Fetch Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 Will the Hawks find more scoring here on out ? I hope so but the Redwings almost pulled off keeping Chicago off their best play will LA do the same ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iluvdebbies Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I think that the officiating in this series was absolutely atrocious, almost to the point of being laughable. What the Red Wings were allowed to do to Toews was almost Criminal, I am Boston Bruins fans and I found myself in my living room cussing at my television set, causing my wife to come out and ask me what was wrong with me. So, I don’t know if I feel all that bad for the Red Wings fans that are upset today. I know my buddy Mafia Man and Redwing77 are hurting today, but the Red Wings hacked, slashed and hammered Toews and then when the Blackhawks wanted to collect on the bill the Red Wings wouldn’t drop the mitts. I think the officiating crew in this series needs to be fired from the league. They’re not worthy of officiating games in the WCHA. Unfortunately, Stephen Walkom will be officiating games in the next round of the SCP. Officiating crew? FYI ...the same crew doesn't work every game in a playoff series. In the Chicago/Detroit 7 game series there were 11 different referees(just talking referees and not linesmen). Nine of these same referees worked your Bruins vs Rangers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Will the Hawks find more scoring here on out ? I hope so but the Redwings almost pulled off keeping Chicago off their best play will LA do the same ? That is what happens when the refs allow clutching, grabbing, and holding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Here's my question; why was the hooking and holding so bad in this series compared to the other three series that we watched? I didn't see the obstruction bein this bad in the other series in my opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Here's my question; why was the hooking and holding so bad in this series compared to the other three series that we watched? I didn't see the obstruction bein this bad in the other series in my opinion. One word. Toews. It appeared babcock saw they were getting away with it and it seemed to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I don't care if they took off the cage at age 20 or age 16, either way they were wearing if for a very long time and used to it long before they were allowed to take it off. What you're saying about players having their vision obstructed by the cage was being said about helmets back in the '70s. I'm sure some people would say wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle impairs your vision, but what person in his right mind would consider riding a motorcycle without a helmet? I have always felt strongly about this topic, but Crosby's recent broken jaw has only validated what I have preached all along. Proper protective gear would have prevented that injury, there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever. Why are you so concerned with a jaw? What about the neck? They have never created a proper neck guard...why aren't you bringing up other parts of the body which aren't covered? Why simply the lower part of one's face? If Crosby would have attempted to catch the puck and broke his hand would you be calling for the NHL to create a mandate on players putting additional padding on their gloves? Or if he took a slapper to the side of the foot...would you be calling for a mandate that all players must wear skate plates no questions asked? Significant blows to the head at high speeds can cause life altering brain damage....a stick or puck to the eye could potentially alter your vision forever thus changing your quality of life. I get the helmet (especially in today's game) and I'm for a grandfather of the visor. But a full facemask is ridiculous....these guys are professionals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Blah blah, blah, your pro-fighting stance is well noted. However, the book that I referenced overwhelmingly shoots down each and every one of your pro-fighting arguments. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the days of the goon in hockey are numbered. The game can't continue its knuckle-dragging ways forever. I promise you the full cage is in the college game to stay and it will come to the NHL someday, although perhaps not in our lifetime. Fighting ending in hockey may end. I believe it should stay but the amount of staged fights is ridiculous, it gives our game a bad name. I still believe college hockey will go to a 2/3 visor in the next 5-10 years. The more the college game changes away from the NHL the more kids head north. The NHL will never (in my lifetime, I'm 28) wear full visor unless somehow the game changes or the type of facemask changes to allow better vision. There is a reason Crosby went to the jaw protecter only and not a full visor/cage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 One word. Toews. It appeared babcock saw they were getting away with it and it seemed to work. You might be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 (edited) Blah blah, blah, your pro-fighting stance is well noted. However, the book that I referenced overwhelmingly shoots down each and every one of your pro-fighting arguments. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the days of the goon in hockey are numbered. The game can't continue its knuckle-dragging ways forever. I promise you the full cage is in the college game to stay and it will come to the NHL someday, although perhaps not in our lifetime. Do you really want to argue the same old tired the hockey goon versus the pacifist argument again Koski? Fighting isn't isn't leaving hockey and the author you quoted is known for his anti pugilistic stances. I wouldn't read his book if you gave it too me for free. Three quarters of the people writing about hockey never played a period of hockey in their life, whether it be house league, city league, or rec league for that matter. I am going to save the group the agony watching of me handing it to you again in our annual Goon schools Dave K on the virtues of fighting. Honestly, I am bored with it. Edited May 31, 2013 by Goon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Dave....curious how you feel about the boogard family's lawsuit against the NHL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Go back a few posts and you will see where I stated that I would be in favor of mandatory kevlar socks and neck guards in addition to the full facial protection. The hand and the foot are already protected as well as they possibly can be within reason, the face and neck are not. Do you think the full facemask is ridiculous in football too? I know you're probably going to say football and hockey are two completely different sports, and I would agree with that. But I would say that full facial protection is needed in hockey even more so than it is in football. There is nothing in football that will damage your face as severely as a 100 MPH slapshot. Ok, then baseball players have to wear cages too....and pitcher must pitch with a helmet and full face mask. What your talking about completely changes the game. Do you understand that you play better without a full face mask? Seriously, the first time I played competitive hockey without a mask I instantly saw things better. My teammates seemed more open. I'm guessing you've never played. Facial injuries in the NHL are no more common than any other injury. Except that barring a broken jaw.....u can usually keep playing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I really hope they win, because if they do I'm optimistic that it could be the final nail in the coffin of goon tactics being tolerated in the NHL. Well I for one hope they lose. I understand that his main role in the game was to be an enforcer. But did the NHL make him do it or did he choose to play this way? If he didn't want to be an enforcer he didn't have to. It's not a right to play in any sport professionally. You can get a concussion in many different professions. Does that give you or your family a right to sue? If you don't like it you should try something else. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Ok, then baseball players have to wear cages too....and pitcher must pitch with a helmet and full face mask. What your talking about completely changes the game. Do you understand that you play better without a full face mask? Seriously, the first time I played competitive hockey without a mask I instantly saw things better. My teammates seemed more open. I'm guessing you've never played. Facial injuries in the NHL are no more common than any other injury. Except that barring a broken jaw.....u can usually keep playing. I am a hockey fan and get both sides of this issue and can still remember helmet-less Craig MacTavish skating around in the 1980's and 1990's. Remember the uproar of players and mandatory helmets back then? Even just 5-7 years ago, you were considered a sissy if you wore a half-shield. Then Alexander Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby join the league and now plenty of players wear the half-shield. I played competitive softball for years and remember pitchers experimenting with the hockey-type catcher helmet when they played. They were laughed at and guys intentionally tried to 'spin the dummy'. Go out and watch a competitive tournament nowadays and it's a rarity to NOT see a pitcher wearing the protective helmet. It's all fun and games until the next Bill Masterson happens courtesy of a 100 MPH slap-shot that hits someone in the head. Just ask Ron Harris, he'll tell you. ]"It bothers you the rest of your life. It wasn't dirty and it wasn't meant to happen that way. Still, it's very hard because I made the play. It's always in the back of my mind." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Well I for one hope they lose. I understand that his main role in the game was to be an enforcer. But did the NHL make him do it or did he choose to play this way? If he didn't want to be an enforcer he didn't have to. It's not a right to play in any sport professionally. You can get a concussion in many different professions. Does that give you or your family a right to sue? If you don't like it you should try something else. Boogey did his role because he knew it was his job. That's why I don't get the family suing the NHL. I don't see this case winning. Although, I do think there was some light she on how they hand out narcotics pain killer, which was troubling to me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Shut sports down...completely...they're too dangerous. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Shut sports down...completely...they're too dangerous. No, just shut down soccer. Someone is bound to pull a muscle from all of the flopping going on. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Would Marc Savard still be playing if he'd have been wearing a full cage when this happened? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z1vJrIAg-0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Boogey did his role because he knew it was his job. That's why I don't get the family suing the NHL. I don't see this case winning. Although, I do think there was some light she on how they hand out narcotics pain killer, which was troubling to me. I'm sure the dr's were ok rxing the meds....but the meds should not have been mixed with alcohol and the NHL has nothing to do with this. I think it'd be a shame if the NHL ends up cracking down on enforcers because of the lawsuit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I'm sure the dr's were ok rxing the meds....but the meds should not have been mixed with alcohol and the NHL has nothing to do with this. I think it'd be a shame if the NHL ends up cracking down on enforcers because of the lawsuit. Yea, 'cuz we need more guys like Matt Cooke and Donald Brashear in the game. Even the Soviets never had fight straps in their hockey jerseys because they felt fighting demeaned the game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 (edited) Yea, 'cuz we need more guys like Matt Cooke and Donald Brashear in the game. Even the Soviets never had fight straps in their hockey jerseys because they felt fighting demeaned the game. Don’t get me started on that gutless puke Matt Cooke, if there was one guy I would love to see removed from that game of hockey it would be that P.O.S…. Matt Cooke is the prototypical D-bag; this is why you will never see fighting removed from the game of hockey. This is why I would also the very reason that I would like to see the Instigator rule removed from the game of hockey as well. If these gutless pukes (some like to call them instigators) didn’t have to worry about fighting they would really flourish and run wild if left unchecked in the NHL. The level of violence would actually go up in the NHL. Someday, someone is going to catch this bag of ass with his head down and he’s going to get what he’s has coming to him… Karma has a way of catching up with these guys, eventually. It will be interesting to see if Penguins fans will cry when it happens. Before you jump to defend Matt Cooke, he’s been suspended by the NHL for almost half of an NHL season, he’s ruined the career of Marc Savard. He’s been notorious for running around targeting the head of opposing players and “won’t” drop the gloves when challenged. I am sure the usual suspect will come on here to defend this P.O.S. and tell us what a great guy that he is. Edited May 31, 2013 by Goon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 I saw a debate on PBS about banning college FB & the audience voted who won the debate & the yes to ban won - how long will college sports last ? Injuries were a big part of the debate & the $ & how the NC$$ runs things & what good does it do colleges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 (edited) PS - At this time I have decided to shoot down your silly little theories that you have been spewing repeatedly for as long as I've known you. Excerpt from Adam Proteau's book: Pro-fighting argument #4: Without fighting, the game won't be any safer. In fact, it will be more dangerous, because sticks will be used more often as weapons and players won't be able to make an opponent pay the price for dirty play. This argument ignores NHL reality, a place where sticks are used occasionally as weapons and dirty players are allowed to continue being dirty players except for the most extreme cases. If the league were clean other than for the occasional fight, I would concede the point. But as we saw in Chapter 1, the NHL has gradually slipped into chaos - with near total indifference to the pro-fighting mentality. And in the ultimate indictment of what little difference fighting is as a deterrent, the league's designated fighters are often the ones who take the cheap shots. Fighting exists, and the league still has Sean Avery, Cal Clutterbuck, Maxim Lapierre, and other players infamous for crossing the line of acceptable behavior. Fighting exists, and the league still has grievous and regular instances of thuggish acts and irresponsible play. As always, those who claim fighting is a deterrent simply choose to ignore, or are incapable of understanding, that meting out deterrence is the role and responsibility of the league, not the athletes who compete within the league. Check-mate, Goon. There is no check-mate. That's a horrible argument, you have a middle weight agitator in Avery that would drop the gloves and became famous for his Sloppy Seconds comments and as far as I am concerned really didn't play the game in a dirty manner and played by the hockey code. You have a player in Cal Clutterbuck that plays the game with-in the rule book and usally leads the NHL in hits and doesn't take a lot of penalties, while Cal doesn't fight a lot, he will drop the gloves from time-to-time and plays within the rule book per the hockey code. The part that kills his argument is he puts these two players in the same category with a gutless puke like Maxim Lapierre that among most things runs around flopping and diving all over the ice and is a basic fraud. Lapierre is more like the Penguins hack Matt Cooke who won't fight who has been suspended over 31 games by the NHL. This is the same P.O.S. that lacks honor and no respect for others if he was removed by a dirty hit would probably do the NHL a favor. So in my opinion that's a horrible framed argument , and I suggest that you watch five year old girls hockey because there is probably little chance that you will witness any violence and they will be wearing the full shield. I am done talking to you Koski because you're beyond comprehending that the NHL is a contact sport and Fighting and the hockey code are part of the NHL and will continue to be part of the game of hockey. I am glad that you can glom on and drink Adam Proteau's Kool Aid. I can counter ever one of his arguments by quoting most tough guys currently playing in the NHL. Edited June 1, 2013 by Goon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Your opinion of Matt Cooke sickens me. Because of your over the top irrational hatred I will get an extra special little piece of satisfaction when the Penguins end the Bruins season with the series that starts tomorrow night. Everything that you say about Cooke should be said about the goons who taint the game with their vigilante garbage. Sorry DaveK, I don't know how you can even begin to defend Matt Cooke. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Goon, you can't possibly weasel your way out of the corner that I backed you into with that excerpt from Proteau's book. The argument is over and you lost badly. I schooled you, handed your a$$ to you on a platter, whatever metaphor you want to use. The fact of the matter is that there is more dirty play in the NHL (where fighting is allowed) than there is in college hockey (where fighting is not tolerated). So you are 100% dead wrong in your ludicrous claim that fighting keeps the game clean. No, fighting makes the game even more dirty. That is a fact. Thanks for playing, better luck next time. You need a book to defend your position Koski? Come up with your own Material, the fact that you defend Matt Cooke means have no leg to stand on and no moral high ground what-so-ever. Learn to think for your self. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Goon, you can't possibly weasel your way out of the corner that I backed you into with that excerpt from Proteau's book. The argument is over and you lost badly. I schooled you, handed your a$$ to you on a platter, whatever metaphor you want to use. The fact of the matter is that there is more dirty play in the NHL (where fighting is allowed) than there is in college hockey (where fighting is not tolerated). So you are 100% dead wrong in your ludicrous claim that fighting keeps the game clean. No, fighting makes the game even more dirty. That is a fact. Thanks for playing, better luck next time. Yeah, the act of two guys agreeing to a fight is so much more dirty than Matt Cooke ending the career of Marc Savard. Actually here is that history of that gutless P.O.S. Matt Cooke he's quite the clean guy, oh yeah, I am sure he's miss understood right? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0waePHWjVGY 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.