Jump to content


Shoreline's Photo

Shoreline

Member Since 03 Aug 2003
Offline Last Active Jul 13 2015 08:47 PM
***--

#2225398 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Shoreline on 14 November 2011 - 08:56 PM

The talk of intent is silly, and 99 times out of 100 is completely based on speculation and bias. It is nearly impossible to prove intent, which is why it should only be used when it is damn obvious, like say stomping on a players leg with your skate; black and white, only one outcome, injury. Saying you believe that he didn't mean to do it, like Shanahan did here, shouldn't acquit the player of the act. Likewise, we shouldn't condemn a player on plays like this (not black and white like the stomp) based on the way he looked at him or things he said, though after his reaction, Lucic was looking guilty as sin.

In this case, it has little to do with whether Lucic intended to injure Miller when he hit him like he did. It matters that he did intend to hit him, and Miller did get injured.The rest is for the fans to argue. Lucic made a stupid, reckless, dirty play outside of the bounds of the rules (whether you agree with them or not), and it resulted in injury. Period. It doesn't matter if he knew how stupid it was or if he meant it to be as cheap as it was.

This is a different example than most because this wasn't a goaltender getting hit playing the puck behind the net. I usually defend the skater when a goaltender is behind his goal, sitting on a puck and someone bumps into him. This wasn't behind the net. This wasn't a delayed play. There was no puck anymore. This wasn't a little bump.

Everyone needs to stop comparing this play to plays behind the net, and definitely need to drop the whole "but he didn't mean to" argument. Action trumps intent.

lol.. what? If you can suggest that Lucic intended to hit him therefore it's an intent to injure then that infers every hit is an intent to injure if the hit results in an injury. That sounds quite ridiculous. "Kronwalled" is synonymous with "Intent to injure", sorry Kronner.

An intent to injure penalty cannot 100% without error be called because sometimes the intent isn't as obvious. An intent to injure penalty is one of the more major penalties in the game someone can get, so there had better be some pretty damn clear indication that was intended if one is going to be assessed this penalty and the suspension that inevitably would result. This was not the case even remotely with Lucic. He did intend to hit Miller simply because of the technicality of a charging penalty whereby it states that if he doesn't make any reasonable attempt not to hit the goalie outside the crease it's charging.

It is not only Shanny that saw it that way, it was the officials who were officiating the game, who actually got a call right for a change. Lucic was not smiling like hur hur I made a hit on a goalie /trollface, he had Sabres players in his face and was smiling because every single hit of any sort these days needs a stupid ass reaction by teammates. I would laugh too at those idiots.


#2225382 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Shoreline on 14 November 2011 - 06:27 PM

Okay, if everyone is saying it wasn't intent to injure, then what was it??? He clearly wasn't tryIng to separate the man from the puck (it was already gone), you don't protect your self by throwing all 240 so lbs at Miller when the picks heading to the corner. Then follow through with ur hands. I won't even point out the fact he was laughing about it. Fact is Lucic tried to hit a player, that legally isnt allowed to be hit, and didn't have the puck, while receiving a charging penalty. Its either that or he was trying to avoid hitting him all together and 200+ lucic was trying to protect him self from a goalie who was standing still and defensiveness???

Lucic saw his chance to take a shot at Miller and he did. This isn't whether u feel like goalies should be fair game outside the crease because that isn't in the rules. He CAN'T be hit.

This is also why I had a problem with no call on Thomad for flattening Sedin in the crease. The goalies aren't allowed to be hot, they shouldn't be able to hit back. If thst is legal Hasek flipping Gabby is legal, atleast Hasek attempted at the puck.

These are NHL players they know what they are doing he ran over miller with no other intent but to take him out. If you disagree please explain to me your side and don't just neg me, id love to hear u out...

So the latest conspiracy is that Lucic intended to take Miller out..

I've seen goalies hit behind the net countless times when playing the puck. If they get bowled over, in my opinion it's their fault, the rules often disagree with me here, but still, I don't think you quite understand what any levels of intent are.

First is the situation behind the play. They were going for the puck. Lucic braced himself and made the hit. The only reason this is even a penalty is because contact occurred and Lucic made no effort whatsoever to get out of the way.

Second, intent to injure, might wanna re-watch the Flames/Wings series in the 2004 playoffs of Ville Niemenen skating into the crease and elbowing Curtis Joseph in the head. That is an intent to injure. This hit with Lucic on Miller.. give me an effing break.


#2225368 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Shoreline on 14 November 2011 - 05:24 PM

Has there really been a lot of outrage in this thread? To me it reads mostly as confusion.

As I said in my post, I think an argument can be made that it didn't warrant a suspension. But for Shanny to say it's due to lack of intent doesn't make a lot of sense and is a little surprising based on the standard he was using early in the season.

Goalies are not fair game. It's like if Lucic had lined up a player without the puck, didn't go out of his way to avoid contact, and even followed through on the hit like he did with Miller. He may not have intended to injure that player, but when you intentionally hit a guy who's not legally hittable, it's a grey area at best because the intent is pretty clearly to take a shot at someone you shouldn't.

If he wanted to keep in line with how he has been giving out punishment, honestly I think Shanny should've given a fine to Lucic for intentionally running a goalie and concussing Miller.

Outrage yes, statements like wanting the Red Wings to exact retribution for an incident involving other teams, wondering rhetorically why people like Savard get cheap-shotted, calling Lucic trash, I see plenty of outrage. Surprising you don't.

Your analogy though has nothing to do with what occurred.

Goalies are not fair game, the technicality of this wasn't really debated or inferred otherwise.

The charging nature of the penalty was the fact that this was obviously not incidental contact -- the refs had to call that. If it was not a penalty to finish the check on a goalie playing the puck far away from his crease as any other skater playing the puck would be vulnerable to this would have been a non-issue.

It's not anywhere close to an intent to injure call on the ice. It was not a double minor, it was not a major, there was no misconduct, no match penalty, nothing. It isn't just Shanahan that saw it that way. Lucic simply tried to play the puck and when he was too close he decided to just brace himself and deliver a hit.

There's no argument that it's a penalty (if we're arguing by the NHL's rules, my opinion obviously is another issue) but you're not making any sense trying to justify a suspension.


#2225354 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Shoreline on 14 November 2011 - 04:20 PM

I don't understand the outrage about the lack of suspension.

I can see where the charging call was made, even though I don't like it, but it was a shoulder hit, not a head shot, not a blind side hit, not any of these nitpicky ticky tack penalty du jour the NHL is confusingly trying to enforce. Lucic simply tried for the puck and braced himself to deliver a check to Miller. I doubt it was accidental, which is why it was a penalty, but it's not so bad nor such an intent to injure that it warrants a suspension just because Miller's helmet flew off and now it turns out he has a concussion. I don't think there's any sense to amplifying a punishment just because of outrage.


#2225143 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Shoreline on 13 November 2011 - 04:27 PM

Millers stick was supposed to be the enforcer but he swung it like a girl after breaking a nail.


#2225028 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Shoreline on 13 November 2011 - 12:35 AM

Miller is one of my favourite goalies here but f*** it, I like what Lucic did. Goalies get enough protection in the crease and around it. They don't deserve to go for a skate that far up the ice and expect to be protected as they aren't protecting the net at that point (otherwise the argument is the goalie being anywhere on the ice is considered protecting the net), they're playing the puck as any other skater. Lucic doing that, while infuriating him, lets him know that next time the puck is that far up the ice, Miller is taking a risk by going for a skate so far up the ice, and he just might think twice. I don't think goalie interference applies to that, even less do I think it's charging the goaltender. Lucic is finishing a hit on a player skating far away from his net to play the puck and not playing goal.

The reaction by Miller and Ruff is over the top.


#2224951 11/12 GDT: Stars 2 at Red Wings 5

Posted by Shoreline on 12 November 2011 - 09:10 PM

That's the motherf***ing way to do it boys!

Beautiful cross ice pass.


#2224881 11/12 GDT: Stars 2 at Red Wings 5

Posted by Shoreline on 12 November 2011 - 07:40 PM

I really wish during play Ken/Mickey/Larry would shut the hell up and save the bulls***ting around for the whistles/intermissions.


#2224270 Nine Athletes who Excelled at Being Average

Posted by Shoreline on 10 November 2011 - 09:18 AM

how many cups would that team win?

More than you would, especially Hudler, who, by my count, is beating you 1-0.


#2224243 Philly v. Tampa

Posted by Shoreline on 10 November 2011 - 02:19 AM

Yeah play shouldn't have been stopped.

I'm surprised after all these years the Flyers' tactic wasn't used against the Devils or Wild.

If it's fair game to sit back and prevent an offense from moving the puck into their own zone by stacking players back it's fair game to sit back in your defensive zone and not move the puck forward.

Hopefully if anything it might actually embarrass the team that refuses to forecheck, especially when it's in front of their home crowd.


#2223711 20 Game Suspension in OHL

Posted by Shoreline on 08 November 2011 - 03:38 PM

Ryan Murphy made the problem for himself by not having his head up and by making his own body lower, exposing his upper body to contact. When contact was made his head was level with the top of the boards. At 1:32 is a good angle of where the impact happened, and if you look, his legs are already bent which is why they wind up flying into the air.

To the post above -- "There is no need to come around that corner with that much speed" -- this is bulls***. Khunackl, to get that much speed, had to have in mind pursuing the puck with speed, and Murphy getting the puck at the last second changed his course only slightly.

Announcers in this clip were annoying as f*** calling it a headshot. I really want to see midgets (aka dwarfs, little people) play in the NHL, OHL, AHL, etc., just to show how stupid this headshot bulls*** is. If a player makes himself prone to being hit in the head then that's his fault. I love how every big hit that happens to injure a guy, if not a perfect shoulder to shoulder hit, winds up being a penalty, head shot, suspension, blind side hit, you name the ridiculous names for it.

What's the suspension for this hit going to solve?


#2223410 NHL and steroids according to Laraque

Posted by Shoreline on 06 November 2011 - 02:16 PM

I don't get this. It a whole issue with many factors but the bottom line is, they've got steroids far from baseball now and it incredibly obvious in player performance across the board. Id give baseball a chance again if I were you.

The bridges were already burned. Let's, for fun, say I was suddenly a fan of the MLB again, and oh right, my favourite player, Mark McGwire.. far from baseball now? This presumes I'm an idiot. The only reason the MLB is far less laden with performance enhancing drugs is because they had their pants pulled down, and I still see similar names not only playing in that league, but coaching in it, so their new concessions don't impress me at all. The MLB and their superstars were given a second chance to come clean during the media and Congressional circus, and they decided to plead the fifth. Rather than take the high road they were complicit -- there won't be another chance for the MLB as far as I'm concerned.

If this turns out to be an NHL problem of similar proportions all it takes is following in MLB footsteps to lose my trust and thus interest, but given the NHL's recent safety hysteria and the obvious double standards they would employ (if true) if attempting to conceal it, they are on an even shorter leash, again, as far as I'm concerned. If this is a cloud that hangs over the NHL they should simply come out with what they know.

While I was an ignorant fan, I can't turn a blind eye to this sort of nonsense anymore after having my pants pulled down, being a fan of the MLB and heavily against this sort of element in the league, and being a naive fan who thought this was all conspiracy talk only to find out it was true. Never again. I don't like cheaters, and I have no respect for the leagues and organizations which employ and collude with them to conceal it. I really hope this isn't the case for the NHL.


#2223333 NHL and steroids according to Laraque

Posted by Shoreline on 06 November 2011 - 02:43 AM

Also, to cite the source the OP didn't do:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=379721

The NHLPA listened, but initially refused to take any action, "for obvious political reasons."

"They wanted to keep drug testing as a card in their negotiations with the league," he wrote. "Plus, since their main goal was to protect the players, to take action against drugs would have harmed some of those players."

Last year, a Virginia chiropractor who treated members of the Washington Capitals pleaded guilty to misdemeanour steroids charges.

Douglas Nagel, who had offices in the same Arlington, Va., mall complex as the Capitals' practice facility, was placed on three years of probation and ordered to perform 200 hours of community service.

Capitals players Matt Bradley, Shaone Morrison and Eric Fehr admitted receiving chiropractic treatment from Nagel but denied getting steroids from him.

Nagel denied that he ever distributed steroids and said the drugs he ordered from a Florida supplier were for personal use.

The supplier, Andrew Thomas, had told investigators that Nagel had boasted the steroids were for professional athletes.

When Nagel was arrested in March 2010, the NHL and the Capitals said the league had done a thorough investigation and that there was nothing linking the Nagel case to steroid use by any members of the team.

But Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said at the time that the NHL was not co-operative in his investigation of the case.


The start of this story already looks like the MLB.

Now, if only he would actually name names. If the NHL and NHLPA and the player(s) object, they can sue Laraque and we can see if this is just an attention stunt, or if this is a problem that needs to be dragged out much like the colluding MLB and MLBPA (<- probably the only time they were friends), more will be revealed in court. Either way, not to name players/teams does no good for the integrity of his case.


#2223329 NHL and steroids according to Laraque

Posted by Shoreline on 05 November 2011 - 11:52 PM

I won't concern myself with it until he has the balls to come out with names -- I don't do non-specific, cryptic nonsense.

Same deal with the MLB, and once it the names were out, seeing the evidence, seeing player reactions, I never watched it again. I have no issue canning the NHL too due to lack of integrity but until Laraque can come out with names it's a $$$ campaign that stands to benefit him the more attention he gets without divulging.


#2222611 Toronto wins the President's trophy!

Posted by Shoreline on 04 November 2011 - 01:44 AM

Oh wait, they still have 69 games left.

But good lord, Leafs in 1st, Florida 5th, Boston dead last, and out west Edmonton 1st, Minnesota 4th, Vancouver 10th, San Jose 11th, Red Wings 13th. (Edit: As I was typing this the standings were updated, San Jose went up to 5th and Vancouver dropped to 10th)

What a oddly interesting dozen'ish game start to the season.