View Single Post
03-02-2013, 09:18 PM
HFBoards Sponsor
wpgsilver's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,169
vCash: 942
I'm torn on this issue to some extent.

I think many here agree that there is appropriate times to fight, and that fighting isn't automatically a bad thing.
Do I think Peluso fighting in that spot was a good call? Maybe not. He seems to be a player for us. Not a stud by any means but a guy that is useful to have available.

I don't necessarily think the fight itself was a bad decision. The Jets were flat up until that point and I believe a fight can energize a bench. Seeing a teammate battle out there can wake guys up and have their compete level boosted. I think perhaps had Thorburn tossed knuckles there I would have preferred the fight. (That said Thorburn would have just gotten dummied and thats never good.)

I do think that part of the problem lies in the way the team reacted after that fight. I noticed the next couple of shifts that the washington players had more jump, while we didn't seem to respond.

All in all, I'm not gonna criticize Peluso, because frankly I rarely do. He's a hard nose player that I'm assuming thought he could provide a boost to his team. Did it work? No. Would he do it again? Most likely. And I'm fine with that. I view the fight as a way for him to try and spark the team.

Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
The question is:
How does the fight inspire one bench more than the other?
Evidently it did. And that is part of the problem. I think the Caps to some extent rallied around the fact that Volpatti stepped up and fought a bigger guy. Their compete level increased, so I would say they were inspired.
The Jets clearly didn't respond to the fact that a teammate of their put his body on the line to try and spark them. Thats sucks.

wpgsilver is online now   Reply With Quote