There are some hits that are blatantly illegal and dirty, but then there are some that walk a strange, vague line. Even the angriest Montreal Canadiens fan should be willing to give Zdeno Chara this much: it was an incredibly unfortunate moment that did indeed expose a design flaw in a handful of NHL arenas.
Benefit of the doubt aside, the league’s handling of the situation wasn’t exactly a boon for public relations. It’s a real shame that hockey only tends to make mainstream news when something bad happens rather than when Alex Ovechkin scores an amazing goal, but for the most part, that’s the sad truth.
So it’s in this climate that we’ve seen Max Pacioretty’s head hit that stanchion over and over again, like the latest puck-related version of the Zapruder film. While the PHT staff seemed unanimously in favor of some kind of suspension for Chara, it only seemed right to take the temperature of everyday hockey fans. With that in mind, we asked how the NHL should have handled the situation. Check out the poll results below.
(click to enlarge)
The best way to break down the results is into two categories: pro-suspension and anti-suspension. The biggest winner was a significant suspension (seven games or more) with about 33.5 percent. Overall, about 71.5 percent of readers thought Chara deserved some kind of suspension.
That being said, it’s not like the NHL’s decision was without its supporters. More than a thousand (1,116) of the 4,577 people who voted said that the league made the right call.
So the consensus is that Chara deserved a suspension, with most wanting a pretty hefty one. Still, with that many votes - the most of any poll in PHT’s year of existence - it’s clear that the hit is subject of serious debate.