HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Where's the prefix for ********?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-18-2011, 04:44 PM
  #26
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,341
vCash: 500
Take a look at the Seabrook interview on the Blackhawks website.

The NHL never ceases to amaze me. Never.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 04:51 PM
  #27
theaub
Lets go Hawks!
 
theaub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Markham, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Take a look at the Seabrook interview on the Blackhawks website.

The NHL never ceases to amaze me. Never.
I found it interesting that he said that he didn't go to the locker room because "everyone plays through bumps and bruises"

Guess the Hawks don't take well to the new policy.

And of course he was spot on with his assessment of the NHL suspension policy.

theaub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 04:53 PM
  #28
DayNah
Ship it donk!
 
DayNah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks View Post
The NHL is a joke. What this really does is open the door so gutless pukes like Cooke can hit blindside behind the net as that is ok according to Rule 48. All this does is now the Hawks will take runs at the Canucks behind the net because it is ok.

I though the NHL wanted to clean up headshots, this does nothing. The NHL need to do more, like the NFL. Look at them. The best defenive player Harrison was find 100 grande and he now gets it. Why is the NHL so slow in reacting.


This is just it. Chicago has nothing to lose now so I expect some dirty **** tomorrow night. It sucks cause if some bonehead hawk intentionally injures one of the Sedins/Kesler/Luongo/whoever it could be the reason Van doesn't win the cup this year. The NHL really dropped the ball on this.

DayNah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 05:01 PM
  #29
MTP
I Love Shinpads
 
MTP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Joliet, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,657
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MTP
Posters calling for somebody to injure anyone on the Canucks are making me sick. You know what I want to see?

I want to see Seabrook absolutely crush Torres next year with a 100% legal hit. That's what I want.

MTP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 05:05 PM
  #30
madgoat33
Registered User
 
madgoat33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,498
vCash: 500
I'd rather see the hawks throw up the white flag, sit anyone with injuries that could be made worse(bolland, seabrook, brouwer) and play some AHL players and goon up Vancouver like they had rypien and crew do in the past.

madgoat33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 05:26 PM
  #31
darkcaptain86
Registered User
 
darkcaptain86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 721
vCash: 500
I have a lot Respect for seabrook now after watching that interview. He said what he believed in and talked about how if he would have laid there or went out on a stretcher the consequences would have been different. He basically said that the NHL ****ed up.

darkcaptain86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 05:31 PM
  #32
ralph0226
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
this is a joke...

but nothing will happen against the Nucks - the chosen one for 10/11
I don't see the Hawks retaliating, and as far as the Canucks being the chosen ones....that was decided a while ago.

ralph0226 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 05:55 PM
  #33
justsayin*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,928
vCash: 500
Should have been suspended. Torres is Matt Cooke who plays for a Canadian team.

Had to feel awesome getting the cup last year, but the Blackhawks ran into Canada's best hope in the first round. You have been selected for elimination.

justsayin* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 06:07 PM
  #34
Stassino
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Ottawa, On
Country: Northern Ireland
Posts: 1,083
vCash: 500
I'm sorry you guy's didn't get a better reaction from the B.Shl, **** happens.. literally I guess. Raffi so clearly should've been suspended it's just ridiculous..


Here's to hoping someone takes care of him..

Stassino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 06:19 PM
  #35
RJC
Registered User
 
RJC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stassino View Post
Raffi so clearly should've been suspended it's just ridiculous..
It was soooo clear that the NHL didn't suspend him!!



Last edited by RJC: 04-18-2011 at 06:30 PM.
RJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 06:37 PM
  #36
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,705
vCash: 500
Should have been suspended...wow, can't believe he got away with that hit...

I don't understand why these guys go for each others heads? Torres could have gone shoulder to shoulder, body to body?

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 06:47 PM
  #37
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJC View Post
It was soooo clear that the NHL didn't suspend him!!

Well, I don't see any reason not to just repost what I said in the other thread where you posted this (horribly inaccurate) picture of yours.

"Blindside, made up of the two words "blind" and "side." Illuminating, no?

Assuming you have learned what the word "side" means...
"Blind" here refers to what the player cannot see based on the position of his head or has no means of expecting.

The pass came from Seabrook's right. His head turned from a position of about 60 degrees right (do you know your angles?) to a position perpendicular to the boards just as he got hit.
Considering how fast the game moves, Seabrook never had anything close to enough time to process that Torres was even near him.

So, let's review.
Seabrook, for the duration of the play, was looking to the RIGHT. He got hit from the LEFT.

Look at that! It was a blindside hit after all.

Go away, honestly. There's just no talking to some 'Nucks fans. There are a few on here that are fair and that I respect, but sadly they are not in the majority.
Have fun with the rest of your team's playoffs, however long they may last."

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 06:57 PM
  #38
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,863
vCash: 500
I say again:

For the folks that somehow think this was within the rules: The original call was interference. Surely you know what that means but just in case, let me point it out. Seabrook did not and still hasn't touched the puck. Under that circumstance, all your graphs and double talk go out of the window. At the very least we are talking a 5 minute major, and intent to injure therefore a game misconduct.... and thank god they didn't carry Seabrook off on a stretcher.

Shame on Campbell for not doing his job!

BobbyJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:03 PM
  #39
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Well, I don't see any reason not to just repost what I said in the other thread where you posted this (horribly inaccurate) picture of yours.

"Blindside, made up of the two words "blind" and "side." Illuminating, no?

Assuming you have learned what the word "side" means...
"Blind" here refers to what the player cannot see based on the position of his head or has no means of expecting.

The pass came from Seabrook's right. His head turned from a position of about 60 degrees right (do you know your angles?) to a position perpendicular to the boards just as he got hit.
Considering how fast the game moves, Seabrook never had anything close to enough time to process that Torres was even near him.

So, let's review.
Seabrook, for the duration of the play, was looking to the RIGHT. He got hit from the LEFT.

Look at that! It was a blindside hit after all.

Go away, honestly. There's just no talking to some 'Nucks fans. There are a few on here that are fair and that I respect, but sadly they are not in the majority.
Have fun with the rest of your team's playoffs, however long they may last."
Unnecessary hit to the head, and Torres is a ****ing moron for doing that basically his first shift back from Suspension.

But not a blindside hit. He got him from the front, in the head.

Thats how I see it at least, and why I can see it wasn't a suspension. (along with all the "behind the net rules" hallubaloo)

YouCantYandleThis* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:25 PM
  #40
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,863
vCash: 500
Any progress that may have been made to get this bullcrap out of the game took a major hit with this ruling.

We're back to square one and its looking more and more like a player must be killed before something meaningful is done.

BobbyJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:32 PM
  #41
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by icebank_miceelf View Post
Unnecessary hit to the head, and Torres is a ****ing moron for doing that basically his first shift back from Suspension.

But not a blindside hit. He got him from the front, in the head.

Thats how I see it at least, and why I can see it wasn't a suspension. (along with all the "behind the net rules" hallubaloo)
See, that's where the semantics come in.

I've always viewed "blindside" as a hit coming from the opposite direction that a player is looking in. In Seabrook's case, his head was looking right for pretty much the entire duration of that play. Torres hit him from the left.
Do you get where I'm coming from?

I feel as if the NHL has never quite given us enough specifics to really understand what is suspendable and what isn't.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:41 PM
  #42
The Frenchman
Registered User
 
The Frenchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 494
vCash: 500
Does this mean that John Scott will be in the lineup tomorrow?

The Frenchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:48 PM
  #43
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
See, that's where the semantics come in.

I've always viewed "blindside" as a hit coming from the opposite direction that a player is looking in. In Seabrook's case, his head was looking right for pretty much the entire duration of that play. Torres hit him from the left.
Do you get where I'm coming from?

I feel as if the NHL has never quite given us enough specifics to really understand what is suspendable and what isn't.
And this is the problem with the changes entirely. No one knows what the **** is going on, and there's too much left for interpretation.

I do get where you're coming from, but every Canucks fan/player will tell you that it's Seabrook's job to keep his head up in that situation.

Every Hawks fan/player is gonna say that it's Torres' job to realize that Seabrook was in a vulnerable situation.

AFTER THAT, then you can get into whether it was a charge, elbow, player history, intent, or whatever.

Whatever the case, the rules aren't in the least bit clear and someone high up needs to come out and clear things up properly.

YouCantYandleThis* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:50 PM
  #44
DayNah
Ship it donk!
 
DayNah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by icebank_miceelf View Post

Whatever the case, the rules aren't in the least bit clear and someone high up needs to come out and clear things up properly.
This pretty much sums it up. It seems they re write the rules every time somebody does a questionable hit.

DayNah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 07:52 PM
  #45
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by icebank_miceelf View Post
And this is the problem with the changes entirely. No one knows what the **** is going on, and there's too much left for interpretation.

I do get where you're coming from, but every Canucks fan/player will tell you that it's Seabrook's job to keep his head up in that situation.

Every Hawks fan/player is gonna say that it's Torres' job to realize that Seabrook was in a vulnerable situation.

AFTER THAT, then you can get into whether it was a charge, elbow, player history, intent, or whatever.

Whatever the case, the rules aren't in the least bit clear and someone high up needs to come out and clear things up properly.
Agreed on all counts.

There's no reason for this to be such a large gray area. I'd be pretty disappointed if the NHL doesn't make quite a few more specifications this summer. If they want to be taken seriously, than they need to act like it.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 08:03 PM
  #46
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,456
vCash: 500
What I don't understand is why did Gillies get a 10 game suspension for a high hit on Clutterbuck? It also wasn't a blindside hit but he gets 10 games. Is there that big of a difference between bringing your hands up and hitting someone in the head like Gillies did and smashing someone without the puck in the head like Torres did?

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 08:06 PM
  #47
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 111,598
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
What I don't understand is why did Gillies get a 10 game suspension for a high hit on Clutterbuck? It also wasn't a blindside hit but he gets 10 games. Is there that big of a difference between bringing your hands up and hitting someone in the head like Gillies did and smashing someone without the puck in the head like Torres did?
Gillies pissed off NHL and embarrassed them badly with his antics vs Pens

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 09:15 PM
  #48
BBSeabs27
#freeseabs
 
BBSeabs27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,313
vCash: 500
I'd just like to say that the NHL has a lot of work to do this summer.

BBSeabs27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 09:21 PM
  #49
witticism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 76
vCash: 500
Just adding my vote that Raffi should be sitting for, lets say, 4 games. Of course, I am in the camp that thinks that head shots add nothing to the game but shorter NHL careers, and they should all be banned. If that was one of our dmen I would be fuming, so I totally get chicago fans' outrage. Furthermore, I am legitimately worried that something stupid could happen tomorrow, endangering the Canucks and thus their playoff chances.

That said, if Raffi gets Seabrook in the chest/shoulder and levels him, as was possible, then I would be praising Raffi for laying an awesome check... but that wasn't what he did. Seabrook was vulnerable, and he got him straight in the noggin. Thats a no-no and the NHL needs to nut up and start protecting its assets. Seabrook is an Olympian for god sakes, show him some respect.

witticism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2011, 10:24 PM
  #50
Shankill Butcher
Registered User
 
Shankill Butcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
I say again:

For the folks that somehow think this was within the rules: The original call was interference. Surely you know what that means but just in case, let me point it out. Seabrook did not and still hasn't touched the puck. Under that circumstance, all your graphs and double talk go out of the window. At the very least we are talking a 5 minute major, and intent to injure therefore a game misconduct.... and thank god they didn't carry Seabrook off on a stretcher.

Shame on Campbell for not doing his job!
This is my biggest issue with the hit as well. In Campbell's statement he said it wasn't Rule 48 or charging, but the fact that it was an interference call on the ice was never addressed. Either he feels it wasn't interference, or just ignored that fact in his ruling. You can't say there's no suspension because it was a "clean hit" on an interference call without some sort of explanation.

And as for the call on the ice, if the ref felt that that hit was an interference penalty, I would really like to know in his opinion what it would take to justify a major.

Shankill Butcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.