Re: The Phaneuf Incident
posted at 12/9/2013 9:19 AM EST
In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
In response to Crowls2424's comment:
I do think Orpik wanted to blow Eriksson up. That's what big hits are all about.
You don't think Orpik intends to destroy Eriksson? I do. I also think that is part of the game.
Are you suggesting that Phaneuf's intent is to injure Miller? I don't. I also think he is looking to destroy Miller, just uglier and more dangerous because he is facing the boards.
Sorry if that sounds like I am splitting hairs. Just think today's NHL needs to focus on dangerous/reckless as compared to trying to establish intent. I will never forget Shanahan using the intent explanation on the Marchand/Salo suspension.
If Orpik's hit connects on the chin/head, it is reckless.
Pacioretty hitting Boychuk from behind is reckless.
Phaneuf hitting Miller from behind is reckless.
I don't know what happened around here, but some of these posts are nuts. People are saying Orpik should be chastised for trying to hurt Eriksson. OF COURSE HE WAS.
That's part of hockey! The stupid statements have Orpik targeting the head, a
s if you can come full steam in Destructo-mode to hit a moving target and intentionally put a shoulder to the head. That was unfortunate.
I'm not suggesting Phaneuf intended on hurting Miller. I'm suggesting that the hit itself is intentional. Why he did it, I have no idea. That's between him and God.
Crowls post is bang on. NAS's point makes several assumptions, just like the league does. Bear Bryant used to say, you knock em down, then you help em up. Yvon Durelle said, "I'd never hurt the guy, but i'm gonna knock em out". Everything about sport is an oxymoron. When injuries dominate the headlines more than the games do....time to wake up.
Virtually nobody intends to injure. They love to inflict a bit of pain...knock the wind out of each other, but nobody wants to seriously hurt another player, nor do they often "target the head" in which to do so. NAS's point on the laughability of the moving target applies in "most" situations.
Bringing intent into the equation is stupid. That doesn't nail anything down, but rather encourages more endless debate. The rules package needs to be adjsted so there's little question whether hits that cause serious injury are legal.
The referee's don't know what in fawks going on, and that's been a problem pro hockeys had for decades. Acceptable play isn't dictated by the score or the timeclock in anything else. There's no way 2 refs didn't see Phaneuf, or Orpik, or Marchand or dozens of others. They just choose to ignore, and they do that because indecision is passed down. When the heart and soul of some of this stuff is as nebulous as intent, and targetting, things are just way too vague. Nothing's supposed to be vague about rules in sport.
If someone gets tripped..intent be damned. It's a penalty. Who cares about targetting. ST admits he went over the line. How did he do that? Appears he seriously hurt someone. Does anyone think he...or any of the other league goons have never grabbed someone from behind, knocked em down and cuffed em a couple times? Happens all the time, and they'll never figure they crossed any line, unless the other guy can;t get up. Same with Orpik, and Paille and every other NHLer. It's part of the culture to flatten people, but not to jeopordize their career and more importantly...they're life. How are thses guys supposed to figure that out at game speed. Without substantial change, it's impossible.
When something bad happens, through force, there needs to be accountability. It's nearly an impossible line for the players to walk(without changing the way they play the game) but it needs to happen.
Not just the league, a big part of the problem lies with the players. They all want it to stay as it is, yet they want change.
Take away the BS. We know Thornton will be suspended, and it will only happen because of perceived injury, and the duration will also be predicated on the actual severity of injury. Next, the league has to figure out a way to penalize the team. That will ensure immediate change. Sean Thornton sitting for a few games will be a blessing, to even many Bruin lovers. Hows that a deterent? Actions that hurt the team, have much more meaning than actions that hurt the player. Imagine how many more penalties there would be, if the offending player merely went to the box, while his team continued to play 5 on 5.
It's really easy to start making some headway. Referee's need to start calling more penalties. Anytime someone is knocked into next week, it's either boarding, or charging. 2 or 5, or any multiple of that. Pretty simple. After that, it's out of the refs jouristiction and the league can do what it wants. Again, it's not that they're missing this stuff, they're just not doing a good job calling it. Things that hurt the team, get everyones attention.