Marchand get 5 games

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Marchand get 5 games

    when the bruins are on the short end... savvy, bergy, krejci, and even marchand(subban hip check, raymond hip-check)... no one on the team went to the media and cried. NOBODY. heck andrew ference called out his own teammate for a bad hit(paille). i applauded him for it at the time. much to the chagrine of many posting here. so your "i wonder what boston would have said if it happened to them" argument makes no sense. same hit happened to marchand by raymond last year in the finals- NOTHING from the bruins or their mgt. to further my point, marty brodeur himself was OK with the lucic/miller incident. should we apologize for that? lucic didn't "get away" with anything. as for chara/patch, a dozen guys every year get run into the stancion- NONE resulting in suspensions- supplemental discipline. funny how the league re-configured their rinks after this eh? where was the real issue there? this happens in nashville, it doesn't make a single nightly sports program. welcome to montreal.  the bruins have "gotten away" with nothing. this whole "league perception" thing is really a montreal / vancouver thing- i have plenty of rangers, isles, pens, sabres friends... not one of them thinks the bruins are a dirty team. they do however see the habs and nucks as diving, whining crybabies.   

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Marchand get 5 games

    In Response to Re: Marchand get 5 games:
    In Response to Re: Marchand get 5 games : That's been the rule since the 70's. Surprised so few people realize that.
    Posted by red75

    I admit the number of games I've viewed in my life is certainly lower than many of the others here, but I can't honestly say I remember seeing this penalty called once.  That's probably part of it - players know and keep from doing it.  There's also a discretionary aspect.  The referee doesn't have to give the penalty unless he thinks it is warrented.

    Interestingly, I just checked the rules and it does say that "Generally, this rule is applied when a fightys(sic) occurs."
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchand get 5 games

    I thought they got the call wrong on the iceing that led to Peverly's goal, however if you watch the tape you will hear the linesman screaming "No, No" long before the puck even crosses the end line.  It was a bad call on the ice, but the refs didn't misplay the puck, turn it over to Peverly, and score the goal.  So yes, I think you have a gripe there, but I don't think you can just equate the missed call with a goal.  Everyone on the ice knew iceing had been waived off, rightly or wrongly.

    And I get the desire for the Bruins to be punished on some level, from people who hate the Bruins.  I would probably be happy if Burrows was castrated a horrible zamboni accident between periods.  But that doesn't make it right or fair.

    I do think a big part of this was about 'appeasing the masses', and it was in large part a result of Lucic, Chara, and Marchand escaping suspensions on earlier offenses.  But again, that's not what Shanny is supposed to be doing.  He not there to even out perceived wrongs from the past or to try to keep everyone happy.  Everyone hates a winner, but it's Shanny's job to block out all of that noise and interpret the rulebook for each incident.  I think he is starting to slip away from that.

    Remember that reputation calls are not always the friend of Vancouver either.  If you're still wondering why some extra rough stuff was allowed in the Finals against the Canucks, I think it was pretty clear that the diving, faking, and the antics of Burrows and Lapierre put the Canucks in a position where the refs decided to stop protecting them on every play.  You guys like the reputation call now, but you sure hated it last June...
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Marchand get 5 games

    In Response to Re: Marchand get 5 games:
    In Response to Re: Marchand get 5 games : Why was Burrows not given more for his spear to the throat?  Seemed pretty obvious to me and TV land.  How did they land a 5 on 3 when they jumped hog pile on Thornton(b/c now one would man up one on one) after Burrows spears him.   Ooops got off track... 11 PP to 7 PP.  I will never complain about losing a game to bad officiaiting. Those come and go and human error makes the game exciting at times.   Marchand is a doubt about it.  I said it all last year and basically stopped b/c it was becoming a broken record.  Some on here love and defend, others don't and pile it on.  I was in the latter but stopped and became neutral as I can on his matters.  I personally think the league made a mistake.  Much much bigger fish to fry than that hit.  This was likely the biggest game of the year and I believe thats why this was handled in this manner.  I don't care what team you cheer for.  That simply isnt a 5 game suspension! Again, everyone is entitled to an opinion.  I just really dislike your team.  It takes me a lot to strongly dislike a team and normally can find something I like...but the brand your team plays is almost every post here in the last week.  I'm a hockey fan first...and if Van was my team I would seriously change teams.  I dislike the way they play...The Gazoo's are talented no denyig it and Van when rolling can beat anyone.  But year in year out they get beat by the same recipe...someday maybe they reach the top.  I think they peeked last year.
    Posted by shuperman

    I agree 100% and they WILL get beat again by the same recipe, its tried & true.
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Marchand get 5 games

    In Response to Re: Marchand get 5 games:
    In Response to Re: Marchand get 5 games : If the NHL was interested in "appeasing the masses", then both Chara and Lucic would have been suspended for the Patch and Miller incidents.  If anything, there's suspicion around the league that the Boston-NHL Front Office connection has resulted in the league going easier on Bruins (at least, in the past).  There may be no basis for this, but perception is a powerful thing.
    Posted by 49-North

    I don't think there's suspicion around the league.  The strong teams are always  a target for the conspiracy theorists, and they're usually fans, not those within the business, who should know better.  Also disagree with your Miller-Patch assessment.  Think it's more of a make up call mentality.  As a Bruin fan, I understand and accept the Paille suspension, am on the fence with the Ferrence thing,....feel the patch drama and calls for suspension were ludicous...figured Lucic shoulda got one, and vehemently disagree with this one.  It circumvents the rules.  Plain and simple. Maybe i'm a homer, but not a blind one.
    And yes, the linesman blew the icing call.
    As for perception, any judicial group MUST be above that in order to maintain an ounce of credibility.
    In this case, Marchand did not take out Salo, "at or below the knee".  Maybe he's a rat, maybe he should have been suspended before(I wouldn't have argued the slew-foot), but he can't be rightly suspended for playing within the rules.
    I watch a lot of Bruins games.  If the league wants to send a message to BM, or 40 or so other guys who play the same type of game(several on your fave) the league will get it's chance.  No need to make things up.
    Watch the video again.  Wouldn't you agree, the point of impact was not "at or below the knee"?
    Also, 3rd man doesn't mean "fight".  The rules are pretty clear.  Anytime there is a confrontation between 2 players, the 3rd man rule can apply.
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchand get 5 games

    As far as the 3rd man in rule, I love Fraser's explanation because it has the discretion that you've got to expect from officials.  Bieksa and Malhotra were the first guys to come to Burrows defense, but I don't think they deserve penalties because they were trying to break it up and get ahold of Thornton, as they should really.  

    Then Lapierre comes flying in and starts firing off punches to the back of Thornton's head while he's being held down.  That's the guy who should get 3rd man in, and a misconduct.  Or better yet, the refs should just back away the next time he starts a confrontation and then beckons them in to save him.