The Phaneuf Incident

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

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    Interesting that a lot of Leaf fans are calling Phaneuf just dumb. I mean how far away did he come too make the hit on a delayed penalty. Hopefully Celine Dion will be back when the Lerfs play the Bruins and he gets a contract extension, it's best for the the division.

     

    Oh one more thing, Toronto is stuck with the whole Clarkson contract. No buyout LoL

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

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting that a lot of Leaf fans are calling Phaneuf just dumb. I mean how far away did he come too make the hit on a delayed penalty. Hopefully Celine Dion will be back when the Lerfs play the Bruins and he gets a contract extension, it's best for the the division.

     

    Oh one more thing, Toronto is stuck with the whole Clarkson contract. No buyout LoL

    [/QUOTE]

    I hope they sign Celine for 8 long years at the max money and the Clarkson contract is hysterical!

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sobchack. Show Sobchack's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to stan17's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If you want to take hits like this from the game start clipping guys w/ automatic 10 gm suspensions and go from there. 2 or 3 gms is no deterrent.

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed.  If they don't up the # of games, then the MORE effective deterrent is stiffer fines.  If you fine these guys the equivalent of a parking ticket in their income world (like they do in the NFL), this is going to keep happening.  

    These guys are ultimately mercenaries; they play for money, as is their right.  Hit them were it counts. Stick Phaneuf for over $200K on a $5.5M salary, you'll see how quickly this stuff stops.  The NHLPA wouldn't protest because it's member-on-member, esp. if the fine money goes into a player friendly pool.

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

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Where is the outrage for the Clarkson slash? 

    People get upset that dirty plays which don't end in major injury don't get calls, yet Dupuis on Kelly has it's own thread while I'm the only one talking about the Clarkson two handed chop!

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess because we see it all the time and usually it's just a big welt, not a broken limb. 

    You are right, there were 2 distinct penalties on the same guy, same play. At best, one game penalty. Should be 3 minimum.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from perrysound. Show perrysound's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Miller must feel a little bad that no one on the team went after Phaneuf.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I got to think all Bruins are gun-shy on retaliation right now. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Dion Phaneuf, throws a dirty hit. Had plenty of time to stop or let up, instead he seems to lunge himself forward into Miller.

    [/QUOTE]

    And to be very clear for those who don't understand hockey or checking in hockey:

    Lunging forward isn't a penalty.  People were calling Orpik's hit dirty because he lunged forward.  That's not dirty.  However, in this case, it does show intent.  (There was never a question of intent on the Orpik hit.)

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard to climb inside of the player's head to establish intent.  Orpik clearly was looking to destroy Eriksson, he has a histroy of throwing these big hits.  That said, it's not illegal to throw a green-light hit on a guy, Boychuk does it too.  New rules say if you hit the guy in the head, it's reckless and suspension worthy.  If Orpik caught Eriksson's head, it should be a suspension. 

    Pacioretty and Phaneuf hits were also reckless.  Players in vulnerable positions that were smoked.  Given the score and situation, one could see a little more "intent" on the Phaneuf hit.

    In the end, ST getting suspended has little to no impact on the on-ice performance of the team for the next several weeks, actually might help them.  I object to the awful on-ice officiating and the lack of consistency for administering supplemental discipline. 

    I agree that if Chara, Lucic or Marchand delivered; Orpik hit, Pacioretty hit, Neal hit or Phaneuf hit, the book would be thrown at them.  I think they know it too, and think it impacts how they play on the ice sometimes.  When ST gets his lengthy suspension, I worry that it will impact how they back each other up. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    Toronto's Phaneuf to have hearing for hit

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=695094&navid=nhl:topheads

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Hard to climb inside of the player's head to establish intent.

    [/QUOTE]

    It is, but when you see a guy go from slowing down to gliding and lunging forward, it would be difficult to believe him if he said it was unintentional.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Hard to climb inside of the player's head to establish intent.

    [/QUOTE]

    It is, but when you see a guy go from slowing down to gliding and lunging forward, it would be difficult to believe him if he said it was unintentional.

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Hard to climb inside of the player's head to establish intent.

    [/QUOTE]

    It is, but when you see a guy go from slowing down to gliding and lunging forward, it would be difficult to believe him if he said it was unintentional.

    [/QUOTE]


    And you said Thornton is a piece of garbage ? See, Orpik could of protected himself...even after he went down he could of fought back if he wasn't a giant pittpuzzy. Miller had no such chance. That is the ultimate skumbag punk move. So - the ref can handle it ? the NHL ? NOT A CHANCE. The next time Dion's ugly punk azz hits the ice, I'd be thrilled with a nice slew foot and a quick knockout.

    Then maybe next time that dirtbag, and the next, thinks twice. Does it suk - yep. But some meaningless 3 game suspension ain't gettin it done. So open season on anybody who headshots the spoked B.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    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.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do think Orpik wanted to blow Eriksson up.  That's what big hits are all about.  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, as 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.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    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.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do think Orpik wanted to blow Eriksson up.  That's what big hits are all about.  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, as 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.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fair, and I agree.  If Orpik's hit "caught" chin/head it was incidental, reckless nonetheless.  Phaneuf sees numbers he can't make that hit, nothing but reckless.

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

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    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.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do think Orpik wanted to blow Eriksson up.  That's what big hits are all about.  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, as 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.

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Hard to climb inside of the player's head to establish intent.

    [/QUOTE]

    It is, but when you see a guy go from slowing down to gliding and lunging forward, it would be difficult to believe him if he said it was unintentional.

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Of course he was trying to destroy eriksson. Every hit I threw I was trying to hurt the opponent, just within the rules. There's nothing wrong with trying to destroy a guy. I think Orpik's hit was slightly otuside the rules, that's the problem. 

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: The Phaneuf Incident

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Has NAS defended this one too? LMAO

    This has got to stop.   B's may need to bring up a goon from Providence and start laying down the hammer. Stinks McQuaid isn't healthy enough, because he's perfect for these serial killer type beatdowns.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why is McQuaid perfect for this?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share