Jarkko Ruutu bites Andrew Peters

[Doggy 130]

For a quick comparison, Marc Savard was suspended for 1 game for biting a few years ago.

I think it was stupid, but not that big of a deal. I can't imagine it really even hurt that much, considering Peters was wearing a glove. Much more dangerous incidents happen every game.

The alleged bite was not on his glove. If there was a bite it came after the glove came off. You really think he would've reacted like that with his glove on?

[ComradeWasabi 109]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_dadd...maining-content

About halfway down is a picture taken from behind the Sabres' bench of the trainer treating Peters' thumb.

[P. Marlowe 748]

Banning fighting would just be driving the nail in the sport's coffin.

There are many countries in Europe where hockey is the most popular team sport and there are very few fights.

[toby91_ca 620]

The alleged bite was not on his glove. If there was a bite it came after the glove came off. You really think he would've reacted like that with his glove on?

Well, I thought Peters' reaction was a complete joke.

[P. Marlowe 748]

Well, I thought Peters' reaction was a complete joke.

From the video you can see that when Peters's hand leaves his glove he's already leaving, so the bite must've happened when his hand was in his glove.

[Inultus 12]

Well, I thought Peters' reaction was a complete joke.

Well if you believe the poster in the link above, his thumb was bleeding. I've crushed my thumb with a hammer and it still didn't bleed (although it hurt like and SOB), so if it was bleeding I suspect it hurt pretty badly.

[Opie 308]

You do?

All I see is the back of Peters' helmet until after the alleged bite takes place.

I, for one, believe Ruutu did bite down simply because of the immediate reaction Peters has as well as everything that followed.

Look when Peters goes to pull his hand back you can see Ruutu's mouth closed on the glove and that is why the glove comes off. You can't see Ruutu actually clamp down on the finger but you can see that the jaw was closed and the glove is pinched in between. You can even see his head turn as Peters pulls the glove away.

Now whether or not like another poster said it was a reaction to keep from getting mouthwashed as well as facewashed I don't know but you can clearly see his jaw clenched on the glove.

2 games seems alright with me, but I would like some consistency from the NHL, this makes the Avery thing seem like a lot longer suspension now. Doesn't this also impact the game negatively, I mean it is all over the internet, was ESPN's only hockey highlight of the day, was on Yahoo's home page, for all the reasons what Avery said was bad for the game so is this, and this was a guy biting another.

On the other hand there is a precedence for this already and this suspension is longer than that one (Savard) so I guess all in all I am ok with two games it is better than none!

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

I love how he tries to deny it happened even though its clearly on video

[Red Crazy 201]

And the decline of hockey continues.

Ruutu, Tootoo, Avery, etc should not be in this league they are all idiots and they are making a joke of the NHL and hockey in general. These " instigators" serve no purpose and they usually only play on teams that have to resort to this BS. It is time the NHL kick these assclowns out and get back some " code" back into this league.

[Opie 308]

And the decline of hockey continues.

Ruutu, Tootoo, Avery, etc should not be in this league they are all idiots and they are making a joke of the NHL and hockey in general. These " instigators" serve no purpose and they usually only play on teams that have to resort to this BS. It is time the NHL kick these assclowns out and get back some " code" back into this league.

You don't even have to send anyone to KHL, just get rid of the instigator rule. Avery rarely backs his mouth or his actions up with his fists, why? He doesn't have to.

Even if he is not suspended by the league for his comments do any of you really believe that either Iginla or Dion would have gone to blows with him.

Sure they would have tried to, but all Avery has to do is act like he doesn't want to throw with them and they both risk 17 minutes worth of penalties.

So Avery gets 2 or maybe even 5 minutes, big deal he just took either the flames best forward or D man, that is a win for Dallas.

Now if it is a 5 min major for fighting and no stupid ass instigator s***, Iggy can rain down thunder all over Avery's ass sit for 5 and it is a relative wash.

With the instigator Iggy or Dion lose almost a whole period of Hockey.

STUPID F**KING RULE!!!

[Datsyerberger 279]

2 game suspension? That's ridiculous. That kinda crap doesn't belong in the game. 10 games, at LEAST more than the 6 and permanent humiliation Avery got for 2 words.

At the same time, I also think that Peters should have got a matching suspension. One should not be intentionally sticking any of their body parts into anyone else's orifices during a hockey game. That's ******* disgusting.

Both players are massively in the wrong here and should be punished accordingly, not slapped on the wrost. Edit: Nor on the wurst, or the wrist.

Edited January 8, 2009 by Datsyerberger

[Electrophile 3,554]

There are many countries in Europe where hockey is the most popular team sport and there are very few fights.

You just made my point for me. We're not talking about what is popular in Europe, we're in the United States. A country where hockey probably ranks behind the World Series of Poker in total viewership.

If the NHL banned fighting, it would be the final nail in the coffin for the sport HERE. Because my original point dealt with hockey in the United States, not halfway across the globe.

[Doggy 130]

From the video you can see that when Peters's hand leaves his glove he's already leaving, so the bite must've happened when his hand was in his glove.

Nah, the glove is off at least second or two before he reacts. Ruutu bites his gloves, it comes flying off, he throws the bare hand into his face and then reacts.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

You don't even have to send anyone to KHL, just get rid of the instigator rule. Avery rarely backs his mouth or his actions up with his fists, why? He doesn't have to.

Even if he is not suspended by the league for his comments do any of you really believe that either Iginla or Dion would have gone to blows with him.

Sure they would have tried to, but all Avery has to do is act like he doesn't want to throw with them and they both risk 17 minutes worth of penalties.

So Avery gets 2 or maybe even 5 minutes, big deal he just took either the flames best forward or D man, that is a win for Dallas.

Now if it is a 5 min major for fighting and no stupid ass instigator s***, Iggy can rain down thunder all over Avery's ass sit for 5 and it is a relative wash.

With the instigator Iggy or Dion lose almost a whole period of Hockey.

STUPID F**KING RULE!!!

I'm not a fan of the instigator rule. But i'm also not a fan of lawlessness in the NHL, we've had those days and we're still the butt of many jokes because of the brawling.

Personally, I don't like the instigator rule. However, I cannot justify a simple 5 minute major for jumping and pummeling a guy who isn't fighting back.

Seriously, how do we reconcile that as objective human beings?

2 guys decide to man up, each get 5 for fighting.

1 guy annoys another or throws questionable hit or s***, even looks at a guy funny, player B jumps said player and pounds guy into oblivion. And player B gets the same punishment as if he had a straight up, man to man fight?

We all don't like the instigator but if we're honest with ourselves, situation 2 is not the same as situation 1 and I don't think anybody can honestly say they deserve the same penalty.

So what do you do now? If there's a clear case of a player jumping and pounding a guy who isn't fighting back, how can you possibly not give him some kind of extra punishment? A misconduct I would think at least. Which puts you at 15 minutes vs 17. Okay, that's a start, but still that's a long time to take an Iginla off the ice isn't it. So you aren't really changing the nature of the dilemma.

Or maybe you do give the offender and extra 2 minutes, maybe you call it instigating, maybe you don't, but you don't make them add up. So there's no 3 instigators and you get a suspension kind of deal. That might work.

As a die hard fight fan I don't like the instigator but I can't honestly bring myself to say i'd prefer to let somebody pound on an unwilling opponent and still give the guy only 5 minutes as if he had a straight up fight. That's not honest.

As for Ruutuu....oh vey! Biting? Seriously. And as for the NHL...WTF NHL? Say sloppy seconds, get immediate, indefinite supsension from league. Perform moderate act of attempted cannibalism on NHL ice, get 2 games??????? Biting ought to be a 10 game minimum suspension. Who the f*** bites somebody? And we've had these discussions before about biting. #1, why the f*** is your mouth open in a scrum? #2, if somebody's finger finds a way in there, turn your freaking head and get it out. If somebody were to stick a freaking turd in your mouth would your instinct still be to bite down on it? I don't think so. So I dont' buy that cockamamie excuse.

GS&T Rant officially over.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Look when Peters goes to pull his hand back you can see Ruutu's mouth closed on the glove and that is why the glove comes off. You can't see Ruutu actually clamp down on the finger but you can see that the jaw was closed and the glove is pinched in between. You can even see his head turn as Peters pulls the glove away.

Now whether or not like another poster said it was a reaction to keep from getting mouthwashed as well as facewashed I don't know but you can clearly see his jaw clenched on the glove.

2 games seems alright with me, but I would like some consistency from the NHL, this makes the Avery thing seem like a lot longer suspension now. Doesn't this also impact the game negatively, I mean it is all over the internet, was ESPN's only hockey highlight of the day, was on Yahoo's home page, for all the reasons what Avery said was bad for the game so is this, and this was a guy biting another.

On the other hand there is a precedence for this already and this suspension is longer than that one (Savard) so I guess all in all I am ok with two games it is better than none!

You know what, I was actually referring to *after* the initial bite took place. I thought the real bite came after the glove was off, when Peters' bare hand again goes close to Ruutu. At that point, you can't see Ruutu's head because the back of Peters' helmet is between Ruutu's face and the camera. Now I see what you're referring to.

Still, I tend to agree with Doggy that Peters didn't react until after he put his hand back by Ruutu's face. If you watch the play again, it looks as though there isn't a serious reaction until his hand goes back up toward Ruutu's mouth. A bite isn't really like a stubbed toe, its not going to take a second or two before you feel it.

Doesn't matter though, the fact is it's very much looking like its not an alleged bite anymore and that it was in fact a bite. Suspension is the right thing to do.

[Opie 308]

You know what, I was actually referring to *after* the bite took place. I initially thought the bite came after the glove was off, when Peters' bare hand again goes close to Ruutu. At that point, you can't see Ruutu's because the back of Peters' helmet is between Ruutu's face and the camera. Now I see what you're referring to.

I could be wrong but that is what I saw, but recreational chemistry has screwed my perceptions a little!!

[Doc Holiday 0]

Well if you believe the poster in the link above, his thumb was bleeding. I've crushed my thumb with a hammer and it still didn't bleed (although it hurt like and SOB), so if it was bleeding I suspect it hurt pretty badly.

Blunt objects won't pierce the skin.

The front teeth are meant for cutting.

[Opie 308]

Blunt objects won't pierce the skin.

The front teeth are meant for cutting.

You know I left that one alone because I couldn't come up with a nice way to word it!

[gravy2dope 0]

They are both a couple of plugs who couldn't even make Grand Rapids. Who Cares!!!

And if Ruutooth was a fighter (which he obviously isn't) he wouldn't have any front teeth!!!

Edited January 8, 2009 by gravy2dope

[Doggy 130]

Blunt objects won't pierce the skin.

The front teeth are meant for cutting.

I can bite my hand pretty ******* hard without drawing blood. And it kinda hurts too.

[Inultus 12]

I can bite my hand pretty ******* hard without drawing blood. And it kinda hurts too.

Exactly, so if he actually bit it hard enough that it bled (which is what an eye-witness said) then I bet it hurt like a beyotch.

[Opie 308]

I can bite my hand pretty ******* hard without drawing blood. And it kinda hurts too.

Yeah, but are you biting it with the intent to snack on it?

Kind of like punching yourself your body will prevent you from really doing it, unless you really try to remove your finger tip you will always come up a little short. Well, if you really bit the top off then you would be a little short!!

Waits for the groans....

wait for it...

bad joke I know!!

[esteef 2,679]

I'm not a fan of the instigator rule. But i'm also not a fan of lawlessness in the NHL, we've had those days and we're still the butt of many jokes because of the brawling.

Personally, I don't like the instigator rule. However, I cannot justify a simple 5 minute major for jumping and pummeling a guy who isn't fighting back.

Seriously, how do we reconcile that as objective human beings?

2 guys decide to man up, each get 5 for fighting.

1 guy annoys another or throws questionable hit or s***, even looks at a guy funny, player B jumps said player and pounds guy into oblivion. And player B gets the same punishment as if he had a straight up, man to man fight?

We all don't like the instigator but if we're honest with ourselves, situation 2 is not the same as situation 1 and I don't think anybody can honestly say they deserve the same penalty.

So what do you do now? If there's a clear case of a player jumping and pounding a guy who isn't fighting back, how can you possibly not give him some kind of extra punishment? A misconduct I would think at least. Which puts you at 15 minutes vs 17. Okay, that's a start, but still that's a long time to take an Iginla off the ice isn't it. So you aren't really changing the nature of the dilemma.

Or maybe you do give the offender and extra 2 minutes, maybe you call it instigating, maybe you don't, but you don't make them add up. So there's no 3 instigators and you get a suspension kind of deal. That might work.

As a die hard fight fan I don't like the instigator but I can't honestly bring myself to say i'd prefer to let somebody pound on an unwilling opponent and still give the guy only 5 minutes as if he had a straight up fight. That's not honest.

As for Ruutuu....oh vey! Biting? Seriously. And as for the NHL...WTF NHL? Say sloppy seconds, get immediate, indefinite supsension from league. Perform moderate act of attempted cannibalism on NHL ice, get 2 games??????? Biting ought to be a 10 game minimum suspension. Who the f*** bites somebody? And we've had these discussions before about biting. #1, why the f*** is your mouth open in a scrum? #2, if somebody's finger finds a way in there, turn your freaking head and get it out. If somebody were to stick a freaking turd in your mouth would your instinct still be to bite down on it? I don't think so. So I dont' buy that cockamamie excuse.

GS&T Rant officially over.

I agree with all of that you long winded bastard!

[Doggy 130]

Lol, GS&T must be a really quick typer. Some of his posts would take a retard like me 30 mins to write.

[hillbillywingsfan 794]

so avrey got 4 games for a stupid comment and ruutooth gets 2 for taking a plug out of someones thumb????? wow.