I've kept quiet about all these incidents the entire time...but let me just voice the following without getting into stupid fights with each fanbase.
1. Flyers. You guys won the game, our 4th line was on and Vitale made a big, clean it. Schenn and Crosby were rumbling all game. Guess what...that is hockey. Would it have matter if Vitale made that hit 10 sec into the 1st period? No. Did Schenn get a penalty after cross checking Crosby? Nope. Who cares.
Milbury afterwards...(and this will come into play later). When you're a part of a professional league and depends on a fan base that has to compete with all other sports...regardless if any one sees it or not...whether you agree with it or not...whether its true or not...there is a certain amount of professionalism EXPECTED and REQUIRED! Those comments by Milbury were childish, plain and simple. Of course this is not the first time he's put his foot in his mouth. Don Cherry does it all the time. You can call someone out all you want...but you just do not make light of a injury issue that is plaguing the league. That is unprofessional and uncalled for. Plain and simple. I would have the same level of disgust if he said it about Pronger, Giroux, Letang, Hall...or any other player that has received a concussion ever. It's in extremely poor taste and Milbury displayed very poor judgement making the statements. It's not something the league wants in it...I don't care your views on the executive committee for the NHL.
Laviollette got fined for his antics...as he should have. So did Granto...as he should have. The Pens and Flyers seemed to deal with it the next game with a fight. Thats hockey. To say that the Penguins sent out goons to hurt anyone is irresponsible and childish.
2. Boston game. Players embellish calls ALL. THE. TIME! I can honestly not even fathom how many times I've seen a player close their arm on another players stick to get the hooking call. Its called acting and whether or not we like it...it's apart of the game. Boston players are just as guilty as are every other team in the league. To call out the Penguins and act as if all embellishment is 100% concentrated within the Penguins...again...childish. Come on guys...get frickin real. The whining about that incident that took place should be more than enough to embarrass any fan base. Not gonna even get into the irony about fans whining about the fan base they whine about whining. Again...grow up.
3. Rangers fiasco. 1. The Orpik hit could have gone either way. It was an unfortunate it, pure and simple. To suggest Orpik intentionally kneed him to hurt him...come on. Get over yourselves. Not a change in hell. Yes, I'm sorry Stephan got hurt...but guess what...players get hurt on unfortunate collisions like that. I understand the Rangers fans wanting a call...and the refs got it right. 5 and a game. Thats what the play warranted, thats what he got.
Tortz...again...this is a professional league. There is a certain standard of conduct EXPECTED AND REQUIRED by all players and coaches. Tortz disregarded this standard and let his emotions get the best of him. He went on an unprofessional rant and targeted players that had nothing to do with the incident and the organization as a whole. When has it EVER been acceptable to do that? It never has been and it never will be. Tortz made a mistake and got the fine. Anyone who disagrees with the fine needs to step back and think about what it means to be an NHL coach and the appropriate ways one needs to conduct themselves. It was, again, childish and unprofessional.
This article...should be an example of the kind of disgusting journalism that should not be tolerated in this league. It, again, has NEVER been acceptable for anyone that got in trouble in those games to conduct themselves the way they did. NEVER. They ranted and got the fine. Man up and accept it. No different than HF Boards. You wanna go on the main boards and rant and rave against a fan base in an unacceptable manner...the Mods are gonna have their way with you. End of story.
This article is right up there with the disgusting journalism displayed when the guy accused Ovechkin of doing steroids...
Did Brooks make up Mario's comments and the fact that he wasn't fined?
Did Brooks make up Tortorella being fined for similar comments that were focused even more on the Penguins organization than the league?
Did Brooks make up the fact that Milbury has been attacking players characters for years, but only was reprimanded and coerced to apologize when it was about Crosby?
Do you need the link again? Maybe you clicked the wrong one.
Did Brooks make up about Torts saying the league and NBC wanted the Winter Classic to go to OT for ratings (referring to the penalty shot call) and that's why he got fined....again?
Oh, that's right. he didn't mention that he's a repeat offender.
I think that's taking into account fighting majors, which shouldn't be included.
Also, the Penguins always seem to find themselves with a power play in overtime, and I'd be willing to get they have the most 5 on 3 power plays in the last few years. Now, don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting theres a conspiracy to gift the penguins more power plays. It's simply that the Penguins best players are all divers, so they draw a lot of penalties, and since the league forgets to enforce the unsportsmanlike diving rule, and at best, gives BOTH players penalties, it results in lots of PPs for the pens. Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Kunitz, Sullivan are all notorious divers. And Letang is in a league of his own. What an absolute phony. Have some pride, for gods sake.
talking about substance. way to embarrass yourself.
Can we have one ***** about Crosby or Pittsburgh thread on the main board were everyone with half a brain cell goes to ***** about conspiracies and other garbage instead of a new thread every day.
A coach got fined for having no class. He can say anything about anyone in private, when he does it on the air... It's got nothing to do with Pittsburgh, their players, penalties or Rangers. It has to do with a NHL coach (Management) airing dirty laundry...
...and why shouldn't it? There are some Ranger fans that would rather blame a shadowy, evidence-free conspiracy instead of taking a hard look at the ineptitude of their own franchise.
I don't really remember the play. If I did, I would have addressed it. For the sake of argument, I think Ovechkin got plenty of leeway with the league over the years.
How could you NOT remember this play? It was talked about ad nauseum when it happened and is constantly brought up, especially by Penguins fans.
The real reason you can't remember however is that you are another unfortunate victim of confirmation bias. You can remember every single incident, including that one time Cooke gave Richards a dirty look, but if it doesn't support your outrageous theory it quickly disappears from your memory altogether. It's easy to see why one would believe in a conspiracy theory when they suffer from this kind of affliction. I guess what I'm trying to say is .. well, I'm sorry.
A coach got fined for having no class. He can say anything about anyone in private, when he does it on the air... It's got nothing to do with Pittsburgh, their players, penalties or Rangers. It has to do with a NHL coach (Management) airing dirty laundry...
Just like Lemieux's letter to the league about the Penguins and Islanders event, but oh wait nothing happened to the Penguins.
How could you NOT remember this play? It was talked about ad nauseum when it happened and is constantly brought up, especially by Penguins fans.
The real reason you can't remember however is that you are another unfortunate victim of confirmation bias. You can remember every single incident, including that one time Cooke gave Richards a dirty look, but if it doesn't support your outrageous theory it quickly disappears from your memory altogether. It's easy to see why one would believe in a conspiracy theory when they suffer from this kind of affliction. I guess what I'm trying to say is .. well, I'm sorry.
this is exactly what I wanted to prove when I asked about the Ovechkin/Gonchar incident, but my english isn't helping me yet... so thanks.
Some of us want to see a league where everyone is treated equal and on their own merits. Get rid of this draft and salary cap nonsense and we might actually start getting there...
Bettman has clear biases and handpicked favourites. Playoff series have been 'nudged' in certain directions for years now. We all have seen it. The double standards are blatent, as Brooks has pointed out.
If you have this amount of problems with the league, I suggest another hobby. If things are as bad as you say, why bother watching?
Did Brooks make up about Torts saying the league and NBC wanted the Winter Classic to go to OT for ratings (referring to the penalty shot call) and that's why he got fined....again?
Oh, that's right. he didn't mention that he's a repeat offender.
Is this a joke? "Repeat offender" is considered for dirty suspendable hits. It has absolutely no bearing on whether a guy can speak his mind about another organization or not. Are you new here?
Is this a joke? "Repeat offender" is considered for dirty suspendable hits. It has absolutely no bearing on whether a guy can speak his mind about another organization or not. Are you new here?
I find it hilarious you refuse to acknowledge the multiple criticisms of your brilliant posts regarding what seems to be true.
I think what it comes down to is Torts should've just chosen his words more carefully. If he just toned it down and called NHL a 'Garbage League, he'd be alright.
Is this a joke? "Repeat offender" is considered for dirty suspendable hits. It has absolutely no bearing on whether a guy can speak his mind about another organization or not. Are you new here?
So you're saying that a coach being fined earlier in the year for questioning the league, has no bearings when he does it a 2nd, 3rd or 4th time in that season?
And of course, any such irrational instituition would be so blind to any sense of logic that it would protect a graying post-industrial city over the Media Capital of the World?
if there was as many individual points of view proposing that the NYR are the recipients of preferrential treatment, I guess I wouldn't be able to ignore it. Which is my point.
also, your point assumes the biggest interest for the league officials would be the profits of the NY media market. But Bettman's term is known for stubbornly trying to show that the NHL can succeed in #1 smaller markets, and #2 non-traditional hockey markets. The goal of his admin hasn't been to show just how much coverage and attention the NHL could soak out of places like Van, Tor, NY, or LA. I'm not tying this to my original point, but just addressing your sarcastic counter-point, but having Pittsburgh fail as a franchise would mean less growth potential then the NYR not having a Cup franchise. My view-point obviously isn't that i fill the NYR or any other team has been deprived anything at all. But like I've stated, the amount of different places that the favoritism crticism comes from is impossible to blow-off, unless sticking your head in the sand is a legit defense.
I think what it comes down to is Torts should've just chosen his words more carefully. If he just toned it down and called NHL a 'Garbage League, he'd be alright.
I think the quote you're looking for is Garage League, at least get it right.
The degree to which people go all-in on this and can only see one extreme or the other is mind-boggling. And I'm not so much referring to Tortorella, but more Milbury. There's an intermediate position between "him apologizing has nothing to do with the Penguins/Crosby!" and "Milbury was forced to apologize by Bettman/NBC for insulting the golden boy!". The fact is, Milbury has made pathetic, boorish comments about both individual players and entire nationalities before without reprimand, but only now is he forced to apologize for something he said. What was the reason?
-Because he made a negative comment about Crosby specifically?
-Because he made a joke about concussions, a serious contemporary health issue in the NHL?
-Because he made stereotypical, sexist comments about an NHL head coach during a time in which the NHL is trying to promote inclusiveness and acceptance?
It's probably a combination of all three, yet some people want to say it's only because of the first, while others want to contend the first has absolutely nothing to do with it. Both positions are extreme, and, in my opinion, somewhat naive.
You get the drift though don't you? What are your thoughts on it?
Lemieux made the statement as a player and not a head coach for starters. He was also the best player in the game at the time and was whining because clutching and grabbing was pissing him off. Torts is not in a union he's part of management and is held to a higher standard when it comes to whining. Could technically fine both and I can't recall if Lemieux got fined for that all those years ago or not actually.
The vast majority of these owners live and die with league revenue. Propping up certain players and teams bolsters league revenue thus lining their pockets and keeping their teams making money. Pretty simple economics, really.
This seems to be the logic in place for why the Pens allegedly get favorable treatment - it's good for business. But then, by that token, aren't you saying that bigger market teams get preferential treatment? Surely the league would love to see the Rangers in the playoffs as opposed to a team like the Hurricanes, Panthers, or Lightning. So, in the future, when the Rangers come back to earth and are back to battling for 8th seeds instead of Presidents Trophies, should we expect the NHL to administer favoritism in their direction to make sure they get in over teams that would make the league less money and give them less exposure?
Or maybe we should look no further than their first round matchup. Who do you think the NHL would rather see advance to the second round, Ottawa or New York? Hmm. If I see anything resembling favoritism for the Rangers I'll be sure to flood the main boards alerting others of this travesty.
Lemieux made the statement as a player and not a head coach for starters. He was also the best player in the game at the time and was whining because clutching and grabbing was pissing him off. Torts is not in a union he's part of management and is held to a higher standard when it comes to whining. Could technically fine both and I can't recall if Lemieux got fined for that all those years ago or not actually.
What has a more negative effect on the league though? Lemieux was the best player in the league at the time, and basically called the NHL a joke. Also no, I don't believe he recieved any type of fine, or even a warning. It's that sort of thing that has some people questioning the fairness is all.
