• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
stevkrause

Aaron Rome

Rate this topic

110 posts in this topic

I don't really understand rule 48. I mean to me these are the hits that are dangerous, it is clearly from Horton's "blindside" and caused an injury. Is this not what the rule was put in place to prevent? I agree with a lot of you saying that it really wasn't that bad of a hit but to me these are the types of hits that the NHL is trying to get rid of to protect the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is, 4 games in the SCF is unprecedented. Certainly, the hit deserved a suspension. A game or 2 ok, but the remainder of the playoffs? Has it been done before? The league looks stupid because the suspensions seem to be arbitrary. If they want to crack down, fine. They should ramp up the level of suspensions but to go from what 1 game or zero games in the last hit like this to 4.

It makes no sense. And I am NOT defending the hit or the guy. I am questioning the way the league hands down suspensions.

I think part of the reason they made such a stand on this is because they missed suspending burrows. They miss that and he goes out and pots 2 goals including the ot winner. I think they are definitely trying to compensate for that. But I do think they suspension length is worthy.

sputman likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think part of the reason they made such a stand on this is because they missed suspending burrows. They miss that and he goes out and pots 2 goals including the ot winner. I think they are definitely trying to compensate for that. But I do think they suspension length is worthy.

Not only that, but new group trying to make a new impression. They may be trying to send the message "we won't not suspend you just because it's the playoffs". I hope that's the case, and I also hope they go for "we won't not suspend you just because you're a star player or an important player on a star's team".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you on this. Yes it was a tad late..barely. was not a shot to the head. I think some people need to "re-watch" the video a little more close and not have the hate on for the nucks when watching. I think if any 1-2 games...thats it. But thats just me.

well there you go. 4 games.

You need to watch the video again. Rome hits Horton in the head or at least very close to the head, in a manner which suggests that he was targeting the head. 4 games is just fine. Bruins should be happy he got anything, though, given their previous arguments this season about what suspensions should be for head hunting.

It's honestly pathetic that people are taken back so much by this hit. The hit was obviously late but besides it's timing it was a perfect open ice hit. There is a difference between coming from the blindside, and hitting someone head on when they're not paying attention. Should have been an interference penalty and nothing else. Rome led with the shoulder, you can''t punish someone for hitting too hard thats like suspending Datsyuk for stick handling too good. It sucks that Horton got hurt but next time he will be more aware when he is crossing the blue line.

Hitting someone hard head on is fine. What Rome did is hit Horton from the blind side, completely east-west hit while Horton was moving north-south. He also targeted Horton's head, and hit him well after Horton had passed the puck.

I hope Rome comes back and makes another sweet hit like that.Glad someone is keeping the old school hockey spirit alive.Horton should keep his head up.

The hit was illegal. However, Horton made it far worse on himself by completely zoning out. This is uncharacteristic of a hockey player to do, because they know that it will often lead to them being freight-trained.

You two seriously need to learn how to play hockey. I get that you like watching huge hits, but that's not a good hit. That's an illegal hit, and an unsafe hit. Even if Horton has his head up and looking forward, he's just looped around the neutral zone and he's barely moving at that point, so Rome still wastes him.

It was not charging. Not a chance.

He jumped into the hit. That's TEXTBOOK charging.

Horton was watching his pass. As others have mentioned' date=' he had passed forward to Lucic. If Lucic wasn't offside, then Horton certainly wasn't. And he wasn't in a helpless position--and note that players are often in helpless positions when they are hit legally--but rather simply took the hit far harder than he would otherwise because [i']he stopped being aware of his surroundings[/i]. All hockey players must be aware of what's going on around them, else they risk being crushed. Had Horton seen the hit coming, chances are high that he would have taken it much more smoothly.

Horton was in a helpless position regardless of whether he was looking at Rome, Lucic, or the hot dog guy. Sometimes a guy just gets flattened. And if the hit is late, and to the head, it might cause injury, and it might get a guy suspended.

redwings4life and Konnan511 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people using the word blindside in this thread are ridiculous, they should put a word in the rule called peripheral vision to help people who haven't played figure out that just because a guy comes across to hit another doesn't mean if their head is up they cant see the guy. One of the first things I was taught in hockey was to use my peripheral vision to avoid hits. When they come from the angle Cooke did, then yes that is blindside, but when the guy making the hit comes BLATANTLY form in front of a guy, if they have their head up they will see him.

ENuck and sleepwalker like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people using the word blindside in this thread are ridiculous, they should put a word in the rule called peripheral vision to help people who haven't played figure out that just because a guy comes across to hit another doesn't mean if their head is up they cant see the guy. One of the first things I was taught in hockey was to use my peripheral vision to avoid hits. When they come from the angle Cooke did, then yes that is blindside, but when the guy making the hit comes BLATANTLY form in front of a guy, if they have their head up they will see him.

Ok coach, how does Horton avoid this one? He's gliding into center ice while Lucic is lining up to receive the pass and Rome is lining up to hit him. He is moving pretty slowly and couldn't get out of the way if he tried to. Which, of course, would have required his knowing that the hit was coming. Just because Rome's final motion was to hit Horton towards center ice doesn't make this a north-south hit; he was skating east-west for a good distance directly before he threw the hit. That makes it a blindside hit. Whether Horton should have seen him is irrelevant; especially as Horton wouldn't have been able to avoid him anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok coach, how does Horton avoid this one? He's gliding into center ice while Lucic is lining up to receive the pass and Rome is lining up to hit him. He is moving pretty slowly and couldn't get out of the way if he tried to. Which, of course, would have required his knowing that the hit was coming. Just because Rome's final motion was to hit Horton towards center ice doesn't make this a north-south hit; he was skating east-west for a good distance directly before he threw the hit. That makes it a blindside hit. Whether Horton should have seen him is irrelevant; especially as Horton wouldn't have been able to avoid him anyway.

sigh, you have no concept of hitting in hockey. Would you try to hit Lindros if he was looking at you? If horton had his head up the whole time chances are Rome doesn't step up because he knows Horton would get something up in defense. The whole entire pattern of Rome's skating would have been visible to horton if he was looking where he was about to skate. The fact that Horton could have seen him is the most relevant thing because if his head was in the proper position it wouldn't have beena blindside. So what you are saying is guys should deliberately look away or skate with their heads down to draw penalties?

ENuck likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




It's a rough game, keep your head up.


I wonder what Scott Stevens would have to say about the Rome hit on Horton? Edited by under_par_00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok coach, how does Horton avoid this one? He's gliding into center ice while Lucic is lining up to receive the pass and Rome is lining up to hit him. He is moving pretty slowly and couldn't get out of the way if he tried to. Which, of course, would have required his knowing that the hit was coming. Just because Rome's final motion was to hit Horton towards center ice doesn't make this a north-south hit; he was skating east-west for a good distance directly before he threw the hit. That makes it a blindside hit. Whether Horton should have seen him is irrelevant; especially as Horton wouldn't have been able to avoid him anyway.

I think this was pretty clearly a north south hit...nowhere even close to a blindside hit and I don't think many in the hockey world (players, coaches, analysts, etc.) are questioning that. For me, the only problem at all with the hit is that it was a little late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A late hit that lead to a devastating injury. "An eye for and eye" type of suspension. I'm perfectly fine with it.

The hit wasn't dirty, it was just late, and you can't have that.

mjlegend and Mitchmac33 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hit was to the area of the collarbone. It was the impact on the ice that gave Horton the concussion.

Eh? I guess I need to rewatch the video. I thought it was a head shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided I'd illustrate this:

All of this adds up to a long suspension. I think the NHL got it right.

I +1'd you because I think your assessment is spot on, but those dots reminded me of NHL EHM 2007.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what Scott Stevens would have to say about the Rome hit on Horton?

To be honest? I doubt he'd be as happy with it as people seem to think. After he knocked Lindros out he was pretty upset. Apparently he had to be consoled by his coach afterwords. Moreover, Stevens' retirement wasn't on his own terms-- he did so because of post-concussion syndrome. When a guy gets carted off the ice on a stretcher and has to stay in the hospital overnight it's pretty upsetting. Stevens' hits were kind of like Kronwall's in the sense that he'd catch people and just wreck them. But, like Kronwall, Stevens wasn't a dirty player aside from making hits that some called dirty. He wasn't a guy who tried to injure people any way he could (see: Pronger, Chris).

Today we know a lot more about concussions than we did ten years ago. Medical science continues to show how serious concussions are and how dire the long-term repercussions can be. Having a brazen attitude about causing someone else brain damage is just ignorant.

stevkrause likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is, 4 games in the SCF is unprecedented. Certainly, the hit deserved a suspension. A game or 2 ok, but the remainder of the playoffs? Has it been done before? The league looks stupid because the suspensions seem to be arbitrary. If they want to crack down, fine. They should ramp up the level of suspensions but to go from what 1 game or zero games in the last hit like this to 4.

It makes no sense. And I am NOT defending the hit or the guy. I am questioning the way the league hands down suspensions.

Rome is a schlub. There's no way this suspension would go down this hard on Chara. The NHL's shown many times that examples are only to be made with non-stars.

Life is a little bit different than a hockey game. The guys on the ice know that they can hit or be hit. You are not seriously comparing a hockey game to running over a chick on the road are you?

I am because in both cases you have to consider the health of a defenceless person. Most hockey players let up when the see the guy in front of them is defenceless. No one has a license to be reckless. Intent to injure is taken very seriously in the NHL among management AND players.

Konnan511 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest? I doubt he'd be as happy with it as people seem to think. After he knocked Lindros out he was pretty upset. Apparently he had to be consoled by his coach afterwords. Moreover, Stevens' retirement wasn't on his own terms-- he did so because of post-concussion syndrome. When a guy gets carted off the ice on a stretcher and has to stay in the hospital overnight it's pretty upsetting. Stevens' hits were kind of like Kronwall's in the sense that he'd catch people and just wreck them. But, like Kronwall, Stevens wasn't a dirty player aside from making hits that some called dirty. He wasn't a guy who tried to injure people any way he could (see: Pronger, Chris).

Today we know a lot more about concussions than we did ten years ago. Medical science continues to show how serious concussions are and how dire the long-term repercussions can be. Having a brazen attitude about causing someone else brain damage is just ignorant.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest? I doubt he'd be as happy with it as people seem to think. After he knocked Lindros out he was pretty upset. Apparently he had to be consoled by his coach afterwords. Moreover, Stevens' retirement wasn't on his own terms-- he did so because of post-concussion syndrome. When a guy gets carted off the ice on a stretcher and has to stay in the hospital overnight it's pretty upsetting. Stevens' hits were kind of like Kronwall's in the sense that he'd catch people and just wreck them. But, like Kronwall, Stevens wasn't a dirty player aside from making hits that some called dirty. He wasn't a guy who tried to injure people any way he could (see: Pronger, Chris).

Today we know a lot more about concussions than we did ten years ago. Medical science continues to show how serious concussions are and how dire the long-term repercussions can be. Having a brazen attitude about causing someone else brain damage is just ignorant.

A large chunk of Stevens's big hits would be considered illegal today, as they would violate rule 48.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A large chunk of Stevens's big hits would be considered illegal today, as they would violate rule 48.

True. A big part of that comes from how much more we know about concussions today. The best parallel would be helmet-to-helmet hits in the NFL. At some point our standards for clean/dirty plays have to catch up with the medical reality of what concussions can do to players. If ruling out certain hits can significantly improve the quality of life of the players during and after their careers end it's the league's responsibility to take action. No one should have to suffer from memory loss or periodic headaches/nausea for the rest of their life. The impact on a person's quality of life is so much larger for brain injuries compared to muscle or skeletal injuries.

Konnan511 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh? I guess I need to rewatch the video. I thought it was a head shot.

You really should. It takes a couple views to really get what's happening. To the folks still claiming this was a blindside hit, you need to pause your way thru the :52 mark of the video back in post #7. Rome nearly comes to a stop before jumping into Horton. Pause thru the video and see. At the moment of impact, the only part of Rome not directly in front of Horton is the right leg that he used to plant himself (you can see the ice spray from that plant near the end of the video if you want to). Even at the moment of impact, Horton is still admiring his pass, but the angle of body contact is nearly face-to-face. You can also see that Horton's accelerating stride (with his left leg, as he presumably heads to the net) actually angles his body toward the hit.

esteef likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True. A big part of that comes from how much more we know about concussions today. The best parallel would be helmet-to-helmet hits in the NFL. At some point our standards for clean/dirty plays have to catch up with the medical reality of what concussions can do to players. If ruling out certain hits can significantly improve the quality of life of the players during and after their careers end it's the league's responsibility to take action. No one should have to suffer from memory loss or periodic headaches/nausea for the rest of their life. The impact on a person's quality of life is so much larger for brain injuries compared to muscle or skeletal injuries.

they also get paid millions, play a game they love, and have the ability to avoid hits if they wanted to see: lidstrom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest? I doubt he'd be as happy with it as people seem to think. After he knocked Lindros out he was pretty upset. Apparently he had to be consoled by his coach afterwords. Moreover, Stevens' retirement wasn't on his own terms-- he did so because of post-concussion syndrome. When a guy gets carted off the ice on a stretcher and has to stay in the hospital overnight it's pretty upsetting. Stevens' hits were kind of like Kronwall's in the sense that he'd catch people and just wreck them. But, like Kronwall, Stevens wasn't a dirty player aside from making hits that some called dirty. He wasn't a guy who tried to injure people any way he could (see: Pronger, Chris).

Today we know a lot more about concussions than we did ten years ago. Medical science continues to show how serious concussions are and how dire the long-term repercussions can be. Having a brazen attitude about causing someone else brain damage is just ignorant.

Perfectly stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they also get paid millions, play a game they love, and have the ability to avoid hits if they wanted to see: lidstrom.

Ah yes, just have the vision and presence of mind of a NHL Hall of Fame defenseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they also get paid millions, play a game they love, and have the ability to avoid hits if they wanted to see: lidstrom.

Wow... just, wow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they also get paid millions, play a game they love, and have the ability to avoid hits if they wanted to see: lidstrom.

You think people get hit because they don't want to avoid them??

Who wouldn't want to avoid getting crushed if it were that easy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A large chunk of Stevens's big hits would be considered illegal today, as they would violate rule 48.

I honestly don't think they would. First off a lot of people think all of Steven's hits were like his highlight reel. But those were by far the most devastating. A handful of them would be. Kariya, Kozlov, Lindros.

But the great proportion of them were from the front, arms tucked in, skates on the ice and while there may have been contact to the head, it was not the principal point. Typically they were crushing a guy in the chest.

Edited by haroldsnepsts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think part of the reason they made such a stand on this is because they missed suspending burrows. They miss that and he goes out and pots 2 goals including the ot winner. I think they are definitely trying to compensate for that. But I do think they suspension length is worthy.

i dont know why somebody "negatived" you on this. your exact point has been talked about on sports shows ever since the hit. though i wouldn't say it was in response to burrows scoring 2 goals afterwards, i think they would have come down on anybody hard regardless of what he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0