|
|
Post by franko on Mar 12, 2004 13:13:14 GMT -5
on the rule of precedent. Disagree here, Skilly -- not on precedent but on clearly defined parameters. Precedent right now means that the severity of the injury is taken into account. I think that there should be a standard "punishment": a hit from behind, no matter how severe (or not) receives the same amount of time, a high stick (accidental or not, draws blood or not) receives the same amount of time, etc. A hook or a trip are not attempts to injure. A slash? How can you say it isn't -- just meant to distract? Right. "I didn't mean to break his wrist" -- doesn't matter -- you did and you might have. Suspension for a definite and predetermined length of time. But they won't get it right, and hockey continues to be the WWE on skates, turning back to the 70s and SlapShot. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 12, 2004 20:19:42 GMT -5
Disagree here, Skilly -- not on precedent but on clearly defined parameters. Precedent right now means that the severity of the injury is taken into account. I think that there should be a standard "punishment": a hit from behind, no matter how severe (or not) receives the same amount of time, a high stick (accidental or not, draws blood or not) receives the same amount of time, etc. A hook or a trip are not attempts to injure. A slash? How can you say it isn't -- just meant to distract? Right. "I didn't mean to break his wrist" -- doesn't matter -- you did and you might have. Suspension for a definite and predetermined length of time. But they won't get it right, and hockey continues to be the WWE on skates, turning back to the 70s and SlapShot. This is true and it is what I was trying to say all along. You have a better way with words obviously. I just find it hard to comprehend when they say "Bertuzzi could have killed Steve Moore" and then find a way to rationalize Mats Sundin'savelin toss and Bryan Marchment's roller derby when they could have quite easily killed someone as well. The "attempt" was there .... if you didn't mean to do it then why did you commit the act. I just think that Bertuzzi is getting a raw deal on this in the media and by fans. I firmly believe that he should be suspended for 30-40 games, he was wrong, it was uncalled for .... but others have done uncalled for things and I think that they should treat him fairly. I am totally in favour of pre-defined penalties, suspensions for infractions of it will clean up the sport .... but to hang one guy for this and another guy gets a slap because the same act didn't meet the same consequence I find hard to grasp. It might work in law .... murder, attempted murder etc ..... different penalties for different consequences .... but when you are trying to clean up a sport the consequence should not matter when it is the act we are trying to get rid of not the result. |
|
|
|
Post by Montrealer on Mar 13, 2004 9:57:26 GMT -5
Can someone explain how a stick would kill someone when tossed into a crowd?
I think way too many people watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer* as a documentary.
*-I watched it, it was pretty good actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 13, 2004 13:55:14 GMT -5
Just a Face Rub+....Hmmmm. These gloves are in effect plastic armor on the outside. Without forewarning Moore is hit by a round house right on the temple (which in itself can kill or seriously hurt a person) and is out on his feet as soon as he is hit. Bertuzzi then throws his full weight (he is 55 lbs heavier) on the guy as he is falling, uses his right hand to direct Moore's head into the ice and puts his left forearm across the back of Moores neck as he hits the ice. Let me get this straight. Let's draw a parallel. A 245 lb thug mugs an average sized guy at a gas station and leaves him cut up and severely concussed with a broken neck. Although 'full recovery' is projected it is unclear if the guy will in fact do so to the extent that he can resume an active job and life in general (eg continuing effects of the concussion). Fortunately this is all captured on a security camera and the perpetrator is caught. But he's sorry for what happened (ie he's sorry the guy got hurt but he doesn't own up to the fact that he was wrong in doing what he did [ in other words if the guy hadn't been hurt it would have been OK], which is basically what Bertuzzi said in his 'apology') and, after all, it was only a 'minor incident' so he should be more or less let off with a slap on the wrist. Somehow I don't think that this would happen. So to characterize what Bertuzzi did as an " 'attack'...just a face rub+" and an "unfortunate misguided part of a hocky game" I find an outrageous statement and, frankly, an insult to my intelligence. It was a true premeditated assault (in criminal terms) pure and simple with serious consequences. The attitude that one is making too much of a fuss of this, that this is just a "misguided" part of a sporting event is, I think, part of the problem. Hockey like any part of society is subject to the laws of the country and this is particularly the case when it obviously has failed to police itself. When players like Mike Modano say (several years ago) that the game is getting too violent and something should be done about it's time to listen, else a player will one day be killed. It has after all already happened. When you draw a parallel, it's often the 49th parallel. In US college hockey, fighting is not tolerated. In Canada's Major Junior leagues (or Jr.B or a lot of others for that matter), if nobody gets hurt, a fight is between 2 and 5 minutes. Given that level of acceptance of violence, a fight is not a criminal assault. Bertuzzi went beyond the Marquis of Queensbury rules. He used terrible judgement during an emotional violent game. He should be punished for that, but isn't a criminal. It was a good punch. Is he being penalized for being strong. If it was Moore doing the same to Bertuzzi it would have ended in a scrum with their shirts being pulled over their heads and nasty words thrown over the referees shoulders. No police involved, no courts, no lawyers. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 13, 2004 14:41:31 GMT -5
Can someone explain how a stick would kill someone when tossed into a crowd? I think way too many people watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer* as a documentary. *-I watched it, it was pretty good actually. Well Angel (not that i like you like that or anything .... BTVS spinoff). It doesnnot necessarily have to kill someone to have legal consequences. I know when I am at a hockey game with my wife and daughter I try to get seats behind the netting. WHY? Because I like it there.... heck no! .... I hate it there. But my wife and daughter are too busy trying to see if they know someone and their heads are like swivels. I go for the game ...they go for the social aspect. Now if they aren't looking when that composite stick that it jagged comes flying well it could hit them in the eye, it could hit them in the head and startle them causing them to bang their head elsewhere, it could given the right circumstances actually cut them and cause an infection which could require surgery. Anything could happen. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 10, 2004 16:03:45 GMT -5
|
|
