• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
TheDetroitRedWings

Shawn Thornton attacks Orpik (leaves game on stretcher)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

i wish thornton wouldn't have did what he did so the focal point in the media would have been how big a ******-canoe neal is. i wish he would have ended up with the longer suspension out of all of this. what he did was totally cowardly.

i think how it played out is really unfortunate. orpik goes off on a stretcher from a couple gloved punches so it makes thornton out to be the worst dude in the history of the world, but since marchand is disliked by most and was able to get off the ice, his injury was no big deal.

i wish the league punished more for intent an not on theatrics. thornton shouldnt have slew footed and he shouldnt have punched a guy thats down. but at the end of the day he was trying to fight a guy that had made a borderline dirty hit. i can understand someone getting caught up in the passion of the game and making the mistake he did. whereas neal's actions just make me not want to be a hockey fan when people can get away with dirty plays like that. honestly that is worse thaneven lemiuex on draper IMO.

Unquestionably Neal should get a huge suspension, and he probably will considering he's been suspended before. They're both hugely chickens*** attacks on defenseless targets.

But I disagree about Orpik's hit being borderline dirty. In no way was that a dirty hit. He hit him in the chest, not high, and he was already too committed to the hit to pull up after Eriksson failed to play the puck (although it did hit him, so even then the hit is legal).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unquestionably Neal should get a huge suspension, and he probably will considering he's been suspended before. They're both hugely chickens*** attacks on defenseless targets.

But I disagree about Orpik's hit being borderline dirty. In no way was that a dirty hit. He hit him in the chest, not high, and he was already too committed to the hit to pull up after Eriksson failed to play the puck (although it did hit him, so even then the hit is legal).

fair enough. i think i had a poor word choice there. i think questionable would have been the better choice. but in fairness to thornton, he didn't have the benefit of replay like we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bylsma has no problem with the hit from Orpik, maybe they should have asked him about the Neal thing, I am sure he doesn't have a problem with that either if it happened to Malkin or Crosby he would sing a different tune. That's exactly the reason why I can't stand the Penguins they are so talented but extremely hypocrites, Julien was honest and of course right.

Maybe I'm missing something, but are you referencing a question that wasn't asked, to which you are assuming a particular answer and then using that as a reason why you can't stand the Penguins? Bizzare.

I'm coming late to the party here, but my take on things: I must say, I haven't spent any time looking for replays, I only saw the kneeing and the Thornton incident.

Kneeing - if someone asked me who I thought was the dirtiest penguin, it's probably Neal. If you watch any player in NHL away from the puck...little dirty stuff goes on all the time, so I don't think many of the other Penguins are dirtier than the average NHLer....Neal is a bit different though. He's a skilled player, so he doesn't do it all the time like a Marchand (even though he has some skill too). Back to the kneeing. Looked really bad to me....looked like he tried to make it look accidental, but it cleary wasn't. What I can't tell is how much force there was. What is keeping me from coming down too hard is that it was Marchand and it looked like he was milking it as I don't think he missed a shift. That's not all that fair though. I haven't seen the play in real time, which would probably help me judge better.

Thornton - that was disgustingly dirty. To come up from behind, pull a guy back and kick out his feet is really bad. That's what I hated more so than the blows to the head when he was on his back, but that doesn't help the matter.

Thornton will clearly get more games and I think deservedly so, but my mind could change based on seeing the kneeing in real time. I don't agree with giving susespensions based on results, but the NHL does and because of that, Thornton would get more games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fair enough. i think i had a poor word choice there. i think questionable would have been the better choice. but in fairness to thornton, he didn't have the benefit of replay like we do.

Of course he, did they show replays all the time on the big scoreboards. You constantly see players and coaches looking up at it during games. Thornton should have had a good view of it too, since he immediately went to the penalty box after the hit. Which brings me to my last point, Orpik hit Eriksson on the first shift of the game. Thornton got ejected at the 11:00 minute mark of the first. There was plenty of time for his team to look at the board, see that it wasn't a dirty hit, and lay off Orpik. Certainly nobody can say that Thornton was too emotional, or pissed off, or lost his cool. He had ten minutes to think on it. It was deliberate and dirty, there's no other way of looking at it.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unquestionably Neal should get a huge suspension, and he probably will considering he's been suspended before. They're both hugely chickens*** attacks on defenseless targets.

But I disagree about Orpik's hit being borderline dirty. In no way was that a dirty hit. He hit him in the chest, not high, and he was already too committed to the hit to pull up after Eriksson failed to play the puck (although it did hit him, so even then the hit is legal).

I wouldn't call it dirty but I think it should've been an interference penalty. When you're going to cut the timing that closely, if the player ends up not touching the puck and you deck him, that's on you.

It still in no way justifies Thornton's reaction. I just think Orpik should've gotten a 2 minute penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course he, did they show replays all the time on the big scoreboards. You constantly see players and coaches looking up at it during games. Thornton should have had a good view of it too, since he immediately went to the penalty box after the hit. Which brings me to my last point, Orpik hit Eriksson on the first shift of the game. Thornton got ejected at the 11:00 minute mark of the first. There was plenty of time for his team to look at the board, see that it wasn't a dirty hit, and lay off Orpik. Certainly nobody can say that Thornton was too emotional, or pissed off, or lost his cool. He had ten minutes to think on it. It was deliberate and dirty, there's no other way of looking at it.

This.

The Eriksson hit is way early in the game 19:39 to be exact. First shift of the game!

No time stamp, but later in the period Thorton tries to get Orpik to fight. Orpik declines.

This is probably where Thorton should have just left it alone, but he's stewing not calming down.

Neal's knee happens at 8:59. Which stirs the pot some more. Thorton then sees Campbell and Orpik jawing at each other. He decides he needs to help out his teammates and his punches follow.

Don't know what he was thinking when he decided to knock Orpik down to the ice and follow up with some gloved punches.

I'll disagree with you slightly Kip... I think he was too emotional, pissed off, and lost his cool... because he'd been thinking about it since the first shift of the game. Like you said, for 10 minutes!

It doesn't justify his actions in anyway. It just makes his behavior all the more ridiculous.

Furthermore, I don't buy his tearful "not my intention" apology. It was his intention to punch Orpik.

Maybe he didn't want him to be carted off on a stretcher, but he wanted to punish him with his fists.

DIsgusting. All around.

Edited by e_prime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This.

The Eriksson hit is way early in the game 19:39 to be exact. First shift of the game!

No time stamp, but later in the period Thorton tries to get Orpik to fight. Orpik declines.

This is probably where Thorton should have just left it alone, but he's stewing not calming down.

Neal's knee happens at 8:59. Which stirs the pot some more. Thorton then sees Campbell and Orpik jawing at each other. He decides he needs to help out his teammates and his punches follow.

Don't know what he was thinking when he decided to knock Orpik down to the ice and follow up with some gloved punches.

He was too emotional, pissed off, and lost his cool... because he'd been thinking about it since the first shift of the game.

It doesn't justify his actions in anyway. It just makes his behavior all the more ridiculous.

Furthermore, I don't buy his tearful "not my intention" apology. It was his intention to punch Orpik.

Maybe he didn't want him to be carted off on a stretcher, but he wanted to punish him with his fists.

DIsgusting. All around.

mccarty wanted to punish lemieux with his fists, and is revered here for it. can't have it both ways... sure the slew foot was pretty douchey, but many felt mccarty 'jumped' lemiuex similar to this altercation....

the only difference is the stretcher. had it not been brought out, we probably wouldn't even be having this conversation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call it dirty but I think it should've been an interference penalty. When you're going to cut the timing that closely, if the player ends up not touching the puck and you deck him, that's on you.

It still in no way justifies Thornton's reaction. I just think Orpik should've gotten a 2 minute penalty.

Finally, here's a video of the hit in slow motion (please disregard the crappy music and text commentary). There's a slow mo of the hit at :46 seconds. Play attention to the puck, it pretty clearly changes directions after hitting Eriksson's stick about a fraction of a second before the hit. The only way this is a penalty is if someone wants to say that he targeted the head (but Eriksson's head and body moved right before the hit after Orpik had already committed) or that he charged (Orpik left his feet on the follow through). Other than that it's just a good, well timed hockey hit.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mccarty wanted to punish lemieux with his fists, and is revered here for it. can't have it both ways... sure the slew foot was pretty douchey, but many felt mccarty 'jumped' lemiuex similar to this altercation....

the only difference is the stretcher. had it not been brought out, we probably wouldn't even be having this conversation...

It's a slippery slope for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giving a recent tendency in Shanny's hearing resolutions, Neal gets 2 slaps on the both wrists with resolution reading a word 'unintentional' - he wears right jersey. and thornton get 10 games since he wears wrong jersey and is an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RedWingsFeed: The Character Assassination of Brooks Orpik: Bostons Thornton chasing down... http://t.co/dCrTKCskhp via @TheHockeyWriter #NHL #RedWings

As captain save a ho when it comes to Kronner, I don't appreciate an article claiming character assassination on one player turning around and pointing a finger at an uninvolved player with a "but but but he's worse justification." Did think the article was an interesting read though.

And, of course, 5 games for Neal:

@NHLPlayerSafety: James Neal suspension video: http://t.co/vOqnaI92TR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RedWingsFeed: The Character Assassination of Brooks Orpik: Bostons Thornton chasing down... http://t.co/dCrTKCskhp via @TheHockeyWriter #NHL #RedWings

As captain save a ho when it comes to Kronner, I don't appreciate an article claiming character assassination on one player turning around and pointing a finger at an uninvolved player with a "but but but he's worse justification." Did think the article was an interesting read though.

And, of course, 5 games for Neal:

@NHLPlayerSafety: James Neal suspension video: http://t.co/vOqnaI92TR

It's all over the place and it's been pissing me off all day. Orpik didn't do anything cheap, dirty, or borderline. Yet somehow he's got to respond to doing nothing or else get hauled to the ice from behind and punched in the face. I mean, it must be his fault. Obviously frequent goon and occasional hockey player Shawn Thornton couldn't have gotten carried away with his dumb ass retaliation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
giving a recent tendency in Shanny's hearing resolutions, Neal gets 2 slaps on the both wrists with resolution reading a word 'unintentional' - he wears right jersey. and thornton get 10 games since he wears wrong jersey and is an idiot.
Shanahan is such a joke. How can one justify not even looking at the hit from Orpik and of course Neal should have an inperson hearing too but since both are wearing the right the jersey the Penguins are getting away with t once again. The department of player safety and especially Shanahan should be ashamed, disgusting. Hopefully, they pull this crap against the Calgary Flames on Bartschi or Monahan, McGrattan is not going to ask them if they want to dance +gg+

btw. if that's true https://twitter.com/IanAltenbaugh/status/410144999309729792, huge kudos to Shero.

Edited by frankgrimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Neal got 5 games, but according to Shanny's video he wasn't considered a repeat offender for some reason even though he'd been suspended twice before. I don't really get it.

“Though he is not a repeat offender under terms of the CBA (collective bargaining agreement), we cannot ignore the fact that Neal has previously been fined once and suspended twice in his six-year NHL career,”

The CBA says he's not a repeat offender. Shanny doesn't ignore the fact that he's been suspended and fined before.

Status as a "first" or "repeat" offender shall be re-determined every eighteen months. For example, where a player is suspended for the first time, he is a repeat offender if he is suspended again within eighteen months of the first incident. If he is not suspended a second time within this eighteen month period, he is no longer a repeat offender for disciplinary purposes.

Neal's last suspension was April 2012... he's cleared that 18 month window.

National Hockey League Collective Bargaining Agreement
Factors In Determining Supplementary DisciplineIn deciding on supplementary discipline, the following factorswill be taken into account:     a)   The type of conduct involved: conduct outside of NHLrules; excessive force in contact otherwise permitted by NHLrules; and careless or accidental conduct. Players areresponsible for the consequences of their actions.     b)   Injury to the opposing player(s) involved in theincident.     c)   The status of the offender, and specifically whether heis a first time or repeat offender.  Players who repeatedlyviolate NHL rules will be more severely punished for eachviolation.     d)   The situation of the game in which the incidentoccurred: late in the game, lopsided score, prior events in thegame.     e)   Such other factors as may be appropriate in thecircumstances.

As sick as it is.. if Marchand had been stretchered off, maybe Neal probably would have gotten more.

Edited by e_prime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Though he is not a repeat offender under terms of the CBA (collective bargaining agreement), we cannot ignore the fact that Neal has previously been fined once and suspended twice in his six-year NHL career,”

The CBA says he's not a repeat offender. Shanny doesn't ignore the fact that he's been suspended and fined before.

If Marchand had been stretchered off, maybe Neal would have gotten more.

I'm still glad this wasn't the case and I really dislike Marchand, he is only tough because he can hide between McQuaid, Lucic, Chara and Shawn Thornton, but if he would have been stretchered off one is looking at a severe (maybe even crosbylike concussion) and that's something I don't want to see/read about a player, no matter if I like him or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, here's a video of the hit in slow motion (please disregard the crappy music and text commentary). There's a slow mo of the hit at :46 seconds. Play attention to the puck, it pretty clearly changes directions after hitting Eriksson's stick about a fraction of a second before the hit. The only way this is a penalty is if someone wants to say that he targeted the head (but Eriksson's head and body moved right before the hit after Orpik had already committed) or that he charged (Orpik left his feet on the follow through). Other than that it's just a good, well timed hockey hit.

Yeah, the original angles I saw it was hard to tell if the puck was just skipping. But here it does look like it probably clipped it.

It's a predatory hit by Orpik so I'm not surprised the Bruins are upset, in the same way people react to Kronner's hits. But Thorton's actions are way over the line. If a guy doesn't want to engage you have to let it go and get retribution other ways. Orpik could've been a marked man all game and you take shots at their stars. There's no excuse for what Thornton did.

This is a difficult point to make because it sounds like I'm excusing Thornton's actions and I'm not, but I was surprised at the outcome and stretcher and whatnot because the actions themselves didn't seem that brutal. He must've really caught Orpik on the button or something. But that's exactly why you can't pull crap like that on an unsuspecting player. You end up with Bertuzzi-Moore, or McSorley.

The league could've helped itself by coming down on the Emery mugging and established a precedent for beating an unwilling opponent. Though at the same time you don't want to create an environment where the rats can operate more freely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Though he is not a repeat offender under terms of the CBA (collective bargaining agreement), we cannot ignore the fact that Neal has previously been fined once and suspended twice in his six-year NHL career,”

The CBA says he's not a repeat offender. Shanny doesn't ignore the fact that he's been suspended and fined before.

If Marchand had been stretchered off, maybe Neal would have gotten more.

Ah gotcha, I guess I wasn't paying good enough attention while that was on. Thanks for the clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanahan is such a joke. How can one justify not even looking at the hit from Orpik

How could one justify looking at the hit from Orpik? Absolutely nothing wrong with it, about as clean as you get. The only argument that could be made is whether or not there is interference as he didn't have the puck, but the puck was coming to him and he didn't get it. Either way, that argument, by no means, creates an argument for suspension.

He got hurt on the play because he fell back and hit his head on the ice, didn't look like Orpik made contact with his head at all....shoulder dead on chest/shoulder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the original angles I saw it was hard to tell if the puck was just skipping. But here it does look like it probably clipped it.

It's a predatory hit by Orpik so I'm not surprised the Bruins are upset, in the same way people react to Kronner's hits. But Thorton's actions are way over the line. If a guy doesn't want to engage you have to let it go and get retribution other ways. Orpik could've been a marked man all game and you take shots at their stars. There's no excuse for what Thornton did.

This is a difficult point to make because it sounds like I'm excusing Thornton's actions and I'm not, but I was surprised at the outcome and stretcher and whatnot because the actions themselves didn't seem that brutal. He must've really caught Orpik on the button or something. But that's exactly why you can't pull crap like that on an unsuspecting player. You end up with Bertuzzi-Moore, or McSorley.

The league could've helped itself by coming down on the Emery mugging and established a precedent for beating an unwilling opponent. Though at the same time you don't want to create an environment where the rats can operate more freely.

I agree with you about the hit, it's definitely predatory. He was hitting Eriksson whether he touched the puck or not. It's almost by pure luck that it turned out not to be illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah gotcha, I guess I wasn't paying good enough attention while that was on. Thanks for the clarification.

I hate the idea of this 18 month "Oh you've been a good boy, we'll clean your slate." nonsense.

In my opinion, to say that it shouldn't factor is bologna.

I'm still glad this wasn't the case and I really dislike Marchand, he is only tough because he can hide between McQuaid, Lucic, Chara and Shawn Thornton, but if he would have been stretchered off one is looking at a severe (maybe even crosbylike concussion) and that's something I don't want to see/read about a player, no matter if I like him or not.

Yeah, I edited that post to ensure that no one thought I was hoping or wanting Marchand to be stretchered off.

Neal's knee was just as reckless and disgusting as Thorton's actions.

Also, love Neal's dodging of the question on hitting Marchand.

Edited by e_prime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the idea of this 18 month "Oh you've been a good boy, we'll clean your slate." nonsense.

In my opinion, to say that it shouldn't factor is bologna.

I agree with you, but if Neal's not careful he's going to get taught a hard lesson soon enough. Star or not, if he gets the reputation as a dirty player (and he will if he keeps pulling crap like this) sooner or later they'll hand him a real serious suspension.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the idea of this 18 month "Oh you've been a good boy, we'll clean your slate." nonsense.

In my opinion, to say that it shouldn't factor is bologna.

But previous history here wasn't a "non-factor." If Neal had no previous history at all, I doubt he gets 5 games. If you think about it, 5 games is actually quite a bit for an incident that didn't result in any injury. I have no idea on the stats, but I'd guess there would be very few suspensions of greater than 5 games that had no injuries involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this