Steve Ott Attacks Cal Clutterbuck for Clean Hit

There is a new culture developing in the NHL, and it isn't necessarily a good thing. Lately, it seems to be stylish for a player to challenge an opponent to a fight after the opponent throws a clean hit on a teammate of the challenging player.

It's one thing to see a guy pulled into a fight because he threw a borderline or dirty hit. We expect that to happen, and it's part of the game's longstanding code.

However, there are an increasing number of examples where this happens after a clean hit. Another one of those was Tuesday night in Dallas.

The problem of fights after clean hits has been around for a while, but it's starting to get increased attention. In March of last year, NHL.com published an article talking about -- in part -- the growing support for an increase in instigator penalties.

We haven't seen that. Instead, we get plays like the one Tuesday in Dallas. Watch the video.



There is nothing wrong with the Clutterbuck hit. Despite the fact that Richards is leaning and not fully upright, Clutterbuck is able to avoid a headshot. He doesn't take a run at Richards, and he doesn't leave his feet to deliver the hit. It's a clean hit.

Even Steve Ott knows it was a clean hit.

"It was a situation where I'm right there and you just can't hit Brad Richards like that. That can't happen without some kind of response, so I responded."

Earlier this week, TSN's Bob McKenzie posted a piece about this issue. While McKenzie was focused on the injury suffered by Boston defenseman Mark Stuart while he was defending himself for a clean hit against Los Angeles, he might as well have been talking about Ott and Clutterbuck.

I suppose I'm old fashioned but for me the appropriate response to the Stuart hit would have come from a menu that includes the following: a) Kopitar gets up and exacts revenge by scoring a goal against Boston; b) If Kopitar was really incensed by the hit, he drops the gloves himself with Stuart (don't laugh, the point is the game had more honor when players fought their own battles); c) the Kings take Stuart's number and the first time he's in a position to get hit, he gets creamed; d) the Kings begin laying more hits and physical abuse on Boston's best offensive players Marc Savard and Patrice Bergeron, and believe me Wayne Simmonds would be excellent at this; e) all of the above.

Personally, I think that would make for a better game than watching Simmonds fight Stuart and Stuart break his finger and miss weeks of action. But that's just me.

Not sure this is old fashioned. Sounds more "right" than "old-fashioned."

There is a large population of NHL players who would avoid fights at all costs. There could be any number of legitimate reasons, ranging from "I'm nursing an injury" to "My team needs me on the ice, not in the box for five minutes or longer."

Clutterbuck is generally one of those players. Despite having nearly 600 hits over the first two years of his career, Tuesday night's fights with Ott were just the sixth and seventh NHL bouts for him (first two this season). He hits hard, but clean, and he doesn't seem to enjoy getting involved in fights. He prefers to play a good, hard, physical game.

What does Ott gain from pulling Clutterbuck into a fight over a clean hit? Well, he gets cred in his locker room and in the stands. Oh, and he looks like a guy who should have been given a two-minute minor for instigating and a misconduct to go along with his fighting major.

Before you scream to get rid of the instigator rule, remember that a properly-applied instigator rule does have its advantages in hockey.