Selliria 76 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 Great we lose a tough Canadian and replace him witha soft euro. Lovely. We should atleast call up janik to try and replace some physicality. Now we have the softest defense in the NHL. 5 soft euros, and another soft American. Gotta give holland credit, he's made the wings so soft it's laughable. Guess I'll go watch a some Probert fight now to remember how the wings once were a tough and skilled team. And you know what? We're still one of the top teams in the NHL. Sorry if it bothers you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
puckloo39 5,686 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 so... one more try here: no news on suspension for Kosto-puke-os? Did they just blow off the hearing scheduled for today (reason: just a Red Wing, no biggie?) Re-scheduled said hearing? Gave the offender a raise and extension for his actions? Maybe some of you closer to the action have heard, there is nothing on google news search. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holliday 1,888 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 He's been suspended six games according to James Mirtle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Selliria 76 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 He's been suspended six games according to James Mirtle. Good. I read this morning that he was having a hearing to determine whether he'd be suspended or not but I couldn't find anything after that. Thanks for sharing! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgyfireman 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 He's been suspended six games according to James Mirtle. 6 games seems fair.I was at the game and most fans around agreed it was a dirty hit.Hope Stuart recovers soon so you guys can paste the Canucks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vladifan 680 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 so... one more try here: no news on suspension for Kosto-puke-os? Did they just blow off the hearing scheduled for today (reason: just a Red Wing, no biggie?) Re-scheduled said hearing? Gave the offender a raise and extension for his actions? Maybe some of you closer to the action have heard, there is nothing on google news search. Loo, if you google it now you'll get more responses than you can shake a hockey stick at. Bad grammar, but I mean well! It is indeed six games, plus $29,000+ in salary? Did I read that right?!... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vladifan 680 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 From NHL.com http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=548895 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Selliria 76 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 Some of them on the Calgary board actually think this is too harsh of a punishment and that it's because the victim was a Wings player. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
puckloo39 5,686 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 Loo, if you google it now you'll get more responses than you can shake a hockey stick at. Bad grammar, but I mean well! It is indeed six games, plus $29,000+ in salary? Did I read that right?!... thanks, they're all posted less than 10 minutes ago. Shaking my hockey stick in their general direction... I guess 6 is better than no games - or a pat on the back. Puke forfeits $29569.92, to be precise. It doesn't take him as long as it does me to make that amount (like half a year or so), so I doubt he really cares. Perhaps if his absence causes hardship/losses to Calgary, they will not be so happy about such behavior. One can hope! Some of them on the Calgary board actually think this is too harsh of a punishment and that it's because the victim was a Wings player. Stuart was dumb for putting his head/jaw in the path of Kostpoulos' flying elbow, I guess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 6 games I think is appropriate, at least when I try to be unbiased. 1 Vladifan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 6 games I think is appropriate, at least when I try to be unbiased. A little off topic, but honestly when I think about it, unless we're talking about the playoffs, any suspension should be more than two games, or make it none at all. Because sitting a guy for a couple games in an 82 game season is practically just giving him a rest. If you're going to dole out punishment, make sure it really hurts the team. If the act doesn't warrant that kind of punishment then it probably didn't deserve suspending for any games at all. 1 Vladifan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
esteef 2,679 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 A little off topic, but honestly when I think about it, unless we're talking about the playoffs, any suspension should be more than two games, or make it none at all. Because sitting a guy for a couple games in an 82 game season is practically just giving him a rest. If you're going to dole out punishment, make sure it really hurts the team. If the act doesn't warrant that kind of punishment then it probably didn't deserve suspending for any games at all. How about let the Wings pick who sits those 6 games? Now that would be "hurtful". esteef Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown0001 7,652 Report post Posted January 9, 2011 I am still disappoint. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 A little off topic, but honestly when I think about it, unless we're talking about the playoffs, any suspension should be more than two games, or make it none at all. Because sitting a guy for a couple games in an 82 game season is practically just giving him a rest. If you're going to dole out punishment, make sure it really hurts the team. If the act doesn't warrant that kind of punishment then it probably didn't deserve suspending for any games at all. I like the idea someone had about picking who you want to serve the suspension. Or something along those lines. The leading scorer or defenseman with the highest average TOI must serve it. Bwahahahaha! 1 Vladifan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HankthaTank 1,100 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) I am still disappoint. I know. Of course I went on a little tangent on how Stuie has been one of the real iron men of this team, hardly misses any games. And then I am on my way home from work and hear Kenny Kal stating he was face down on the ice and it didn't look good. Just s*** timing... Edited January 10, 2011 by HankthaTank Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
esteef 2,679 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 I know. Of course I went on a little tangent on how Stuie has been one of the real iron men of this team, hardly misses any games. And then I am on my way home from work and hear Kenny Kal stating he was face down on the ice and it didn't look good. Just s*** timing... It's all your fault! esteef Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HankthaTank 1,100 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 It's all your fault! esteef Seems to only be the absolute worse things too, when it comes down to it. Mind: "Ya know, the other day I was just thinking how we don't see enough Ruslan Salei hat tricks." Now, we wait. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown_Ryan 119 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Mike Milbury - "A deaf, dumb and blind kid can see what it is." I guess he thinks it was a clean hit! Yahoo Story Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
w00p33 2 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Could it be that "a man" is someone who denies his animal instincts and the pressure of the crowd, teammates and traditions and just doesn't choose to hurt another person because what they're doing is just playing a game? Interesting point. I have varied reactions to the fighting scenario. Most of the time I enjoy it, but sometimes I think the bigger man is the one who backs down. Take this scenario : Sean Avery (who I have no respect for) challenges Ovechkin (who I have much respect for) but Ovy backs down. I cheer the move because Ovy's the "bigger man" in this case. Ovy challenges Avery and he backs down and I boo him for being a p*ssy for not taking what he dishes out. Depends on the situation. In a case like this Kostoplous was already headed for the box, so I think no further retaliation was needed. Besides that, the game at that point is very tight, no reason to lose another guy to a fighting penalty and risk losing the game. Detroit had the "bigger men" in this situation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeff48109 474 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Wings response But Henrik Zetterberg believes the six-game ban was too short, considering that the Red Wings will be missing one of their best defensemen for six-to-eight weeks.“I think it was a little too short. It should have been more than that,'' Zetterberg said. "It was an ugly hit. Our guy’s gone for six weeks, he misses six games. “Six games, you can take that easily.’’ Nicklas Lidstrom said it's difficult for the NHL to find the right balance in dishing out punishment when a player suffers a long-term injury. “It’s hard to find a way to justify someone being out for a long period of time,'' Lidstrom said. He added: “It’s a blow to the head, that’s something you want to get rid of, that’s one way of doing it, suspending guys. The amount of games, that’s up to the league to decide.’’ Said coach Mike Babcock: “It continues to be an issue in the NHL, head hits. ... The league really stepped up in this regard. If you want to eliminate head hits you got to be real stiff with suspensions. In saying all that, I don’t think the guy deserves to be suspended longer. Yet, it’s a big loss for us. Stewie’s an important guy. You hate to see it happen.’’ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
w00p33 2 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Kostopolous should be suspended however long Stuart injury keeps him out. it's funny (not ha-ha funny) , because I would like to see this rule in place. But if that were the case we wouldn't have Bert. So the question is if the league ever adopted this rule (unlikely)would it have a sort of statute of limitations appended to it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Louisville 112 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 48.1 Illegal Check to the Head - A lateral OR blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted. Campbell says it was a definite lateral hit, so I'm not sure what Calgary and it's dumb ass fans are arguing. Too bad it was an idiot 4th line scrub but hey, they're lineup is full of crap players. Have fun not making the playoffs. 1 Vladifan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Louisville 112 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Before a whole mess of people go nuts over MM just know that it is TV, it is about ratings and presenting contrasting viewpoints. True that, but the fact that he starts off by yelling "LOVED IT" twice before the guy finished his sentence is just typical Milbury. But hey, I never take him seriously because he is the definition of FAIL when it comes to managing a hockey team. Him and McGuire are just clowns with gigs. 1 Vladifan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Whoa, Zetterberg with the statements and then Babs and Nick with the politically correct ones. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HankthaTank 1,100 Report post Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) Detroit Red Wings defenseman Brad Stuart underwent surgery Thursday to repair a broken jaw suffered on Jan. 7 on a hit from Calgary’s Tom Kostopoulos. per mlive Edited January 14, 2011 by HankthaTank Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
