2021 NHL Playoffs

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 6/9/2021 at 5:21 PM, F.Michael said:

His stream is stronger cuz his urethra is shorter and tighter.

[F.Michael 4,590]

3 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

His stream is stronger cuz his urethra is shorter and tighter.

Ou peut-être a-t-il une trompe d'éléphant ?

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

14 hours ago, marcaractac said:

This doesn't make any sense. 

Dangerous plays should be eliminated by punishing potentially dangerous plays, not by waiting until someone is hurt by one. That's where the deterrence comes from. If a player is hurt in a play, the offender is still punished. They don't simply get away with it because a player got hurt. I said that the injury should not have any impact on the severity of the punishment, not that the player shouldn't be punished period. 

So your first point: the player is still punished. The injury simply doesn't impact the duration of suspension. The action itself and player history should be the only factors at play. Whether or not players get hurt in these plays is basically a coin flip. If a player doesn't get hurt, why would the punishment be less because of it? Punish the action the same way, regardless. You're literally thinking backwards here.

Point 2: Who said anything about a game misconduct and fine being the only punishment? We're talking about actions getting the same punishment whether a player is hurt or not. Meaning suspending dangerous plays. Period. 

Point 3: Consistent punishment takes luck out of it. Players would be deterred knowing they'll get punished for wreck-less plays regardless of outcome. Your "point" makes no sense. 

Okay. So if I stab a guy and he dies I should get the same punishment as if he lived. Got it.

Seriously. Let's look at the Todd Bertuzzi suspension. Are you arguing that the punishment should be the same if Moore gets up and skates away? That's crazy. The league would never suspend a player for an entire year for a penalty like that if Moore wasn't hurt. But they would, and should if the player's career is ended. By your logic, the punishment should be the same whether Moore is ok, or his career is over. 

1. Penalty A results in a 2 game suspension no matter what.

2. Penalty A could result in a 2 game suspension if the guy walks away, but could result in 10 games, 20 games or even a whole season if he's hurt.

Which one is the bigger deterrent?

8 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Ou peut-être a-t-il une trompe d'éléphant ?

I speak American Pierre.

[F.Michael 4,590]

7 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

 

I speak American Pierre.

C'est François-Michel, chien cochon d'Amérique. Ta mère était un hamster et ton père sent le sureau.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

10 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

C'est François-Michel, chien cochon d'Amérique. Ta mère était un hamster et ton père sent le sureau.

What you do with your hamster is your business.

[F.Michael 4,590]

 

[marcaractac 3,962]

9 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Okay. So if I stab a guy and he dies I should get the same punishment as if he lived. Got it.

Seriously. Let's look at the Todd Bertuzzi suspension. Are you arguing that the punishment should be the same if Moore gets up and skates away? That's crazy. The league would never suspend a player for an entire year for a penalty like that if Moore wasn't hurt. But they would, and should if the player's career is ended. By your logic, the punishment should be the same whether Moore is ok, or his career is over. 

1. Penalty A results in a 2 game suspension no matter what.

2. Penalty A could result in a 2 game suspension if the guy walks away, but could result in 10 games, 20 games or even a whole season if he's hurt.

Which one is the bigger deterrent?

I speak American Pierre.

This is hockey, not crime.

You keep assuming I'm saying everyone should be punished based on how they currently punish based upon no injury. At no point did I say that. I clearly said the system needs to be reviewed. Punishment needs to be severe enough for the action committed regardless of consequence. Is it that difficult for you to understand? But please continue to cling to a case from nearly 20 years ago.

[marcaractac 3,962]

3 hours ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Again, this isn't a courtroom, it's a hockey rink. Violence is sanctioned here. And last I checked Bertuzzi had criminal proceedings for his actions. Pretty sure DPS wasn't judge on the bench for those proceedings.

If you want to argue for the merit of the blood rule, or increased sanctions for catastrophic injury or something, go for it, I'm not totally disagreeable to it.

But that's not the point anyone is contesting here.

1. I'm saying the play is clean and legal. You don't issue punishment for clean and legal plays regardless of injury.

2. I believe what Marc is saying - and I don't disagree - that it is the play which should be punished, not the end result. We've watched countless times dirty illegal plays be ignored because their was no injury and no uproar. And we've watched clean plays get punished because of injury and uproar. The fix here is punish the play, not the result. You're only teaching clean players to hold back, and dirty players that they can get away with it sometimes, with this wildly inconsistent punishment system.

This. And as far as severity of the punishment? Somewhere between what they do now for injured vs not injured, while still factoring in player history and what not. 

2 games for a play that doesn't hurt a guy and 6 if he does? 4 game suspension standard. Double suspension for each repeated offense. 

You'll still get the crazy outliers every 20-30 years where someone gets Bertuzzi'd. Those events should be the ONLY ones taken on a case by case basis rather than every single situation like we do now. The writing was on the wall for that one as there was known ill intent before that game even started. There was intention to hurt that was known. There is a huge difference between a premeditated intention to hurt vs a hit that goes wrong in the heat of the moment.  

[kipwinger 8,520]

Man I wanted James Wisniewski on this team there for a bit. Babcock would have hated him of course (he scored too many points or something) but he was tough and could score. Loved seeing that guy on the ice.

Edited June 11, 2021 by kipwinger

[kipwinger 8,520]

13 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Wiz got uninvited from Seabrooks wedding for that hit lol

Meh, Seabrook is big pud. He's Chicago's Danny Dekeyser. I'm sure his wedding was nothing but bridesmaid's speeches and the chicken dance. F*ck that dork.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

This is reasonable, however, the difference between a clean hit and a dirty one is subjective. You would have to be able define your terms in a way that is satisfactory to everyone involved.

[marcaractac 3,962]

On 6/11/2021 at 10:31 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

This is reasonable, however, the difference between a clean hit and a dirty one is subjective. You would have to be able define your terms in a way that is satisfactory to everyone involved.

You take the subjectiveness out of it. Head contact? Suspension. Accidental or not. Slew foot? Suspension. Knee on knee? Suspension. Charing to make a huge hit? Suspension. Left feet? Suspension. 

Sometimes these plays are accidents, yes. But players would adjust accordingly. By only punishing hits by injury as they do now, players will take the gamble. Especially in the playoffs. 

You'll get the freak accident stuff like Perry on Tavares, which was clearly an unavoidable accident. Those plays should be the only things that have to be reviewed case-by-case. 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

7 hours ago, BarkBurgerman said:

I finally got around to listening to the Spittin Chiclets that aired right after the hit and before the suspension. The one with Torey Mitchell (really good episode, Mitchell has some wild stories about playing with Roenick).

Surprise surprise, everyone thought the hit was clean, legal, and barely even charging. Biz makes the point that back-checking =/= charging. He's right. And Whitney gets right to the point about injuries: If Evans gets right up and celebrates the goal, no one ever raises an eyebrow, and everyone goes home saying "Wow what a hit and what a goal".

Biz and Whitney end it by saying Scheif will probably end up with a 1 game suspension cause of the freak out and charging claims. Grinelli doesn't even think any suspension will come.

DPS gives Scheif 4 games...

Clown league.

 

I think its because the DoPS said it was a "predatory " hit, that's why the 4 games.

[Scott R Lucidi 442]

I had never heard of Scheifele playing dirty before.  I love how all the people said he should have played the puck.  This would mean him continuing to increase speed and dive at the hash marks face first with his stick out in front of him.  Ultimately, this leads to him being injured by the net or the boards, and still presents a chance of injury to Evans as well.  As NumberCRLGnidMan has pointed out, he stopped taking strides and braced himself for a clean hit on Evans.  Then he delivered a clean hit to the chest in tenths of a second after the puck had crossed the line.  This was not a dirty premeditated play.  This was Scheifele trying to stop a goal by checking Evans.  He just was fractions of a second late is all.  Kudos to Evans for taking the punishment to seal the game.  

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

2 hours ago, Scott R Lucidi said:

I had never heard of Scheifele playing dirty before.  I love how all the people said he should have played the puck.  This would mean him continuing to increase speed and dive at the hash marks face first with his stick out in front of him.  Ultimately, this leads to him being injured by the net or the boards, and still presents a chance of injury to Evans as well.  As NumberCRLGnidMan has pointed out, he stopped taking strides and braced himself for a clean hit on Evans.  Then he delivered a clean hit to the chest in tenths of a second after the puck had crossed the line.  This was not a dirty premeditated play.  This was Scheifele trying to stop a goal by checking Evans.  He just was fractions of a second late is all.  Kudos to Evans for taking the punishment to seal the game.  

Scheifele is not a dirty player. First offense. Which is why 4 games was excessive.

Pause the video at 1:06 and 1:07. You will see that Evans has possession of the puck and is wrapping it around the post. Notice Scheifele here. He had a chance to possibly knock the puck away with his stick. He makes no attempt to do so. He doesn't even look at the puck. He is looking squarely at Evans. At 1:07 you can see him begin to square up for the hit. He is close enough that he absolutely could have poke checked here or knocked the puck away with a backhand and might have saved a goal and whole lot of grief for himself if he did.

23 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

And what is a predatory hit? The NHL doesn't define what it is, and there's no rule against it. The word predatory doesn't even appear once in the NHL rule book. Sounds like the NHL DPS is just making this up as it goes along.

And that's the biggest problem. NHL rules are deliberately vague so the league can interpret the rules willy nilly as it wants.

USA hockey rules define that a charge is taking more than two strides into a hit. The NHL doesn't bother to do this. A charge is just a check delivered after great distance traveled. What is a great distance? What if the checker stops striding 35 ft before contact? What if it's a necessary back-checking play? Does the distance traveled have to be in a straight line? What if I gather speed in a figure eight and then deliver a hit? Technically I didn't travel very far.

Biz mentions this exactly on spittin chiclets. Scheif just exhausted himself skating the length of the ice and then has about a half second to correctly read and execute the play. He chose the body, a legal play on the back check. Should he have played the puck? Probably, but you can't fault him for that decision making in the rush of the moment.

I believe a "predatory" hit is one against a vulnerable player. Or it could just mean a hit to the head. Or both. Not sure.

Edited June 14, 2021 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[F.Michael 4,590]

23 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

And no where does it say a player has to play the puck over the player.

It's neither, or both, or all hits. Because the NHL does not define what a predatory hit is. It's literally a term not in the rulebook pulled directly from their cheeks that fans just parrot.

They may as well say Scheifele got 4 games for pernicious hitting. What's a pernicious hit? Well it's worse than a predatory hit, but not as bad as a heinous hit. At least it wasn't a nefarious hit though, those are the worst.

Scheife got 4 games due to public outcry.

The 'reaction' by the Sportsnet panel (headed by MacLean) was something else.

Edited June 15, 2021 by F.Michael

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Exactly.

 

Ah. The good old days.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

Holy f*** that Sciffleeee hit was a month ago. Shattup

Habs getting rolled after 2.

Gallant signed a 4 year deal to coach NYR for 1.5 years.

 

 

[kipwinger 8,520]

Well this game is completely out of hand. 4-1 Vegas. Montreal is just completely outclassed in this one.

[marcaractac 3,962]

7 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Well this game is completely out of hand. 4-1 Vegas. Montreal is just completely outclassed in this one.

[F.Michael 4,590]

23 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Well this game is completely out of hand. 4-2 Vegas Tampa. Montreal NYI is just completely outclassed in this one.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

18 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Go habies go

Leafs fans: "We won a semi final game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[F.Michael 4,590]

Habs coach Ducharme + for Covid?

https://www.tsn.ca/montreal-canadiens-dominique-ducharme-covid-19-game-3-1.1656737

 

In other news...

 

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by F.Michael

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

Just now, BarkBurgerman said:

>Has "Covid"
>Not sick at all

Yet more evidence that the super spooky hoaxdemic is not real. On top of refs not calling penalties against Vegas, letting them slash Perry in the goddamn face, now they're using the fake-flu to keep the coach away from the bench and his players.

It's so rigged against the Habs it's not even funny anymore. Gary needs his precious expansion to go all the way, I get it.

Just three days ago you were saying Parros and the DOPS literally worked for Bergy. 

This guy's tinfoil hat is reversible apparently. 

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

1 minute ago, BarkBurgerman said:

God bless your heart you confused sweet summer child. DOPS and Parros does not run the refs or covid protocols. I can understand that that befuddles you though. 

But he does work for the NHL. Either the NHL wants Montreal to win, or they don't. Which is it. 

In related news, I don't think I've ever seen officiating as bad as it's been during these playoffs.