HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   Defending a teammate? Worth it or not? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1081439)

jml87 01-15-2012 03:44 PM

Defending a teammate? Worth it or not?
 
So, similar circumstances between these two hits, just different reactions.

Flyers reaction to hit on Talbot

Flyers do not retaliate or stick up for their teammate who is hit with a hard check, possibly to the head. However, Flyers go on to win the game and they didn't have to go on the penalty kill for starting a scuffle with the offender.

Richards reacts to hit on Kopitar

Immediately after the hit, Richards fights Morrow which leads to big penalty time and Dallas uses this powerplay time to tie the game. Kings end up losing in the SO.

After seeing these two hits, I was wondering people's opinions. Both teams are up by one goal with minimal time left in the period. Kopitar is obviously way more important than a guy like Talbot, but Talbot is still a nice player, a good leader, and important to the Flyers team. So my question is should you go after another player who delivers a big hit on your teammate even at the cost of a large penalty?

My opinion is that, unless it's a playoff game or one that has major playoff implications, you stand up for your teammate. In the old days, it was a no brainer, but with the insane amount of penalty minutes you get nowadays, it's a little bit tougher of a decision.

But helping teammates is important. It unites a team, shows leadership, and shows the other team that they can't just skate around and go after your teammates. So even if we gained both those points against Dallas, I know I would've been pretty pissed to see the Kings do what the Flyers did after a hit on Kopitar.

Live in the Now 01-15-2012 03:45 PM

You gotta stand up for your teammates. The overall message sent and team spirit gained from doing so will outweigh the one win gained from not doing it over the long run.

Nose of Sutter 01-15-2012 03:51 PM

Yeah, Live in the now nailed it. There is no excuse for not defending your superstar player after he gets hit like that and injured. (not saying the hit was dirty) Mike Richards probably gained alot of respect in the locker room for that.

jml87 01-15-2012 04:06 PM

I really don't think the hit has to be dirty for there to need a reaction. Your teammate is still hurt, you don't know how bad, and the guy that hurt your teammate is standing right there. If it is a good hit, than it's even worse because there will be no repercussions unless you do something about it.

Habstract 01-15-2012 04:12 PM

When your teammates get nailed like that(Even if the hit is legal), I expect anybody on the ice at that time to stick up for him. I know the instigator penalty is dumb but there is certain things that build/maintain team spirit, this is one of them..

Muzzinga 01-15-2012 04:31 PM

big difference between Talbot and Kopitar, if that had been Giroux getting hit, i guarantee the flyers would have stepped up

Wildturkey12 01-15-2012 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yantropov (Post 42533839)
I know the instigator penalty is dumb but there is certain things that build/maintain team spirit, this is one of them..

The instigator penalty needs to go. I think you would see a major cut down on all of these hits to the head.

I think clean hit or not, you have to stand up for your team mate.

bral 01-15-2012 05:48 PM

Unless it's a playoff game, you react exactly as Richards did. The important thing to me is that Sutter commended the action of Richards.

deeshamrock 01-15-2012 06:05 PM

Quote:

You gotta stand up for your teammates. The overall message sent and team spirit gained from doing so will outweigh the one win gained from not doing it over the long run.
Richards is never going to skate away, it's not in his DNA and one of the reasons he's led teams to championships at every level he's ever played at. They know he's the guy who has their back and they will go to war for him.

The also lost the game because they twice were playing down by 2 goals. Those 3 goals were just as costly, if not more so.

And what he gained by doing that, will count alot more than the point they lost.

Whiskeypete 01-15-2012 06:11 PM

MR did the right thing.

if anything he should have traded for someones helmet without a visor, before he went out there. "hey let me try that lid, i may switch helmets and want to see how it feels"....jk of course

the problem with the hit is A) he was engaged with someone on him, so his attention is already elsewhere. most guys won't take a run at someone in this situation because of this. B) it's LA's top player and as a result most guys won't throw a major hit on him. the fact that it was Morrow, who wears the C for DAL is one reason there wasn't a huge blowup.

the hit was clean, i have no issue with it for that. my issue with it was he was engaged and in a real vulnerable situation. Morrow could easily have stood his ground on the post as Kopi came around the net. he would have taken away his wrap around and pass lane. if anything Kopi would have bounced into him or skated out into the corner. to take a couple of strides at a guy knowing he is engaged and you are essentially going to blindside him is chicken ****. next game against DAL Morrow will get blown-up by someone on LA as payment.

Kingurentai 01-15-2012 06:19 PM

No question MR did the right thing and hope the Kings react that way during reg season. Playoffs they can put a big hit on the offender when the timing is right, or if necessary, put a big hit on their star player.

Just see how pathetic Buffalo looked and the demoralization after the hit n Miller.

The Butcher 01-15-2012 07:28 PM

Personally, I think it's more important to immediately stand up for your teammate in a situation like that in lower level games (rec leagues, etc). Usually the goons in these leagues have nothing to lose, they don't care if they get kicked out it doesn't effect their bottom line in the least. This makes me think that you have to send an immediate message.

At this level, there is too much to lose. I'd rather the players take advantage of any kind of power play opportunity or not go shorthanded themselves than to see them do something dumb. I love that Mike Richards plays that style of game and will back down from nobody but an NHL player should always be tough enough to handle most of what the opponent throws at them.

I'd much rather that players tell the offender to watch his back and get him when the referee isn't paying attention. I think that is much smarter retribution.

Habstract 01-15-2012 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildturkey12 (Post 42537083)
The instigator penalty needs to go. I think you would see a major cut down on all of these hits to the head.

I think clean hit or not, you have to stand up for your team mate.

This is what I am saying, this is dumb to have an instigator penalty as it protect "cheap" players from facing the repercussion of their actions. I was saying that it's worth taking the instigator penalty when one of your teammates get crunch like that.

Wildturkey12 01-16-2012 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yantropov (Post 42544587)
This is what I am saying, this is dumb to have an instigator penalty as it protect "cheap" players from facing the repercussion of their actions.

If they got rid of it, it would be a win win for everyone, less injuries and more fights.

kingsfan 01-16-2012 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sw1tch (Post 42534827)
big difference between Talbot and Kopitar, if that had been Giroux getting hit, i guarantee the flyers would have stepped up

I think this played a big part in it, but not just because one guy is a star and the other isn't.

Talbot also throws big hits too, unlike Kopitar. It's a lot easier to not do anything for a teammate that hands out the hard stuff than it is for a guy like Kopitar. Talbot, you know not only has he dished out hits like that -and Kopitar hasn't largely- but you also know Talbot can go and fight that guy himself if he feels he was wronged. Kopitar won't, and if he did try, he'd likely get hammered. I'd rather see Richards try and exact some revenge from Morrow than Kopitar.

As for the OP's question, I think it depends on the situation, the time of the game and what was done. A dirty hit in the 2nd is going to draw a reaction (not saying Morrow's hit was dirty), where as a hard but clean hit in the 3rd likely won't unless the score is very lopsided.

I'm ok with it either way, as long as team as a whole knows that each guy has the next guys ass if **** goes down and there's a need to drop the gloves. That the whole point of what Richards did, to show he has his teammates back.

kingsfan 01-16-2012 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yantropov (Post 42544587)
This is what I am saying, this is dumb to have an instigator penalty as it protect "cheap" players from facing the repercussion of their actions. I was saying that it's worth taking the instigator penalty when one of your teammates get crunch like that.

Agreed. I wonder why the NHLPA doesn't fight for this in CBA talks.

BringTheReign 01-16-2012 05:55 PM

I think cheap shots need to dealt with right away, but a big hit needs to be ignored.

It's ****ing hockey for crying out loud! Hitting is legal!

In the old days of the league, players who received a huge hit simply got up, brushed themselves off, and continued to play the game hard. That's how it should be. Sure, remember who did it and maybe try and give a little clean pay back later on, but don't rush them and drop the gloves when the hit was clean.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:03 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.