Three Games for Winchester

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

    Three Games for Winchester

    I think Shanny got this one right

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    Count me pleasantly surprised.

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=60&id=479923&lang=en

    I didn't see anywhere that Winchester had a history of other infractions. So the dart board said three.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    Glad it didn't seem to do any damage, but it is about as clear an elbow to the head as you can get.  About right, I guess

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    No harm, no foul?  What happened to punish the act not the result?  If that was John Scott, down to the smallest detail, there'd be a mob calling for his blood.

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    No call on the ice for this, right?  Good job guys.

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:[QUOTE]

    No call on the ice for this, right?  Good job guys.[/QUOTE]


    Good thing there are four zebras out there!

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    The NHL should have given him a pass on that flagrant elbow to the head with both skates off the ice.

    I mean didn't Greg Campbell punish him enough by administering "frontier justice". Hey Greg I'm begging you to not fight any more - you're embarrassing yourself and the team. You suck at it, PLEASE STOP. Another putrid display of turning the other cheek by this team and this coach. If that episode followed by the Thornton staged fight didn't make you sick to witness... ahh f it

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to JWensink's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The NHL should have given him a pass on that flagrant elbow to the head with both skates off the ice.

    I mean didn't Greg Campbell punish him enough by administering "frontier justice". Hey Greg I'm begging you to not fight any more - you're embarrassing yourself and the team. You suck at it, PLEASE STOP. Another putrid display of turning the other cheek by this team and this coach. If that episode followed by the Thornton staged fight didn't make you sick to witness... ahh f it

    [/QUOTE]

    I'll second the motion that Campbell keep his gloves on.

    Now, out of curiousity: what reaction would you have liked to see?

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester


    I dont care if he isn't a good fighter I still like to see him go once in awhile, especially when it's a light weight that needed to be 'disciplined'.
    It's part of what makes them a great team, "... and one for all"

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    I'm glad Thornton fought Matt Cooke.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad McQuaid fought John Scott.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad Campbell fought Jesse Winchester.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    I have to admit, I thought he would get one game, as much as I hated the hit, especially the leaving the feet. No history, no injury and no penalty.

    So the last two cases (have I missed any?) Scott and Winchester, both with no history get more than expected (by me atleast)

    Any chance Shanny might be upping the games slowly here?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

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

    I'm glad Thornton fought Matt Cooke.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad McQuaid fought John Scott.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad Campbell fought Jesse Winchester.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    [/QUOTE]


    Got me thinking. Is any player afraid of another player these days? Years ago there seemed to me a legit fear of a Schultz, Semenko,Kocur,Probert etc..Those guys could get dirty on you and give you a beating.

    Does Marchand really fear George Parros? You know, the George Parros who always gives the buddy tap to a guy after they are seperated. If Parros ever went after Marchand, he could just turtle and let his equipment, helmet and face shield take the brunt.

    I think the fear of the enforcer is pretty much outdated thinking.

    If I'm Marchand, the fact that George Parros is on the other bench doesnt change my game a bit. Whats the worst he can do to me?

     

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    I'm glad Thornton fought Matt Cooke.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad McQuaid fought John Scott.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad Campbell fought Jesse Winchester.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    [/QUOTE]


    Got me thinking. Is any player afraid of another player these days? Years ago there seemed to me a legit fear of a Schultz, Semenko,Kocur,Probert etc..Those guys could get dirty on you and give you a beating.

    Does Marchand really fear George Parros? You know, the George Parros who always gives the buddy tap to a guy after they are seperated. If Parros ever went after Marchand, he could just turtle and let his equipment, helmet and face shield take the brunt.

    I think the fear of the enforcer is pretty much outdated thinking.

    If I'm Marchand, the fact that George Parros is on the other bench doesnt change my game a bit. Whats the worst he can do to me?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I'm pretty sure Braden Holtby is afraid of Ray Emery.

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    while i hate including soxfan in a discussion. i'm pretty sure everyone is afraid of ray emery. 

     

    the enforcer is a thing of the past. fighting still has a place. when two guys really hate each other, they should be able to fight. please place number 22 on waivers. 

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to DrCC's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JWensink's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The NHL should have given him a pass on that flagrant elbow to the head with both skates off the ice.

    I mean didn't Greg Campbell punish him enough by administering "frontier justice". Hey Greg I'm begging you to not fight any more - you're embarrassing yourself and the team. You suck at it, PLEASE STOP. Another putrid display of turning the other cheek by this team and this coach. If that episode followed by the Thornton staged fight didn't make you sick to witness... ahh f it

    [/QUOTE]

    I'll second the motion that Campbell keep his gloves on.

    Now, out of curiousity: what reaction would you have liked to see?

    [/QUOTE]


    Here's the thing Doc - What Campbell did meant nothing physically and even less emotionally. So what would be appropriate imo? The 1st Bruin team mate of Chris Kelly within arms length of Winchester to do something.

    In case you didn't see it Julien commented on the Scott hit recently, and it was shown on the B's pregame show. I'm sure many saw it, but nobody commented on it. He said "that he would never send a player out to go after someone" (I take no issue with that statement)...Then he went on to say " that if a player took it upon themselves to do so - he wouldn't allow it" So you see, if there seems to be a lack of emotional responses going on to blatant attempts to injure - there you have it.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    I think Claude appreciates the reactions of Campbell and McQ as being part of the game. Why he retains Thornton is not his best decision. Thorny has always given his best, but he has never had the speed or skills for today's NHL. In fact many of his earliest comments centered on "If I couldn't fight, I wouldn't be here". It's time to applaud his contributions and have him retire.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

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

    I'm glad Thornton fought Matt Cooke.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad McQuaid fought John Scott.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    I'm glad Campbell fought Jesse Winchester.  It showed that you cannot "take liberties" with Bruins players.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thank You NAS! Everybody thinks you need to win a fight to have an impact! They totally miss the whole point of what a "hockey fight is " it's NEVER for the fans! No matter how much we want it to be! Campbell was put out there in place of Kelly for that shift for a reason. And he did his job! That's why he's a Bruin & still a warrior in my books! Atta boy Campbell - keep up the good work! 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hangnail's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think Shanny got this one right

    [/QUOTE]

    So, 3 games for a bang/bang elbow play and 7 for gliding across the ice with seconds of premeditated and malicious intent?

    Shanahan the tool can't get out his own contradictory way.

    [/QUOTE]

    John Scott got 7 games and will cost him just shy of $27,000.

    When you get to work on Monday, run across the floor and and stick your elbow out at some poor unsuspecting guys head.

    Then let me know how much you have to pay.

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    ^rusty?

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    30 games? 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ^rusty?

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hangnail's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think Shanny got this one right

    [/QUOTE]

    So, 3 games for a bang/bang elbow play and 7 for gliding across the ice with seconds of premeditated and malicious intent?

    Shanahan the tool can't get out his own contradictory way.

    [/QUOTE]

    John Scott got 7 games and will cost him just shy of $27,000.

    When you get to work on Monday, run across the floor and and stick your elbow out at some poor unsuspecting guys head.

    Then let me know how much you have to pay.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not enough, obviously.  The NHL will be sitting on as many lawsuits as the NFL was sitting on or will sit on by showing negligence in the game like that.

    Should have been 30 games and 100K fine for Scott.  If Bettman the little bald worm and Shananhan, that pompouse, whiny, overrated loser were serious about getting head shots out of the game, there would be no 7 game suspensions for what Bouillon, Cooke or Scott kind of hits.

    7 games is 2 weeks of action. Big deal.

    Stop defending Bettman and Shanahan. Eash is a walking hypcrite. I don't know what's worse here...The Jacobs Lovers or Bettman/Shanahan Lovers.

    [/QUOTE]

    Again, how am I defending Bettman/Shanahan? I've said numerous times, a hit like the one by Scott and Cooke should result in more games, epecially if the other player is out for an extended period of time. I've also said the punishment system for these hits needs to be overhauled, but they can't do it during the season when a Bruin gets hit. It's called common sense. Why don't you get that?

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    If Rusty thinks Scott should have gotten 30 games and Winchester's elbow was worse, how many games should Winchester have gotten? 

    45 maybe?

    The season?

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

    Re: Three Games for Winchester

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't think you can get much worse than a Bouillon, Cooke or Scott kind of malicious head hit like that, Handy.  So, 30 should be for first time offenders, 60 for a second offense and banned from the league for a 3rd.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you had half a brain, you'd list Randy Jones.

    No league hands out punishment like this, and there's no way the NHLPA approves it.

    I would, however, stand behind you getting banned permanently after the third banning.

    Thanks for coming over there to get mocked, however.

    30 games for an elbow.  What a dope.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share