Skip to content

NHL plans Friday telephone hearing with Lupul for crosscheck

Jan 2, 2014, 3:40 PM EDT

Many believe that the punishment for Joffrey Lupul‘s crosscheck on Patrick Eaves from the 2014 Winter Classic will draw more than the two-minute minor it generated on Wednesday. That’s for the league to decide, and that process will be helped along by a hearing on Friday afternoon.

The NHL didn’t say this officially, but the Canadian Press’ Stephen Whyno reports that it will be a telephone hearing, which means that the ceiling on a possible suspension for the Toronto Maple Leafs forward is smaller.

Lupul, 30, was suspended for two games back in March, so he’ll be considered a repeat offender. While that works against him, nothing is “broken” for Patrick Eaves, so the injury aspect might not be a concern. (The Detroit Red Wings are still checking for a concussion, however.)

Here’s video of the hit:

  1. joey4id - Jan 2, 2014 at 3:45 PM

    If Neal got 5 for his knee on Marchand, then Lupul could be out for at least the same amount.

    • valoisvipers - Jan 2, 2014 at 9:01 PM

      I totally agree with you Joey, there was way more risk for injury on this than there was with Neal’s knee.

      • joey4id - Jan 2, 2014 at 10:53 PM

        Make sure you click the “thumbs up”. Happy New Year!

    • cofran2004 - Jan 3, 2014 at 1:33 PM

      I agreed with your point, and almost thumb upped your post. Then you asked for it. By the rules of the internet, that means I have to thumb you down. Sorry man…

      But I do agree with you!

      • joey4id - Jan 3, 2014 at 1:52 PM

        Hahahaha! I’ll take that has a thumbs up! :-)

  2. ibieiniid - Jan 2, 2014 at 3:57 PM

    sh**ty play but I bet they only give him a fine, depending on what the conversation was like with Shanny a year ago. maybe he already got his break.

  3. mshantz22 - Jan 2, 2014 at 4:11 PM

    Nah, I see him getting 2 games. A cross check to the head of a player with a history of concussion problems should come with a 2-3 game suspension.

    • ibieiniid - Jan 2, 2014 at 4:29 PM

      wait, players are supposed to evaluate past concussion history when deciding whether to lay legal or illegal checks?

    • joey4id - Jan 2, 2014 at 4:50 PM

      I don’t think Shanahan will consider the medical history of the player who was the recipient of an illegal shot to the head when determining the length of the suspension.

  4. muckleflugga - Jan 2, 2014 at 4:15 PM

    the two minute minor was a joke…in any other game lupul would have been tossed…

    yet the same weak-kneed officials caught a phantom hand closing on a mystery puck buried under bodies and snow but managed to miss the severity of lupul’s hack…this while eaves was bent in pain and barely able to leave the ice…

    farce…two minutes in each instance…how do the fouls compare in gravity…?

    still, lupul’s reaction in the instant he caught eaves suggests he was himself surprised, almost reaching-out in apology…no excuses, lupul was angry and used his stick with purpose and intent to injure…

    a thorough pistol whipping and a four game holiday is warranted…more given history of dangerous play and if eaves is further concussed


    any cross-check to any body part anywhere on the ice should be penalized with five minutes…

    the habit, seemingly brought under control when several prominent players were injured pre 2006, has flourished since edmonton’s league promoted charity run to the cup final in the same year…think pronger…

    he put the hack back in hockey

    • joey4id - Jan 2, 2014 at 5:04 PM

      Kaleta rec’d a 10 game suspension for a hit to the head of Jack Johnson. No penalty was assessed on the play, and Johnson was not injured. At least Lopul got a penalty.

    • 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Jan 2, 2014 at 5:49 PM

      That phantom call makes up for the missed high stick, which would have been four minutes. Chalk that up to the Hockey Gods.

      As for Lupul, perhaps the refs were hesitant to toss a guy from the Classic. In any other game I have to believe he gets five and maybe a game for that play.

    • sunderlanding - Jan 2, 2014 at 8:04 PM

      The refs missed the high stick on Phaneuf so it’s possible the cross check didn’t look as bad at full speed. It was snowing pretty bad, besides people do cross check each other all game, so it’s not like they don’t see this kind of stuff. Maybe if you watched more hockey you’d realize that. Also you don’t spell hockey with “hack”. The joke doesn’t work when you can’t spell properly.

    • sunderlanding - Jan 2, 2014 at 8:07 PM

      Intent to injur? I’m glad you don’t ref games. It was a cross check gone wrong. Sure he wanted to make his presence felt, but he didn’t intend to injur him. Have you every even played hockey?

      • gandallk - Jan 2, 2014 at 9:41 PM

        Intent to injur or intent to injure….Have you every even played hockey is very hard to understand.

      • sunderlanding - Jan 3, 2014 at 3:44 PM

        Are you actually trying to say something?

    • elrock7 - Jan 2, 2014 at 9:40 PM

      Sure but it is OK to slice open Phaneufs lip with a High stick (4 minutes) penalty which was not called, and the shoulder to Lupuls head seconds before the cross check.

      Yeah I agree weak-kneed refs!

  5. muckleflugga - Jan 2, 2014 at 9:24 PM


    i’ll try and be kind, while begging forgiveness from any who’ve heard this before

    i don’t watch…

    hockey anymore…i gave up my season tickets…too much dull defensive hockey and not enough entertainment…it’s become a bore where violence trumps skill…highlights suffice…


    i prefer to play hockey…

    i’ve played competitive contact hockey since 1964…before helmets and before armoured protection…i still play competitive league hockey with players young enough to be my children…i play thrice weekly…i play in tournaments…they call me

    i know what a cross check is…it is by definition intent to injure in some measure…control of an opponent is achieved by force reinforced through pain…anybody who actually straps on pads is aware of that reality…

    why else would lupul have driven his stick with force at eaves’ upper arm if he did not intend to deliver hurt…if eaves was forced to leave the game, logic would dictate he’d likely have been injured if struck with equal force by the shaft of a stick on any unpadded area on his body…?

    the term ‘hack’ is an intentional play on the term ‘hackey’…used when we meet teams from quebec where stick work is a norm precipitating an enthusiastic and western-style hammering

    the term ‘injure’ almost always includes an e, itself achieved when spelling properly

    have you ever heard the term ‘dumbass’ haunting your steps…?

    • elrock7 - Jan 2, 2014 at 9:42 PM

      And you still come on these forums even though you don’t watch hockey….hmmm

    • jhaegs - Jan 3, 2014 at 1:13 PM

      They call you? What do they call you- the weird old guy?

      • cofran2004 - Jan 3, 2014 at 1:41 PM

        They call him that weird guy who sleeps on the bench and never leaves. While he’s walking across the ice on his way off the rink, he imagines he has skates on. The world as he sees it is a blur of colors, each representative of the game he believes he’s playing.

        We see a smelly bum who left a coiler on the bench and won’t leave the arena.

        I keed, I keed. Just having some fun at your expense, muckle.

  6. muckleflugga - Jan 2, 2014 at 10:16 PM


    i’ve lost count of the number of sports specialty channels featuring highlights of everything from cricket to golf…the internet is rife with sports coverage…that’s all i need in an information saturated world…time is compressed

    when a hockey game of consequence is coming, i record it on the pvr…then ditch commercials while fast forwarding to scoring plays…the rest is a waste of time with pointless jabber from the talking heads…i’ve heard it all a thousand times and counting

    debate in these pages is another source of information rich with media by way of enhancement…there’s some good information to be had…it often leads to deeper looks into games…inviting contribution often farcical by nature and design

    in winter i play the horses worldwide…filling in the dead time when tracks are up by grazing pht and countless other blogs

    the only play in winter involves hockey and indoor soccer…when the weather warms up…i shut the machines down and play outside

    playing is better than watching…always…

    people who play know as a player would know

    people who watch know as a watcher would know

    • jhaegs - Jan 3, 2014 at 1:08 PM

      I play and watch… I guess that means I know everything! No wonder why none of your posts make sense…

    • jhaegs - Jan 3, 2014 at 2:25 PM

      Also, anyone that calls the time between scoring plays “a waste of time” is an idiot.

      Unless you’re a crazy old geezer like yourself, and you’re on borrowed time as it is…

  7. elvispocomo - Jan 3, 2014 at 12:02 PM

    Yeah, I’ve got to say that’s a suspension since players need to be in control of their sticks at all times. Just as Kassian meant to swing around with his stick in the preseason but not hit Gagner in the head, Lupul meant to crosscheck Eaves’ shoulder but hit him in the head instead. Reckless and dangerous, and likely a bit retaliatory after being hit off the puck just before.

  8. jhaegs - Jan 3, 2014 at 1:11 PM

    Lupul, Phaneuf, Clarkson… I think Toronto needs to work on how to legally check someone.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1764)
  2. P. Kane (1271)
  3. P. Datsyuk (1244)
  4. M. Richards (1092)
  5. M. Giordano (1091)