I must say that one last night hurt. Good crowd, lots of former Tommies in attendance but that late goal, oh to have it back. Perhaps I'm getting spoiled but the novelty of the one goal losses is fast losing its appeal. We have 3 wins but looking back we could just as easily be sitting with 6 or 7 if we got one bounce in a few games.
Hoping STU can brush that off and head to PEI ready to face a team on a great high after beating UNB last night. 5th year former Tommie Devan Praught scored the winner last night against them. That must feel good for him.
Really good to see the Tommies being as competitive as they've been....How big is that Van Lauren anyway? Saw the hit on Gaudet and can't believe he got eight games for that...didn't think the subsequent slash was worth four games either....
I don't wish to take sides, but that was a bad hit. The later slash was nowhere as dangerous as the hit to the head. I would also argue that Van Laren did have time to react in a different way than he did.
How many games did both those guys get? I haven't seen or heard.
To STUTOMMIES: I agree with your view on the loss last night. No matter how well you played or deserved better, at the end of the night it's a loss. Playing UPEI tonight and home-home with UNB are three tough games. Plus, it is reasonable to think that SFX are not as bad as their record and will improve in the second half. So, the question becomes "who does STU catch for that last playoff spot?"
I've only seen STU a couple of times but am impressed with their work ethic and discipline. They are a work in progress and I still maintain that there will be more L's than W's at the end of the season. I don't think I'll be able to say that next year. Chris Morehouse should help a bit when he gets to play next week.
In the meantime, enjoy the resurgence of STU hockey.
A playoff spot is probably still a bit optimistic for this group. The foundation for a good program is in place...good discipline. Work ethic. They compete hard and no longer react and negate power plays or draw the extra penalty and have to kill it. There's some pride there and something to build on.
Now, it's a matter of upgrading the talent level. Teams around the conference are noticing a difference in the team in pride and competitive level. Ryan and Bissonnette are holding players accountable. Quick aside after last nights game: spoke to the Moncton group, wrapped up there, went to STU side and spoke to Ryan/Bissonnette for about 10 minutes after. Wanted to speak to Sanza. Ryan: "I'll get him for you."
Well, by this time, players had showered and dressed and most had dispersed. Sanza was in the parking lot. Ryan had someone go get him, he came back in and answered every question directly and honestly, and took responsibility.
Last year's group would have been satisfied with a close call against the second place team in the AUS. This year's group was disappointed at a point, or two, that got away. Points will get tougher to come by as teams upgrade for the second half. Bernier will be a significant addition on defence, I'm told, and Morehouse will be another good, character addition. The philosophy and the foundation are being established. Now it's a matter of upgrading the talent.
I don't wish to take sides, but that was a bad hit. The later slash was nowhere as dangerous as the hit to the head. I would also argue that Van Laren did have time to react in a different way than he did.
How many games did both those guys get? I haven't seen or heard.
I think we share the exact same view on this incident.
Van Laren got 8 games (automatic 4, plus remaining 2 regular season games plus the 2 christmas break exhibition games; he's eligible to return January 6th.)
Quesnel got 4 games (automatic)
I think if Quesnel had been penalized fairly on the play (Game Misconduct, Major, Double Minor, whatever...) and hadn't received any extra games. Van Laren could have only received the automatic 4 and not too many people, even on this side of the issue, would have said much about it.
Second time I have seen it and have to agree, I think Van Laren could have pulled away but he was clearly looking for the hit. I don't think he was looking to hurt him.
I don't like the slash, it's still dirty and it wasn't necessary. Quensel could have manned up and went after him, fought, took the instigator and only would have been 2 games. Instead he chooses the coward route, he got what he deserved. And to every other team fan out there, except Moncton, you know what I mean because that "stick" first mentality of Moncton is beyond maddening. No need to comment if you don't like. This has nothing to do with Timbit either. Iam just stating my opinion, which I think may be shared.
Moncton hacks and whacks like pansies but as soon as something happens to them they cry and cry. STOP F**CKING WITH PEOPLE AND PI**ING THEM OFF AND MAYBE THINGS LIKE THIS WON"T HAPPEN.
AND FOR THE GOD DA*M RECORD, AGAIN, I HAVE SEEN THAT SAME D**M HIT 2 OTHER TIMES AT THE JLL BOTH ON TOMMIES (Thatcher Bell and Wes Welcher) AND I DON'T REMEMBER THE RESPONSE BEING THE SAME AS THE MCT PLAYER!!!!
3rd Jules Melanson UDM 10 GAME MISCONDUCT 11:13
3rd Jules Melanson UDM 5 CONTACT TO THE HEAD 11:13 PP
3rd Jason Cassidy STU 2 ROUGHING 11:13 PP
Cassidy of all guys, smaller than Quesnel, manned up. Melanson is huge. Welcher was out 9 games with a separated shoulder and concussion. Yeah, sorry about Gaudet.
3rd Jules Melanson UDM 10 GAME MISCONDUCT 11:13
3rd Jules Melanson UDM 5 CONTACT TO THE HEAD 11:13 PP
3rd Jason Cassidy STU 2 ROUGHING 11:13 PP
Cassidy of all guys, smaller than Quesnel, manned up. Melanson is huge. Welcher was out 9 games with a separated shoulder and concussion. Yeah, sorry about Gaudet.
I remember that one very well, matter of fact the video is still on my Photobucket account. Melanson never hit his head, he made contact with his shoulder and Welcher's helmet which wasn't on tight went flying.
And the only comment I'm going to make on your other post is that the one and only reason he DID slash him like he did, was wanting to get somewhat even without getting suspended. Had he got a 4 minute double minor or a game misconduct like he was expecting to get... The one and only reason he didn't jump him and beat him up was because he didn't want to get suspended and miss games. Knowing what he knows now of course he would have jumped him and taken the 1 game suspension.
I heard a UNB player say something recently, regarding Moncton players, that was something along the lines of "they have glue in their gloves in junior (where fighting is allowed) but act like tough guys once they get to the AUS (where fighting isn't allowed)."
And the only comment I'm going to make on your other post is that the one and only reason he DID slash him like he did, was wanting to get somewhat even without getting suspended. Had he got a 4 minute double minor or a game misconduct like he was expecting to get... The one and only reason he didn't jump him and beat him up was because he didn't want to get suspended and miss games. Knowing what he knows now of course he would have jumped him and taken the 1 game suspension.
That's is a lame excuse and you know it. Let's slash his leg off instead, like he was probably doing the rest of the night any way. You can't fool anybody because the teams play you too, not just Fredericton ones either. I may not like the Squirrels and they may not like me but THEY KNOW THE CODE. MONCTON DOESN"T GET IT. I'M SO MAD RIGHT NOW, DONE.
I heard a UNB player say something recently, regarding Moncton players, that was something along the lines of "they have glue in their gloves in junior (where fighting is allowed) but act like tough guys once they get to the AUS (where fighting isn't allowed)."
That was Clendenning on Twitter. Let's say a few of our guys didn't exactly take his words too kindly, one sent out an invitation (via Twitter) and Clendenning retracted his words, somewhat. Gotta love modern technology.
Quote:
@Clendenning19 Jordan Clendenning
Moncton Bleu Eagles- crazy glue in their gloves in Junior and tough as nails in the AUS while the fighting rule is taken out.. #gofigure
Even had one of the F'Ton city councillors call us the 'Blue Angels' on twitter last night.
Quote:
@mikeobrien_fton Mike O'Brien
I'm a UNB @VarsityReds fan, but am looking forward to the @stutommies game tonight against the dreaded U of Moncton Blue Angels (Anges Bleu)
I don't know, but I always make it a point in any of my online postings, or other media dealings, to do anything in my power to no provoke anyone on the other side. No need to give anyone anymore reason to want to beat you...
That was Clendenning on Twitter. Let's say a few of our guys didn't exactly take his words too kindly, one sent out an invitation (via Twitter) and Clendenning retracted his words, somewhat. Gotta love modern technology.
Even had one of the F'Ton city councillors call us the 'Blue Angels' on twitter last night.
I don't know, but I always make it a point in any of my online postings, or other media dealings, to do anything in my power to no provoke anyone on the other side. No need to give anyone anymore reason to want to beat you...
I really don't think it's just players out of UdeM who sometimes get liberties knowing the other party won't be fighting because of the rules.....how many times do you see these little guys with big sticks who suddenly get brave? in years gone by, udem always had the rep of using their sticks probably more than they should have and that reputation has stuck....regardless of what actually might be the case...in this incident, the van laren hit was uncalled for....he went for the guy's head....the moncton player responded with a slash to his legs...happens all the time...get over it...
"I really don't think it's just players out of UdeM who sometimes get liberties knowing the other party won't be fighting because of the rules.."
I agree, I have heard that for years, about UPEI and Dal in particular, Given I was working for SMU, I was not surrounded by people who would say the same, but others probably did. Having said that, I did see a guy half Wallingford's size, trying not once but twice, to get something going with him ( Wallingford) in Moncton last weekend.
But I would reiterate, Fighting is not "allowed" in hockey, anywhere, there are penalties for it, ...everywhere. It is the tolerance for it, and consequently the depth of the penalty.
my first take on the video is wow....a lot late. Dont think it deserves 8 games at all! that seems a little harsh to be honest. 4 to 6 was fine....but the Moncton player deserves a little more. They way STUtommies made it sound like they player was right there but he CHASED Van Laren down and two handed him.
Every time I look at the hit I'm torn between "throw the book at him" and "jeeze, that's a lot of games". Six games (plus two exhib) is a good chunk of the season.
But, then I think: if that was Pridham, Bast, Clark, Carter or Culligan to name a few, there would be a similar uproar. Gaudet is one of the top guys at UdeM. Gaudet may be out for more than six games, who knows. I'm sure we all sit around and whine about guys like Matt Cooke and how he should never play again. I'm not saying that Van Laren is a Matt Cooke, but he did the same thing.
I still don't think the slash warrents more than a major at best, if you take it as an isolated incident. The fact that Quesnel tracked him down to deliver the whack would indicate intent to injure, so perhaps that call is also correct.
Again, not taking sides, just expressing an opinion. Hopefully, everyone recovers and Timbit and STUTOMMIES can someday share a laugh together.
Every time I look at the hit I'm torn between "throw the book at him" and "jeeze, that's a lot of games". Six games (plus two exhib) is a good chunk of the season.
But, then I think: if that was Pridham, Bast, Clark, Carter or Culligan to name a few, there would be a similar uproar. Gaudet is one of the top guys at UdeM. Gaudet may be out for more than six games, who knows. I'm sure we all sit around and whine about guys like Matt Cooke and how he should never play again. I'm not saying that Van Laren is a Matt Cooke, but he did the same thing.
I still don't think the slash warrents more than a major at best, if you take it as an isolated incident. The fact that Quesnel tracked him down to deliver the whack would indicate intent to injure, so perhaps that call is also correct.
Again, not taking sides, just expressing an opinion. Hopefully, everyone recovers and Timbit and STUTOMMIES can someday share a laugh together.
At the end of the day it is just a game and everyone is entitled to their own opinions. No hard feelings for me towards anyone. Frustration for sure but I'm not launching a vendetta against anyone.
To me, the time was very short to make a decision of hit or don't hit. Everything happens between 4 and 5 seconds. Van Laren had less than 1 second to say, the puck is gone, his head is turned, avoid collision, let him go, hit him, what have you. Van Laren is bigger than Gaudet, it looks like front shoulder to head. Illegal now, but that was a legal hockey hit 2 years ago. As far as the Cook hit, I don't think so. Cook raised his elbow and came from the rear/side. Van Laren came from the front and Gaudet would have seen him if he hadn't dropped the puck and had his head turned, the body was still moving forward straight.
The slash, it was cheap. Should have challenged the guy to fight. Don't use your hockey stick for anything other than handling the puck. No honour there. As I see it.
Last edited by STUTOMMIES: 11-21-2011 at 03:55 PM.
No honour in blindsiding anyone either, even if rules made it "legal" at one time. Steckel didn't get penalized for that cheap shot on Crosby, and is was definitely a cheap shot by the much bigger Steckel, and Sidney is only coming back tonight ...
No honour in blindsiding anyone either, even if rules made it "legal" at one time. Steckel didn't get penalized for that cheap shot on Crosby, and is was definitely a cheap shot by the much bigger Steckel, and Sidney is only coming back tonight ...
It wasn't a blindside hit IMO. Look again, he hit him straight on. If his head is up it still would have been a big hit. His head was down. PICK YPOUR HEAD UP!!!
Semantics. Blind-side or head down, it is the same net effect. The victim does not see you coming. I repeat, I believe there is no "honour" in that kind of cheap shot.
I witnessed Acadia's big Leo Jenner end the much smaller Taylor Procyshen's hockey career with an unpenalized headshot last year in the playoffs. It was a dirty high hit that I'm sure many, including the ref, must have rationalized as "finishing your check". Doesn't make it right.
As you can tell, I cannot condone anyone going after the head of another player, whether he sees it coming or not. Never have, never will, no matter if the rules have maybe finally caught up to that reality.
Semantics. Blind-side or head down, it is the same net effect. The victim does not see you coming. I repeat, I believe there is no "honour" in that kind of cheap shot.
I witnessed Acadia's big Leo Jenner end the much smaller Taylor Procyshen's hockey career with an unpenalized headshot last year in the playoffs. It was a dirty high hit that I'm sure many, including the ref, must have rationalized as "finishing your check". Doesn't make it right.
As you can tell, I cannot condone anyone going after the head of another player, whether he sees it coming or not. Never have, never will, no matter if the rules have maybe finally caught up to that reality.
Talk about semantics, "cheap shot" insinuates he tried to blind side him. He didn't, he came straight on within .5 of a second of him dropping the puck. When he lined him up he had the puck, initial body contact was to the chest, the momentum that Gaudet had propelled his head into his shoulder. Yes, it was a hit to head but unlike your example of Cooke, the head was not the intended target. That doesn't make it right but Chris didn't try to hurt him. It will happen again because hockey is a fast game that happens in split seconds.
The slash was deliberate, it was intent to injure, and nobody can deny that. On the other hand you have a hit to the head, not good at all, but it wasn't deliberate and there was no intent to injure. You want to make it out that a Tommie was gooning it up, well he wasn't. Why don't you ask Timbit if Van Laren apologized and told UdM that it wasn't what he was trying to do? He is a good kid and your squirrel speak trying to make him into a big bad Tommie villain SUCKS!
Last edited by STUTOMMIES: 11-21-2011 at 05:26 PM.
Reason: spelling error
Hey 'Foyle...in your post over at The CIS Blog you said "In the Moncton paper UdeM coach Serge Bourgeois is looking for even MORE games against Van Laren." So he got suspended for 4 games, they appealed, he got his suspension lengthened...and now they are looking for even more games to be added?? Am I getting that right?
I'm sorry...if you are cruising through the middle of the ice with the puck and with your head down you should expect to get walloped....it's just unfortunate what the end result was. If the exact same hit happened (contact to the head and all) but Gaudet got right back up and wasn't injured we would all be saying how great of a hit that was and there wouldn't have been any suspension. I do think there is a difference between a blind-side hit (such as a hit from behind that you really don't have a chance to avoid) and a hit with your head down (no, he didn't see it coming but that was partly his own fault...you need to keep your head up and be aware of your surroundings, especially considering where he was on the ice).
Anyways, I certainly don't think Van Laren was intentionally trying to hurt him (I like to think the majority of the players in the AUS wouldn't stoop to that, and I agree with STUTOMMIES that he hardly had any time to make a decision one way or another) but I understand that these are the types of hits they are trying to get out of the game so I do get the suspension since it is obvious there was contact to the head, but Gaudet should be partly to blame as well for putting himself in that position.
Last edited by UNB Bruins Fan: 11-21-2011 at 05:12 PM.
Hey 'Foyle...in your post over at The CIS Blog you said "In the Moncton paper UdeM coach Serge Bourgeois is looking for even MORE games against Van Laren." So he got suspended for 4 games, they appealed, he got his suspension lengthened...and now they are looking for even more games to be added?? Am I getting that right?
Yup.
Quote:
"The fact the player is not allowed to play in exhibition games tells us the six regular game suspension is not enough. ...
"I believe the AUS needs to show leadership in this case of intent to injure and that a proper sanction be applied to discourage these types of incidents," Boudreau said.
"Our appeal will help establish the rules in similar cases."
Did you actually watch the video? Van Laren brings up his forearm/elbow at the moment of impact. It`s hard to tell from the video if Gaudet has his head down, but as you and others have stated, things happened pretty quick. Only Van Laren knows if he meant to hurt him; the hit was certainly more than enough to separate a player from the puck. But, as you have stated, `Gaudet should be partly to blame as well for putting himself in that position`.
Much the same way a (word rejected) victim is to blame for `dressing provocatively`.
Pathetic....
Last edited by AUS Fan: 11-21-2011 at 05:34 PM.
Reason: Four letter word starting with R and rhymes with grape.
Did you actually watch the video? Van Laren brings up his forearm/elbow at the moment of impact. It`s hard to tell from the video if Gaudet has his head down, but as you and others have stated, things happened pretty quick. Only Van Laren knows if he meant to hurt him; the hit was certainly more than enough to separate a player from the puck.
