|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 10, 2004 15:59:12 GMT -5
I know this is Non-Habs, but it is recent and topical and you can move it wherever you see fit. For now:
I watched the Hit/sucker punch by Todd Bertuzzi.
1. It wasn't that bad.
2. Todd kept his glove on when he punched.
3. Like McSorley he wanted his opponent to turn around and fight.
4. Bertuzzi did something wrong and should be punished.
5. The extent of the injury was not what was intended by Bertuzzi. This is what is commonly known as an accident.
6. We are responsible not only for our intentions and actions but for the unexpected consequences as well.
7. If you hit someone with a punch on the street, it is very different from hitting someone on the rink. The standards, morals and expectations in the two circumstances are vastly different. Hitting with a stick on the street is assualt with a deadly weapon. On the rink it's hooking or cross checking.
8. Bertuzzi made a mistake and should be piunished. He should also be rehabilitated and not deprived of his livelyhood.
9. Bertuzzi is remourseful, genuinely regrets the outcome of the incident and is not likely to repeat the mistake he made.
10. The NHL should not attempt to relieve themselves of their responsibility by making the player the scapegoat.
11. The courts should take into account the nature of the game, the standards by which it is commonly played, the intent of the individuals involved and the extent to which the outcome was accidental and not intended.
12. The severity of the injury likely was the result of Bertuzzi's elbow landing on the neck and not the initial punch. That's how it looks on the replay.
Let cool heads prevail and don't use this unfortunate incident to sweep the problem and a career under the rug by hanging a scapegoat.
Can we leave this post on this board for a couple of days?
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Mar 10, 2004 16:17:06 GMT -5
Habs Fan in LA: you seem to be a little soft on Bertuzzi. Unintended consequences aside, it was probably the worst cheap shot this side of Marty McSorley I have seen in my life. Moore had ALREADY gotten in fight in the 1st period, which by the manly rules of hockey, should have settled any issue of retaliation for the Naslund incident. I don't care how badly Bertuzzi feels about the whole thing, and I don't care whether or not there was clear "intent to injure" as opposed to "intent to sucker punch" - it was negligent, reckless, and ultimately, extremely damaging to the other player, which MUST be weighed into the punishment.
By the McSorley standards, Bertuzzi should be suspended for the balance of the season and the playoffs at a bare minimum. I would go the extra step and suspend him for the the bulk of next season as well. It's too bad for the Canucks and too bad for Bertuzzi, who is one of the bright young stars of the game. He's not a goon like McSorley, but that's not the point. He did a stupid and dangerous thing and he should pay the price.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Habsome One on Mar 10, 2004 16:18:36 GMT -5
The attack was premedidated. That should say it all right there.
I don't buy any argument for leniency such as the attacker never intended for things to get so out of hand. While that is probably true for Bertuzzi, that's just tough luck for him. He should pay DEARLY for his crime. If you see someone you loathe in a subway station and your blood boils over, and you snap and push the guy in the back (albeit only to hurt his back) and he flies forward in front of an oncoming train....
You get the picture. While the police don't necessarily have to get involved in this matter (unless Moore wishes to place charges), the NHL can't be lenient.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Habsome One on Mar 10, 2004 16:19:58 GMT -5
7. If you hit someone with a punch on the street, it is very different from hitting someone on the rink. The standards, morals and expectations in the two circumstances are vastly different. Hitting with a stick on the street is assualt with a deadly weapon. On the rink it's hooking or cross checking. Where do we draw the line? |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 10, 2004 16:42:06 GMT -5
Habs Fan in LA: you seem to be a little soft on Bertuzzi. Unintended consequences aside, it was probably the worst cheap shot this side of Marty McSorley I have seen in my life. Moore had ALREADY gotten in fight in the 1st period, which by the manly rules of hockey, should have settled any issue of retaliation for the Naslund incident. I don't care how badly Bertuzzi feels about the whole thing, and I don't care whether or not there was clear "intent to injure" as opposed to "intent to sucker punch" - it was negligent, reckless, and ultimately, extremely damaging to the other player, which MUST be weighed into the punishment. By the McSorley standards, Bertuzzi should be suspended for the balance of the season and the playoffs at a bare minimum. I would go the extra step and suspend him for the the bulk of next season as well. It's too bad for the Canucks and too bad for Bertuzzi, who is one of the bright young stars of the game. He's not a goon like McSorley, but that's not the point. He did a stupid and dangerous thing and he should pay the price. I don't mean to take both sides of the argument, but it isn't black and white. I also think that McSorley was punished too severely for what was a high sticking hockey incident. It was premeditated. I watched carefully several times and I didn't see a deliberate attempt to injure severely. I saw an old style macho Don Cherry type of enforcement where the victim turned away from a confrontation. McSorley and Bertuzzi were attemptint to instigate and provoke a fight, not to physically disable their intended victim. If an 18 year old American GI slams an Iraqi against the wall during an interrogation in Baghdad under a hail of bullets, it's not the same as assaulting an Iraqi on the streets of Cleveland. The situation creates extenuating circumstances where certain types of behaviour are more acceptable. Bertuzzi doesn't need to assault from the back. He's a warrior who has skill and toughness. I really think it was poor judgement caused by the emotion of the situation and a very bad accidental outcome. Still we have to be responsible for our actions and held accountable. I'm not saying ignore the attack, but rather let the punishment fit the crime, in this case an aggressive assault in a hockey game. 10 - 20 game suspension, not a criminal felony. |
|
|
|
Post by The Habsome One on Mar 10, 2004 16:50:14 GMT -5
I don't mean to take both sides of the argument, but it isn't black and white. I also think that McSorley was punished too severely for what was a high sticking hockey incident. It was premeditated. I watched carefully several times and I didn't see a deliberate attempt to injure severely. I saw an old style macho Don Cherry type of enforcement where the victim turned away from a confrontation. McSorley and Bertuzzi were attemptint to instigate and provoke a fight, not to physically disable their intended victim. If an 18 year old American GI slams an Iraqi against the wall during an interrogation in Baghdad under a hail of bullets, it's not the same as assaulting an Iraqi on the streets of Cleveland. The situation creates extenuating circumstances where certain types of behaviour are more acceptable. Bertuzzi doesn't need to assault from the back. He's a warrior who has skill and toughness. I really think it was poor judgement caused by the emotion of the situation and a very bad accidental outcome. Still we have to be responsible for our actions and held accountable. I'm not saying ignore the attack, but rather let the punishment fit the crime, in this case an aggressive assault in a hockey game. 10 - 20 game suspension, not a criminal felony. What if Moore's injury was fatal? Still a mere 10-20 games? |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 10, 2004 17:18:51 GMT -5
An apologetic yes!
If a puck sails into the stands and kills a spectator, the NHL erects netting in all the arenas. Nobody wants spectators to die, but I don't favor helmet laws either.
If a goaltender deliberately clears a puck into the stands and it kills a spectator, it's still an accident even if the shot was deliberate. The consequence was accidental.
I'm not saying it's all that clear even in my own mind. I'm not on a soap box praising fighting in the NHL or condemning it either. I just don't think penalizing Bertuzzi excessively is the answer.
I do know that the Bertuzzi incident is most downloaded video on the Internet since Janet Jackson.
Fans like fighting. This doesn't mean that Corey Locke should be subjected to assaults by Donald Brashear as they each ply their trades.
Todd instigated a fight. He attacked from behind. He attempted to start a fight. I really don't think that a punch wearing a padded hockey glove is a criminal attempt to injure.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Mar 10, 2004 18:15:52 GMT -5
I don't think the glove offered much padding to Moore, though it protected Bertuzzi's hand. He may not have intended to knock Moore out with that punch, but if you watch it you can see that his whole body weight and momentum went into it and made it an absolutely devastating blow, which he may or may not have been intending. I can't make up my mind about whether there should be criminal charges, partly because I'm uncomfortable with involving police in these incidents as it seems fairly arbitrary where the line is drawn.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 11, 2004 11:41:57 GMT -5
When Matt Johnson sucker punched jeff beukeboom he left his feet and pummelled him. The concussion that Jeff beukeboom received was so severe he had to retire. NHL punishment = 12 games.
Steve Moore according to the doctors will play again.
Alot of poeple can play this IF game. If Steve Moore died .... well what if Mats Sundin's stick impaled someone? He only got one game!
The other night Marchement cross checked from behind Ritchie. Ritchie suffer a broken clavicle bone. The last I heard that bone is linked to the neck .... so in essence Ritchie has a broken collar/neck bone. Moore's was fractured. No suspension for the poster boy of repeat offenders!!
If the NHL would call the rule book as it is written, these types of instances would not happen. But when they do happen, the leastthey could do is be fair and abide by their own precendents.
To those who say this was premeditated. What grounds to you have. All Bertuzzi is quoted as saying is
if it had to be in Vancouver they would have retaliated. He didn't say I am going to get him or break his neck. He stalked him on the ice ..... shadowing a player is stalking ... so in the playoffs when New Jersey has Madden shadowing whoever and he highsticks him accidentally is this "criminal" .... and New Jersey plans their games around this strategy so it could be argued that itis premeditated.
Bertuzzi should have been suspended 25 games, this suspensioln basically puts his livlihood on hold and prevents him from playing the World Cup (warranted ? maybe). If Vancouver gets eliminated in 4 games this playoffs Bertuzzi gets 10 more games .... if they get eliminated in round 3 they might let him start next year is basically whatthey are saying.
And one more thing. Colin Campbell was quoted as saying after the Sundin and Roenick instances that he took their salary into consideration as a reason for the light punishments. It cost them both under $100000 dollars. Well this instance is going to cost Bertuzzi over 1 million dollars, again showing the unpredictablility of the NHl's discplinarian. A court wouldn't even award that in a settlement.
|
|
