HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Pics of the Moore/Naslund hit

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-18-2004, 01:04 PM
  #26
Ensane
EL GUAPO
 
Ensane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 15,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reign Nateo
True, but Morris had the puck when May hit him, Naslund did not. I think that is the biggest beef people have with the hit, Moore made no action to go for the puck (which was very much playable for him) and deliberately tried to level Naslund who was in a vulnerable posistion and no where near the puck. And in IMO stuck his elbow out when he realized Naslund's head had dropped. I think most people are upset that a guy like Moore went out of his way, and away from the play to take the NHL's leading scorer out. Even without the elbow it's a cheap shot IMO.

If Naslund has the puck he keeps his head up (evident by the amount of head injuries and huge hits he has taken in his career: about zero).

BTW it's spelt "hypocrite" this isn't some animal in africa it's a noun! (just being an ass)
Here's how I see it. Both are racing to a loose puck, the (probably) slower of hte two, Moore, gets there first. However you can tell that neither player knows who's gonna win the foot race, because both have their sticks extended out far to at least poke at the puck. And even if Naslund did know that Moore would get there first, Moore sure didn't. Not knowing if he would get their first, Moore braced himself for what he thought could be a check from Naslund. Instead, Naslund continued to poke check at the puck, and put his head down to avoid Moore. The rest is history. People always expect players who don't have the puck to do the hitting, but after watching Forsberg for nearly a decade, sometimes the opposite is true.

That's how I percieve what happened. It all occurred within a matter of a coupla seconds--there's no way for Moore to know that Naslund wasn't going to hit him. Those who have played college hockey or another form of full contact hockey can probably relate to this situation as well. It's been fully stated that Moore doesn't have a history of doing anything but working hard and cleanly finishing his checks, and furthermore there hasn't been any conclusive shots showing Moore sticking his elbow out--instead all the shots show that he lead with his shoulder and had his elbow tucked away where it legally should have been. I also wouldn't hold my breath like the conspiracy theorists such as Koltsov are doing. Both Fox and Sportsnet had the reverse angle, and to me, you can see enough of hte elbow to conclude that it was tucked.

Borderline interferrence, okay then. But how many of those do the refs let go even when it's within their line of site?

Ensane is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:05 PM
  #27
RoyIsALegend*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reign Nateo
And Moore will be punished if he makes the Avs line-up. Those things are certanties so lets leave it at that.
Punished by who?

By *WHO*?

The Avs can throw out *THREE* heavyweights at any given time, and the Canucks don't have a single one. Please, let Brad May back up his talk by taking on Peter Worrell. I'd love to see the bloodbath that ensues.

RoyIsALegend* is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:09 PM
  #28
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,317
vCash: 500
Chris McAllister is suddenly a heavyweight? At any rate, I would love to see all three on the ice at once...since none of them have any hockey acumen whatsoever.

Anyways, it wasn't a completely clean hit, but it wasn't exactly Lemieux-on-Draper. Worthy of an interference call - Naslund didn't have the puck. At any rate, I think Naslund's injury came out of his head hitting the ice, not the shoulder/elbow/bicep/whatever of Steve Moore hitting his head.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:10 PM
  #29
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensane
Here's how I see it. Both are racing to a loose puck, the (probably) slower of hte two, Moore, gets there first. However you can tell that neither player knows who's gonna win the foot race, because both have their sticks extended out far to at least poke at the puck. And even if Naslund did know that Moore would get there first, Moore sure didn't. Not knowing if he would get their first, Moore braced himself for what he thought could be a check from Naslund. Instead, Naslund continued to poke check at the puck, and put his head down to avoid Moore. The rest is history. People always expect players who don't have the puck to do the hitting, but after watching Forsberg for nearly a decade, sometimes the opposite is true.

That's how I percieve what happened. It all occurred within a matter of a coupla seconds--there's no way for Moore to know that Naslund wasn't going to hit him. Those who have played college hockey or another form of full contact hockey can probably relate to this situation as well. It's been fully stated that Moore doesn't have a history of doing anything but working hard and cleanly finishing his checks, and furthermore there hasn't been any conclusive shots showing Moore sticking his elbow out--instead all the shots show that he lead with his shoulder and had his elbow tucked away where it legally should have been. I also wouldn't hold my breath like the conspiracy theorists such as Koltsov are doing. Both Fox and Sportsnet had the reverse angle, and to me, you can see enough of hte elbow to conclude that it was tucked.

Borderline interferrence, okay then. But how many of those do the refs let go even when it's within their line of site?
That's all fair enough, but as much speculation as anything any Canucks fan has said. He could have been doing what you said, or what I say. Only he knows, but I think your argument is a sound one. But I think you can see the frustration, picture the same hit but the player wearing 19 is Sakic and instead of 36, the other number is 37 (Ruutu) and I think you can see where I'm coming from.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:13 PM
  #30
RoyIsALegend*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reign Nateo
But I think you can see the frustration, picture the same hit but the player wearing 19 is Sakic and instead of 36, the other number is 37 (Ruutu) and I think you can see where I'm coming from.
You're basically saying that the only reason you're declaring this hit illegal is because it was the Canucks' star player.

Suddenly, the actual hit means nothing and it's about what number is on their jerseys?

Hogwash.

RoyIsALegend* is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:15 PM
  #31
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyIsALegend
Punished by who?

By *WHO*?

The Avs can throw out *THREE* heavyweights at any given time, and the Canucks don't have a single one. Please, let Brad May back up his talk by taking on Peter Worrell. I'd love to see the bloodbath that ensues.
Colorado's checking lines would be even worse if they threw those guys in the line-up. Langdon beat the hell out of Worrell last year in Florida so he doesn't frighten me (Langdon smaller than May). Cummins is a bum, and I hope you don't mean McAllister (you forget he was once a Canuck) maybe McCormick? I've seen all of those guys fight and I would rather have Brookbank thank you very much.

Anyway I don't want to get into some childish debate about who can beat up who, that's your territory RIAL, but Moore will be punished, but it will be in Barret Jackman, MacInnis style. I good hard check that rattles some teeth.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:16 PM
  #32
ChemiseBleuHonnete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,374
vCash: 500
oh come on guys.... It's painfully obvious that Naslund didn't had the puck, and that Moore went head-hunting. Maybe Moore didn't thrown the biggest hit or elbow (I think that it was with his arm) on earth but he was still not interested in the puck and went intentially on Naslund. Was there an intent to injure? Well maybe not but it's not like if he tried to not hit the head. IMO it was a dangerous play and hitting a playing under those conditions is definitively not clean. Like I said it's not the dirtiest play but not a clean one.

Also, do you realize that Naslund is the best player in the NHL right now? The league cannot affroid to lose players like him.

ChemiseBleuHonnete is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:17 PM
  #33
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyIsALegend
You're basically saying that the only reason you're declaring this hit illegal is because it was the Canucks' star player.

Suddenly, the actual hit means nothing and it's about what number is on their jerseys?

Hogwash.
No I'm saying it was a borderline illegal hit, that shouldn't be drawing this much attention and the only reason it is is because Moore is a fringe player and Naslund leads the league in scoring, and any group of fans would react in the same manner.

You either don't care what people write or you have the worst reading comprehension ever. Maybe you read it the way you want it to sound?

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:19 PM
  #34
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 25,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ax²+bx+c
Also, do you realize that Naslund is the best player in the NHL right now? The league cannot affroid to lose players like him.
Then tell him to keep his head up.

Jacob is online now  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:20 PM
  #35
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ax²+bx+c
oh come on guys.... It's painfully obvious that Naslund didn't had the puck, and that Moore went head-hunting. Maybe Moore didn't thrown the biggest hit or elbow (I think that it was with his arm) on earth but he was still not interested in the puck and went intentially on Naslund. Was there an intent to injure? Well maybe not but it's not like if he tried to not hit the head. IMO it was a dangerous play and hitting a playing under those conditions is definitively not clean. Like I said it's not the dirtiest play but not a clean one.

Also, do you realize that Naslund is the best player in the NHL right now? The league cannot affroid to lose players like him.
Basically what I'm saying. You can speculate all you want, but from my hockey experience, he knew what he was trying to do and it was a dirty hit. Not the worst hit this year, but dirty nonetheless.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:21 PM
  #36
Count of DannyKristo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,083
vCash: 500
I don't care if Naslund is leading the league in scoring

That means he should get a free ride and never be touched? You'd think the guy was Gretzky or something. Give me a friggin break.

Count of DannyKristo is online now  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:22 PM
  #37
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobv2
Then tell him to keep his head up.
As I said before Naslund has exactly 0 concussions and has taken very few big hits in his 11 years in this league. He always has his head up when he has the puck.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:25 PM
  #38
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 25,762
vCash: 500
You're right, which is, in my opinion, part of the reason there is so much discussion on what is pretty much your run of the mill open ice collision.
Naslund's just not the type to put himself in such a precarious position. But he did.

Jacob is online now  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:28 PM
  #39
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobv2
You're right, which is, in my opinion, part of the reason there is so much discussion on what is pretty much your run of the mill open ice collision.
Naslund's just not the type to put himself in such a precarious position. But he did.
Your missing the point. He was in that posistion because he didn't have the puck. He wasn't expecting to be hit while not in possession of the puck. NHL players shouldn't have to go around worrying about getting smoked without the puck. Naslund only put himself in that posistion because he wasn't in posisition to get hit, which makes the hit dirty IMO.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:30 PM
  #40
Rattrick
Registered User
 
Rattrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 12,876
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rattrick
Quote:
Originally Posted by ax²+bx+c
Also, do you realize that Naslund is the best player in the NHL right now? The league cannot affroid to lose players like him.
Damnit how is Naslund different than any other player. This situation should be treated no different because it was Naslund or if it was Naslund laying the check on Moore.

Rattrick is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:30 PM
  #41
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Whatever, some of us beleive the hit was dirty, some don't. We can't change each others minds so I for what am not wasting anymore of my life talking about it.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:32 PM
  #42
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 25,762
vCash: 500
Well you're barking up the wrong tree, because the referees in this situation didn't do anything out of the ordinary in not calling the penalty. Naslund definitely did not have clear posession, but he was in the vicinity and was reaching for the puck, and given a split second longer and it'd probably be on the end of his blade.

So maybe the call should have been interference. But what's dirty about interference? Every time a defenseman pins a forward up against the boards, is that all of a sudden dirty?

I've seen a heck of a lot worse. This season, Tuomo Ruutu elbowed Konstantin Koltsov squarely in the jaw while Koltsov was flying down the ice and nowhere near the puck. It was a similar situation in that both guys were going pretty hard right at eachother. It warranted a penalty, but it didn't warrant any kind of retribution, nor did the coach whine about it for days after the fact.


Last edited by Jacob: 02-18-2004 at 01:36 PM.
Jacob is online now  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:33 PM
  #43
ehc73
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,943
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to ehc73
The way I see it, I think he wanted to make a big open ice hit. Swing momentum a la Scott Stevens. That's why he didn't make a move for the puck. However, Naslund reached, which made the hit worse. If he had been standing up, both players would've bounced off each other(it's not like Moore's a giant). Granted, there still would've been response from the Canucks(hell, if you're not going to stand up for your captain/leading scorer when he gets decked, something's wrong with your team), but there wouldn't have been this kind of reaction. And yes, it still would have garnered an interference penalty because Moore made no play on the puck and interefered with Naslund getting to it.
Intent to injure? I don't think so. Trying to make a big hit? I think so. Cheap shot? Debatable. He was going for a hit and leaned in when he was going to miss. Could he have just gone by? Yeah, but that would mean Naslund would get the puck, so I guess until the reverse angle is shown(ie from what the benches saw), this debate will rage on.

However, that said, there is something to be said about the unwritten rules in the NHL. The one that says star players(the finesse ones), while not untouchable, shall not be manhandled. If Ruutu or May got walloped like that, it wouldn't be such a big deal. They play physical and have thrown the odd illegal elbow when no one was looking. But this was Naslund, a guy that threw his biggest bodycheck in a Nike commercial and gets around guys by dancing around them not plowing through them. There would be the same reaction if say Jason King deck Joe Sakic like that. King's a nice guy, he figures he can swing some momentum by giving an open ice hit and decks Sakic. If that happened like how Naslund got decked, reaction would be exactly the same. Sakic plays a similar game to Naslund, get around guys with the puck on a string, check guys by using quick hands. These kinds of guys put butts in seats and they're the ones that no one figures will be on the receiving end of a complete plastering. If they get decked, you better believe a teammate's gonna go after the hitter. Then the number will be taken and the next game it'll be settled. Is this kind of thing fair? Of course not. These guys play hockey, right? They should be able to take hits just like anyone else. But that's the way it is, whether you choose to believe it or not. The finesse guys do take hits, hell even Gretzky got hit, but big ones like that simply aren't supposed to happen unless the player is being stupid and looking down at a pass(see Paul Kariya in last year's SCF). It's the unwritten rules of the NHL. You play dirty, expect to get dirty stuff done to you. You play physical, expect big hits.

That's my view on things. If you want to ignore it because I'm a Canuck fan, go ahead.

ehc73 is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:34 PM
  #44
aylib
User and abuser
 
aylib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stale ol' Hockey
Country: Iraq
Posts: 2,160
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to aylib
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leetchie

To me, this is an interference penalty, worthy of two minutes, nothing more, nothing less.
While I don't agree with "marginal players" running the league leaders theory, I also would like to point out that if every "interference" like that would cost the guilty party only 2 minutes- there would be a lot more injured players. Hopefully May or Brookbank take care of business, so that players without the puck won't have to worry about getting nailed.
I am critizing the "2 minute intereference" reference more than the hit itself. A bit of Doull on Nedved in this one, since I didn't see Naslund control the puck. These pictures are all I saw of the hit.

aylib is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:35 PM
  #45
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Naslund is hands down the best in the game (considering so many are out due to injury). I agree with the idea that it is rubbish to give him a pass from contact ESPECIALLY when Bertuzzi runs at the nucks opponents star players nightly. The game should be the same for all.

After watching the vids and pics it is no doubt that Moore, after touching the puck PRIOR to MN reaching for it, lowered his arm to check him. It was an absolutely *clean* hit in that MN was going for a puck that Moore had *just* touched. Momentum was carrying them into eachother. Now, if Moore hadn't of touched the puck at all, then it is another story. He did, MN reached and got hit. It is over.

Moore *did nothing* to injure MN on purpose. He did nothing that any player on any team wouldn't have done to an opponent. Moore isn't a good player but he also isn't a hack. He weren't out "headhunting", that is rubbish. His job is to play a checking game and that is what he did. Seeing the vids just makes it even more obvious that it was merely a hit.

Bush league statements by all who said that "Moore should be run" or "there is a price on his head". It isn't like the play earlier in the season where Bertuzzi spun about with his stick and popped that other lad in the neck. THAT were on purpose. This one resulted in an unfortunate injury to one of the best players in the league. Remeber though, MN likes to finish his checks as well. It isn't like he were 99 out there mincing about where physical play is concerned. That is one of the reasons that MN is such a grand player. He don't shy away from contact. If Moore would have kept his head down after touching the puck you can bet that MN would have hit him.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:36 PM
  #46
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobv2
I've seen a heck of a lot worse. This season, Tuomo Ruutu elbowed Konstantin Koltsov squarely in the jaw while Koltsov was flying down the ice and nowhere near the puck. It warranted a penalty, but it didn't warrant any kind of retribution, nor did the coach whine about it for days after the fact.
Well than your team has issues. If that happened to a Canuck, there would have been a brawl. Just a difference in team policy I guess. I'm not calling the interference dirty, I'm calling the action dirty, you shouldn't hit a player without the puck, that is why there is a penalty called interference.

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:39 PM
  #47
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 25,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Well than your team has issues.
I have no affiliation with the Penguins, I just root for them.

But it's such a common occurrance in today's game- whether a defenseman gives one of his forwards a sucker pass or a guy is just oblivious to the whereabouts of the puck- that there's absolutely no need to seek retribution, especially when the game is close.

Sure, they can go out and start pounding on Moore with clean checks, but shouldn't they be doing that anyway?

Jacob is online now  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:45 PM
  #48
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,427
vCash: 50
Moore actually played the puck before hitting Näslund. It was Näslund who never was close to playing the puck. Surely being a fan of the Canucks can't make anyone blind to that fact.

The more I see the hit the more it becomes obvious that Näslund was off balance, over-extending himself and putting himself in a weird situation by trying to semi-avoid the hit. Näslund had no chance of getting the puck and if he is going to throw himself head first into those situations in the future he will get nailed and nailed again.

Shame he got a concussion after bumping his head on the ice, but Näslund should have known better. If Moore does nothing on the play, Näslund will ram him in the side head first. A star player must have much better judgement out on the ice. If Näslund decide to take the hit on his shoulder nothing will happen on the play.

Star player or no star player, you will run into guys finishing their checks all game long. I hope Näslund comes back as soon as possible, wiser from the experience.

Freudian is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:48 PM
  #49
Leetchie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 892
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Leetchie
Quote:
Originally Posted by aylib
While I don't agree with "marginal players" running the league leaders theory, I also would like to point out that if every "interference" like that would cost the guilty party only 2 minutes- there would be a lot more injured players. Hopefully May or Brookbank take care of business, so that players without the puck won't have to worry about getting nailed.
I am critizing the "2 minute intereference" reference more than the hit itself. A bit of Doull on Nedved in this one, since I didn't see Naslund control the puck. These pictures are all I saw of the hit.
You know what? The part of the body that Moore hit Naslund with was probably the elbow -- but not the end of it. I think it was more the front of the elbow -- the forearm area -- and it wasn't intended to injure him.

Looking at the video of it again, looks like Moore intended to play the puck first, realized he might get beat, thought about a hit, and when he reached in with his stick and missed the puck, he had to do whatever it took to get in the way of Naslund having a breakaway, so he stepped in front of him and went for a big hit. How can anyone call it head-hunting when his elbow was tucked and about 3 feet off the ice??

Leetchie is offline  
Old
02-18-2004, 01:58 PM
  #50
BB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bahrain
Country: Bahrain
Posts: 909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by balddog66
As it looks to me, Moore should have had the puck before Naslund, but appears to have left it with the hit in mind all along, Naslund reaches for the puck and then gets hit hard, was there any talk of a butt end? Not sure where the blood came from?

The cut on his face came from when his face hit the ice after the hit. I believe it was his visor that cut him when his face hit the ice. Darn good for nothing visors!!

BB 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 11:38 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.