Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

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

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    In that letter can we add a line asking for some real offensive talent, maybe a goal scorer?  #1 Center?  Real #2 Dman, maybe a 1a?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Awry. Show Awry's posts

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    bottom line is the NHL game doesn't need MORE rules, More hard-to-decipher-penalties, MORE discretionary - and unevenly administered-  powers put in the hands of the Referees, the NHL does not need MORE stoppages of the flow and momentum of the game (such as would be the case with umpteen Video reviews...)

    The game does not need a 'carrying your stick too high' penalty for the sake of re-emphasizing the ancient art of 'keeping your stick on the ice'.

    High-sticking has been around since man could hold and carry a stick.

    - Face protection in the form of a cage will eliminate high-sticking because there will be nothing to high-stick!
    - Diving will be eliminated, because there will be nothing to high-stick
    - Chasing the Ref around the ice to show him the bit of blood from a supposed high-stick in order to get an extra 2 minutes of PowerPlay would be eliminated. (this to me, is one of the most embarrasssing aspects of the NHL Rulebook as it is presently written - "If there's blood, it's extra...")

    The best and most effective changes to the game always come with fewer rules, not more.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobbyOrrAlumni. Show BobbyOrrAlumni's posts

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    In Response to Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely:
    [QUOTE]bottom line is the NHL game doesn't need MORE rules, More hard-to-decipher-penalties, MORE discretionary - and unevenly administered-  powers put in the hands of the Referees, the NHL does not need MORE stoppages of the flow and momentum of the game (such as would be the case with umpteen Video reviews...) The game does not need a 'carrying your stick too high' penalty for the sake of re-emphasizing the ancient art of 'keeping your stick on the ice'. High-sticking has been around since man could hold and carry a stick. - Face protection in the form of a cage will eliminate high-sticking because there will be nothing to high-stick! - Diving will be eliminated, because there will be nothing to high-stick - Chasing the Ref around the ice to show him the bit of blood from a supposed high-stick in order to get an extra 2 minutes of PowerPlay would be eliminated. (this to me, is one of the most embarrasssing aspects of the NHL Rulebook as it is presently written - "If there's blood, it's extra...") The best and most effective changes to the game always come with fewer rules, not more.
    Posted by Awry[/QUOTE]

    Somehow, I don't think Cam will see this in the same way you do !

    Thank God !
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Awry. Show Awry's posts

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    Oh. I thought you guys were serious, when you started this thread, about eliminating high-sticking and diving...

    this from 'bogie6'

    "Awsry, I disagree with your full face cage proposal. In fact, i disagree with using them in Minor hockey. My reason is that too many Minor and college players have accepted the full cage as built in protection, and carry their sticks up high all the time.Eliminate the cage, and teach the kids to KEEP YOUR STICK ON THE ICE. How many times has that been drilled into kids in order to teach the right way to handle the puck. High stickings were few and far between in the days of Orr, but have continued to rise with the advent of full cage masks. i would rather see a few teeth go missing as long as the emphasis was on keeping the stick on the ice. i would also initiate a penalty for any stick carried above the shoulder as we once did in Squirts, in order to teach good stick control."

    How old are you? Kids have worn cages since the mid 70's. Given that less than a quarter of a percent of all kids who play hockey go on to make a living playing in the NHL, I would say Player Safety at the Minor levels takes precedence over the moral lesson of 'keeping one's stick on the ice' or 'stick control'. It'd be one thing if it was only teeth these kids were losing

    Besides, there is no such thing as 'stick control.'

    Right now the NHL has a 'Zero Tolerance' Rule for all stick infractions above the shoulders - there is no difference between malice and accident - your stick - no matter how - hits a guy in the face, you go to the Box (for 4 minutes if you draw blood...hilarious).

    I think that is stupid. An inadverdent high-stick should not be penalized, the only reason it is, is because a guy can be hurt.
    With a full cage, a high-sticking penalty would only be called and enforced in the most flagrant cases. As it should be.

    Full cages create what you want; Less government, fewer rules means less chance that a Ref can decide a game or Series, less chance that - even worse - a dive could...

    No harm no foul, I say

    Take away the foul by taking away the harm. Full cages for everyone.





     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    In Response to Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely:
    [QUOTE]Oh. I thought you guys were serious, when you started this thread, about eliminating high-sticking and diving... this from 'bogie6' "Awsry, I disagree with your full face cage proposal. In fact, i disagree with using them in Minor hockey. My reason is that too many Minor and college players have accepted the full cage as built in protection, and carry their sticks up high all the time.Eliminate the cage, and teach the kids to KEEP YOUR STICK ON THE ICE. How many times has that been drilled into kids in order to teach the right way to handle the puck. High stickings were few and far between in the days of Orr, but have continued to rise with the advent of full cage masks. i would rather see a few teeth go missing as long as the emphasis was on keeping the stick on the ice. i would also initiate a penalty for any stick carried above the shoulder as we once did in Squirts, in order to teach good stick control." How old are you? Kids have worn cages since the mid 70's. Given that less than a quarter of a percent of all kids who play hockey go on to make a living playing in the NHL, I would say Player Safety at the Minor levels takes precedence over the moral lesson of 'keeping one's stick on the ice' or 'stick control'. It'd be one thing if it was only teeth these kids were losing Besides, there is no such thing as 'stick control.' Right now the NHL has a 'Zero Tolerance' Rule for all stick infractions above the shoulders - there is no difference between malice and accident - your stick - no matter how - hits a guy in the face, you go to the Box (for 4 minutes if you draw blood...hilarious). I think that is stupid. An inadverdent high-stick should not be penalized, the only reason it is, is because a guy can be hurt. With a full cage, a high-sticking penalty would only be called and enforced in the most flagrant cases. As it should be. Full cages create what you want; Less government, fewer rules means less chance that a Ref can decide a game or Series, less chance that - even worse - a dive could... No harm no foul, I say Take away the foul by taking away the harm. Full cages for everyone.
    Posted by Awry[/QUOTE]

    The best part of that if they implemented it, I would be everything I own that mask technology would just go ballistic overnight.

    Why does NO ONE in the NHL wear full face protection now?

    Because they suck, the vision is horrible out of them.  I found a guy who makes the old cat eye cages and I don't wear the chin cup, if I had to wear the chin cup I would quit playing.

    If they made the NHL wear them, we'd see improvements in the face masks and that would benefit everybody.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Awry. Show Awry's posts

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    hey are not allowed to wear them (full cages)

    The Boychuk high-sticking penalty (the B's are presently trying to kill)
    would not be a penalty in my full cage NHL
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely

    In Response to Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Open Letter to Mr. Cam Neely : Hey Nite,ask him about Subban getting Peverly in the face with his stick.The only reason there was no penalty called was that Peverly chose to continue playing through it instead of reacting as if he'd been shot.How you get your stick into another players face while playing D on a 1 on 1 is beyond me.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    and because the game was tied at that point.  That's what I was trying to tell that Troll on this thread.
     

Share