Devise 4,475 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 It's not really ridiculous at all. Dwight King fights Crombeen after he hurt Pietrangelo on a clean hit. Dwight King NEVER fights. Clean hit by Edler on Hall, being challenged to fight. I'm sure you think that was clean Tyler, so Chara goes to fight Emelin after a hit on one of their stars. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYnbkW6bDUg Got match penalty, but reversed because it was obviously not head contact. People still trying to fight Belov for his hit on their captain and star. There's so many fucking examples of this happening, it happens nearly every. single. time. Unless it's a star on star hit. Hit on star and fight. Pull your head out of your ass you Habs homer, this happens in every single time a star player is hit. Orpik should know what's coming, you're going to get followed around the ice all night until you fight. Should he have to worry about that dumbass thing Thornton did? Hell no, but he should know that guys will be gunning for him all night until he answers the bell. That's the way it is, that's the way it always will be. Does he have to drop the gloves and fight? Obviously not, but if he does it clears the air and nothing escalates like it does in that game. Neal's knee to Marchand's head likely doesn't happen and nether does Orpik getting cheap shotted (understatement) by Thornton. Again though, that doesn't mean Orpik ever HAS to fight. I'm fine with them delivering clean hard hits on him, and egging him on to fight in scrums. Even if he doesn't fight that is them at least manning up. It is when you cross the line like Thornton that safety actually comes into play. Again, not that hard for someone to get knocked out and then crack their head open on the ice. You've seen it tons of times too, where teams that regardless of hits on their star players play roles that agitate teams to get them off their game. The Bruins are a classic case of this. They did that to the Canucks during the playoffs and hell they even got away with a lot in terms of penalties. That combined with the play of Thomas won them a Cup. Yet if you refuse to engage like Orpik does for an entire team, you then in term frustrate them. Then they can't goon to get your players off the ice and they have to out work and out play you in the game. Fighting in that sense is fine. It's a cat and mouse game of mixing and combined strategies as well as emotions. But regardless of it all, it has to be about the spirit of the game. Not about "sending" a message that leaves players in the hospital or worse. Because at the end of the night, when the whistle blows the game ends and these men are human beings most of them with wives and children to go home to. Full contact sport with intensity and injures due to that intensity is fine. But that line needs to be drawn and not just by some phantom "code" that isn't on paper. The league needs to draw it. If it were up to me...if I ran the NHL, I'd take it out of my own hands. You cross the line like Thornton did? Fine, deal with the police. You attempted to get a player in the context of a hockey game to fight you and he refused. Happens at a bar all the time, dudes get in each others faces and if one backs down...he backs down. But if you sucker punch him after he backs down and attack him? That is assault. So if I was the NHL in any more cases like this I"d let it be criminal charges. Suspend them until they are done dealing with the legal problems, so not only do they lose pay but they will also end up paying for it and damaging their real world reputation. Will make every single player think twice about attacking other players, which is exactly what Thornton did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grumpy Bear 347 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 (edited) ^^^agree with what Kyle said Edited December 9, 2013 by Bushito Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grumpy Bear 347 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Again though, that doesn't mean Orpik ever HAS to fight. I'm fine with them delivering clean hard hits on him, and egging him on to fight in scrums. Even if he doesn't fight that is them at least manning up. It is when you cross the line like Thornton that safety actually comes into play. Again, not that hard for someone to get knocked out and then crack their head open on the ice. You've seen it tons of times too, where teams that regardless of hits on their star players play roles that agitate teams to get them off their game. The Bruins are a classic case of this. They did that to the Canucks during the playoffs and hell they even got away with a lot in terms of penalties. That combined with the play of Thomas won them a Cup. Yet if you refuse to engage like Orpik does for an entire team, you then in term frustrate them. Then they can't goon to get your players off the ice and they have to out work and out play you in the game. Fighting in that sense is fine. It's a cat and mouse game of mixing and combined strategies as well as emotions. But regardless of it all, it has to be about the spirit of the game. Not about "sending" a message that leaves players in the hospital or worse. Because at the end of the night, when the whistle blows the game ends and these men are human beings most of them with wives and children to go home to. Full contact sport with intensity and injures due to that intensity is fine. But that line needs to be drawn and not just by some phantom "code" that isn't on paper. The league needs to draw it. If it were up to me...if I ran the NHL, I'd take it out of my own hands. You cross the line like Thornton did? Fine, deal with the police. You attempted to get a player in the context of a hockey game to fight you and he refused. Happens at a bar all the time, dudes get in each others faces and if one backs down...he backs down. But if you sucker punch him after he backs down and attack him? That is assault. So if I was the NHL in any more cases like this I"d let it be criminal charges. Suspend them until they are done dealing with the legal problems, so not only do they lose pay but they will also end up paying for it and damaging their real world reputation. Will make every single player think twice about attacking other players, which is exactly what Thornton did. And exactly what Neal did, I like how everyone leaves that part out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devise 4,475 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 And exactly what Neal did, I like how everyone leaves that part out. I'm a Caps fan so I hardly mean to leave out what Neal did. He is just as fault for an intentional knee to the head and I completely agree that it is being given less attention than the Thornton incident. The big issue I have with the Neal knee and there have been several other situations like this when Steckel collided with Crosby at the Winter Classic years ago...players being able to throw in this dirty plays but doing so under the convenience of the situation to help plead their innocence. Neal didn't just forget to move his knee out of the way, he had tons of time...he targeted the head. At the end of the day concussions and violence just continue to raise to an all time high right now in the league. We had an injury on a clean hit although arguably interference and likely two suspensions from one game. Then last night Phanuef boards Dougie Hamilton and could get suspended. Couldn't even go a whole day without more incidents tbh. I just think the league needs to take a much better stance on some of this stuff. I don't even mean just suspensions and more fierce. Clarity needs to be drawn on when and how fighting is accepted in the game, and what type of fighting, such as sticking up for your teammates and where that line is. Punishment should be more severe in terms of suspensions not just because someone is a repeat offender but due to the danger of the situation. If someone delivers a late interference hit when the other player had his head down the danger, while still apparent is much less than something like what Neal did. Repeat offender or not Neal should get 10+ games for what he did. That situation if repeated could result in severe injury a good 60-75 percent of the time. Needs to be treated as unacceptable. Coaches should be grilling and getting mad at their players for this kind of stuff to. Fines on teams regarding cap space and what they are allowed to do should be put in place if stuff like this happens on repeated teams. Let the punishment go across the board so teams grill their players about this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike 708 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 As a Penguins fan I say anything against a Penguins player is wrong and anything they do is right (I didn't read any posts in this thread but I'm sure I'm wrong). Orpik to IR today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBR 158 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Neal got fucking 5 games !?!? Thornton better get a season-long suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devise 4,475 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Neal got fucking 5 games !?!? Thornton better get a season-long suspension. I mean Thornton will get a long one...but watch the Neal knee. It was intentional. He had tons of time to react and looks down at Marchand before making contact. He didn't thrash his knee into him with all his might...but he knew exactly what he was doing. Even if it was just a light knee to the head on a player he disliked, that is still an intentional cheap shot in a very dangerous position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamond_ace 3,110 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Yes, the Neal knee was intentional (even as a Pens fan I agree with that) but anyone who thinks it's equal to Thornton is blind or a Bruins fan (or a Caps fan, in the case of Meg who I've seen comments on FB about the two incidents). Neal's 5 games are a bit much, I'd maybe have gone 3, but I can see 5. Thornton needs one that's much longer than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grumpy Bear 347 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 A blind side to the head of an unprotected and vulnerable player is what both of these instances are and they deserve the same penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grumpy Bear 347 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 I'd much rather be punched in the head than take a knee there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Yeah but being tossed to the ice with a clothesline and then punched against the ice is worse than having your head get knocked by a knee. At least with the knee there is no head hitting the hard ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Tortorella 2,653 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Yes, the Neal knee was intentional (even as a Pens fan I agree with that) but anyone who thinks it's equal to Thornton is blind or a Bruins fan (or a Caps fan, in the case of Meg who I've seen comments on FB about the two incidents). Neal's 5 games are a bit much, I'd maybe have gone 3, but I can see 5. Thornton needs one that's much longer than that. Neal has a history though. 5 games is good enough IMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAFjvfA8zqk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devise 4,475 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Not to mention Neals happened during the actual play. While I still feel like he was intending to hit Marchand, Neal could of made that knee a lot worse. He was sending a message more than he was trying to injure. Thorntons was after the whistle, he came all the from down the ice when one thing in his mind. To me they are completely different cases, both are awful but Thorntons if far worse. Neals is a player trying to get away with a cheap shot during the game. Thornton pretty much borderlines on assault tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grumpy Bear 347 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Yeah but being tossed to the ice with a clothesline and then punched against the ice is worse than having your head get knocked by a knee. At least with the knee there is no head hitting the hard ice. It's arguing semantics at this point, both went out with intent to injure. I honestly feel like Rhortons was more a crime of passion where I feel Neal just purposely went out to injure on purpose and knew he was. That's just my opinion though which means diddly. I feel they both deserve to lose their season and phaneuf does as well. If the league wants the players not to have the ability to police themselves send a stronger message, 5 games isn't shit for what Neal did. If I hit my wife and she calls the cops and when they arrest me I say "well I could have hit her harder" they should give me a lighter sentence? Give every player who goes out with intent to injure a season off and it ends or let the players do the job and bring back the goons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 It's arguing semantics at this point, both went out with intent to injure. I honestly feel like Rhortons was more a crime of passion where I feel Neal just purposely went out to injure on purpose and knew he was. That's just my opinion though which means diddly. I feel they both deserve to lose their season and phaneuf does as well. If the league wants the players not to have the ability to police themselves send a stronger message, 5 games isn't shit for what Neal did. If I hit my wife and she calls the cops and when they arrest me I say "well I could have hit her harder" they should give me a lighter sentence? Give every player who goes out with intent to injure a season off and it ends or let the players do the job and bring back the goons. I agree, things need to be tougher on these guys to send a message. I'm just saying no one can say Neal deserves more than Thornton in this case. Also the way the rules are, Devise is right that in-play dirty-ness is less than after-play dirty-ness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer 21 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 I am in the minority that thought Neals actions are equal to Thornton. In any event I would love to see the suspensions doubled as well as fines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 I am in the minority that thought Neals actions are equal to Thornton. In any event I would love to see the suspensions doubled as well as fines. One was in play one wasn't though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer 21 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 One was in play one wasn't though. True but they are equally malicious and reckless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer 21 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 A good read, my opinion from Matt Barnaby http://mattbarnabyhockey.tumblr.com/post/69429950769/december-7th-a-night-to-forget Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Tortorella 2,653 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 No, no one deserves a hit to the head. Ever. Period. " Many feel that you don’t have to answer for clean hits but those are mostly from people that never have laced em up or have never played at the level that these guys play." What a great argument. Riddle me this: what makes hockey different than any other contact sport where clean hits that result in fights don't result in automatic rejections? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devise 4,475 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Thinking more on this I've started considering that a big issue here is this phantom rule set which governs violence in the NHL. It feels...childish almost. Like the players are a group of children under supervision of their parents (refs and player safety) and those only intervene in extreme situations when this "code" is deemed broken. This code that players often reference is made up of phantom morals that are supposedly shared between players. Although not every player. It's stupid, it's childish, it's unprofessional. All of it. Fighting should be in the game but the league needs to stop pretending it doesn't exist. There is nothing in the rule book that says fighting is allowed, penalties are dolled out for it but the league rarely suspends people for fighting. It doesn't even really acknowledge it, save for the refs. As a collective the league has this neutral stance on it's violence as if it can't choose a side one way or the other. It isn't about picking a side anymore. You can remain down the middle and allow fighting in the game but clearly defining the rules and circumstances around the violence will put the league in a better situation in regards to punishing players who cross a line. Mostly because that line can actually get defined for fans and players alike. I feel like the league doesn't want to do any of this because then they'd have to acknowledge that fighting is "allowed" in the NHL in a way. I mean the NHL is far more childish about how it operates with violence than pretty much any other big sport. NFL, NBA, MLB, even Soccer don't have the level of scrums, fist fights, insults, bickering, and this phantom code. You can see it on the HBO series a few seasons ago when they aired. Things like the refs not having issues when a player punches someone in the face if the player sticks the goalie first. But none of this stuff is written down or available. Far too much in this league is left to the discretion of the players/refs and it ends up coming up quite unprofessional and childish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle 667 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 @DarrenDreger40s Bettman says lots of expressions of interest in expansion. NHL is willing to listen. However, decision to expand hasn't been made. Great stuff! Would love to see a team in the PacNW and Quebec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 @DarrenDreger40s Bettman says lots of expressions of interest in expansion. NHL is willing to listen. However, decision to expand hasn't been made. Great stuff! Would love to see a team in the PacNW and Quebec. Agreed. Top 5 in my opinion have to be: Seattle, Portland, Quebec City, Kansas City and New Orleans (NO for the lulz) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle 667 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Agreed. Top 5 in my opinion have to be: Seattle, Portland, Quebec City, Kansas City and New Orleans (NO for the lulz) I'd go: PACNW Team: Portland/Seattle Quebec Toronto #2 KC Houston (Huge and growing city, would draw people simply on population) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Tortorella 2,653 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 @DarrenDreger40s Bettman says lots of expressions of interest in expansion. NHL is willing to listen. However, decision to expand hasn't been made. Great stuff! Would love to see a team in the PacNW and Quebec. I'm an expansion and Southern market guy, but there are a couple franchises (Florida and Phoenix) I'd rather see relocated before expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.ed69a7260a477fcf4feead7a0e4b7506.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now