HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

OYLer Opines and Laments

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-23-2003, 03:55 PM
  #1
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
OYLer Opines and Laments

In another thread I was responding to the following comments. In order not to muddy that thread with such a lengthy response this thread is offered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyF
As for Laraque VS Worrell... they are super tight buddies off the ice. If they do go, man it isn't because they want to put it that way.
That's the problem with the new instigator rule. Now we have replaced appropriate competitive violence with a phoney and contrived dance, a system of controlled ritual violence. I swear the WWF has come to the NHL. When our reigning heavyweight and their new young tough guy agree to 'go' it becomes just plain insulting to us, the fans of hockey. Such a parody of what fighting is to, and how it benefits the game of hockey has become manifestly distasteful in its destiny.

In the last game against St. Louis, Tkachuk ran over Salo intentionally. Tommy could have been hurt and after that incident Tommy's game certainly didn't get any better. Any professional hockey team properly coached, would immediately, have Tkachuk pounded senseless, the message clearly sent, no crap like that happens to anyone on our team, especially at home and in our building. Those who take liberties get hammered; no questions asked.

I would rather have Laraque skate hard and make a huge legal hit, leave Forsberg wincing in pain, or maybe re-arrange Selanne's face on the plexiglass, and force Worrell to come out and defend his skilled players, than have Georges take a silly, in your face, drop the gloves penalty. And when Worrell and Georges do go, I don't want either of them worrying about possibly losing their team the game because of an instigator penalty. Worse yet, when a player gets injured because of intentional or careless misuse of the stick, a message must be sent to the perpetrator, a fist breaking his nose works for me. Folks, this men's NHL professional hockey not tiddlywinks!

Worst of all, is when players intentionally attempt to injure, or regretably, in the heat of the moment, loses control because the harmed players have no on ice recourse to address the damage done. Consider the last time the Avs played the Blues and Pronger viciously crosschecked Paul Kariya, 8 steamboats, after Paul scored a goal. Sure Pronger got a slap-on-the-wrist roughing penalty. However, coming to the aid of his teammate, Rob Blake was given a roughing penalty because he didn't want to drop his gloves. With the game still in the balance, defending a skilled player and going to the box for 7 minutes wouldn't have been smart. When the puck next dropped if an enforcer could have come out, to take care of business, without putting his team in a hole, those kind of cheapshots would not occur or happen much less frequently.

So when play resumed, at the faceoff, it was a 4 on 4, to my great disappointment. The advantage was nullified and Pronger got away scot-free after cheap-shotting a much smaller skilled player who had been in a vulnerable position. Crosschecked in the kidneys while facing away with his arms extended in the air in victory, Kariya was crumpled to the ice. Just asked Craig Simpson about how these types of cowardly cheapshots prematurely ended his career, and for that matter shortened Gretsky's career.

If Chelios, Hatcher, Pronger and/or EXELBY etc., knew Laraque or his counterparts would exert a pile of hurt on them for taking liberties, more skilled hockey and increased scoring would grace the NHL. Every true fan of hockey, who I know, would rather watch a fast skilled game of hockey, whose outcome was determined by skilled players, and not Hooliganism. But when Liberties are taken, I assert the fact that poorly concieved penalties can outstrip and compromise on ice justice. The game of hockey has got to be self-policing, as well as, officiated properly with a rule set which makes sense.

The silliness of the new Diving Penalty comes to mind. This piece of fluff theater inflicted on we the knowledgeable fan base is a travesty which pollutes hockey's competitive purity. In times past, in better times, when a player took a dive the Refs ignored it, the player was then caught out of position, his check left undefended and open would usually get a great scoring chance or score a goal. The Greg Louganis wannabees (think Forsberg here) would then be laughed off the ice. Unfortunately, now every player is forced to dramatically prostrate themselves in the new "big bucks/high steaks" arena. The new Americanized version of hockey, complete with the fenzy to franchise anywhere if it is a large enough market, has diluted hockey's knowledgeable fan base.
And why, you ask, is this so? Because most of the new big market American fan base couldn't tell the difference between a dive and when a player was legitimately hooked or pulled down. Ergo, the diving indiscretion did fined it's way into hockey's NHL locker-rooms complete with its List of Shame. The non-call personified into the DIVING penalty, favouring the higher paid players; made so, just to placate the newbie perspective by alerting them that drama queens can and do exist in the NHL.

It was this same conundrum of corporate reasoning, that allowed some milktoast business executive to commission an opinion poll which determined the following: the one and only thing most non-northeastern Americans knew about hockey came from Jay Leno's repeated telling, of that lame old joke, about going a fight and a hockey game breaking out. So, regrettably, the game of hockey was penalized when the new NHL Braintrust instigated this ongoing rule of idiocy! Remembering as always The Golden Rule, those who have the most gold, make the rules, and change them at will to suit themselves.
:mad:

p.s. I would apoligize to all those that tried to read this post before I cleaned up all of the errors. I had just had high speed internet connected and was too much in a hurry to post before the Avs/Oilers game started. After returning from the local watering hole I reviewed this post with horror. I installed MSWord only after I had edited this rant some 10 times.

OYLer is offline  
Old
10-23-2003, 10:11 PM
  #2
oilflash
Registered User
 
oilflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: smalltownAB
Country: Canada
Posts: 130
vCash: 500
geeze oyler do you and the other guys here, like tome-26 do this full time or what? :p

oilflash is offline  
Old
10-24-2003, 11:20 AM
  #3
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OYLer
In the last game against St. Louis, Tkachuk ran over Salo intentionally.
What gave you that impression? Tkachuk drove to the net hard to take a pass, just missed the tip, and did end up running into Salo. But, that's not intentionally running Salo. That's just looking to score a goal by going to a high traffic area.

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-24-2003, 11:43 AM
  #4
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
Laperriere22[/b]]But, that's not intentionally running Salo.
Well he did get a penalty for goaltender interference, and that is an intentional penalty. Don't get me wrong, if I were a St. Louis fan I would be happy my power forward was intimidating the opposition goaltender and only drawing a minor. Tkachuk could have avoided Tommy easily but that's not the hardnosed game that Keith likes to play. I was dissappointed that one of our bigger Oilers didn't exact payback and run him legally, of course, and then tune him up for good measure. From an Oilers' fan viewpoint Keith Tkachuk had it coming.

And yes going to the net is a good thing but running a goaltender isn't.

OYLer is offline  
Old
10-24-2003, 12:00 PM
  #5
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OYLer
Well he did get a penalty for goaltender interference, and that is an intentional penalty. Don't get me wrong, if I were a St. Louis fan I would be happy my power forward was intimidating the opposition goaltender and only drawing a minor. Tkachuk could have avoided Tommy easily but that's not the hardnosed game that Keith likes to play. I was dissappointed that one of our bigger Oilers didn't exact payback and run him legally, of course, and then tune him up for good measure. From an Oilers' fan viewpoint Keith Tkachuk had it coming.

And yes going to the net is a good thing but running a goaltender isn't.
Well, the penalty he got for it was questionable in my mind. I can live with the call though. But, being called for a penalty doesn't mean he ran Salo. It means he made contact with Salo and the refs deemed he had not been helped (which he hadn't). Making contact with Salo was unavoidable because of the angle Tkachuk had to take the get some space between himself and the defenseman to try and score off the pass.

If the Oilers had gone after Tkachuk, I'd have no problem with that though. Making contact with the goalie is good enough reason to go after a player in my book and though I'm a Blues fan, I don't bother defending Tkachuk's actions too often. But, in this case, I didn't see him looking to hit Salo at all; it was just the end result of that scoring chance.

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-24-2003, 12:21 PM
  #6
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
Laperriere22[/b]]I don't bother defending Tkachuk's actions too often. But, in this case, I didn't see him looking to hit Salo at all; it was just the end result of that scoring chance.
Obviously I am a big Oilers' fan. But in this case we must politely agree to disagree. The beauty of Tkachuk's intentional penalty was that it was not flagrant and that Tommy didn't get hurt. As all personal perspective is egocentric, disagreements arise. Controversy is born from such disagreements and provides the zest which fuels these interest related bulletin boards.

OYLer is offline  
Old
10-25-2003, 07:10 AM
  #7
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OYLer
Obviously I am a big Oilers' fan. But in this case we must politely agree to disagree. The beauty of Tkachuk's intentional penalty was that it was not flagrant and that Tommy didn't get hurt. As all personal perspective is egocentric, disagreements arise. Controversy is born from such disagreements and provides the zest which fuels these interest related bulletin boards.
That works for me. Be forewarned that there are much more belligerent and insulting Blues fans wandering on HF though; wouldn't want to be responsible for misleading you into thinking we all behave civilly in a disagreement.

Hope the Oilers play better tonight than they have the last two (excluding the first 10 minutes against the Blues of course) BTW. I do like the Oilers a good deal; just not when they play the Blues.

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-25-2003, 07:18 AM
  #8
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laperriere22
That works for me. Be forewarned that there are much more belligerent and insulting Blues fans wandering on HF though; wouldn't want to be responsible for misleading you into thinking we all behave civilly in a disagreement.

Hope the Oilers play better tonight than they have the last two (excluding the first 10 minutes against the Blues of course) BTW. I do like the Oilers a good deal; just not when they play the Blues.
Re: Your avatar...who is that, and why do you want to lynch him?

Digger12 is offline  
Old
10-25-2003, 07:24 AM
  #9
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Re: Your avatar...who is that, and why do you want to lynch him?
That is Gary Thorne and he is the most incompetent play-by-play man in hockey today. I suppose Canadians don't have to deal with him because he is on ESPN exclusively, but he is the #1 play-by-play guy for ESPN and won't do his job correctly. He's the worst ambassador hockey has in the US; he's a baseball guy that does hockey. I'd love to see him hang for all the games he's mangled. The last game he did that I watched, he called Steve Ott "Zubov's defensive partner". Nuff said.

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-26-2003, 07:14 PM
  #10
IceDragoon
Registered User
 
IceDragoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South of Sanity
Posts: 3,874
vCash: 500
We're not the only ones who feel that the instigator penalty is a stinker, OYLer.

Honour and accountability

Instigator rule has taken both out of the game in the NHL


dead link deleted

I couldn't find this article on slam (yet), so this link won't last past tonite. If I find it, I will replace the link. If I can't find it, and you want to read it, just pm me and I'll send it to you.

IceDragoon is offline  
Old
10-26-2003, 11:43 PM
  #11
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceDragoon
I couldn't find this article on slam (yet), so this link won't last past tonite.
Thanx IceDragoon a good read, as always you are a source of valued info and input.

OYLer is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 04:56 AM
  #12
IceDragoon
Registered User
 
IceDragoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South of Sanity
Posts: 3,874
vCash: 500
This article has some good inside insight. So, since it has not been posted on slam, and it is no longer available anywhere online, I'm hoping it's now ok to let it all 'show' ->. :moon:


Honour and accountability

Instigator rule has taken both out of the game in the NHL

By ROBERT TYCHKOWSKI, EDMONTON SUN - 2003.10.26

Every rat in the NHL still drinks a toast to the summer of 1992. And in 1996, with the NHL's big cats even more powerless to keep them honest, the rats toasted again.

"Everybody raise a stick,'' they said. "Here's to the end of accountability.''

By changing hockey to try to please Americans who didn't like it, the NHL thought it was laying the groundwork for a home-run TV deal when it introduced the instigating rule. The deal never came. What they got instead was a giant skirt that antagonists and dirty players have been hiding behind ever since.

The aesthetics are better - fighting is way down and those Americans who still don't watch hockey are truly thankful - but the less visible, more dangerous stuff has been on the increase ever since.

Players are getting frustrated, and hurt.

"Get rid of it,'' said Keith Tkachuk, a 13-year veteran who liked the NHL a lot better before the rule was in place. "Accountability is everything and right now there is very little. They should just get rid of it and the game will get a lot cleaner, I guarantee you.''

STICKS ARE UP, SO ARE INJURIES

Talk like that was initially dismissed as Don Cherry rhetoric, but time has changed a lot of opinions. Since the instigating rule came into effect, checking from behind is up, head injuries are up and more and more star players are going down. Players carry their sticks higher than they ever did, abuse the stars more than they ever did and deliver more of the kill-shot body checks that put people on the IR. In the old days they called it "running around'' and teams sent somebody out there to stop it. Now there is no stopping it.

"No, there isn't,'' said Tkachuk.

Rick Tocchet has a unique perspective - he is the all-time leading penalty minutes leader for the Broad Street Bullies, played 10 years after the instigating rule came in, and is now an assistant coach with the superstar-studded Colorado Avalanche. He's seen the rule from all angles and would like to see it changed.

"You want honour in the game, you want accountability,'' he said, adding there isn't much of either when guys like Sean Avery are starting fights with Peter Forsberg. "Let's just say that 15 years ago I don't think Sean Avery would have started a fight with Peter Forsberg because of the consequences.''

It's not just the big guys like Tkachuk or tough guys like Tocchet who don't like the rule. The vast majority of players would like to see it revisited in some way. Stars like Doug Weight, Mario Lemieux, Paul Kariya and Steve Yzerman have all criticized it.

Newer players who've never known the NHL without it even see a need for change.

"It needs to be modified,'' said Oilers forward Shawn Horcoff, who is not a fighter by any stretch. "You take the instigator rule away and there are a lot of guys in the league who won't be acting the way they do. They feel protected by it. Everybody knows it.

"There are players who, at times, deserve to be challenged.''

In defending the rules, NHL vice-president of hockey operations Mike Murphy said recently that players can still police themselves.

"Two minutes?'' he said. "I'll pay that price and I'll kill that penalty.''

But it's not two minutes, is it? Make somebody answer for what they did today and it's 2-5-10 and sometimes a game - a pretty stiff price to pay if you're a top-four defenceman or a regular forward. If the other guy doesn't fight back, you're shorthanded seven minutes. Three instigating penalties in a season and the automatic suspensions start piling up.

"It's a tough situation,'' said Tocchet. "It's a 2-1 game and somebody runs your star. You're thinking, is this the time? Do I want to take 2, 5 and 10?''

Players don't want to scrap the instigating penalties all together, nobody wants a return to the 1970s gong shows - they'd just like to see a little discretion.

"There's room for the instigator rule,'' said St. Louis tough guy Reed Low, who leads the NHL in fighting majors over the last two seasons with 43. "When they first brought it in it was good. You don't want to have a guy who can't play hockey going out there and beating people up at will, for no reason.

FRUSTRATING FOR EVERYBODY

"But it's frustrating for everybody that people don't have to be accountable for their actions. They talk about wanting to make the game better, but they let little half (expletives) run around hampering the play of our stars.

"Guys shouldn't be skating around with their sticks in the air. There's a middle ground somewhere, they just have to find it.''

If a goon is coming off the bench to beat somebody up for no reason, Tocchet says throw the book at him: 2-5-10 and a game. If somebody's goalie just got run and the defenceman attacks the offender, then make it five each and let them settle it like men.

"I know some refs, back in the day, who if they saw someone being real cheap out there and you went after the guy, they wouldn't give you the extra penalty,'' said Tocchet. "I like those kinds of refs. Because right from the beginning there's going to be no B.S. Now they have to call it like robots.''

And players are getting frustrated, or hurt.

"It's getting to be a problem, but the good part is everybody is starting to recognize that it's a problem,'' said Low. "They don't need to change it completely, just enough so that they can take into account what caused the fight in the first place and allow us to police ourselves when it's necessary.''
_________

Again, right back at you OYLer.

IceDragoon is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 05:44 AM
  #13
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
The biggest problem is that someone hurts one of your guys, your tough guy goes out for revenge, gets the instigator, and the opposition scores on the power play...

I guarantee you, this enforcer won't be nearly as effective for a while, because he doesn't want to hurt his team... which is a shame...

Imagine the 80's if the Oilers didn't have Semenko?

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:20 AM
  #14
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilflash
geeze oyler do you and the other guys here, like tome-26 do this full time or what? :p
lol, no - but at school I'm on here lots, and I usually keep the page open on my computer, or have it on my laptop when watching T.V. or what ever.

thome_26 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 10:26 PM.

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.