• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

vladdy16

Gustav Nyquist Hearing

Rate this topic

44 posts in this topic

Ducks player got 10 for slashing the ref last night (didn't see it). My guess is we keep the 10 going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HadThomasVokounOnFortSt said:

Ducks player got 10 for slashing the ref last night (didn't see it). My guess is we keep the 10 going. 

 

there's a rule about harming an official being an automatic 10 at least though.. the same rule doesn't apply to players. 

 

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if nyq got 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He should be suspended. However, looking at how they essentially let Marchand off for nothing, I'll be very upset if it's a substantial length of games. 

Edited by Wheelchairsuperhero
Hockeymom1960 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wheelchairsuperhero said:

He should be suspended. However, looking at how they essentially let Marchand off for nothing, I'll be very upset if it's a substantial length of games. 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it will be 6 at the absolute minimum and should be more...which will be consistent with past infractions of this nature.

Same can be said about the Marchand incident....consistent with the past, they don't punish severely for slew footing....you can argue they should, but at least there is some consistency here.

Wheelchairsuperhero likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, amato said:

there's a rule about harming an official being an automatic 10 at least though.. the same rule doesn't apply to players. 

there is no such thing as automatic rule. we all know too well, that certain player are exempt from almost any rule.

as per Nyquist, if he gets 10 games, he should learn that next time he better slash/cross check/sucker punch a ref (Marc ******* Joannette or whoever) for letting those little pricks get away with constant crosschecks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it will be 6 at the absolute minimum and should be more...which will be consistent with past infractions of this nature.

Same can be said about the Marchand incident....consistent with the past, they don't punish severely for slew footing....you can argue they should, but at least there is some consistency here.

I'm with you, you're right. I would argue that slew footing should be punished more severely, as I think it's extremely dangerous for several reasons. I'm also a bit salty because he did it to a guy with a bad knee. Back to Nyquist, he definitely deserves suspension. It sucks, but it is what it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to call someone a liar, but I didn't like Nyquists explanation of what happened. It wasn't an accident, and he should have just owned up to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like harsher penalties for slewfooting as well, but what Marchand did is irrelevent to this case. Nyquist straight up pitchforked a guy in the face in a moment of anger. Clearly wasn't accidental. Gus should get a hefty suspension and a long stern look from Zetterberg. Gutless move, and it brings shame to the winged wheel.

Gustav Nyquist, you are hereby admonished. 

BringBack19 and F.Michael like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on Earth has this suspension taken so long to hand out? It's been  almost 4 days now. It seems to be a fairly straight forward decision considering how it looked. Not sure why this hasn't been determined yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watch the video...I know, what took me so long?  But ya, if that were another team's player against one of our boys, I'd want the max. Moment of anger or not, dirty, dirty play. That was intent and could've been a lot more serious. I wouldn't be surprised at 10+. Imagine if he got his eye? So much for trading him...ugh. Who is next to derail they're trade value? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, Kris Letang sends his "I didn't get suspended" regards...
letangslash.gif?w=650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jedi said:

Meanwhile, Kris Letang sends his "I didn't get suspended" regards...
letangslash.gif?w=650

YIKES!

Hell, if that's the standard for not getting suspended, then a $$$ fine should suffice. But then again, that was Uncle Gary's Penguins and we are the hated Red Wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I would like harsher penalties for slewfooting as well, but what Marchand did is irrelevent to this case. Nyquist straight up pitchforked a guy in the face in a moment of anger. Clearly wasn't accidental. Gus should get a hefty suspension and a long stern look from Zetterberg. Gutless move, and it brings shame to the winged wheel.

Gustav Nyquist, you are hereby admonished. 

A stern look from Zetteberg and his Zetterbeard? Why don't you just sentence him to death?

Edited by Wheelchairsuperhero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's around what I was thinking. I'm okay with this. Dirty play, not a dirty player. If they're going to set an example, Nyquist isn't the guy. They've had plenty opportunity to set examples with much dirtier players and I'm sure they will have many more. Regardless, I hope Gus learns his lesson here and is more conscious of his stick action...

I was hoping this would give Jurco an opportunity, but he's a healthy scratch yet again tonight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BringBack19 said:

I hate to call someone a liar, but I didn't like Nyquists explanation of what happened. It wasn't an accident, and he should have just owned up to it.

I'm not trying to defend Gus' actions. 

It looked like he meant to retaliate someway, but what happened didn't seem premeditated (there wasn't really time for that anyway) and he seemed pretty shocked/surprised immediately after it happened. So in that respect it might not have been 'on purpose', but it looked bad when it happened and it sounded bad when he was trying to dismiss it as accidental after the game. 

It's been days since it happened, perhaps in that time he's been able to take more responsibility for it before the meeting today. In the end, (he doesn't really have a record of playing dirty that I can think of) 6 games sounds like the right amount for the incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roboturner said:

I'm not trying to defend Gus' actions. 

It looked like he meant to retaliate someway, but what happened didn't seem premeditated (there wasn't really time for that anyway) and he seemed pretty shocked/surprised immediately after it happened. So in that respect it might not have been 'on purpose', but it looked bad when it happened and it sounded bad when he was trying to dismiss it as accidental after the game. 

It's been days since it happened, perhaps in that time he's been able to take more responsibility for it before the meeting today. In the end, (he doesn't really have a record of playing dirty that I can think of) 6 games sounds like the right amount for the incident.

Yeah by swinging his stick at another player. Looked like he was maybe intending to hit the body and caught the face on accident, but he was definitely intending to swing his stick at Spurgeon, which is wrong. Depends on your definition of premeditated. He was checked to the ice on the play and when he got up swung his stick in anger. So I guess you can say it was a crime of passion. It was definitely on purpose though, just maybe not purposely to face. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do pens playing tonight? wanted to check letang. i am afraid he could literally laugh his a.s.s off after that suspension.

Edited by ami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Yeah by swinging his stick at another player. Looked like he was maybe intending to hit the body and caught the face on accident, but he was definitely intending to swing his stick at Spurgeon, which is wrong. Depends on your definition of premeditated. He was checked to the ice on the play and when he got up swung his stick in anger. So I guess you can say it was a crime of passion. It was definitely on purpose though, just maybe not purposely to face. 

alright bud

Edit: Everybody can now see just how dangerous a roundhouse kick from Christopher Reeves is.

Edited by roboturner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roboturner said:

alright bud

Edit: Everybody can now see just how dangerous a roundhouse kick from Christopher Reeves is.

Do you disagree with something I said?

Share this post


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