Jump to content

Hack & Whack Rule!'s Photo

Hack & Whack Rule!

Member Since 13 Mar 2008
Offline Last Active Today, 09:44 PM

#2276209 People v. NHL:

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 31 March 2012 - 03:47 PM

The NHL has, for years, found ways to milk more money from the fans, when it comes to viewing games. They have said before that if you want to watch your local team, you should buy tickets. But, here's the dealio...I live in Saskatchewan, but grew up south of Windsor, so I've been a DRW fan for many years. A few weeks ago, Detroit played in Vancouver, and the game was on SNETP (Sportsnet Pacific, I would assume) on Shaw Direct. I get that channel...I checked. At game time, I sat down in front of the boob tube, after claiming it in the name of the Legion of the Winged Wheel. I was greeted not with a pre game warmup by the teams...no poor grammar usage from announcers...no big talk about Sidney Crosby, even though he had nothing to do with this game but without him it couldn't happen and the entire future of the NHL could be in jeopardy. I got nothing but a black screen with a message telling me that I was in a blackout area, and essentially, I should buy a ticket and get my lazy ass to Vancouver. I hope the NHL gets nailed to the wall. I hope they get exposed for bending the fans over with every chance they get. I hope Gary Bettman spontaneously combusts. I hope this leads to more access to watch hockey.

#2259279 freeredwings.tv stops streaming NHL games

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 20 February 2012 - 11:19 AM

I was good while it lasted. Thanks for running it as long as you did. Maybe someone should start up a freepenguins.tv site and only show Wings games...it would probably go unnoticed, and maybe even receive funding from the NHL.

#2250598 How Would You Fix the All Star Game?

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 29 January 2012 - 07:02 PM

I, personally, don't like how the All Stars are picked...it could easily become a popularity contest, rather than a "Mr. Awesome" contest. One surefire way to make any ASG better than this years, though, is to NEVER...EVER...allow Drake to be the entertainment.

#2249212 Nick Lidstrom and Chuck Norris

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 25 January 2012 - 07:39 AM

Nick Lidstrom doesn't block pucks that have been shot toward him...he dares them to go by.

#2248091 No suspension for Zetterberg

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 22 January 2012 - 10:20 AM

If there is even a one game suspension on this play, it will push the NHL one step closer to being out of my life. I don't disagree that Zetterberg's hand was on Nikitin's back, but there is zero evidence that it caused the fall. Common sense will rule on this one. The player lost his footing as he neared the boards...maybe he panicked, maybe it was a bad spot on the ice, maybe it was a skate issue. What you really have to watch is Zetterberg. His hand comes off the player's back and kinda circles down before coming up. If it was a push, the hand would have jerked forward as if you were pushing on a door that someone suddenly opens. Watch Zetterberg's body...for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction...Z's body movement doesn't change. If he had pushed the player, the player's body would have pushed back, which would have been indicated in Z's movement.

I agree that the players must have some kind of protection, but if this is going to a no contact league, I will not be watching. In my, not so learned I'll admit, opinion, the reason that there are so many injuries is that the players are trusting some new rules too much. Why wouldn't a guy skate hard to the corner, knowing that just about any hit will result in a penalty and possible suspension? It's making them reckless and they aren't watching out for themselves.

I'm predicting that no suspension will come down, Shanahan will release a video detailing why there is no suspension, and Evgeni Malkin will always look like a potato from the neck up.

#2214474 Bouchard suspended 2 games

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 13 October 2011 - 08:53 AM

How on earth is this an example of a clean hit, he slashed/high sticked a guy in the mouth????

Suspensions are supposed to be deterrents, they are supposed to make you think before you swing your stick.

If he meant to hit him in the hand or thigh, it doesn't matter, he hit him in the face.

They don't recall penalties because the guy didn't mean to high stick another player. Think about the times a guy gets high sticked because a player is trying to move out of the zone and brings their stick up over their shoulder. Intentional or not it was careless.

What Bouchard did was not careless or an unfortunate series of events, he high sticked the guy on purpose. Right in the face, with the puck no where near them.

Shanny is sending a message, be careful with both your stick and your body, the head is a place the league is being very protective of.

I would have understood if Shanny said no suspension because he was not a repeat offender, however I also have zero problem with 2 games.

For those of you saying this shouldn't be a suspension, where do you draw the line between this and a McSorley/Simon stick to the head?
Do you put devices on the stick to measure speed of the stick during the hit?
Do you start taping the game with high speed film and have mythbusters figure out the speed?


Do you suspend for any stick swung intentionally that lands on the head or face?

Easy, cowboy. I don't call that a clean hit. After re-reading my post, I see that I wasn't very clear with that statement. What I mean to say, is that eventually clean hits will be punished for unfortunate endings. I don't think Bouchard got the high stick on him on purpose, rather it slid up the other guy's stick. He was going to give him a whack with it, but lost control. Just about every other player in the league does the same type of stickwork, just not with the hit to the face...usually. I know that a player must keep control of his stick, or suffer the consequences, but that's why there are high-sticking penalties with the extra two minutes for blood.

#2190645 Does this annoy you?

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 27 June 2011 - 11:55 PM

Sorry, I would have taken more time proof reading this had I known my 6th grade English teacher was critiquing it....

Your sixth (not 6th) grade teacher would have, in all likelihood, just stamped a big "F" on your post.

#2190287 Does this annoy you?

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 27 June 2011 - 09:08 AM


does any one else find it annoying that teams are able to bail themselves out of terrible contracts by sending players to the minors? Chicago doing with Huet last summer, the Oilers doing it with Souray, the Rangers doing it with Wade Redden. In my opinion, these teams should have to deal with the stupidity they bring upon themselves. Its an absolute cop out and they humiliate these players in the process by sending them to the minors. I hope the next CBA corrects this.

A lack of capital letters at the beginning of a sentence...yes, it annoys me. Using "any one" instead "anyone" annoys me. Leaving out the word "it"...oh yes, that's annoying. The teams having recourse to deal with substandard performances from players making a lot of money...not so annoying.

#2174918 The New Reality

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 13 May 2011 - 09:39 AM

I agree with most of what you say as well. The Franzen contract looked really bad from the start, for me, but if he can get his poop in a group, I like him. He needs to start using his size a little more. Start pushing people around, and they'll think twice about bringing some aggressive play his way. Other players seem to back off Datsyuk when he has the puck, because they don't want to be left confused and embarrassed by what he does. If Franzen were to bring something like that, I'd be a happy camper. Hudler is just a little bit less than useless, and so is Ericsson. The odd benefits that they bring are greatly overshadowed by their dumbassery, if that's a real word. Abdelkader would be more useful if he could stop getting high sticking penalties, but hopefully he has gained a little experience and learns to control that. I also think that, as a team, the Wings need to protect their goalie a lot more. Our guys are constantly getting cross checked and pushed around in front of the other team's net, so we need to clear that area as well as we can without taking penalties. Along the "protect the goalie" theme, I also think someone should have drop kicked Pavelski, and others, for all the snow showers that were given to Howard. That would be an acceptable penalty all day long, in my opinion. Howard's confidence, and maybe his abilities, would pick up if someone would come out and say "You can't do that s*** to my goalie, so I'm kicking your ass now". Maybe not those words, exactly, but along that line.

#2156062 Kronwall

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 21 April 2011 - 08:20 PM

It is scientific fact that, although it would be a complete shutdown defense with Kronwall and Stuart playing together, Kronwall does not actually need a partner. This will allow for more resting time for the other d-men while Kronner is on the ice. Having that extra time to rest will allow the other d-men to perform that much better. On a related sidenote, there are tests being done (as I write this) to determine whether or not Kronwall could actually populate an entire line on his own. The theory is that if the other four skaters are taken off the ice as well, there is more room for Kronwall to "work his magic".

#2038049 NHL Center Ice

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 29 September 2010 - 04:49 PM

I live in Alberta and will be moving to Saskatchewan soon...I couldn't see many Wings games without it. I can't stand watching the s***ty streams off the webernet, so the money is totally worth it.

#1961927 Someone's not happy with Red Wings fans.....

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 27 April 2010 - 06:51 PM

Let me get this straight.... A writer in a city whose team is in the playoffs is trashing the other team's fans. This, in the words of Mike Tyson, is ludicrous! I'm absolutely flabbergasted. What is hockey coming to? Take away the traditions, the rivalries, the over-the-top celebrating and douchebag writers and guess what you are left with. That's right...Ping Pong! That guy has a bad case of cranial-rectal inversion, obviously. Maybe he's just f***ed up because he, like everyone else in Dogtown, just realized there is a professional hockey team there, and after searching "hockey" on wikipedia, came to the conclusion that it's the greatest f***in' sport in the universe.

I fart in his general direction...

#1807286 OHL Hit

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 02 November 2009 - 10:05 PM

QUOTE (Four @ November 2, 2009 - 10:59PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I called it a terrible hit, and it was. What good came out of that hit? Please tell me.

If Fanelli ever plays again, and I pray for a full recovery for him, he has probably learned a lesson here. That probably sounds cold, but it isn't meant to. This is a tough sport we watch and play. The next time something like this goes down, I'll bet he doesn't turn his back. That's the best I can come up with. Nobody said that a good hit can't have terrible consequences, and that is just what happened here.

Is it a s***ty deal for Fanelli? Yes, without a doubt.
Was there anything wrong with the hit? Nope, other than the outcome, of course.
Suspension worthy? Only if suspensions are given out for the result of "good hockey gone bad".

#1807279 OHL Hit

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 02 November 2009 - 09:55 PM

QUOTE (Four @ November 2, 2009 - 10:39PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You want history?
One of many dirty hits, this one on Tavares.

An excellent post from another forum made by an Otter fan;

And H&WR, I'm not even going to waste my time with you. I made this thread to show the hit, not create a huge argument. Instead of hoping the guys okay, you resort to bashing me and saying I'm wrong. Get a life and quit arguing. It was an intent to injure, and he has a history of doing so. He charges players all the time.

My first post in this thread:

First of all, I hope the kid will be okay.

Second of all, dude saw the train coming...twice! You can't spin like that to turn your back on somebody and not expect to get hit. He wasn't looking where he should have been. The guys elbows were tucked and he had his guy lined up for a check. That's the name of the game here, folks.

It sucks the kid went down like that, but I don't see anything deserving of a penalty.

An excerpt from a subsequent post of mine:

Again, I hope the kid is okay.

Slow down big fella! You are making guesses and assumptions, then stating them as fact. I refer to the intent to injure part. Fine, you showed the hit. You also posted this at the same time:

I live very close to Kitchener and I'm sure some of you have heard or seen this already. Terrible hit.

When you state an opinion on LGW, some are going to agree with you and some won't. We know which group I stand in. Dissenting opinions is what keeps things like this going. I think I'm right, you think you are right. One of us is wrong. As I said...if you don't want to be called out on the playground, stay inside at recess. As for this guy's history, I'll be honest and tell you I don't know s*** about him, and I also don't care. I'm talking about this hit.

And relax, I'm okay with you disagreeing with me.

Good luck to the Fanelli family.

#1807242 OHL Hit

Posted by Hack & Whack Rule! on 02 November 2009 - 09:14 PM

QUOTE (Four @ November 2, 2009 - 09:59PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My eyes are dirty?
...Who the f*** are you?!
Did the kid put himself in a bad position? Yes of course he did.
Did the guy hitting him charge? Yes, I believe he did.
Did the guy hitting him, hit too high? Yes, I believe he did.
Did the guy hitting him try to slow down? No.
Did the guy hitting him show any remorse? Hell no, he pushes another guy other right after the hit.
Did an overage OHL player hit a 16 year old rookie with intention to hurt? I believe so.

It's people like you why I hate trying to debate on here. You are rude and cannot let people debate different sides, you have to resort to pointing fingers and accusing people of being wrong.

Yes, your eyes are dirty because you aren't seeing clearly.
I the f*** am Hack and Whack Rule.
...bad position? Yes, you agree with me.
...charge? No, he stopped skating at the bottom of the circle.
...hit too high? Possibly, apparently size matters (my wife was wrong). But I'll give you that one up to the point that Liamba is smidge taller.
...slow down? It's called hockey. People get the smackdown in hockey. Why slow down? Refer to the bad position part of this post.
...remorse? The other guy was going to level him, so he prepared himself. Nothing wrong there, either. In fact, he then took a shot from the goalie.
...intention to hurt? You think so, or you know so?

I apologize if I hurt your feelings. That sounds like attitude, but it is not meant to. The whole point of debate is to accuse the other of being wrong, and then show them why. You have done this yourself in this thread. If you don't want to be "accused" of being wrong (I call it "proven" wrong, but whatever) then you should be more selective in your posts. Especially if you are going to use a frame from a video showing an elbow up on a hit, when the hit is clearly complete in said frame. Again, I apologize for sounding rude.