Broad Street Hockey: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Ole Miss-Alabama: "Let's Go Eat.Wait. What Happened?"

Instigator rule used improperly in Carcillo-Gleason fight

As fighting in the NHL continues to escalate, league officials are looking for ways to curtail it. Public outcry following the death of Don Sanderson, who died during a fight in a senior league game in Canada, led to contemplation of several changes at the NHL level. Among those changes, some proposed an outright ban of fighting, which you can understand didn't go over so well. Several other ideas, including forcing players to keep helmets on during fights were put in place in some of Canada's junior leagues.

In the NHL, though, the most widely accepted of the proposals was the addition of a ten-minute misconduct for staged fights that take place immediately following a faceoff. General managers around the NHL supported the idea, but the Players' Association quickly scrapped it.

Most agree that fighting in today's game is perfectly fine -- that the Sanderson incident was a freak occurrence. In fact, as tragic as his death was, you'd have to go back 36 years to find another fatality from an on-ice event in all of North America. The players insist that so-called "staged fights" aren't a problem, and as the NHLPA's vote against the aforementioned misconduct penalty proves, the players' opinion counts.

But there is agreement on one thing across the hockey world: the increase in fights following clean hits is a disturbing trend.

"We've had those discussions at coaches' meetings," Maple Leafs head coach Ron Wilson told the Toronto Star last month. "What's wrong with a clean hit? Why do you have to fight if you've hit somebody clean?"

To stop this trend from continuing, Terry Gregson, the NHL's new Director of Officiating, has decided to order his troops to enforce the oft-ignored instigator rule with greater frequency. Here's Gregson:

It's not new. We're not changing the wording and we're not trying to make every fight an instigator call. But if a player travels (to start a fight), you have to ask 'did someone clearly instigate?' And if so, apply the rule. Now, even when there are clean hits, there seems to be retaliation going on.

The message is clear: if you start a fight after your teammate is hit cleanly, you're going to get called as an instigator. But what about on dirty hits? After all, the purpose of fighting in hockey is to police those who recklessly walk the line between putting a shoulder into a scorer with his head down and a dangerous, illegal, injury-susceptible body check.

Last night, Flyers tough guy Dan Carcillo delivered one of those hits. From behind, he nailed Carolina's Ray Whitney two feet forward into the boards. Whitney was okay, but he took a scary head-first spill toward the dasher. As expected, Hurricanes defenseman Tim Gleason stood up for his teammate and forced Carcillo to drop his gloves.

Video, after the jump...

 

Star-divide

What you see there is a perfect example of the Code. Carcillo delivered a dangerous check and Gleason made him own up to what he did. It's the players policing themselves, safely and effectively, as they have done for years.

Unfortunately, though, under the new orders from Gregson, the referees sent Gleason to the box for instigating. Instead of what was originally a two-minute minor to Carcillo for boarding, the Hurricanes lost the power play due to the instigation minor, and they lost Gleason for 17 minutes - the two minute minor, five minutes for fighting, and ten minutes due to the mandatory misconduct that goes along with the instigator penalty.

As 'Canes Country points out, defenseman Joe Corvo had to step up and play 30 minutes on the night to compensate, putting the Flyers at a severe advantage after one of their players delivered a dirty, penalty-worthy hit. All of this just because Gleason simply defended a teammate?

Here's former Devils coach Brent Sutter following a similar incident last season:

That to me is a big problem. You’re coming to the aid of a teammate, but you get punished. I’d expect my players to do the same thing. And they will do the same thing. That’s what the game is about. To me, that’s being allowed to police the game as players.

Last night's incident wasn't the first case of the instigator rule being used improperly following proper enforcement of the Code, but with Gregson's new marching orders now put into action, it will happen more and more.

There's no doubt in anybody's mind that unwarranted fights following clean hits need to be stopped, and the proper enforcement of the instigator rule is the ideal solution to that problem. It becomes a separate problem altogether, though, when the rule unfairly punishes players defending their teammates by dictum of the Code.

There's a fine line here, and the NHL needs learn how to walk it.

1 recs  |  Comment 10 comments  |  Add comment |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Let’s make the players wear tutus and ballet slippers instead of skates and jerseys because all these new rules are turning hockey into a sissy game. Next thing you’ll have is no more verbal antagonizing. Yes, send them all to their rooms without supper. This no fighting push is a joke. I’m sorry one person died, but taking the fighting out of hockey because of that is like grounding all planes because one crash landed in the Hudson last year. Again, it’s a tragedy but it’s an isolated incident.

by Kanayd on Oct 3, 2009 9:17 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The bigger problem is that the league has once again decided to over-regulate the game. If you aren’t going to write the rules so that they do what you want them to do, don’t write them. Stop making new rules when properly enforcing the ones you have would work JUST FINE.

Think about it. We had to have a lock out before they started to call interference and obstruction.

by Mike B on D on Oct 3, 2009 10:45 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The other problem becomes the interpretation of a “clean hit.” That can be a very tough call for a ref to make. Carcillo’s hit last night certainly was dangerous and dirty. As I said in the thread last night, I thought Gleason was absolutely right to fight Carcillo and stand up for Ray Whitney. But think back to the Playoffs last year when Kunitz hit Timonen near the net as Timonen was trying to clear the puck. I remember we had a debate here at BSH to whether it was an elbow to the head or whether or not Kunitz left his feet. Immediatly, Hartnell went after Kunitz and fought him near the benches. The refs didn’t call a penalty on Kunitz but the Flyers certainty thought Kunitz was taking a dangerous run at Timonen, our best defensmean, so Hartnell did, IMO, the right thing by sending the message to Kunitz and the rest of the Penguins that “if you try to go after our best defensive with intent to injure him, you will have to face the consequences.” Theoretically, under the the newer enforcement of the instigator rule, Hartnell would have received a 10-min game misconduct and we would have been pissed.

I think they are right to try to eliminate fights after clean hits but it is a really hard judgment call for refs to make and if they get it wrong it can have a huge impact on the game. I am kinda 50/50 on the rule. I like the idea of eliminating fights after clean hits but there can be dirty hits that refs will either miss it or, incorrectly, think it is clean.

The NHL has good intentions but, as always, they seem to get it wrong which ends of taking away from the hockey being played.

by flyrsfrk05 on Oct 3, 2009 10:57 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The rule could actually make the game ‘dirtier’. This is because, if a guy knows that he isnt going to have to stand up for himself after a questionable call, hes much more likely to make a questionable hit. Also, if you cant stand up for a guy by fighting, then your probably going to stand up for him by making a dirty hit on the other team.

by philiafan14364 on Oct 3, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I could also make it easier to draw penalties. Many people thought we had problems with people like Crosby taking dives a few years ago. Now that the refs are paranoid and have to make more judgments on dirty hits, that could get worse, and people could “take a dive” simply by overreacting to a hit to make it look dirtier than it is, creating a weird cycle. I know it sounds a little crazy, but I don’t put it past some players to try to exploit it with the refs under so much pressure.

by DragonGirl0583 on Oct 3, 2009 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly. So skilled players are targeted for dirty hits because there is no fear of retribution. Good intentions aside, this is stupid idea.

Dragongirl- that’s another layer to the whole thing. They don’t call diving enough now (Yeah Crosby you whining little snot, We’re looking at you.) This will only get worse. The refs are already making calls without seeing a infraction (stick parallel to the ice is an automatic hooking, even if they player grabs your stick and puts it there). there is no way this will help things.

Just enforce what you have the right way, and this goes away.

by Mike B on D on Oct 3, 2009 12:04 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

i imagine i’m in the minority here, but i appreciate the new rule. i’m tired of players delivering clean hits and scrums or fight erupting over them. i’ve read a lot of criticism of the league attempting to take some of the physicality out of the game with rules changes (this being one of them), i read little criticism of players and teams who can’t accept a good, clean hit without retribution.

carcillo’s hit was not clean (was penalized) and I would not have given gleason an instigator penalty. were the hit clean (not penalized), I would have.

if we want to continue to see fighting in hockey and endless this ridiculous debate then the players need to policy themselves. they need to do so by stopping scuffles after clean hits and staged fights.

i love a good fight that develops during an aggressive game. i love watching a guy like richards get into it after a physical battle along the boards. if a player boards another player or delivers an elbow to the head on a hit, you’d better stick up for your man that’s down. if andrew alberts crushes jeff carter along the boards, you should do exactly what the flyers did, play hockey and take the body, but keep your gloves on.

where there is obscurity in the rule, like Kunitz’s hit on Timmonen starting the Hartnell fight, it is certainly within the bounds for Hartnell to charge after him. however, its an unpenalized hit, the refs make the calls. Hartnell still had the right to fight and if you feel its such a severe situation that it calls for it, go for it. You are well aware of the potential to be penalized.

by beatniche on Oct 3, 2009 4:41 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Beat, I think you misunderstand. We all seem to agree that fighting after a clean hit is detrimental to the game. But we just do not like they way they’re going about trying to stop it.

by Mike B on D on Oct 3, 2009 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

that i grasped, i think. My overly wordy point was that i do think they are going about it the correct way, however, it was used improperly against gleason.

by beatniche on Oct 4, 2009 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

it is tragic when a person dies, to have their life cut short. Unfortunately accidents happen sometimes, that takes a human life.
The modern day answer, when someone dies via an accident, is to make laws and dramatic changes to make sure no one dies in the same manner again.
In this case a fight broke out at a hockey game and one of the players suffered a fatal injury (by accident).
So the immediate answer is to stop fighting in hockey.

If they take fighting out, then dirty hits will increase. So, what happens, when one day someone delivers a dirty hit and the recipiant suffers a fatal injury as a result? The more you make way for dirty hits, the more and more it becomes a risk that a dirty hit will kill someone. Fighting is there to keep the dangerous hitting in check.

Besides how do public officials have the room to talk, when they are out there supporting more severe fighting (and killing of people) on a more global and massive scale? The things they do in this world kill people and a more alarming rate, then a couple of fist fights.

by FlyersGoalies1and27 on Oct 4, 2009 12:22 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs


User Tools

All the Philadelphia Flyers news and commentary that's fit to print.
Start posting about the Flyers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Assholeheart_small
Calling Time Out.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Changing the points system
Flyerhomer_small
Tired & Confused
Watchmenfacebutton_small
Fantasy Hockey Shout Out
Flyers_small
Bitter Bitter Bitter.
Yaiso_small
Problem solving, angry blogger style.
Flyerhomer_small
Lines
Small
I was right and wrong.
Joe-carter-1993-world-series_small
Dan Carcillo on TSN's 'Off the Record'
Photo_3_small
Playing GM part III: Deadline Acquistion

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Atlantic Standings

GP W L OTL PT
New Jersey 57 36 19 2 74
Pittsburgh 59 35 22 2 72
Philadelphia 56 28 25 3 59
New York Rangers 59 26 26 7 59
New York Islanders 58 23 27 8 54

(updated 2.8.2010 at 8:30 AM EST)

28 - 25 - 1 - 3

Lost 1


Managing Editor

Travis_headshot_2_small Travis Hughes

Staff Writers

Think_sc_cropped_small Geoff Detweiler

Me_minus_kbond_small Ben Rothenberg

Adirondack Correspondent

Small Dan Morency