I am all for players finishing their check, just not after the whistle has been already blown, and oskars never even had possession of the puck
The whistle had JUST blown... lets not make it out like play had been stopped for an extended period of time or anything. And a player does not need to possess the puck for it to be a legal check.
The whistle had JUST blown... lets not make it out like play had been stopped for an extended period of time or anything. And a player does not need to possess the puck for it to be a legal check.
Bad, wreckless, unnecessary hit (trying to level someone without possession of the puck is actually not a legal hit...hence the reason interference exists?).
The fact that it was also a charge makes it not a hockey play. No attempt to stop or slow down - he just comes from the blue line and bowls him over.
You're just adamant that this is somehow not Scottie's fault. I'm not saying it was malicious, it was just dumb.
The whistle had JUST blown... lets not make it out like play had been stopped for an extended period of time or anything. And a player does not need to possess the puck for it to be a legal check.
If Cooke or Avery had layed this hit out would you still think it was fine? What if the player we lost to injury was Kimmo, or Richards, or Giroux etc.. would you still be fine with it?
If Cooke or Avery had layed this hit out would you still think it was fine? What if the player we lost to injury was Kimmo, or Richards, or Giroux etc.. would you still be fine with it?
Yes. Would it suck more? Yes.
I'm pretty even keeled when it comes to acceptable v. unacceptable hits. Hell, go look at the Richards on Booth hit, I was one of the few on here criticizing Richards.
If Cooke or Avery had layed this hit out would you still think it was fine? What if the player we lost to injury was Kimmo, or Richards, or Giroux etc.. would you still be fine with it?
If Cooke or Avery had laid this hit, I would question their intent more given their histories. If Kimmo, Richards, Giroux, etc., had been lost, I'd have been pretty upset about the situation, but don't think that would have had me demanding Upshall's head.
But if Richards or Hartnell had laid this hit on an opponent and received the same suspension, would you agree?
Bad, wreckless, unnecessary hit (trying to level someone without possession of the puck is actually not a legal hit...hence the reason interference exists?).
The fact that it was also a charge makes it not a hockey play. No attempt to stop or slow down - he just comes from the blue line and bowls him over.
You're just adamant that this is somehow not Scottie's fault. I'm not saying it was malicious, it was just dumb.
I'm out.
That's not what constitutes a charge necessarily. He was gliding, not skating into him or leaping into him.
And you're creating a paper tiger. I agree it was a penalty, just the 2 minute variety. It's rotten luck that he went into the boards the way he did, and I don't believe players should be punished for rotten luck. Same reason I thought the Downie suspension was *ing absurd.
That's not what constitutes a charge necessarily. He was gliding, not skating into him or leaping into him.
And you're creating a paper tiger. I agree it was a penalty, just the 2 minute variety. It's rotten luck that he went into the boards the way he did, and I don't believe players should be punished for rotten luck. Same reason I thought the Downie suspension was *ing absurd.
I'm not creating a paper tiger at all. You started this whole discussion by saying that this is Bartulis' fault for not having his head up...that is a retarded *ing statement. The dude got run and to make matters worse, the puck wasn't there and the play was dead, and he got rocked into the boards.
If Upshall is going to make that "play" in this NHL, he's going to get suspended for it, and that's fine. Be more careful and respect your fellow athlete.
That's not what constitutes a charge necessarily. He was gliding, not skating into him or leaping into him.
And you're creating a paper tiger. I agree it was a penalty, just the 2 minute variety. It's rotten luck that he went into the boards the way he did, and I don't believe players should be punished for rotten luck. Same reason I thought the Downie suspension was *ing absurd.
According to the charging rule, emphasis is first put on the distance travelled. I know there's more of a tendency to count the strides, but the official rules (IMHO) give this wiggle room. Kind of like Richards getting a major / game misc (IIRC) for interference against Booth.
I'm pretty even keeled when it comes to acceptable v. unacceptable hits. Hell, go look at the Richards on Booth hit, I was one of the few on here criticizing Richards.
See I thought Richards hit was legal, I probably wouldnt have made the hit if I was playing but Richards is a very physical player who catches people with there head down.
I dont know how you could criticize a hit that at the time broke no rules whatsoever, and condone a hit that broke numerous rules.
I'm not creating a paper tiger at all. You started this whole discussion by saying that this is Bartulis' fault for not having his head up...that is a retarded *ing statement. The dude got run and to make matters worse, the puck wasn't there and the play was dead, and he got rocked into the boards.
If Upshall is going to make that "play" in this NHL, he's going to get suspended for it, and that's fine. Be more careful and respect your fellow athlete.
It's Bartulis' fault he got flattened the way he did, that doesn't mean I ever argued it wasn't a penalty. It was a two-minute penalty for roughing or whatever you want to call it, because it was late.
My first two posts in this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
There was no way that should have been a 5 minute penalty... and, frankly, it shouldn't have been a suspension.
Similar to Downie's hit, it's rotten luck the guy went into the end boards the way he did, but the act itself wasn't that bad (Downie's was worse).
If Bartulis had been paying attention to what was going on around him, then nothing would have happened. God knows if Upshall came in like that on Pronger he would have caught an elbow to the face. As a D he should have been turning around to face the forwards coming at his goalie, not standing there looking at him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Yeah, 2 minute penalty... which is what it got. The refs called it right, the NHL once again gave a suspension on the result not the act itself.
You're a NHL D on a puck getting frozen by the goalie in the NHL, the forwards are going to be crashing the net. Get your head up. Watch all the other D when that happens, they turn and get their sticks up to ward off guys coming at 'em (and, more importantly, their goalie).
The puck was RIGHT THE **** at his feet. It was RIGHT there. You're making it sound like Bartulis was some unsuspecting player on the other side of the rink from where the action was. He wasn't. He was right where the action was, with his goalie juggling a shot and covering it at his feet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieParent
According to the charging rule, emphasis is first put on the distance travelled. I know there's more of a tendency to count the strides, but the official rules (IMHO) give this wiggle room. Kind of like Richards getting a major / game misc (IIRC) for interference against Booth.
Charging rule has wiggle room, but it's the stupid kind... the big boom, "Oh, that's a penalty" kind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangecrush18
See I thought Richards hit was legal, I probably wouldnt have made the hit if I was playing but Richards is a very physical player who catches people with there head down.
I dont know how you could criticize a hit that at the time broke no rules whatsoever, and condone a hit that broke numerous rules.
That hit was vicious. Richards ducked his shoulder to get underneath Booth and put his shoulder clean through his jaw. Legal? By rule at the time, yep. Absolutely brutal and unnecessary in the sport? Yep.
Suspension not deserved, a beatdown from Bartulis' teammates should have sufficed but no one stepped up, guess they value their relationship with Uppie over Barts.
Suspension not deserved, a beatdown from Bartulis' teammates should have sufficed but no one stepped up, guess they value their relationship with Uppie over Barts.
Or maybe they wanted the trainer to have a look at Bartulis without being interfered by two people punching each other. You know, for medical reasons. Backstabbing ****** those are.
Suspension not deserved, a beatdown from Bartulis' teammates should have sufficed but no one stepped up, guess they value their relationship with Uppie over Barts.
I don't think a suspension was needed either. As for Upshall not needing to answer for the hit, it was pretty clear that he regretted that hit and when that shows your lust for revenge suddenly drops, at least that's my experience. I mean, sure he has a few buddies still on the team, but there's a lot of new faces as well (Carcillo for instance).
Or maybe they wanted the trainer to have a look at Bartulis without being interfered by two people punching each other. You know, for medical reasons. Backstabbing ****** those are.
Or maybe they were more interested in getting the PP and trying to win the game instead of satisfying the bloodlust of some fans.
