Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]Look at the technique: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YjnsJDQOek&feature=related 1. Never leaves feet. 2. Staight on. 3. Puck in the play.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]
    Romes hit wasn't remotely close to the Stevens hits, maybe in severity but not in technique.It could be argued that both players intent was to injure the opposing players with their checks but what cannot be misstaken is Stevens hits were within the rules in place at the time while Rome knew his wasn't.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    Or i guess he doesn't as witnessed in his interview. Scary. His time will come.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaxCap. Show FaxCap's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]I believe Rome as well.  Back in the day Scott Stevens made a living outta that type of hit.  Watch this hit.  Doesnt it look very similar?  No call http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKmYWy-gBU&feature=related Rome's hit was very late.  I believe Horton was out in the air and the his head went smack off the ice.  And I agree that the so called victims need to stop admiring their pass in the middle of the ice and realize this is a contact game.  "Heads Up".  We really could use Horton especially in game 7.  he is money. 
    Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]

    I agree with you except for the "very late" part. According to the Canadian TV network using the frame count it was about 8/10th of a second late. That's using an NHL rule of thumb re the mental count you make after a player passes the puck. I agree and always have it was "late" but not very late.

    At the speed of today's game 3/4 of a second a blink of an eye.

    In the whole statement by Rome he mentions an almost exact hit in the last week of the regular season. The hitter got NOTHING but a 5 minute penalty.
    Rome's complaint is simply "why is the refereeing all over the map?" and I have to agree 100%. I have seen calls against the Bruins this series where I just shook my head. Why is it the back ref, 15 feet away, doesn't make a call but the twit front ref 60 feet away makes a call. Bullsh*t

    When you concider the refs are graded all year with the top 16 getting to work the playoffs. They make extra money and the prestige of working the playoffs. You would think as the refs drop off as we progress in the playoffs we would see the best refereeing. So far that hasn't happened. So far I think the refereeing both way has been crap.

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

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    RWTK,

    I saw that first video of Kariya but it isnt as good as this one.  Listen to what they are saying.  Interference.  He doesnt have the puck.  And he targets the head.  Yes Lindros and Francis have the puck.  But he is targeting the head.  Which is a no no.  They got concusions for a reason.  Its not bc he didnt target the head.  Isnt that what this entire head shot debate is about??
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKmYWy-gBU

    watch this one and tell me its not similar.  Kariya releases the puck.  Vulnerable position Stevens destroys him.  I had Scott Stevens posters when he was with the Capitals all over my wall at home.  I had the Tackla pants like his and everything.  I wanted to be Scott Stevens.  But in todays NHL is he not on top of the most wanted for head hits.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]Shupe also mentioned the one on Francis. How is this not straigt on, within the play, with the puck at their feet? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRpLhv_odCs How are these remotely comparable?
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Its straight on but Stevens leaves his feet at the 2 second mark.  Head shot. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play" : So again, with Chara, no puck in the area at all(more so), yet no suspension on a far more violent play based on terms of injury.  Rome's play is cut in dry, but so is Chara's by your definition.  And an interference call was made on Chara.  But no suspension?  right or wrong? 
    Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]
    Why do you keep bringing up Chara? The only relevance Chara's hit on Patches has, is the fact that it made changes to the NHL landscape(specifically how future hits would be treated).Is it that hard to understand that things  are different since that hit? Cooke's hit on Savard went unpenalized yet, every similar hit  from thereafter was suspendable.Where's the confusion? Things change once the starting point has been established.What am I missing here that you feel the need to ask the same question over and over again?Let me be clear.....Chara's hit=not suspendable........Rome's hit=suspendable........if the Rome hit happenned before the Chara hit then the circumstances would be reversed. It didn't so they aren't....
    GO BRUINS!!!!!!!! 2 MORE WINS!!!!!!!!!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]Technique is almost flawless from Stevens. His skates are on the ice.  It's all shoulder with Stevens at the chest.  The only one remotely close was Lindros's on the highlight reel, but Lindros is much taller than Stevens and it it's borderline if he extends the elbow. My point here is, Stevens made this into an art form.  Now, many young players think it means doing it well after the puck is gone and leaving your feet to make the big hit. Again, the reason why we didn't see these head shots in previous eras is because players knew the code. If they stepped out of it, they'd be pummeled into submission. Then we see Stevens turn it into an art form similarly to how Leo Boivin was known for the hip check, and now every D Man thinks he is Scott Stevens and it's "cool" to be this perceived "tough" guy.  It's sort of like how Jordan was so incredible at dunking, now all the younger players want to do what he did to get on Sportscenter. Think about how many times Chara could just destroy or even kill someone every time they come over the line or go into the corner.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]Off topic for a bit, but Jordan had all those amazing dunks because the refs let him travel allmost every time. The fans loved it and it looked spectacular but many, many times he took at least 4 steps. Actually many players travel but i think the rule has been eased to accomodate these dunks. Much the same way dangerous hits were allowed to creep into the game because they looked spectacular for lack of a better word.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    late shmate, horton relased the puck while on the spoked B, and was hit at the blue line- PERIOD. that's not even close. you see guys change direction and slap a puck out of mid-air in a quarter of the time it took for rome to hit horton. cheap shot. he had all the time he needed to make a decision, his decision was to take a late run at one of boston's best playoff performers. plain and simple. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    oh yeah, and he did leave his feet. watch the replay.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play" : Why do you keep bringing up Chara? The only relevance Chara's hit on Patches has, is the fact that it made changes to the NHL landscape(specifically how future hits would be treated).Is it that hard to understand that things  are different since that hit? Cooke's hit on Savard went unpenalized yet, every similar hit  from thereafter was suspendable.Where's the confusion? Things change once the starting point has been established.What am I missing here that you feel the need to ask the same question over and over again?Let me be clear.....Chara's hit=not suspendable........Rome's hit=suspendable........if the Rome hit happenned before the Chara hit then the circumstances would be reversed. It didn't so they aren't.... GO BRUINS!!!!!!!! 2 MORE WINS!!!!!!!!!
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Rome= Suspension  BUT new Rome rule of 4 games? 
    Chara= non suspension, yet lots of the experts and players believe he should have been suspended.  So we leave our faith in the league on so called questionable hits.  Torres on Seabrook.  I thought he should have been suspended.  There will always be a gray area.  Always.  And this sint going away anytime soon. 
    I bring up Chara as an example of a player that was seriously injured from an illegal play.  He did get a penalty and the player was seriously hurt.  I can understand to an extent why they would be up in arms.  Thats probably the only point I am trying to make with Chara.  And for the simple fact you said no puck=dirty hit.  Chara no puck, Lucic no puck.  everyone sees things differently and puts a magical twist on it.  But it isnt cut and dry.  Far from it.  Lord after Rome's hit they changed the wording.  So not cut and dry.  far from it
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play" : I agree with you except for the "very late" part. According to the Canadian TV network using the frame count it was about 8/10th of a second late. That's using an NHL rule of thumb re the mental count you make after a player passes the puck. I agree and always have it was "late" but not very late. At the speed of today's game 3/4 of a second a blink of an eye. In the whole statement by Rome he mentions an almost exact hit in the last week of the regular season. The hitter got NOTHING but a 5 minute penalty. Rome's complaint is simply "why is the refereeing all over the map?" and I have to agree 100%. I have seen calls against the Bruins this series where I just shook my head. Why is it the back ref, 15 feet away, doesn't make a call but the twit front ref 60 feet away makes a call. Bullsh*t When you concider the refs are graded all year with the top 16 getting to work the playoffs. They make extra money and the prestige of working the playoffs. You would think as the refs drop off as we progress in the playoffs we would see the best refereeing. So far that hasn't happened. So far I think the refereeing both way has been crap. FX
    Posted by FaxCap[/QUOTE]
    The bull is the fact that both Rome and yourself are trying to use a hit for which someone was given a 5 and a game as an example of why Rome was over-punished.3 times this year,Rome was penalized for illegal hits(in 56 games) and he's still crying about over-punishment. I, for 1, hoped he wouldn't be suspended at all so that he could pay his debt on the ice.It amazes me that Rome(and clowns like you) think that we should feel sorry for him because he's missing the finals.Someone needs to remind him that he's a fringe player who's suspended for injuring a Conn-Smythe candidate.No punishment Rome can receive will bring Horton(and his clutch scoring)back.
    GO BRUINS!!!!!!!! 2 MORE WINS!!!!!!!!!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    RWTK,
    if you watch Stevens hits in nearly 1/2 I would say he does leave his feet.  Back then this was a legal hit.  In todays hockey it isnt.  The game is changing.  Not for the better. 

    Hitting to the head will only end when they put the head outta our behinds.  Its next to impossible for 100% of the time to hit shoulder on shoulder or chest.  6'9 hitting 6'.  How is this physically possible?  Accounting for speed, skill level, motive and player???  It will never leave the game.  Until they remove open ice hitting.  Then we will have a european league like Bettman wants. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    amen dez
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play" : Rome= Suspension  BUT new Rome rule of 4 games?  Chara= non suspension, yet lots of the experts and players believe he should have been suspended.  So we leave our faith in the league on so called questionable hits.  Torres on Seabrook.  I thought he should have been suspended.  There will always be a gray area.  Always.  And this sint going away anytime soon.  I bring up Chara as an example of a player that was seriously injured from an illegal play.  He did get a penalty and the player was seriously hurt.  I can understand to an extent why they would be up in arms.  Thats probably the only point I am trying to make with Chara.  And for the simple fact you said no puck=dirty hit.  Chara no puck, Lucic no puck.  everyone sees things differently and puts a magical twist on it.  But it isnt cut and dry.  Far from it.  Lord after Rome's hit they changed the wording.  So not cut and dry.  far from it
    Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]
    Rome's 3rd incident of the year involving questionable hits.That's more than Chara's entire career.......where's the confusion? The league used Chara's lack of previous discipline as a major factor in the non-suspension. Should 1st timers be treated the same as repeat offenders?
    GO BRUINS!!!!!!!! 2 MORE WINS!!!!!!!!!
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    Everyones had plenty to say here, and most have at least a grain of relevance.  I hate that Horton is done.  Poor, poor, trade off, however I think the league got it right. I think the abitlity differential between Horton and Rome had a lot to do with the length of the suspension.  Think it always does.
     These injuries, and entailing suspensions are a political thing, almost as much as a safety thing, and I think the league is doing a pretty good job, even though they're in a hopeless situation.
    Of course Rome didn't want to seriously hurt Horton.  Cooke didn't either for that matter, but for those that never played the sport at a high level, it's difficult to understand these things.
    You have to understand the culture.  These guys are tough.  Most take great pride in pasteing someone, and great opportunites don't present themself that often.  No one wants, or intends to seriously hurt someone.
    They want to put each other down, and they don't want them to jump right back up.   In fact the longer they stay down the better(unless faking something).  A little blood is a good thing, but again....they don't want to hurt anybody.
    If you don't understand the real meaning of what appears to be incredible double speak....you'll never get it.
     As much as I was dissapointed in Ference speaking up about the Paille hit, earlier in the year, that is the only thing that will push change.  Until recently, those type of hits gave players a reputation....one they didn't at all mind having.  Four fifths of the league would rather be feared than respected, and the culture continues to play to that.
    The only thing that will speed up the demise of this element of the game, is the rank and file frowning upon it, rather than validating it.
    It's not the league here guys...it's the players.  The league is trying to protect the players, and the players are trying to screw the league over it, every chance they get.  And of course there are going to be inconsistencies.  Is anyone dumb enough to think that Crosby and Cooke would be treated identically, if they both delivered the exact same suspendable hit?
    It's nuts trying to debate this stuff, because "history", coupled with a half dozen other elements always comes into play when suspendable hits are involved.  I don't really see how it can be any other way, especially when players are attempting to "look hurt" as often as they "are hurt".
    Disgusting.
    And............., we're acting like a bunch of 12 year old girls in our attempt to find drama in every players media statements.  Rarely do any of them ever say what they really feel.  We're all over them for that.  When they do, we get all emotional and hysterical because they're not politically correct enough.

    Sure Rome coulda said something different.  I probably would have picked the more accepted route, but I would have thought the same as him.  An honest statement by any player would go something like this. "I love drilling guys.  I'm not gonna stop.  Geez, I wish though, I coulda only put Horty outta commission for a shift or 2.  I hate the fact he's hurt"

    The hard shoulder, and elbow pads have to go.  It really bugs me that something of such significance, something that could be addressed so quickly....hasn't.  Again, the PA is easily as bad as the league when it comes to anything regarding safety.  One top tier player, complaining about the inconvenience of breaking in a new pair of elbow pads could stall everything.
     Some have suggested the red line and no touch icings need to be addressed.  My opinion is that the icing thing is the most absurd rule in the game currently, however, it's not resulting in a lot of serious injuries.  Why?  The code.  A player is villified by his peers if he aggressively takes someone out in this situation.  If the players in general think something isn't cool....it doesn't happen much.

    How about getting rid of the insigator rule.  That's easy to do, and might send a clearer message.  Have the players lost respect for each other?
    I say no, they've just got a little cockier.
    The reason Gretzky and company didn't get pounded wasn't respect, it was fear, and fear is a powerfully motivating factor in pro hockey.  It keeps the mind clear even in the heat of battle. 
    Why don't people seem to understand here....dirty or clean, suspendable or not...it didn't used to matter.  Mess with the wrong players....and you're gonna pay.

    These guys play a fast violent game, at an emotional level that would incite the general public to behave much, much worse in the same situations.  Like it or lump it, the fear factor is huge, and unfortunately, it's gone. 
    Finally, "keep your head up".  Dirty plays, borderline plays, plays that injure, or attempt to injure have been around for a long time, and the culture of pro sport is to nail someone for not paying particular attention, not give him a free pass.  It's somewhat of a predatory environment.
    Again, whether the hit was late or not doesn't matter.  These things happen.  Always have.
    Therefore, it seems obvious to me, that it's more important for a player to remember this than it's ever been, especially when you're in the heightened physicality of the playoffs.
    It's dumb to blame Horton, and ridiculous to suggest what was in Rome's mind leading up to impact.  It's obvious he wanted to nail him.  They all want to nail each other.

    The league got it as right as they could get it.  They can't allow plays that threaten someones life.
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]If you aren't headhunting with a blindside cheapshot, the pad argument is moot or at least not the top reason for the influx of dirty hits the last 10 or so years. 1. Get rid of the instigator. 2. Have punishments like the Rome hit be more severe.  4 games is nothing as the barometer.  Make fines heavier, also fining the coach. 3. See if they can address the shoulder pads.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    I agree with all of this.  10 yrs too late.  Not sure about that. 10 plus yrs ago we were arguing knee on knee.  I hate all the head shots.  I love hockey and really enjoy chatter back and forth between everyone on here. 
    Some very good posts on this subject.  Like I said I think chara's was a hockey play gone wrong.  I don't think in a million yrs he could do that again(with the same outcome).   I think the league will have a very hard time eliminating this completely though b/c in a contact sport fueled by raw emotion and huge men you are bound to have the unfortunate happen.  I don't personally think Rome is a dirty player.  It doesnt sound like he learned from this incident. 

    Cheers fellas.  Gotta big game to get ready for
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    Really? Really? Calling someone out because they disagree? Laughable at best. If this hit was on someone other than a Bruins player I would wager most of you would be singing a different tune.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play" : I agree with all of this.  10 yrs too late.  Not sure about that. 10 plus yrs ago we were arguing knee on knee.  I hate all the head shots.  I love hockey and really enjoy chatter back and forth between everyone on here.  Some very good posts on this subject.  Like I said I think chara's was a hockey play gone wrong.  I don't think in a million yrs he could do that again(with the same outcome).   I think the league will have a very hard time eliminating this completely though b/c in a contact sport fueled by raw emotion and huge men you are bound to have the unfortunate happen.  I don't personally think Rome is a dirty player.  It doesnt sound like he learned from this incident.  Cheers fellas.  Gotta big game to get ready for
    Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]

    you have inferred though, there are similarities between the Chara incident and Rome(in terms of being suspendable)
    I think there's a pretty big difference.  I thought Chara "rubbed" out Pacioretti.  Me thinks Rome "pounded" Horton.  Both resulted in serious injury, but the second was a more violent, flagrant foul.
    In any event, it's a moving target.  Pretty much anything resulting in injury will be suspendable moving forward.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play"

    In Response to Re: Rome: "If I could go back, I'd wish he didn't get hurt but I don't think it would change my decision on the play":
    [QUOTE]Really? Really? Calling someone out because they disagree? Laughable at best. If this hit was on someone other than a Bruins player I would wager most of you would be singing a different tune.
    Posted by callodthedom19[/QUOTE]

    Who are you "calling out" with this post?  It is unclear to me.
     

Share