Its crazy what a difference a decade makes. 10 years ago it was Eric Lindros' fault for his concussions because he skated with his head down. He was never considered a "guy in a vulnerable position." It was always "he needs to keep his head up if he doesn't want to get hurt."
I wonder how long Scott Stevens' career would have been if he started playing now instead of the 80's.
This^^^^
The problem today is the equipment players are wearing.
Shoulder and elbow pads are like friggin steel.
If Stevens wore today's equipment back then, players would have died.
That said, watching the replay of Horton getting hit; I think the damage was done when his head snapped back and when he hit the ice.
Had he got up and skated back in to the play after the hit, I doubt if there would have been a penalty.
Like I said when Pacioretty got hurt. The injury resulted from an illegal play(interference).
While the hit in and of itself seems to be quite legal (didn't live his feet, moving north-south, elbow tucked, contact being made both with the head and chest), the fact that it was interference, Rome should be suspend.
The one thing I want Bruins fans to take out of this is to understand how the habs fans felt. Although all Chara was trying to do was rub Pacioretty out, the play was still interference. Had Horton had the puck, it would have been hard for the refs to throw him out imo.
Great game for the Bruins. I thought they played much more aggressive and they forechecked really well and caused the Vancouver defense to make mistakes often. Timmy played great again and has played great the entire series IMO. In the end it still only counts for 1 win,but I do think it was a huge win for reasons such as:
1. Came back hard after the Horton injury
2. PP is looking better and getting results
3. PK continues to play really strong against a really good Vancouver PP
4. Gained confidence in their Offensive game
5. Getting 8 goals past Luongo! I still can't believe he was still in at the end of the game.
Hopefully, we play like this in Game#4. It has been a very tight series and the Bruins are playing better each game.
Like I said when Pacioretty got hurt. The injury resulted from an illegal play(interference).
While the hit in and of itself seems to be quite legal (didn't live his feet, moving north-south, elbow tucked, contact being made both with the head and chest), the fact that it was interference, Rome should be suspend.
The one thing I want Bruins fans to take out of this is to understand how the habs fans felt. Although all Chara was trying to do was rub Pacioretty out, the play was still interference. Had Horton had the puck, it would have been hard for the refs to throw him out imo.
as a bruins fan i agreed with the fact that chara should have received a suspension because it was interference. just as i agree rome should
Like I said when Pacioretty got hurt. The injury resulted from an illegal play(interference).
While the hit in and of itself seems to be quite legal (didn't live his feet, moving north-south, elbow tucked, contact being made both with the head and chest), the fact that it was interference, Rome should be suspend.
The one thing I want Bruins fans to take out of this is to understand how the habs fans felt. Although all Chara was trying to do was rub Pacioretty out, the play was still interference. Had Horton had the puck, it would have been hard for the refs to throw him out imo.
With all due respect. Take the HABS crap out of here. You guys have been trolling the bruins threads since you got eliminated. No one really cares about the habs or pacioretty right now in the finals.
With all due respect. Take the HABS crap out of here. You guys have been trolling the bruins threads since you got eliminated. No one really cares about the habs or pacioretty right now in the finals.
Maybe acouple of months ago, but not atm. Thanks.
Stop whining. It's a similar situation and it's just funny to see that when the shoe is on the other foot, the fans who tried to defend one case is the same fan base freaking over a similar injury.
It's extremely relevant and I kept on topic, it's not my fault you don't like what I've pointed out about double standards.
Wow... What a loss! Hahaha.. Oh well, I'd almost rather lose in that fashion then have it be 3-0. Maybe it'll wake these guys up.
The first 4 goals or so ended the game, after that we weren't really playing hockey any more. Which is too bad for Lu, we left him out to dry there and AV kept him in the net. I would have liked to throw Schneider in as soon as AV noticed which direction the game was going.
Out of thought out of mind though. Last I checked, you didn't win a best of 7 in game 3. It's not like MOST of us Canuck fans expected Boston to just roll over and get swept, they're a good team. I remember after period 1 I said to my buddy: "Wow, this is good hockey. Best two 5v5 teams in the league." Then, everything went to ****.
Truth is scott stevens' hits were not clean by todays standards. We have evolved in such a way that we now deem those hits unacceptable. I thiunk it is for the better tbh. Its a lot easier for Rome to let up there than it is for Horton to evade that hit without playing "scared".
I agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycbruins
Lindros had the puck when he'd get labeled. Horton didn't. Simple huge difference.
He should be looking out for himself better but the hit was late, high, and he jumped into it.
But if you're allowed to bite, then I guess everything is fair game
I'm not talking about that specific hit really, just how the perception of a play like that has changed. Stevens had plenty of similar hits that were deemed brutal, but clean, open ice hits where the other player was at fault for having his head down or admiring his pass.
Now its the complete opposite. The player is considered dirty, and reckless for delivering a hit that they grew up watching their idols make. The same hits that made highlight reels, and that the player was applauded for delivering.
I'm just saying its interesting to see how things have changed.
Stop whining. It's a similar situation and it's just funny to see that when the shoe is on the other foot, the fans who tried to defend one case is the same fan base freaking over a similar injury.
It's extremely relevant and I kept on topic, it's not my fault you don't like what I've pointed out about double standards.
They are two totally different hits. One, Chara is like a foot taller than Pax, so it obviously looks like a head target. Two, it was a simple rub out play that happens 10 times a game, just so happened to be on the area of the ice where there is a stanchion. Three, no one gives a **** anymore. Four, you really want to ***** about every single thing that has happened in the past? If you are going to *****, ***** about Zednik and McLaren. Bruins fans have seen one career end in Marc Savard and nearly two with Patrice Bergeron, so I think we have a right to be a little defendant and pissed off.
Enough with this Max Pax BS. The two hits are not even CLOSE to the same play.
And another thing, if you really think that at the speed the game is played, Chara had time to think and decide to ram Pax's head into the stanchion, you're an idiot.
They are two totally different hits. One, Chara is like a foot taller than Pax, so it obviously looks like a head target. Two, it was a simple rub out play that happens 10 times a game, just so happened to be on the area of the ice where there is a stanchion. Three, no one gives a **** anymore. Four, you really want to ***** about every single thing that has happened in the past? If you are going to *****, ***** about Zednik and McLaren. Bruins fans have seen one career end in Marc Savard and nearly two with Patrice Bergeron, so I think we have a right to be a little defendant and pissed off.
Enough with this Max Pax BS. The two hits are not even CLOSE to the same play.
And another thing, if you really think that at the speed the game is played, Chara had time to think and decide to ram Pax's head into the stanchion, you're an idiot.
They are similar plays because they are both injuries that resulted from an illegal play.
had Horton had the puck when Rome hit him, I doubt he even gets a penalty. Nothing about the hit was dirty other than it was late.
Same goes with Chara's rubbing out. And that's why they are comparable.
And like I said when Pacioretty got hurt, Rome like Chara should be suspended because of an injury occuring on an illegal play.
It's funny because I argued with Bruins fans for days about how it should be a suspension because it was an illegal play, yet they argued otherwise citing hypothetical scenarios, one of which was what happened to Horton.
Great game for the Bruins. I thought they played much more aggressive and they forechecked really well and caused the Vancouver defense to make mistakes often. Timmy played great again and has played great the entire series IMO. In the end it still only counts for 1 win,but I do think it was a huge win for reasons such as:
1. Came back hard after the Horton injury
2. PP is looking better and getting results
3. PK continues to play really strong against a really good Vancouver PP
4. Gained confidence in their Offensive game
5. Getting 8 goals past Luongo! I still can't believe he was still in at the end of the game.
Hopefully, we play like this in Game#4. It has been a very tight series and the Bruins are playing better each game.
Go Bruins Go!
Ohh common, give us some credit. Yes, the Bruins played great, but the score was what it was because of how awful the Canucks played. Our defense was making errors despite the forecheck, it was very uncharacteristic and I don't foresee it happeneing in game 4. We're good at dealing with the forecheck, last night was just awful.
If Boston played like they did last night (which was their best game) and we played like we did in games 1 or 2, I'd predict likely a 1 goal game. Keep in mind you guys were outshot, and TT played brilliantly.
Not to take anything away from the Bruins, you guys were the better team last night. I do credit this much more to a Vancouver melt down though then anything else.
Ohh common, give us some credit. Yes, the Bruins played great, but the score was what it was because of how awful the Canucks played. Our defense was making errors despite the forecheck, it was very uncharacteristic and I don't foresee it happeneing in game 4. We're good at dealing with the forecheck, last night was just awful.
If Boston played like they did last night (which was their best game) and we played like we did in games 1 or 2, I'd predict likely a 1 goal game. Keep in mind you guys were outshot, and TT played brilliantly.
Not to take anything away from the Bruins, you guys were the better team last night. I do credit this much more to a Vancouver melt down though then anything else.
And we could say the same for games 1 and 2. I've been saying this all along...these two teams are closer than ppl think.
They are similar plays because they are both injuries that resulted from an illegal play.
had Horton had the puck when Rome hit him, I doubt he even gets a penalty. Nothing about the hit was dirty other than it was late.
Same goes with Chara's rubbing out. And that's why they are comparable.
And like I said when Pacioretty got hurt, Rome like Chara should be suspended because of an injury occuring on an illegal play.
It's funny because I argued with Bruins fans for days about how it should be a suspension because it was an illegal play, yet they argued otherwise citing hypothetical scenarios, one of which was what happened to Horton.
Are you serious? If he had the puck....well sorry bro, but that's why it was an illegal hit, he made THREE strides before getting hit.
Pacioretty was BOARDERLINE interference at best. We see the rub out play all the time, the guy dumps the puck into the zone and the defenseman pinches and seals him off on the boards. An open ice hit almost a full second after he releases the puck versus an injury that occurred only because the Bell Centre doesn't pad the stanchion well is not close.
Wow... What a loss! Hahaha.. Oh well, I'd almost rather lose in that fashion then have it be 3-0. Maybe it'll wake these guys up.
The first 4 goals or so ended the game, after that we weren't really playing hockey any more. Which is too bad for Lu, we left him out to dry there and AV kept him in the net. I would have liked to throw Schneider in as soon as AV noticed which direction the game was going.
Out of thought out of mind though. Last I checked, you didn't win a best of 7 in game 3. It's not like MOST of us Canuck fans expected Boston to just roll over and get swept, they're a good team. I remember after period 1 I said to my buddy: "Wow, this is good hockey. Best two 5v5 teams in the league." Then, everything went to ****.
After four goals, AV asked Lu if he wanted out. Lu refused.
Are you serious? If he had the puck....well sorry bro, but that's why it was an illegal hit, he made THREE strides before getting hit.
Pacioretty was BOARDERLINE interference at best. We see the rub out play all the time, the guy dumps the puck into the zone and the defenseman pinches and seals him off on the boards. An open ice hit almost a full second after he releases the puck versus an injury that occurred only because the Bell Centre doesn't pad the stanchion well is not close.
Get your Habs troll **** out of here.
How am i trolling when I'm saying Rome should get suspended for the same reasons I thought Chara should get suspended?
Go rewatch the video, pacioretty also takes 3 strides before getting rubbed out.
Btw, the refs also gave Chara an interference penalty and then a misconduct because of the injury.
If you think I'm trolling then that's your problem. Not my fault you're so sensitive to others pointing out double standards.
How am i trolling when I'm saying Rome should get suspended for the same reasons I thought Chara should get suspended?
Go rewatch the video, pacioretty also takes 3 strides before getting rubbed out.
Btw, the refs also gave Chara an interference penalty and then a misconduct because of the injury.
If you think I'm trolling then that's your problem. Not my fault you're so sensitive to others pointing out double standards.
