Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

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

    Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    Good job by BDC doing their own version.

    Exact same hit on Marchand and no penalty.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHmSiIsz74I


    Same hit by Brad last year, no 5 min, not even a whisper of a suspension.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06psuTFVFD4


    Same low hit on Looch, no penalty at all.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJRZULaUF-8


    Another legal Hamius hit.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q599OC7UM-4


    Top hits 2010-11 see #6, and what do you know, its a Vancouver player!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-bBFoweoq4


    Ballard, in the playoff last year, play continues, its a good hit.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhrtvlVlVJQ


    Apparently Ballard has his own highlight real of these.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUd8wWhHZx4&feature=related


    Another Ballard..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtUJqBaj3HM&feature=related


    Looks like this is a staple move by lots of Canucks and then they are going to cry about it when it happens to them? Vancouver should be called Montreal West from now on.

    Where is the consistency Shanny?

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

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    Shanahan didn't attain his current position till June of 2011 and didn't fully take over actual rulings of supplementary discipline until the beginning of the 11'-12' season. I would say he's doing a much better job than Campbell did in my view.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:
    [QUOTE]Shanahan didn't attain his current position till June of 2011 and didn't fully take over actual rulings of supplementary discipline until the beginning of the 11'-12' season. I would say he's doing a much better job than Campbell did in my view.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]
    I agree Sandog, it just seems Shanny likes to make up some rules as he goes along. Other than that i think he is doing a better job than Campbell.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these? : I agree Sandog, it just seems Shanny likes to make up some rules as he goes along. Other than that i think he is doing a better job than Campbell.Posted by 50belowzero[/QUOTE]

    There is no way he can please everyone in that job. One thing I've always found in Brendan is integrity so don't think he has a dart board like Colin. Also he is new so I would think he will become better on a learning curve but yah some of the rulings differ a little from night to night I agree.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MDsizzle. Show MDsizzle's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    I wont argue that he's better than campbell. Is the change between the two so drastic that what was labeled clean previous to Brads hit is now a severe suspension?
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macfact. Show Macfact's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    90 percent of those hits under Shanny would now be penalities. He has drawn the line in the sand now. It will have to be enforced. But best for Bruin's fans to move on and look to the future and not dwell on this or it will come back to haunt us. Karma is a bi tch
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    Shanny is better than Campbell, easily.  At least he prepares explanations.  This last ruling reeks of succumbing to all of the noise around the Bruins, instead of considering just the hit, and giving Torres less than half of Marchand's punishment for three head shots is puzzling at best.

    But he's still better than Campbell. 
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karl-Hungus. Show Karl-Hungus's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    saying you're better than campbell ain't saying much.

    the max suspension for a phone hearing by shanny gives the appearance he was swayed by the gillis and vaginault advertising agency.  

    shanny is indeed a joke since there have been similar hits and no suspensions since his reign of terror started.     

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

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    I have a hard time agreeing with either or in this situation, however the problem is the league will now look at this BM incident and what will happen next ? Take out hip checks ? The nhl is getting too harsh because look at it this way, these guys were coached to hit since age 8.9. 10 and its a dam shame the nhl is slowly taking out the hockey in hockey. So you have a player like salo did thought he was ok to keep going and BM stopped him (legal hit) imo now that ive watched so may others.The nhl wants wide open hockey up and down because the fans love it. Very few fans of old left. Boston being the best in the nhl of being oldtime hockey is being punished, one day at a time and teams like the nux are getting away with it. Im totally disgusted with this new dam nhl.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    I really don't see how he's any better than Campbell.  Of all the reviews, regarding Bruin players over the last year or so, this was the clearest.  This type of hit happens with some regularity elsewhere in the league(especially Vancouver), and in BM's case, it's conclusive he didn't take out Salo "at or below the knees".  No one can argue that point.  Therefore, it's not a clip, it's not even a penalty.  If the league wants to take that hit out of the game, that's their right.  Change the rules...let everyone know it's a suspendable offense, and suspend the first guy that breaks the rules.
    Campbell may have let a few things slide, but at least he didn't make up the rules as he went.
    Shannahan, and the league are showing they posess the judgement of a pre-teen. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=60&id=148390

    How does this head hunting hit get 3 games and Marchand gets 5 and a stick to the throat doesn't even get reviewed?  Where is the consistency?  Players safety my ash!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MDsizzle. Show MDsizzle's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    I believe what really seperates Brad's hit from all the other that happen every week in the NHL is mainly two things: A. This was a highly anticipated game and we all knew there was going to be lots of bad blood, so the refs were on edge before the face off, hence the incorrect tossing of Looch, and B. Salo (supposedly) got hurt on the play and it looked bad. I'd be willing to bet, this exact hit takes place the same night somewhere else and there is no injury, there would not even be a penalty.

    Shame on shanny for being weak and allowing the secondary factors to determine the outcome. The primary factor is the hit itself, which by the book, should not have even been a penalty, it was not "Knee or below" as the rule states. Mentioned above, by a fellow wiseman, if the rule needs alteration (ala cooke), great, change the rule, implement it, and then take action once it is in effect. I did not see any make-shift rules for Savard who had his career ended by a dooosh-bag nobody, why is it being done now?

       

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

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    I'd like to hear what Johnny Bucyk has to say on this. Looked to be a decent hip check to me.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:[QUOTE]I really don't see how he's any better than Campbell.  Campbell may have let a few things slide, but at least he didn't make up the rules as he went.
    Posted by stevegm[/QUOTE]

    Steve, I like and respect your posts too much so I won't have a field day with those two statements.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    After ignoring the Torres hit - Shanahan lost his credibility. His inaction can't be rationally defended. He now also sukz, but not as much as Campbell.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these? : Steve, I like and respect your posts too much so I won't have a field day with those two statements.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]


    Oh...go for it Sandog.  Maybe I'm a bit of a pre teen on this one too.  I'm just completely, really, really, disappointed with Shanahan on this one.  I really thought this guy was gonna bring something to the table.  I love the game as much as the Bruins.  I know it's at a bit of a crossroads, and I know it's gonna take a lot of wisdom to navigate the waters for the next few years, or the game will suffer. I believed the press clippings, and now I'm embarassed at my naivete.  I really feel Shanahan is just another corporate suit, and that's the last thing the game of hockey needs right now.  From a disciplinary standpoint, the game needs to be taken by the bootstraps, by thinkers, not corporate players.  To me, Shanahan has made the transition way too smoothly.
    Anyway, I probably need brought back to earth.  Bring it on.  I truly believe that wisdom is the result of a thirst for alternative thinking.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    He's looking more and more haggard with each explanation. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruinfaninnewjersey. Show Bruinfaninnewjersey's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    Who here thinks the Jets were "gifted" with a penalty shot tonight just on reputation? And the Thornton penalty for illegal contact to the head? The league is moving in a whole new direction... and it's not good for Beantown.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these? :   I'm just completely, really, really, disappointed with Shanahan on this one.    I really feel Shanahan is just another corporate suit, and that's the last thing the game of hockey needs right now.  Posted by stevegm[/QUOTE]

    This conspiracy thing "the Bruins get away with too much" or "now the league is against Boston" is out of hand. Sports fans that think Networks and TV advertisers/corporations can dictate the way a championship can be influenced by suits is just as ridiculous thinking.

    No one could convince me that you would catch Shanahan sending an email saying that this player is a "little faker" or allow himself to be lobbied by a GM at the General Manager meetings to not punish a certain player.

    Shanahan didn't teach Marchand to slew foot nor elbow someone in the head, that call was made on reputation by a terrible ref who can't make it out of the first round of the playoffs. I didn't like the length of the suspension either but Shanahan knows certain players aren't getting it so he has to start to dropping the hammer.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    I think Shanahan's been excellent so far. I don't agree with the Marchand call, but, that said, I had a chat yesterday with a friend who is a high-level referee and completely unbiased on the subject. He said he felt the hit was terrible. He said 5 games a bit much, but he didn't like the hit at all. So while I think the hit was OK, I guess others may see it different, and I accept that Shanahan is one of those.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    i'm moving on....until i see another check just like marchands, and hear what the league says/ doesn't say.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these? : This conspiracy thing "the Bruins get away with too much" or "now the league is against Boston" is out of hand. Sports fans that think Networks and TV advertisers/corporations can dictate the way a championship can be influenced by suits is just as ridiculous thinking. No one could convince me that you would catch Shanahan sending an email saying that this player is a "little faker" or allow himself to be lobbied by a GM at the General Manager meetings to not punish a certain player. Shanahan didn't teach Marchand to slew foot nor elbow someone in the head, that call was made on reputation by a terrible ref who can't make it out of the first round of the playoffs. I didn't like the length of the suspension either but Shanahan knows certain players aren't getting it so he has to start to dropping the hammer.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]



    For the record, I don't/never have subscribed to the conspiracy crap, in fact I've publicly dissed that mentality on another thread. Since it appears above, that you're responding to my comments, please know I've never infered any of those things written above.

    And...I agree, he has no reason to play favorites, or pander to GM's. He probably is smart enough to keep his derogatory comments, "out of print", but I don't for a second think his personal feelings for a player like Marchand, are one bit different than Campbell's are of Savard. As a result, he's put himself above the game, and dished out his own justice. That's probably my biggest beef.
    That is absolutely wrong, and not very bright.
    I won't even argue that BM "needs" a little lesson.  I don't disagree that maybe the hammer should be dropped on this guy.  You can't just do it, cuz you want to though...there needs to be grounds.
    On this one, Shanahan ruled like a ticked off player seeking retribution, not an impartial judge.
    The slew foot was Shannahan's chance, but he blew it.
    Why?
    Cuz the slew foot was, in fact a slew foot.  A dirty play, according to league rules, so Brendon has the backing of the rule book.  He can do what he wants.  Maybe we can whine about the length, but it's pretty hard to argue a suspension.  Same with Lucic-Miller.  Big tough guy runs puny goalie.  That can be a discretionary charging, interference call by a ref, which would be supported, followed by supplemental discipline.
    This issue is totally different.  The hearing should make this one black and white.  Obviously the penalty stands, but when considering a suspension, the league can see that the hit is considered legal.  It's not at or below the knee's, therefore, you don't dole out suspensions in that case.   If the league doesn't like it...change the rules, and start from scratch.
    Again, this can be taken to a black and white level.  Most can't.  If a figure of authority wants to send a message...they should have the good sense to pick their spot.
    One exagerated example, and I'm done with this.
    Player A and B are going hard on a potential icing call.  Player A appears to be tripped, goes head first into the boards and breaks his neck.  Player B is penalized, and ejected from the game.  The whole world wants player B's head.  In the hearing though, it's conclusive that player B didn't trip player A.  With the luxury of slow-mo video close-ups, it's obvious that in attempting to block player B's line to the puck, player A attempts to break B's stick by stomping on it, and inadvertently sends himself headfirst, into the boards.
    Player A still has a broken neck and his career is ruined.  In that case does B get suspended?  No.  Hindsight shows there was no violation of the rules, and we must follow rules in sport.  There could very well be a groundswell of indignation, but the fact someone gets hurt...unfortunately, is a fact of life, and in this case, a moot point.  Maybe we rekindle the no touch icing debate, but we seperate the two things.  We don't confuse the 2 issues, as one issue, and the league should have the gonads to stand up, look people in the eye, and tell them you don't make decisions based on the severity of injury.  Decisions are based on rules.
    Shanahan's resulting diatribe regarding his logic is laughable, and speaks to his overall lack of competence.  He's stuck on this "self preservation" stuff, when anyone old enough to read a rule book knows it's completely irrelevant.  There is nothing in the rule book regarding "clipping", that states "submarining" is ok if one is "protecting ones-self".  The rule says "knee or below".  It's conclusive, no more needs to, or should be, read into it.   Shannahan is "dancing" here, in an attempt to justify his personal view, not that of the NHL rule book.
    In his easiest case yet, Shannahan totally blew it.  I'm sure he's making as much as any judge in the country.  He has a responibility to know the laws of the game...inside out, and respond with wisdom and fairness.  He responded like a not so bright fan.  Total incompetance, when he had all the tools, and all the time in the world.  He'd be fired in the real world.
    Nothing personal against Shannahan, just disrespect for his professional conduct.  This one was really really easy, and again, his insistance on the relevancy of his own predator-victim theory, proves he doesn't posess the critical thinking capacity, nor the impartiality to handle this stuff.
    Referee's can do make up calls.  Judges can't.    
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?

    In Response to Re: Shannahan, you are a joke. What about these?:
    [QUOTE]I think Shanahan's been excellent so far. I don't agree with the Marchand call, but, that said, I had a chat yesterday with a friend who is a high-level referee and completely unbiased on the subject. He said he felt the hit was terrible. He said 5 games a bit much, but he didn't like the hit at all. So while I think the hit was OK, I guess others may see it different, and I accept that Shanahan is one of those.
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    Sure people can see things differently, sure we can have our own opinions, but we can't have our own facts.  I know high level referee's that insist it isn't even a minor penalty.
    Fact is....in this particular situation, which is very, very unique, the answer is crystal clear, and it's only crystal clear, because it's one of those very few rules, that leaves no room for interpretation.
    You or I may feel "submarining" is a dirty classless play.  We're entitled to that.  What isn't allowable, "currently"....is to opine that a hip, taking an opposing player out, "above the knee's"....is a violation of the rules, therefore a penalty.
    The only submarine hit currently punishable is one "at or below the knee's", and in any reasonable "hearing", that's the first thing that needs to be addressed.
     
    Referee's can call it where they want, and it's a judgement call, it stands.  suspension though...whole different animal.  Everything is up for discussion, same as Lucic's miconduct had the league not rescinded and the B's had to appeal. 
     

Share