a major factor in MTBI.

The point I made was that deflecting the angle upward reduces angular acceleration of the head. It doesn’t reduce force generated, just where the force goes.

How is it that a high hit that targets the head reduces angular acceleration of the head or reduces force to the head when a lower hit would have been shoulder-to-shoulder/chest/collar? Are you claiming that the head moving around after a hit is more damaging than direct impact to the head? (That might be true if angular acceleration was the only or even the primary factor.)

Nothing in the article you linked does anything to disprove what I said I believe might be the case up top.

The article was not about why people criticize Kronwall’s hits, nor was it intended to disprove anything. It was to clarify the relationship between angular acceleration and MTBI and whiplash.

but this is ridiculous.

Right. I don’t think I was discourteous or called you names, but such is my due for criticizing a few sentences from your post…

by bleep bloop on Oct 26, 2010 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions  

I think

it would have sufficed maybe emailing him privately, instead of calling him out in front of his readers. Maybe your intent was not to be “discourteous” but I think its safe to say the regulars here might see it different.

Please dont take this the wrong way, I always enjoy reading your thoughts and comments.

by bond021 on Oct 26, 2010 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions  

Where it focused on head impact in Impact Biomechanics, angular acceleration was not found to be a major factor in MTBI.

If was not found to be a major factor in MTBI, but it was also not found to be a complete non-factor.

How is it that a high hit that targets the head reduces angular acceleration of the head or reduces force to the head when a lower hit would have been shoulder-to-shoulder/chest/collar? Are you claiming that the head moving around after a hit is more damaging than direct impact to the head? (That might be true if angular acceleration was the only or even the primary factor.)

This is a mistake on my part. I apologize for the misunderstanding that this is what you were arguing. I do not disagree that not targeting the head is the right move; in fact, I say that in the post. My argument was that when hits to the head happen, the upward angle of Kronwall’s follow-through is likely more beneficial than hitting the head straight on and following through straight on. Once again, I said Kronwall shouldn’t have hit him in the head, I did not intend for a comparison between hits to the head that have an upward angle of deflection and hits to the chest that have an upward angle. and are diffused into the head.

Right. I don’t think I was discourteous or called you names,

You didn’t call me names, but you don’t get to play the victim here. This statement in the context in which you were making it was at best a backhanded assertion that what I’m doing is spreading disinformation, which is quite discourteous:

Unfortunately, people are far too willing to believe whatever they were told or read; unfortunately there is far too much misinformation out there. In general, I recommend that people should be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims.

You can’t make a generalized claim like that in a specific argument like we’ve been having and then call it only a slightly-related platitude.

by J.J. from Kansas on Oct 26, 2010 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

we get it...

…you think you’re smart, Bleep Bloop. You dont have to be an ass about it (even someone as self-absorbed as me can sense the hostility in your comments).

oh, and I may as well pretend to be smart too:

The point I made was that deflecting the angle upward reduces angular acceleration of the head. It doesn’t reduce force generated, just where the force goes.

How is it that a high hit that targets the head reduces angular acceleration of the head or reduces force to the head when a lower hit would have been shoulder-to-shoulder/chest/collar? Are you claiming that the head moving around after a hit is more damaging than direct impact to the head? (That might be true if angular acceleration was the only or even the primary factor.)

so, yes: the upward component of the force does actually cause less angular acceleration than the component of the force driving the hittee’s head backwards, because the “moment arm” is shorter. To quote Pronger “Physics”

by Red, White and a Mile high on Oct 26, 2010 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions  

I highly doubt Kronwall was “targeting” Selanne’s head. Kronwall assumed Selanne was going to finish his check, thus instead of getting hit… he initiated the hit. A play Datsyuk is very adept at too. Sometimes the players will lower their head just at the wrong time to facilitate getting hit in the head. That was a hockey hit that unfortunately landed on Selanne’s face. Selanne should know better than to skate casually around Kronwall anyways. Also the Ducks should NEVER talk about dirty play unless they begin with their own players. Such as Mr. elbow leading hitter himself Corey Perry.

by dewman8810 on Oct 26, 2010 8:23 AM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Detroit Red Wings.

FanPosts


The Gentlemen

Images_small J.J. from Kansas

Simpsonsabbey_small Amerinadian

Editor

Jla_small JeffHancock41

Jabdelkadercamp08_small stripe

Author

Small Robocop

Photochop Guru

Whiteknight_small Josh Howard