NHL Playoffs 2011: NHL Gets It Right, Does Not Suspend Raffi Torres

The NHL got it right by not suspending Raffi Torres. 

I'm sure you've all seen the video of Raffi Torres demolishing Brent Seabrook behind the net in Game 3 of the Canucks/Blackhawks series. Seabrook had his head down as he played the puck, and Torres led with his shoulder, hitting Seabrook in the head. 

Torres got a minor for interference on the play, and I've already why this was a bogus call. The Hawks scored on the ensuing power play, tying the game at 2-2.

After the game, the Hawks were livid and actively lobbied for suspension.

"If he wasn't a big Western Canadian kid, somebody else would've been on a stretcher," said Hawks coach Quenneville. "Is it a suspension? I don't have to worry about it. It's not my call. Guy didn't even get through his first game back off one."

Captain Jonathan Toews also chipped in his two cents, "I only saw it from the bench, but his reputation as of late speaks for itself. He's not just going in there to make a play. He's trying to hurt one of our players. To us, that's pretty obvious."

Maybe Quenneville shouldn't have been channelling his inner Don Cherry with that "good Canadian kid" comment, which has been played endlessly in the soundbites.

NHL disciplinarian Colin Campbell apparently heard it, and it might have brought to mind another Don Cherry cliche: "Keep your head up."

The NHL ruled as I had hoped, but not expected in all honesty, and decided that the Torres hit was not worthy of a suspension. 

The following factors played into the decision:

1. The puck was there and Seabrook was in the act of playing it. Therefore, it isn't interference as it was ruled initially on ice.
2. Torres led with his shoulder. He didn't raise his arm, he didn't leave his feet.
3. Seabrook put himself in the defenceless position by not keeping his head up in a high-traffic area.
4. The area behind the net is considered a high-traffic area, and is considered different from an open ice hit. Specifically, the NHL believes that players with the puck behind the net should expect to be hit and act accordingly.
5. The hit was essentially head to head, as both men were travelling directly towards each other.

Essentially, Campbell ruled that Torres and the Canucks were penalized enough by the bogus interference penalty that led to a goal. Seabrook, by all reasonable expectations, should have been expecting a hit in that position, and shouldn't have been skating forward while looking away.

Especially in a physical series where the two teams had combined for almost 200 hits (!) at that point halfway through Game 3.

With this call being the correct one, and the NHL making reasonable suspensions on Jarret Stoll (one game for boarding) and Bobby Ryan (two games for intent to injure), I actually have some hope that Campbell might not make a mockery of the NHL justice system this spring.

Of course, Hawks fans might disagree.

In a radio interview after the non-suspension was ruled, Seabrook admitted that it wasn't interference, as he had the puck. However, he thought Torres should have been suspended for the hit to the head. He also tried to quell the calls for retribution in Game 4, saying that the Hawks need to focus on scoring, not on trying to even scores.

Hopefully, his teammates (John Scott, I'm looking in your direction) get the message and we don't have to talk about another suspension hearing after Game 4.

*When I say the NHL got it right for this ruling, I mean by the rules as they currently stand. I think they need to change the rules to protect the players more from headshots, but that is in an ideal world. Torres and Seabrook were on the ice under the current rules.