Boston's Thornton the third star (really? come on)

I know Boston fans are mad over Cooke's hit, but you give Thornton the third star just for putting a good beating on him? This probably doesn't deserve a thread haha. Thoughts?:yo:

I know Boston fans are mad over Cooke's hit, but you give Thornton the third star just for putting a good beating on him? This probably doesn't deserve a thread haha. Thoughts?:yo:

He was very brave.:sarcasm:

...also did very well after the linesmen stepped in.

He was very brave.:sarcasm:

...also did very well after the linesmen stepped in.

Not everyone can be as heroic as Crosby. I mean, it took a ton of courage to jump an unsuspected Brett McLean, eh?

The Bruins fans who are making such a big deal out of this make me laugh. The hit on Savard wasn't that bad. The Thornton / Cooke fight wasn't anything to write home about. The effort by the Big Bad Bruins tonight -- with Orr and company in attendance -- was dreadful. Thornton had to be the third star because there wasn't much else to be happy about from Boston's side of the rink.

Bruins fans need to spend less time whining about dirty play and more figuring out how to get their team back on track.

The Bruins fans who are making such a big deal out of this make me laugh. The hit on Savard wasn't that bad. The Thornton / Cooke fight wasn't anything to write home about. The effort by the Big Bad Bruins tonight -- with Orr and company in attendance -- was dreadful. Thornton had to be the third star because there wasn't much else to be happy about from Boston's side of the rink.

Bruins fans need to spend less time whining about dirty play and more figuring out how to get their team back on track.

This. Now I'm not saying it was a nice clean hit by Cooke, but it didn't help that Savard has had a history of concussions. Once you get one, it doesn't take much to get another one. So a lot of other players get up and walk away from that hit. Now I'm not saying that justifies the hit, but there's just a lot of what ifs there.

Nobody gets a star in a 3-0 loss unless it's the German goalie in a game against Can.

A pathetic homer move is all it is.

The Bruins fans who are making such a big deal out of this make me laugh. The hit on Savard wasn't that bad. The Thornton / Cooke fight wasn't anything to write home about. The effort by the Big Bad Bruins tonight -- with Orr and company in attendance -- was dreadful. Thornton had to be the third star because there wasn't much else to be happy about from Boston's side of the rink.

Bruins fans need to spend less time whining about dirty play and more figuring out how to get their team back on track.

"The hit on Savard wasn't that bad" - Wow. Just wow. The hit itself was probably one of the dirtiest of the year. It's 100% clear that hit was and should have been an intent to injure call. Campbell hid behind the "there's no clear rule to penalize for a mid elbow.shoulder hit. He even said in his interview on NESN and echo'd what Bettman said "We would have liked to see him suspen ded yet couldn't because there was no call on the play"

He then turns around and says Ovechkin got a suspension because:

a. An injury resulted.
b. The player had a history of suspensions.

Explain to me how Cooke doesn't have any suspensions and how Savard isn't injured again?

It's a bush league hit by a dirty unskilled clown of a player. It's the NHL unfairly giving preference to its money maker team.

It's the NHL unfairly giving preference to its money maker team.

Lol yeah and Ovechkin brings in nothing and they don't use him to promote the game at all which is why he was suspended?

By NHL rules a shoulder to the head is not illegal, a check into the boards is. Cooke actually stood up and fought for himself (albeit not well) which is more then alot of player would do. If anything this game is an example of why fighting should never be removed. The players settled it themselves within the confines of the game.

The fact that Thornton was a star is a joke though considering i'm not sure Boston even showed up for this one.

"The hit on Savard wasn't that bad" - Wow. Just wow. The hit itself was probably one of the dirtiest of the year. It's 100% clear that hit was and should have been an intent to injure call. Campbell hid behind the "there's no clear rule to penalize for a mid elbow.shoulder hit. He even said in his interview on NESN and echo'd what Bettman said "We would have liked to see him suspen ded yet couldn't because there was no call on the play"

He then turns around and says Ovechkin got a suspension because:

a. An injury resulted.
b. The player had a history of suspensions.

Explain to me how Cooke doesn't have any suspensions and how Savard isn't injured again?

It's a bush league hit by a dirty unskilled clown of a player. It's the NHL unfairly giving preference to its money maker team.

It's very simple actually.
Under the current rules, hitting from behind is against the rules and is a suspendable offence (Ovechkin).

Shoulder checks to the head are perfectly legal (Cooke).

The league cannot suspend players for hits that are not against the rules. Is that really so complicated ?

Personally, I have hated these kinds of hits since the days of Scott Stevens. I think he is one of the biggest cheap shot artists the league has ever seen.

However, his hits were perfectly within the rules.
It is not Cooke's fault that Savard had his head down & was not protecting himself. But there was no need for him to drive his hard plastic shoulder pad directly into Savard's head.

It is hard to prove intent to injure.
It is easier to say he is "reckless" like Ovechkin.

Lol yeah and Ovechkin brings in nothing and they don't use him to promote the game at all which is why he was suspended?

By NHL rules a shoulder to the head is not illegal, a check into the boards is. Cooke actually stood up and fought for himself (albeit not well) which is more then alot of player would do. If anything this game is an example of why fighting should never be removed. The players settled it themselves within the confines of the game.

The fact that Thornton was a star is a joke though considering i'm not sure Boston even showed up for this one.

They'd rather see Crosby win over Ovechkin. It's clear just by the fact that the Pens have had 5 of NBC's Sunday billings so far and no other team has had 2.

The hit was not the shoulder at all. Watch it again. It's between the shoulder and the elbow. Regardless of how it was anyway hitting a player who is blind, doesn't have the puck, and INTENTIONALLY (That's the key word because it was CLEARLY intentional) is in its purest sense, a violation of the Intention to Injure Rule.

The only reason Cooke agreed to that fight, is because he knew Campbell and the NHL brass was upstairs watching. So you get pounded, serve your time and move on. Nobody is going to dare do anything to a star player, especially after earlier today they drop a retarded suspension like 8 games on Wiz for a perfectly clean hit.

Thornton as a star? I completely agree. A stupid call by Boston in an attempt to rouse their fans after a terrible game. But hey, I've seen Crosby get plenty a third star in a game with no points. The home team decides it, so they get the biased.

It's very simple actually.
Under the current rules, hitting from behind is against the rules and is a suspendable offence (Ovechkin).

Shoulder checks to the head are perfectly legal (Cooke).

The league cannot suspend players for hits that are not against the rules. Is that really so complicated ?

Personally, I have hated these kinds of hits since the days of Scott Stevens. I think he is one of the biggest cheap shot artists the league has ever seen.

However, his hits were perfectly within the rules.
It is not Cooke's fault that Savard had his head down & was not protecting himself. But there was no need for him to drive his hard plastic shoulder pad directly into Savard's head.

It is hard to prove intent to injure.
It is easier to say he is "reckless" like Ovechkin.

Again, it wasn't a shoulder. That's just what he followed through with. Stop hiding behind this "there is no rule" bit. INTENT TO INJURE. There's your rule. Has everyone forgotten about it? If a player delivers a DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO INJURE A PLAYER either with their stick or with their body... doesn't get much more cut and dry. Savard was in a prone position WELL after moving the puck and Cooke took liberty. He could have EASILY trailed off or hit Savards body but he went for the head. Intent to injure. Cut and dry. Match penalty. Cut and dry.

Again, it wasn't a shoulder. That's just what he followed through with. Stop hiding behind this "there is no rule" bit. INTENT TO INJURE. There's your rule. Has everyone forgotten about it? If a player delivers a DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO INJURE A PLAYER either with their stick or with their body... doesn't get much more cut and dry. Savard was in a prone position WELL after moving the puck and Cooke took liberty. He could have EASILY trailed off or hit Savards body but he went for the head. Intent to injure. Cut and dry. Match penalty. Cut and dry.

In slow motion Savard is hit well after dishing the puck away.
At full speed he is hit less than a second later.
Therefore it is not a late hit.

Is it a blindside hit ? Yes but there is no rule against that.

Also I do not agree that it was an elbow.
It seems very clear to me that it is a shoulder hit to the head.

As for INTENT TO INJURE,
how can you prove intent to injure on a bodycheck ?
It is not easy.

On a stick to the head or a spear you can prove it.
But on an open ice bodycheck at high speeds it is much tougher.
It is not boarding, charging or hitting from behind.

I do not like hits like this.
I think they should change the rule AND change the equipment (shoulder pads & elbow pads should be made of much softer material to be less dangerous).

But until the new rule is in place, it is not a suspendable offence.
The Player's Association would fight tooth & nail to protect its players from being suspended for legal hits.

He got revenge for the hit. That obviously made Shawn Thornton popular tonight. He also had the best game out of any of the Bruins (except maybe Tuukka Rask). He also had some good scoring chances.

It's the stars of the game. Who gives a ****? It was nice to see a character guy get noticed, that's all.

The Bruins fans who are making such a big deal out of this make me laugh. The hit on Savard wasn't that bad. The Thornton / Cooke fight wasn't anything to write home about. The effort by the Big Bad Bruins tonight -- with Orr and company in attendance -- was dreadful. Thornton had to be the third star because there wasn't much else to be happy about from Boston's side of the rink.

Bruins fans need to spend less time whining about dirty play and more figuring out how to get their team back on track.

This.

IMO let Thornton have his 2 minutes of fame (if he even gets that long) as last night's 3rd star. Big whoop. More importantly the bottom line is he and the Boo'ins got pwned tonight after playing a pretty disgustingly uninspired game and therefore due to their lack of effort they rightfully got no points. And well let's be honest....they aren't the powerhouse team they were a season ago. They desperately need points.

But if it makes them feel better...sure....give Thornton the 3rd star. Anything to keep them and their fanbase from throwing an even bigger tantrum than some of them already are. :laugh:

Well according to accounts from people who saw this game, he was the only Bruin to show up.

Who gives a **** about the 3 stars? It's a promotion aimed towards fans, being a "star" of the game doesn't put goals on the board.

He was the only Bruin deserving of a star.

For anyone whinning about Thornton getting a media star, A player from the home team is always voted as a star (expect maybe in those 5 goal blowouts). Was there a better choice them him from the Bruins?

This.

IMO let Thornton have his 2 minutes of fame (if he even gets that long) as last night's 3rd star. Big whoop. More importantly the bottom line is he and the Boo'ins got pwned tonight after playing a pretty disgustingly uninspired game and therefore due to their lack of effort they rightfully got no points. And well let's be honest....they aren't the powerhouse team they were a season ago. They desperately need points.

But if it makes them feel better...sure....give Thornton the 3rd star. Anything to keep them and their fanbase from throwing an even bigger tantrum than some of them already are. :laugh:

So I guess the Bruins are throwing a temper tantrum because they're upset that one of their best players got injured in a borderline play by a ***** named Matt Cooke?

You'd be pissed too if Crosby or Malkin were to get injured like that miss the rest of the season and playoffs.

****

Bruins fans need to spend less time whining about dirty play and more figuring out how to get their team back on track.

As bad as we were whining about the Cooke incident, believe me, we have whined exponentially more about our absolutely pathetic excuse for a team. There have been "Fire Julien" threads on the b's board since November. The 2010-2011 Line Combos thread has already arisen. Hate to burst your bubble, but we know our team needs help. :shakehead

Needless to say, losing Savvy to a total b***s*** hit didnt make us any happier
:deadhorse

This really didn't need a thread to begin with. Certainly not now, with everyone *****ing at each other.

http://hfboards.com/picture.php?albumid=770&pictureid=4578