HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Hearing for Torres on Stoll hit (Thurs 9am PT, NYC; w/DW); out for rest of WCSF

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-16-2013, 01:58 AM
  #426
AJ SF4L
#GoSharks
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Its not fair to compare to Kronwall with Torres. The league is going to have trouble tolerating a guy who can't play in the playoffs without giving someone a concussion. Kronwall can do that. Now he might separate a few shoulders along the way
So, by this logic, if Kronwall injures 4 players during the playoffs due to legal checks and Torres injures one person with a legal check, Torres is the one the NHL can't afford to have play in the playoffs?

What about players like Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Orpik, Keith, Chara, Backes, Subban, Brown, Richards, Penner, Bieksa, Roy, Kesler, or Perry? These are all important players that have injured others through checks, legal or illegal, or taken uncalled cheap shots. Most of them have not been called out on their actions by the league. Why should Torres be banned when all of these players are still allowed?

Matt Cooke and Todd Bertuzzi were given the chance; why not Torres? He's had an incredibly clean season, yet one hard check is enough to say "Well, that's a failed project" and give up on him?

AJ SF4L is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:03 AM
  #427
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
The other thing that was different is Hossa wan't in as vulnerable a position that Savard was in which is probably why the results were more favorable to Hossa

WantonAbandon is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:03 AM
  #428
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 60,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Aside from the results they weren't that different. Hossa didn't have puck, Torres clearly knew he didn't have it, Hossa was totally blindsided.
Marc Savard was elbowed in the head. Hossa was not. Big difference.

Gene Parmesan is online now  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:04 AM
  #429
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Marc Savard was elbowed in the head. Hossa was not. Big difference.
I think Cooke hit him with his shoulder

WantonAbandon is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:10 AM
  #430
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 60,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
I think Cooke hit him with his shoulder
It was a chicken wing type play. I'd have to watch it again. The head was definetly the intended target.

Gene Parmesan is online now  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:11 AM
  #431
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ SF4L View Post
So, by this logic, if Kronwall injures 4 players during the playoffs due to legal checks and Torres injures one person with a legal check, Torres is the one the NHL can't afford to have play in the playoffs?

What about players like Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Orpik, Keith, Chara, Backes, Subban, Brown, Richards, Penner, Bieksa, Roy, Kesler, or Perry? These are all important players that have injured others through checks, legal or illegal, or taken uncalled cheap shots. Most of them have not been called out on their actions by the league. Why should Torres be banned when all of these players are still allowed?

Matt Cooke and Todd Bertuzzi were given the chance; why not Torres? He's had an incredibly clean season, yet one hard check is enough to say "Well, that's a failed project" and give up on him?
Most of the players you have mentioned have been suspended at one time or another.
Bertuzzi was suspended for 20 games and that was before the nhl lost their **** over head shots. Torres was given a chance he was allowed to come back after a 25 game suspension.

If Torres is suspended he will be allowed to come back probably during this series

WantonAbandon is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:12 AM
  #432
NWShark*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
My last fifty cents. The only way you can argue that what Torres did wasn't a charge is: You would have to say he lost his footing as a result of the impact. Its possible, but then again Torres does have that reputation....

One thing the league can't do is claim that the hit was interference too.
It's easy to argue it wasn't a charge. It doesn't meet any of the criteria. Sorry but you don't know what charging is.

NWShark* is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:16 AM
  #433
NWShark*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
I think Cooke hit him with his shoulder
Wrong again. Elbow to the face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z1vJrIAg-0

NWShark* is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:16 AM
  #434
sharklife25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Denver, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 256
vCash: 50
This conversation is ridiculous...

[Mod]

Torres did not charge Stoll, his shoulder collided with Stoll's shoulder and proceeded to hit his head. As a result of this, the head WAS NOT the principle point of contact.

Banning fighting has nothign to do with this discussion as there was no fight involved, but either way, I'm still waiting for a rebuttal as to what would happen if you let players take runs at each other....

[Mod]


Last edited by slocal: 05-16-2013 at 02:49 AM. Reason: don't flame
sharklife25 is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:19 AM
  #435
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWShark View Post
It's easy to argue it wasn't a charge. It doesn't meet any of the criteria. Sorry but you don't know what charging is.
I don't think you understand just how broad the rule is:

A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates or jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner

There is the rule.... Let me guess you don't think Torres charged Hossa?

WantonAbandon is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:21 AM
  #436
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWShark View Post
Wrong again. Elbow to the face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z1vJrIAg-0
Uh no I believe I agree with the Boston commentators

WantonAbandon is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:24 AM
  #437
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharklife25 View Post
This conversation is ridiculous...

[Mod]

Torres did not charge Stoll, his shoulder collided with Stoll's shoulder and proceeded to hit his head. As a result of this, the head WAS NOT the principle point of contact.

Banning fighting has nothign to do with this discussion as there was no fight involved, but either way, I'm still waiting for a rebuttal as to what would happen if you let players take runs at each other....

[Mod]
[Mod] I'm just a realist. If players start running each other the refs can start calling penalties. Fighting is going to do diddly squat. Most likely the Cooke of old just won't fight you... I'm mean sure he will fight Evander Kane (mistakenly thinking its a good idea) but he won't fight someone like McGratton. I commented on fighting in response to a post a while back having to do with culture and what not.... [Mod]


Last edited by slocal: 05-16-2013 at 02:50 AM. Reason: edited quote and response
WantonAbandon is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:29 AM
  #438
nosoupforyou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 6
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWShark View Post
Wrong again. Elbow to the face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z1vJrIAg-0
notice how Savard's head whips like Stoll's head? that's what happens when you get hit in the side of the head. if it were whiplash, the head would move toward the impact area, not away. Just as if you get rear ended in your car, your head will snap back, hopefully into your head rest, then spring forward.

Torres is one dirty player, unfortunately as you are finding out, suspensions are the risk of obtaining his services.

nosoupforyou is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:31 AM
  #439
AJ SF4L
#GoSharks
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Most of the players you have mentioned have been suspended at one time or another.
Bertuzzi was suspended for 20 games and that was before the nhl lost their **** over head shots. Torres was given a chance he was allowed to come back after a 25 game suspension.

If Torres is suspended he will be allowed to come back probably during this series
The problem with saying "They've been suspended" is that it doesn't mean anything. Suspending someone once for a game or two doesn't change anything. Neal was suspended multiple times, one of which was in the playoffs; does that stop him from taking cheapshots? Brown has been getting away with elbows for years and only just recently was punished; do you think one 2-game suspension will change him? Or what about Crosby or Malkin, who both have never been suspended, let alone fined, for their multiple cheapshots; what message does not suspending them send to other players?

Moreover, if the second someone who has a bad history makes a hard, legal check that may have led to injury, and they are instantly whisked away to New York to face a possible 5+ game suspension, does that honestly seem like that player was given a chance? Torres was deliberately singled out by the NHL in order to put him on a pedestal and say, "Look, we are doing a good job cracking down on repeat offenders." Yet in doing so, they ignored Regher elbowing Pavelski and Penner's hit on Wingels. Is the league truly giving Torres a chance if it ignores others and solely focuses on him?

AJ SF4L is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:33 AM
  #440
Crafton
Liver-Eating Johnson
 
Crafton's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,607
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Uh no I believe I agree with the Boston commentators
uh, what Boston commentators? that video links to the FSN Pittsburgh broadcast. even most Pens fans will admit that Steigerwald is a travesty.

Crafton is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 02:48 AM
  #441
KT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 35
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Just because the shoulder clipped Stoll's shoulder doesn't negate that Torres hit Stoll in the head whether you want to call it with the back of his shoulder or his back, he got Stoll's head on the follow-through. It is textbook blindside from the angle he took. It is the same angle Thornton took on Perron.
It's not like stick contact with the head where intent is irrelevant. Read the rule. There has to be clear INTENT to impact the head. Incidental contact from a clean shoulder hit is NOT to be penalized. Besides, how does a guy target another guy's head with the BACK of his helmet? Try it sometime.

KT is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 04:17 AM
  #442
spintheblackcircle
$$$$$$$$
 
spintheblackcircle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 42,931
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Its not unfair. Malkin and Ovechkin have dealt out just as much ****in dirt as Torres
ummmm no

__________________
Changes come. Keep your dignity. Take the high road. Take it like a man.
spintheblackcircle is online now  
Old
05-16-2013, 04:19 AM
  #443
NWShark*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crafton View Post
uh, what Boston commentators? that video links to the FSN Pittsburgh broadcast. even most Pens fans will admit that Steigerwald is a travesty.
don't let facts get in the way of a good argument...

NWShark* is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 05:46 AM
  #444
Plowevelski
wuts this SCF thing?
 
Plowevelski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: BASED PETE DaBoAR
Country: Madagascar
Posts: 1,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Flintstone View Post
No way Torres gets suspended for that hit, I would be shocked
Funniest thing I've read in a long time. I wish it was so... But no he's gonna get suspended because of who he is. Lets suspend Patty too for his clean hit on Doughboy moments before. Doughty was hurt and hunched over! Oh no. Ban hitting. What a circus act that game 1 was. Why does LA have so many chill fans but their team pisses me off so bad with this diving, acting, cheap, dirty bs hockey and I can't stand pretty much anyone on their roster besides Kopitar... UGH. It's getting nearly as bad as Vancouver.

Such bull.. Taking away one of our key depth guys who can come up big and hit and make plays.. What about Bieksa and all the Dbag Nucks players with all their dirty ****? Yeah Glasslat STILL hasn't returned from that great hockey play Bieksa made. Good job Shannahan. Yeah fly Torres out because Stool is just that.. Stool.

Seriously just give LA the series already. Plan the parade, roll out the red carpet for acting, I mean the Kings. Repeat champs! (Now I'm wishing Detroit won in 2009 more and more...) Legit bro

Oh yeah and I forgot what about Edler whacking Burish on the hand effectively making him unable to play? Yeah Burish is the whipping boy but so what? That isn't the point. Torres does that he's gone for like an entire season. **** this league, seriously.

Plowevelski is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 08:30 AM
  #445
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 46,133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWShark View Post
It negates the primary issue that the head was the principal point of contact. That right there means it wasn't a penalty.

Fraser said Stoll was eligible to be checked. It's one of the few points he got right in his assessment of the hit.
It actually does not negate the head being principal point of contact. Principal point of contact means what took the brunt of the violence...not what was hit first. Torres' principal point of contact was the head, period. Whether it is the back of his shoulder or his back, the head took the brunt of the hit, not Stoll's shoulder. Thus, Stoll's head is the principal point of contact and Torres is subject to the rules therein.

Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
Does the textbook really say that the blind side is the direction the player is looking at?
The way the NHL has defined what is a blind side hit is any angle not directly in front of the player essentially. An absolutely asinine interpretation, I know, but that's pretty much what they've gone with. Thornton's angle to Perron is no different than Torres to Stoll. If either Stoll or Perron have their head up, they'd see someone incoming. We can argue this point til we're blue in the face but that is what they've been using as a standard for blindside.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
My last fifty cents. The only way you can argue that what Torres did wasn't a charge is: You would have to say he lost his footing as a result of the impact. Its possible, but then again Torres does have that reputation....

One thing the league can't do is claim that the hit was interference too.
The league isn't claiming this is a charge or interference. They're claiming it's an illegal check to the head. By their rules, it is that. The only other thing it could be by their own standards is roughing but that's pretty much all-encompassing. This wasn't a charge by league standards. League standards has a charge being more than three strides into the hit and/or leaping into the hit. Torres does neither of these things. The refs knew it was a check to the head but they just didn't want to call the penalty as such because they didn't want the focal point to be on them when it got to this point of supplemental discipline. Standard playoff cop-out officiating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sharklife25 View Post
This conversation is ridiculous...

[Mod]

Torres did not charge Stoll, his shoulder collided with Stoll's shoulder and proceeded to hit his head. As a result of this, the head WAS NOT the principle point of contact.

Banning fighting has nothign to do with this discussion as there was no fight involved, but either way, I'm still waiting for a rebuttal as to what would happen if you let players take runs at each other....

[Mod]
Your recollection of the event is correct. Your conclusion is not. The head is the principal point of contact because it took the brunt of the hit. Principal does not always equal first. Principal by the interpretation the league has taken with this is meant to be the most or the most important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KT View Post
It's not like stick contact with the head where intent is irrelevant. Read the rule. There has to be clear INTENT to impact the head. Incidental contact from a clean shoulder hit is NOT to be penalized. Besides, how does a guy target another guy's head with the BACK of his helmet? Try it sometime.
The intent may be difficult to prove but I don't think the league has to talk themselves into it too much when it comes to Torres. The reason why they could easily say intent is because Torres committed to hitting Stoll when he was in a vulnerable position. Yes, Stoll was straightening up but when Torres decided to make his move into the play and take the body, Stoll was bent over the entire time so he's going after a vulnerable player.

I have no doubt that Torres had no intention of hitting Stoll in the head. I recognize that he's done real work in cleaning up his game. However, he was reckless in this instance and he did get Stoll in the head. This was the risk the Sharks took when they got this guy with his history. He's not going to be given the benefit of the doubt and he will play on the physical edge. And with him in his current state with his past, it is a double-edged sword. This particular hit, for someone with no history, may be a fine or a one game suspension. For Torres, it is probably 5 to 10. Hopefully, DW can knock it down but this is what the reality is for someone like Torres. They won't give him a clean slate overnight even with this year of clean play.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 10:02 AM
  #446
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
WA,
On Kronwall, he is frequently not called for charging. He is short and he does leave his feet on a regular basis for hits. I am amazed that he hasn't been called with regularity.

GeneP,
IMO, the three worst headshots were Cooke/Savard followed by Richards/Booth followed by Torres/Michalek.

NW,
Bring up a poster's personal history is a moot point. Truth is truth no matter the source. An argument citing poster's history is a sideshow of an argument. Please refrain in the future if you want to be taken seriously. Argue the argument not the poster's history. And in this case you are incorrect regarding the history.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 10:52 AM
  #447
Sleepy
2014 Avenged
 
Sleepy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
WA,
On Kronwall, he is frequently not called for charging. He is short and he does leave his feet on a regular basis for hits. I am amazed that he hasn't been called with regularity.
So unbelievably true.

Sleepy is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 11:01 AM
  #448
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 60,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
WA,
On Kronwall, he is frequently not called for charging. He is short and he does leave his feet on a regular basis for hits. I am amazed that he hasn't been called with regularity.

GeneP,
IMO, the three worst headshots were Cooke/Savard followed by Richards/Booth followed by Torres/Michalek.

NW,
Bring up a poster's personal history is a moot point. Truth is truth no matter the source. An argument citing poster's history is a sideshow of an argument. Please refrain in the future if you want to be taken seriously. Argue the argument not the poster's history. And in this case you are incorrect regarding the history.
I'd agree with those. I always forget Richards/Booth. That was a cheap shot.

Gene Parmesan is online now  
Old
05-16-2013, 11:07 AM
  #449
deekortiz3
Registered User
 
deekortiz3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 980
vCash: 500
I realized it was 9am and the "Du Du Du" sounds from the People's Court played in my head.

deekortiz3 is offline  
Old
05-16-2013, 11:11 AM
  #450
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 46,972
vCash: 500
The operative word here should be "and". If it can be seen as Torres "targeting the head" I'm gonna barf. The official release refers to "Illegal Check to the Head". This is all they should be looking at.

Quote:
48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A hit resulting in contact with an
opponent’s head where the head is targeted and the principal point of
contact
is not permitted. However, in determining whether such a hit
should have been permitted, the circumstances of the hit, including
whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately
prior to or simultaneously with the hit or the head contact on an
otherwise legal body check was avoidable, can be considered.

__________________
Led Zappa is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:13 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.