View Single Post
10-10-2012, 02:36 PM
CalgaryCanuck03's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,575
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
If you would take the time to explain the difference I would appreciate it.

I don't think that players are "bloodthirsty" generally, but a lot of them are put in positions where their livelihood depends on their ability to play on the edge. It's all well and good to say Raffi Torres or Matt Cooke need to clean up their act but they won't be in the league if they dial it back too much. Those players constantly use the hurt vs injure argument, even when they're injuring more guys than they're hurting. Maybe it's not true for every player but I think it's safe to say players like that are using the argument to sleep at night.
Every hard open ice hit is designed as an intent to hurt play. Defensemen want the forwards to think twice about going through the middle and cough up the puck. Think Scott Stevens hits (remembering the climate on head injuries back then).

Intent to Injure is a deliberate dirty action that is designed to take a player out of the game. Best example is Clarke on Kharlamov.

CalgaryCanuck03 is offline   Reply With Quote