|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 11, 2002 18:28:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 11, 2002 18:50:08 GMT -5
Well I think that its a move to protect their crappy refs. A 5 minute major should have been called just on intent alone, but Kerry "hows my hair, that's it 2 minute bench minor for not answering fast enough" Frasher. Once again another blown call by Frasher. Maybe Vanhelmen can call MT again with more apoliges. 1,000 fine must really hurt when you have all those millions.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 11, 2002 18:51:26 GMT -5
The hairpiece and fatso McGoo are absolutely terrible...
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 11, 2002 19:08:10 GMT -5
I didn't think it warranted a suspension. It was a poke, and he shouldn't be doing that stuff, but it wasn't really vicious by any means. That stuff should go on the file, which is I think the effect of the fine, and the next time similar videotape comes across the league desk, the response should be "You were warned. 2 games. Let it be the last time."
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 11, 2002 19:12:21 GMT -5
If i was paranoid I would say there is a real problem with the way suspensions are handed out when it comes to incidents against Montreal players.
Lat season Kloucek knees Bulis & gets 5 minutes & a game for deliberate attempt to injure. Campbell gives hime a fine & no suspension.
The Mclaren hit - enough said. And now this. As far as I'm concerned spearing falls into the category of deliberate attempt to injure & merits a suspension. These millionaires won't get the message until they miss significant playing time.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 11, 2002 19:43:56 GMT -5
Friggin Leaf fans
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 11, 2002 20:31:31 GMT -5
The NHL rarely takes serious action when an incident did not end up with a serious injury. Take the same slash by Thornton with Markov getting an abdominal injury and Thornton would have received a "serious suspension" of a game or 2.
Thronton's stick work is a problem that the NHL knows about and eventually he will cause a very serious injury.
I know it's stupid but it's the way it is.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 11, 2002 21:47:44 GMT -5
You're right Doc.
Plus there are two sets of rules, one for the stars and one for everybody else. We gotta get some stars to cash in, fast. ;D
|
|
|
Post by KR on Dec 11, 2002 22:47:21 GMT -5
I can live with the fact there was no call at the time. It is entirely possible neither ref saw it as it was behind the play. That Campbell could look at the same replays we all saw at determine it was not worthy of a suspension is a complete joke. By fining Thornton he has admitted to the world that there was indeed a foul commited. It's the usual crap.....if the player isn't hurt the penalty is less. I guess if Markov had ruptured his spleen a la Forsberg it would have been considered "serious". NHL officiating and discipline is a joke. I'm sorry to those that may agree with Campbell, but anyone that believes that spear wasn't worthy of a suspension (especially given Thornton's history with stick infractions)doesn't know jack about hockey.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Ranchod on Dec 11, 2002 23:53:45 GMT -5
Forget suspension, was that even a penalty? Gimme a break suspension... he tapped the guy. Shouldn't be doing it, yeah, but by no means a suspension. How many hooks and slashes do we see in a game that are 100 times worse than that? Overreacting with the suspension stuff, no reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by KR on Dec 12, 2002 0:28:47 GMT -5
Like I said...don't know jack about hockey. Aren't you on the wrong site?
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 0:44:57 GMT -5
Forget suspension, was that even a penalty? Gimme a break suspension... he tapped the guy. Shouldn't be doing it, yeah, but by no means a suspension. How many hooks and slashes do we see in a game that are 100 times worse than that? Overreacting with the suspension stuff, no reason for it. Yea it was a penalty, I believe it's a 5 minute major based on intent. Just like swinging your stick at someone even if you don't make contact. I think it should have got a 5 minute major, but not a suspension. Then again the league is supposed to be cracking down on this kind of stuff that hockey doesnt need.
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Dec 12, 2002 0:47:17 GMT -5
Lets just think about this for a minute. Thornton makes what about 1.825 mil plus whatever they gave him the other day so lets say about 2.5 mil. He gets fined $1000. OK now i'm gonna compare that to what I make and the same % fine was given to me it would be like getting a little more than a $15 parking ticket. I Don't know about the rest of you but when I get a parking ticket(rarely) it goes in the glove box and gets paid when I renew my plates and it doesn't deter me from parking in the same spot it just makes me more aware of getting caught. This "Dicipline" is a complete JOKE On top of this if Q-ball(who I will also admit is playing much better of late keeps on fighting every game he will get a mandatory game suspension for too many major's
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Dec 12, 2002 2:24:15 GMT -5
No doubt it should have been a major. It's hard to believe four zebras missed it. It's not as though it was behind the plat. Markov had just got rid of the puck. Fact is Campbell agrees that it should have been a major. From a Habs point of view i would have liked a 2 gamer so he couldn't play Sat but otherwise it makes no difference as we need the Bs to be beating our competition. No doubt this is on thorton's record and should impact on future incidents but with the rule for the stars it won't matter anyway. Can you imagine if this was done by Domi or Worrell?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Ranchod on Dec 12, 2002 4:56:37 GMT -5
KR, you want a league where everyone plays in tutu's and instead of checking each other they exchange flowers, be my guest... these are big boys and from what I saw that play by no means warranted a suspension. Probably a penalty for slashing, definitely not something that should be condoned, but to take a guy out of the line-up for any number of games for a play like? That's ridiculous. You see slashes worse than that every game (and dives Despatie could only wish he could pull off) and they are never called into question like this.
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Dec 12, 2002 7:26:32 GMT -5
KR, you want a league where everyone plays in tutu's and instead of checking each other they exchange flowers, be my guest... these are big boys and from what I saw that play by no means warranted a suspension. Probably a penalty for slashing, definitely not something that should be condoned, but to take a guy out of the line-up for any number of games for a play like? That's ridiculous. You see slashes worse than that every game (and dives Despatie could only wish he could pull off) and they are never called into question like this. So, following your logic, a simple mugging in, let's say, downtown Detroit, is less of a crime than in, oh say, the retirement community of Bullhead City, Arizona. Interesting. It was a clear and deliberate attempt to injure and in my books would warrant a minimum 5-game suspension. CO
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 12, 2002 8:39:52 GMT -5
Well, for those who think it was a little poke, and that Markov exaggerrated it, try this little experiment;
Place one end of a hockey stick up against a wall, with the other end at an angle, pointing towards your stomach. Now, walk into it.
You'll see that it doesn't take a whole lot of effort, or "force" to cause a whole lot of pain. Its also a "deeper", scarier pain. Personally, I'd take a slash over a spear, no matter how mild, any day of the week.
As for the non-suspension, are we really surprised? This is the NHL after all...
|
|
|
Post by Maritimer on Dec 12, 2002 9:30:35 GMT -5
BC you are correct...this is the NHL and all...Sets great examples for kids.
I coach High School hockey and deal with 15-18 year olds on a nightly basis. I wonder about the following things...
-the amount of stupid attempt to injures in an average games...little spears and butt ends...the odd high cross check -the need to argue with the referee on every call -the need to fight with linesman after breaking up a fight
Gee I wonder where they see such great examples?
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 12, 2002 9:32:39 GMT -5
"Uber'goon, uber'goon". a voice yelps in the background.
Or at least someone willing to hurt and hurt at will.....................
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 12, 2002 9:35:06 GMT -5
BC you are correct...this is the NHL and all...Sets great examples for kids. I coach High School hockey and deal with 15-18 year olds on a nightly basis. I wonder about the following things... -the amount of stupid attempt to injures in an average games...little spears and butt ends...the odd high cross check -the need to argue with the referee on every call -the need to fight with linesman after breaking up a fight Gee I wonder where they see such great examples? Like those millionaires care abour kids? Or care if they are examples? Puh'lise..... They will only respond if there is someone who will hurt them. Rules of the NHL jungle.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 12, 2002 10:23:29 GMT -5
KR, you want a league where everyone plays in tutu's and instead of checking each other they exchange flowers, be my guest... these are big boys and from what I saw that play by no means warranted a suspension. Probably a penalty for slashing, definitely not something that should be condoned, but to take a guy out of the line-up for any number of games for a play like? That's ridiculous. You see slashes worse than that every game (and dives Despatie could only wish he could pull off) and they are never called into question like this. Typical Don Cherry reasoning. If you condon spearing you'll end up with a bunch of wuss on the ice... After all, hockey should be all about spearing, slashing, boarding, fighting, charging and elbowing, condoning these things takes the menhood out of the game... How brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by Maritimer on Dec 12, 2002 10:25:26 GMT -5
Oh don't get me wrong I don't for second believe that Joe Thornton is concerned about the example he sets for little Bobby....but maybe the league should.
They seem to be soooo worried about having fights being the only hockey sports clips in Omaha Nebraska why shouldn't they be worried about the spearing, yapping at refs, and general abuse of the linesman that gets seen everyday by their "future fans"
Is it because of the fan backlash on the next stop of the Boston Bruins Magical Tour that didn't get to see Joe Tho because he was suspended for trying to penetrate somebody's abdominal wall with a sharpened piece of wood?
|
|
|
Post by Ged on Dec 12, 2002 16:59:21 GMT -5
No question about the fact that it was a deliberate spear. Not sure what slashing or butt-ending have to do with this conversation.
Thornton already has his own file at the NHL office. He's been in trouble for stick work before, and because of that, I'd say a single game suspension was not out of order. But, you have to remember there is a double standard when it comes to dealing with stars. And, Mr. Thornton is second in the scoring race, behind some guy named Lemieux.
Campbell has been pretty laxadaisacal in his position IMO. He's not willing to make an example of players, certainly not stars, and so cheap shots like this one go by the way-side. Remember, he slapped McLaren with a pink glove for one of the most vicious hockey plays I've seen in my 30 odd years of being involved in the game.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Ranchod on Dec 12, 2002 22:50:09 GMT -5
clear observer...... you misread my analogy. My point was that if they start suspending guys for plays like that you'd get a parade of suspensions for insignificant plays that go on every game.
And I never said I condoned the play... I thought I even said the exact opposite? Thornton deserved a penalty, no doubt, but that's it.
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Dec 13, 2002 3:13:23 GMT -5
While Rags you must be looking at a different replay as you fail to recognize a blatant spear. You keep talking about a slash. While the initial contact may have constitued a slash the follow up was a dangerous spear which fortunately we don't see every game as you suggest. Obviously Campbell doesn't see it every game either or he wouldn't have acted. It was a deliberate spear which can only be seen as an intent to injure and, in the NHL I like to watch, that should mean a suspension.
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Dec 13, 2002 3:49:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by KR on Dec 13, 2002 10:05:54 GMT -5
First off I should apologize for the "don't know Jack" comment. Having said that, did you see a different hi-lite package than everyone else. You call that a slash? A slash is a chopping motion. A spear is a poking motion using theblade as the contact point. I can't possibly understand how anyone could watch that replay and not call that a spear. No I don't want a league where the players wear tutu's. I want a league where players can do what they are paid to do...play hockey...without having a attempted surgery performed on them without prior consent. What Thornton did was pre-meditated, dangerous and cowardly. A real class act I feel badly that there are fans who watch hockey to see the injuries.
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Dec 14, 2002 18:17:40 GMT -5
clear observer...... you misread my analogy. My point was that if they start suspending guys for plays like that you'd get a parade of suspensions for insignificant plays that go on every game. And I never said I condoned the play... I thought I even said the exact opposite? Thornton deserved a penalty, no doubt, but that's it. My response wasn't to your analogy...it was to your logic where you state, "You see slashes worse than that every game (and dives Despatie could only wish he could pull off) and they are never called into question like this." That statement is flawed, IMHO, two-fold. First, your use of the word "slashes" I believe to be grossly inadequate to describe what I saw. I saw a deliberate spear to a man in the guts with the intent to inflict a hell of alot of damage. Can anyone say, "rack 'em up"!? Second, slash, hack, spear...whichever...seeing them (and worse as you state) in every game that are never called doesn't make it right...inconsistant and confusing?...yeppers...but not right. ...and would equally apply to your most recent, "if they start suspending guys for plays like that you'd get a parade of suspensions for insignificant plays that go on every game." To that I'd respond...GOOD. Throw 'em in the brink. Eventually, if punished severely enough, they'd be a thing of the past. IMHO it's the dinosaurs that are killing this game and it's image. Thx for replying CO
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Ranchod on Dec 14, 2002 21:58:31 GMT -5
I never said it was a slash.... I said a few things that might confuse you into thinking that if you didn't read it properly.
1 - Many hooks and slashes worse than that.... which is not calling it a slash 2 - He should have got a penalty for slashing.... because as far as I know, there is no penalty for spearing, that's the closest thing to it they could call. 3 - You see slashes worse than that.... again, not calling it a slash, just stating that there are worse slashes which (unfortunately) occur much more often than that play that get no attention.
clear.... Now I understand your position, but we are coming from 2 different places in approaching the discipline required here. I'm talking more about what should/should not be a suspension in the NHL today, as things are called today... you're talking about what should be called in an NHL that employs a totally different set of standards for judging disciplinary action. For better or worse, that's a whole other issue... I'd like to see more of a crackdown on stickwork as well, and if the NHL were commited to calling it fairly and consistently then perhaps that play would be a suspension, but knowing that in the real world NHL of today they wouldn't, and I don't feel that play was worthy of being singled out anymore than a number of plays upon which there was no further action taken.
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Dec 14, 2002 22:12:06 GMT -5
Spearing is a 5 min major in the books. Sorry about losing to the laff's that sucks for you and us.
|
|