cprice12

Part of the brawl may have been due to the Sharks being frustrated...but part of it was definitely because the Blues were pretty pissed. San Jose had taken some liberties during the game. A couple plays (hit to the head on McDonald and elbow to Nichol) should be reviewed by Shanahan...but nothing will come of them because the whole system is messed up. I think the Blues were tired of it and with the game over, decided to send a message. I was happy to see that. St. Louis kept the retaliations to a minimum during the game and then took care of business when the game was over. Either way...just very happy the series is even now.

I played growing up, then in college, and then after college in men's leagues. But hey...you can call 'em "no-check", "no-slap" if you like. Whatever makes you feel superior on the interwebs. Maybe I'm wrong. But I just don't see it. I'd love to see a pic of the helmet to see how it broke.

I expect better from a mod. Shame on you. I've seen helmets take a lot more abuse than the turnbuckle play on Zetterberg and be fine. I'd like to see a pic of the helmet where it cracked. I'd bet the helmet itself didn't crack, but the cracks occurred on the shield where it attaches to the helmet. And to the rest of you tossing personal jabs. Stay classy. I'm just discussing the play. Sorry if you can't handle it.

Anyone who has played hockey (like I have for most of my life) and has worn NHL level helmets, knows a helmet shouldn't crack, and in 3 places no less, from something like that. Again...maybe the visor cracked where it attached to the helmet, which I can see...but not the helmet itself...no way. Sorry. If it did indeed crack, it was probably already weak from previous impacts over the course of the season. Maybe he just needs to switch helmet brands.

I find it very hard to believe his helmet was cracked in two places. Sounds like an ad-lib by a reporter. Maybe his visor was cracked, which I could see...but those helmets are made to withstand much worse blows than that.

You are correct. A fine counts and the infraction counts as an "offense". So the next offense would make that player a repeat offender. If this was the regular season, Weber gets suspended. I guess Shanny felt suspending him for a playoff game would be too harsh of a penalty and just went with the fine. I think you guys got hosed. He should be gone for a game. But hey...I picked Nashville on our playoff challenge contest...so I'm not upset about the decision.

You aren't reading what I am saying. I think Weber should be suspended for a game. A message should be sent. I never said he shouldn't be punished because there wasn't an injury. I said you can't compare the Bertuzzi-Moore play to the Weber-Zetterberg play because what Bertuzzi did was far more severe. The Franzen punch was a sucker punch and was waaaay more violent than the Weber head shove. It was so hard and so fast that it may as well have been a blindside punch. There was no time to react...he really couldn't defend himself.

But playoffs do matter. Playoff games are considered more important and therefore missing 1 playoff game is like missing 2 or 3 regular season games. Someone said this before the season...Shanahan or someone.

Bertuzzi ended Moore's career. Zetterberg is apparently fine. The outcome is a huge part of it. I don't think they are comparable at all.

It's technically boarding. He hit Weber from behind while Weber was facing the boards, and Weber's head hit the glass. I'm not sure why it matters that Zetterberg "rolled off" Weber. It's still boarding. I'm sure all Weber cared about was the fact he felt he got boarded, and he said as much in the paper. I'm not condoning Weber's actions at all, it was a classless play. But it's obvious by watching the replay that is why he was upset. I'm surprised you guys didn't mention that sooner (well, not really surprised). Like I said, Weber should have dropped the gloves, that would have been the way to go. It would have put an exclamation point on the game...instead, he did something stupid. If he doesn't get suspended...that will be a shame. I think he deserves a game for that. That is an excellent point. I was shocked Franzen didn't get a game for that.

Zetterberg hit Weber high against the boards, could have been a boarding call...which is why Weber was upset. But yeah, Weber overreacted and should probably get a 1 game suspension. If this were the regular season he would probably get 2 games. I'm not sure what he was thinking. If he was upset, he should have just dropped the gloves and said, "let's go". Zetterberg of course would skate away, but at least Weber would have made his point. But instead, he did something stupid.

Well, the Blues SHOULD win this series. They have played better all season long, they have better goaltending and defense (which is what wins in the playoffs), they have home ice advantage where they have been great, and they flat out dominated San Jose during the season....outscoring them 11-3 with two shutouts in going 4-0-0. With that said...the Blues didn't finish the season strong at all. I'm not sure if they were looking past the last handful of games and to the playoffs, or if they just hit a rough patch, or what. Turnovers and sloppy play were a big part of their mini-slump to end the season. Their best game in the last couple weeks was vs. Detroit, the Blues played a great game, but they fell apart in the last 6 minutes and ended up losing in OT. They won their last game of the season vs. Dallas, but they didn't play that well in the victory. I'm anxious to see how they handle playoff hockey against a team who has a lot of playoff experience. San Jose hasn't played well this year, but they are capable of playing better. I fully expect the Blues to tighten up their play. Guys like Arnott, Langenbrunner & McDonald will hopefully make it clear to the younger players what needs to be done. And Hitchcock should have them technically prepared and ready to go. We'll see if this Blues team has that extra gear to get it done in the playoffs. It would be nice of the Blues could win this in 5 to cut down on travel and get some rest before round 2.

Why so serious? It was basically a statement about how Franzen should have been penalized on the play and how star players fail to get penalized like others do. Explain to me how you come up with only a 2 minute rough, when he drew blood with a cross check to the chin? Bah, nevermind...I'm done in this thread. It's like talking to a wall in here. Wings fans don't think Franzen should have been penalized...shocker...I get it. Maybe we'll see you guys in the playoffs...Good luck with Nashville.

Some of you probably don't care...but some of you might. The STL Post Dispatch Blues beat writer, Jeremy Ruthreford does a live chat every Thursday at 1pm central at stltoday.com. I'm sure there will be plenty of talk about last night's game: http://live.stltoday.com/Event/Blues_chat_at_1_pm_5 I threw in a question just for you guys. No.

A stick infraction that draws blood can't be 2 minutes...it has to be at least 4. And if you give 4 or 5 minutes to Franzen for the crosscheck, and also give Backes 2, that's a power play for St. Louis. And if Franzen is given 5, he is tossed from the game...which obviously could have changed the outcome of the game. But really, I think the ref would have a hard time explaining a diving call on Backes when the stick to the chin check drew blood.

You're talking about a call where the ref didn't even see the high stick. That happens all of the time and, while it sucks, it is understandable...it happens...it's part of the human element. However, a ref actually seeing a stick infraction that draws blood and putting the whistle away like last night? That's a disgrace to the NHL. Especially when they are supposed to be cracking down on things like that.

You're singling out Olczyk...a former Hawk. In general, the national guys love to talk about how great the Wings are. Emmerick was constantly praising the skill of Detroit and Datsyuk more specifically during last night's game. I'm not saying they aren't worthy of praise, but it's weird to hear Wings fans say how the national media guys root against Detroit, when that just isn't the case from what I have seen.

Cross check to the chin...drew blood. You're ok with that not being a penalty?

So, Backes jerking his head when he was punched automatically makes the Franzen "blood-drawing" cross check to the chin and punch to the head not a penalty? I don't recall reading that in the rule book anywhere. Like I said...if Backes had done this to Datsyuk, you guys would be livid and Backes would have been penalized and be facing a fine or suspension.

Cross check to the chin...drew blood. Ok...yeah...he was faking. You're right. What was I thinking?

We post comments from other forums from time to time. Mostly from GDT's so our members can see what other folks are saying. It's usually a thread entitled, "From their perspective." Our users love it. Sorry I called you a sensitive Sally. I'll buy you a beer at a game sometime. I DVR'd the game and skipped the inbetween period stuff. But if you think the national media guys are anti-Detroit...you are crazy. All we ever hear from the national guys is how great Datsyuk, Lidstrom and Zetterberg are. They never stop. Inbetween periods, during the game, after the game...

Uhh... Perron was pumped...but he always is when he scores...that's nothing new. Add in the fact it was a shortanded goal in a scoreless game in the 3rd, it was at home, the crowd went bonkers, etc. Yeah, because the Wings never celebrate goals.

A love tap? I disagree. Watch the replay again sir. Franzen had both hands on his stick, gave him a shove/cross check down low. His hands stay on his stick and then they came up high and he extends his arms and cross checks Backes in the face. The stick obviously cuts Backes' chin, which is an automatic 5 minute penalty and game misconduct because it drew blood and was intentional. You can't only give a 2 minute penalty when a stick infraction draws blood. If you are saying that Backes dove, then I can say that Bertuzzi dove when Steen shoved him after the whistle at the side of the net. Bertuzzi went down kind of easy. The difference is, Steen was penalized for that...and when compared to the Franzen play, that is a joke. I have no problem with letting stuff go. But like I said, the calls on Reaves & more specifically, Steen, compared to the non-call on Franzen made the officiating way to inconsistent and lopsided in that game. That was a huge non-call. The NBC guys were puzzled as well and kind of insinuated that a makeup call would be/could be coming the Blues way, but that never happened. Hitchcock was quoted as taking the blame for the 2nd goal as he had the wrong line paring out there against the Datsyuk line. It should have been the Backes line.

Let's break down the Reaves hit... - Stuart had JUST played the puck, and he was extended from playing the puck and was NOT facing the boards. - Reaves skates by Stuart and hits him shoulder to shoulder. - Because Stuart was reaching, the hit caused Stuart to turn into the boards and catch glass with his face. If you want to give a 2 minute boarding penalty because Stuart's head hit the glass, then ok. I can buy that. But 5 minutes and a game is excessive. But I guess the ref thought there was carelessness on Reaves' part OR they thought he hit him from behind. I disagree with the call, but I can understand why the ref may have thought it was worse than it was...but I disagree with the no-call on Franzen a lot more. Let's break down the Franzen hit... - Franzen and Backes are tied up after the end of the 2nd period. - Franzen obviously upset about something. - Franzen cross checks Backes in the face, knocking Backes down & drawing blood. Then Franzen punches Backes in the head. The intent to injur and the drawing blood should have been 5 minutes and a game misconduct. My main gripe is that if the refs are going to make that call on Reaves and the other ones on Steen, then you can't look the other way on the Franzen hit. That's just horrible officiating. At first I thought, well, maybe they didn't see it...but the video replay shows the ref skating towards them maybe 20 ft. away, looking right at it. He saw it and decided to call nothing. If Backes had done that to Datsyuk? Forget about it...you guys would be livid and calling for a 5 game suspension.

Yup, the non-call on Steen when he got tangled up with Kronwall behind the net should have been a penalty. That probably should have been called. No question. I have no problem with letting teams play and not calling minor stuff or incidental stuff...especially in a game like last night's. AS LONG AS THEY ARE CONSISTENT. The Franzen play was unusual and anything but minor or incidental. It was malicious and intentional. Franzen cross checks Backes in the face, drawing blood, then punches him in the head when he is down. I'm not sure why you think Backes dove. I just watched the replay a few times...didn't look like a dive to me. And even if he did...does it matter? It's still a major penalty on Franzen and 2 minutes on Backes. Maybe if Backes had laid on the ice, face down, and writing in pain like Stuart did...then maybe a penalty is called. Who knows. I think if you are calling penalties on Steen and Reaves for ticky tack stuff (especially pushing Bertuzzi down at the side of the net), then you HAVE TO call Franzen for what he did. My God. Even if the refs missed the cross check to the face, one ref was right there and saw the punch to the head while he was down. I'm sure every one of you guys thought the 3rd would be starting with the Blues on the PP. That looks like 5 minutes and a game misconduct for Franzen if you ask me. Just my opinion.