Opie

Medical personal carry Ottawa Senators' Dean McAmmond off the ice on a stretcher following a hit during the second period of an NHL preseason hockey game against the Philadelphia Flyers at the Scotiabank Place in Ottawa Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2007 Edit: Found this http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?articleid=33834...mp;service=page Steve Downie

I have seen players going full tilt hit a guy and yes they will leave their feet, but usually it is not so drastic that they end up parallel to the ice 4.5 feet above it. Two things that make the hit an intent to injure: 1. Shoulder to the head, he easily could have buried his shoulder into McAmmond's chest, seeing as they are both 5'11. You can say McAmmond's head was down, that means he was looking down, not bent over tying his skates. Yes he should have kept his head on a swivel I agree, but when Downie hit him, from what I saw and read, he had every intention of hurting him. If he hits him in the chest and he knocks McAmmond out or hurts him badly, it is easy to call it a good hard clean hit. 2. The force with which he takes off from the ground, You have got to have a lot of force behind you to end up parallel to the ice. The man did not slightly leave his feat, if you watch the slow mo that was posted, you can see a good 2-3 inches of daylight between his skates and the ice. I think part of what Downie was trying to do was say "Hey no one f***s with me" and he wanted to show the rest of the league to leave him alone. I agree the league is far too inconsistent on these suspensions, and a lot of it has to do with who the offender and the victim are. But that is just like the rest of our society. EDIT: Clarity

I think because he was brand new to the league they wanted to let him know that he was not going to be able to play like that in the NHL.

Hank you are killing me with that thing, it is like a bad car accident you can't help but look, but as soon as you do you think to yourself, "self, I shouldn't have looked at that!"

As you probably saw on the front page, 20 games.

Well that sends a message doesn't it, he will miss about a 1/4 of the season.

What were the shoot out goals like, decent moves, nice shot?

Yup lol!!

Don Sweeney

I like the Kozlov episode!

I figured it would have to do with Gordie!

Ray Bourque

For me, his opinion and what he said was enough to change my opinion. I know the high level of play you have been involved in and the rec leagues must have given you a greater idea of how the NHL game is played and the changes that have occurred over the last 15. However, whenever I get expert opinions on something I consider their past, their motivation in making the statement, and whether or not they are a reliable source. All of those criteria were met, so therefore I decided to apply what he was saying to my own thoughts and my opinion changed. If I had known we were going to debate the way I formulate opinions I would have made all of this clearer in my first post. That way I didn't have you thinking I just blindly accept his opinion. The main reason I even posted about changing my opinion was that I had been one of the biggest and loudest people about the wings not needing an enforcer, mainly because I thought an enforcer would not slow these hits down. Then someone who is involved in the NHL, has been for 15 straight years, is on the ice year in and year out, and I am guessing has a pretty good feel for what is going on when he is on the ice, says enforcers would help, I have to believe him. If you don't because of your extensive knowledge, than fine, however I do not have that knowledge so I will go with Nick on this one!

Due to his knowledge of the game vs mine, wouldn't that by default make his opinion more valid than mine?

Yzer that is the way I used to think as well, in fact I have used that same argument 100's of times on this board, just ask GS&T he has got to be tired of reading me post it, however I can not argue with Nick Lidstrom over this point, if a 15 year vet, that knows the game the way he does, is respected the way he is, and is a very very clean player himself (so there is no motivation for him to say this) says he thinks an enforcer would make him feel safer on the ice, and he thinks it would slow this stuff down. I have to agree. So you are trying to tell me that in matters of the NHL game of Hockey, my opinion and your opinion matter more than Lids. Sorry, dude that is just ignorance, in it's truest form. If you were being sarcastic sorry I didn't pick up on it!!!!

At least try an analogy that makes sense. I understand that stricter sanctions are needed however none are in place. I have always thought that this was a league wide thing, not the wings need to get tougher. These hits are dirty and something needs to be done about it. But when Nick Lidstrom says it leads me to believe that he thinks enforcers would make things better. I have also said for a while now that the instigator rule needs to be gotten rid of, so the players can police themselves. Yes there have been incidents where that went horribly wrong, but there have been many dirty hits that have gone horribly wrong as well. You are grasping at straws in order to make your opinion valid, I was one of the staunchest "anti-enforcers" on this board. A player, a very well respected player, comes and says enforcers would help the problem. I have to agree. He is not saying it is the only solution he is just saying that he thinks it would help. I am sure he would also support a rule change, however at this point in time in the season no rule changes can be made.

No I wouldn't believe Lidstrom if he said the world was flat, because he is not an Geographer. Now if a world renowned, award winning, universally respected Geographer told me the world was flat than yes, I would have to believe him. As I said in my post, because of who he his, you know the awards, the accolades, the fact he is one of the best players in the world, and one of the classiest that makes his word and his opinion on this more valid than mine or anyone else's on this board. I agree the rules need to change, but until they do, If lids says an enforcer is needed or would help I got to believe him. Am I going to sit here and say I know more about the NHL game than Nick Lidstrom, NO WAY IN HELL. I think part of Lidstrom's comments was the fact that their used to be a real stiff "penalty" for a high hit or a dirty or late hit, and that "penalty" fostered respect.

I have to say I think of Lids as one of the smartest players and that he knows a s*** load more about hockey than I ever will. Having said that, if he thinks an enforcer is needed for a safer feeling I can not argue with that kind of statement, not from him. I didn't think having an enforcer would make players feel that much safer but if Captain Nick Lidstrom thinks it to be the truth than I am sold.

McAmmond was out cold before he hit the boards, therefore I would have to assume the violence of the impact had more to due with the hit than him spinning into the boards. BTW in the NHL boarding rule is 44. A more relevant one may be Charging (Rule 47) # A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner. And seeing as the two are both 5'11 I would have to assume that in order for Downie to get his shoulders to McAmmond's head he would have to leave his feet. Notice it says in any manner, thus making it a discretion issue, so regardless of my opinion or yours, the refs thought it was dirty and there was intent to injure, and their are penalties that follow.

Bring home, Isn't there is a difference between playing 110% and playing within the rules, and playing 110% and trying to injure. You make a conscious effort to leave your feet and inflict serious injury. Not that Markov couldn't have hurt Stoll but the intention was not injury. The intention was hit him and break up the play. Drake and Downie's hits were not done with in the rules, and should be punished. Drake's was a definite charge should have drawn a penalty easily, Downie was trying to prove he is a bad ass, and was going for the head hit. I know the crap that I will hear back because I am not talking about hockey but here it goes anyway: In soccer I was able to hit guys and make it look accidental, all you have to do is act like you are jumping for a header and throw a shoulder into a chin. Or as a goalie make it look like you are punching a ball out of the air and punch a guy in the chin! All decisions I made, and all dirty, and if a ref had called me on it I would have argue and been bulls*** over it. My point you know what you are doing before you do it! edit Grammar

Great point how many times did Scott Stevens leave his feet?

From what I have read, mainly the MackKenzie article, people who were there said they saw Downie Pick out a target from center ice, then sprinted as hard as he could at MacAmmond, then lept into him. There was intent, I am not saying he deserves 100 games or anything. Give him the same thing Pronger got one game. But either way I feel it was dirty, and the league needs to do something about all of these dirty hits. A lot of young guys who are at a marginal skill level see destroying someone as a way to make an NHL club. They get into bad habits and make hits that shouldn't be made. Also a big difference between the Drake hit and the Downie hit is that, Drake went through the body of Lebda, the Dizziness and daze was from him smashing the back of his head on the boards. Was it dirty yes, why? because it should have been a charge, he left his feet. But watch Downie's trajectory and then Drakes. Downie goes up at the head of McAmmond, Drake goes through Lebda, he laves his feet but not up at the head of Lebda. Downie took off like a head seeking missile!

Curban He ruined his credibility when he said boarding should have been called! But he did reaffirm my notion that referees have to fail an eye exam before they can get their certs!!

Priceless, I would have paid someone to write that for me, just so I could have been the one to post it!!!!

When Yzerman almost retired in the middle of the 02 cup run, the team already knew he was headed for the rafters. He was the captain forever, he led the team by his play, he was the face of the org for years. Remember the Cup going up on the side of the building only to be vetoed by the fans and changed to Stevie. And before you say it should have been him from the start, the team had no say in what went up on the mural. This team didn't offer him the job to get him to retire, they didn't say hey we will retire your number if you retire. He knew as well as the rest of us that the minute he hung up the skates that no one, I repeat, no one would wear 19 in the winged wheel ever again. And to top it off as a sign of respect, they through the 'C' You just don't get it, they were referencing the huge void left by great leaders like Yzerman and Shanny, and how that needed to be filled by new people. Not disrespecting them in the least. I cannot imagine what talking to you in person is like, it must be the most frustrating thing in the world!