Old School Hockey Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Sorry, but since I was a pee wee hockey player, there were two basic fundamentals to playing the game: Keep you head up and your stick on the ice. I am just completely floored at how many people think that was a cheap shot and not a hockey play. Not that matter much, but Backes is FAR from an angel and would have made the exact same hit given the opportunity. I feel like I am arguing the Lindros - Stevens hit all over again, but from the opposite side. The difference in this is that there was ZERO flying elbow / forearm shiver. It was a shoulder. Backes is the same height as Seabrook. Shame on him for not knowing he was in a playoff game and looking at his skates coming from behind his net with the puck. I take / make that hit every day of the week. I don't direct this to you personally, but for all that thinks this is a bad hit, go watch baseball (sorry TFG), table tennis or any other sport that is non-contact.I have a solution! Take off the armor that players are wearing. Make hurt if you choose to make the big thundering hit. Not a popular opinion but effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0e Th0rnton Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 The bush comments from Keith after the hit were just that! Bush league!Wakey Wakey BackesAnd your name is old school Hockey? Your comments seem to be very new school Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Take off the armor that players are wearing. Make hurt if you choose to make the big thundering hit. Not a popular opinion but effective. that really is the solution. Or at least part of it. These guys are wearing bullet-proof helmets and visors now and they feel indestructible - and who can blame them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Hockey Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 And your name is old school Hockey? Your comments seem to be very new schoolIn my day when you hurt someone you looked to see if they were ok. That's called respect. A lost art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Sorry, but since I was a pee wee hockey player, there were two basic fundamentals to playing the game: Keep you head up and your stick on the ice. I am just completely floored at how many people think that was a cheap shot and not a hockey play. Not that matter much, but Backes is FAR from an angel and would have made the exact same hit given the opportunity. I feel like I am arguing the Lindros - Stevens hit all over again, but from the opposite side. The difference in this is that there was ZERO flying elbow / forearm shiver. It was a shoulder. Backes is the same height as Seabrook. Shame on him for not knowing he was in a playoff game and looking at his skates coming from behind his net with the puck. I take / make that hit every day of the week. I don't direct this to you personally, but for all that thinks this is a bad hit, go watch baseball (sorry TFG), table tennis or any other sport that is non-contact. You realize who you are talking to eh? Anybody who knows me on this forum knows that I'm no shrinking violet. people think that was a cheap shot and not a hockey play.I never called it that. It used to be a hockey play, still is I guess, but he targeted the head. It's also borderline intereference and/or charging, both of which are penalties (so not hockey plays?) Backes is FAR from an angel and would have made the exact same hit given the opportunity.I don't see how that is relevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talloola Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 yes, it is the size of todays players, and the speed and intensity with which they are playing. there will be this type of incident happen, can't be helped, and it doesn't solve anything to side with either player. but seabrook could have accomplished what he wanted to accomplish with half the hit, all he has to do is prevent theplayer from doing what he wants to do, and that doesn't take a hit with that power. my husband, who played hockey and coached for years, and i worked closely with him, talk about these things all thetime, the hit just didn't have to be that hard, even if it was clean. the rules are now there to protect the head area, that is very important, so if the person being hit made a mistake, and theplayer doing the hit, was travelling into him at a more controlled speed, he then can adjust his hit. it does nothing to help protect serious head injuries by just saying it was the fault of the person who was hit.we see it all the time, eg. the hit on toews a few weeks ago caused injury, apparantly a clean hit, but had orpik controlled thepower behind that hit he would have accomplished his task, and toews would not have been injured, that hit was far too hard forthe situation, no need for it. just take the player out, don't try to injure him, and orpik is good for those 'i'm going to hurt you' typeof hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samifan Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Per TSN, Seabrook gets 3 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Video from the league. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=715650 Considering that the old rule of thumb was approximately 2 playoff games = one regular season game,... Seabrook really got the book here in his first offense. Yet I agree with the call and the suspension. We don't want the playoffs to be about taking out the best players on the ice with deliberate head shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Think about this...Seabrook bends his knees and his shoulder hits Backes' shoulder, we're not having this discussion. Backes didn't suddenly duck. Seabrook elevates his shoulder into Backes' head. That's intentional and dirty.I've been a Pens fan for 35 years. We have James Neal. I know dirty. . That's dirty. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 You realize who you are talking to eh? Anybody who knows me on this forum knows that I'm no shrinking violet. 90% of my post was not directed at you, just I choose to expound on your post. I never called it that. It used to be a hockey play, still is I guess, but he targeted the head. It's also borderline intereference and/or charging, both of which are penalties (so not hockey plays?) What Kronwall does is usually 10 times worse in regards to interference / charging. It used to be that you have a 3 second rule / 3 step rule on hitting an opposing player after the player played the puck. Not an official rule, but an unwritten rule. I don't see how that is relevant It really is not relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Midsection, not let me hit you in the gonads hard enough that they protrude from your ears.........and that was the 2nd time Lucic has done that to someone in the last 2 weeks......I laughed at his Zac Rinaldo Defense..."I don't know what I was thinking It was as much his fault as it was mine." Fixed. And Hartnells shot was a heckuva alot harder than Lucic's. Hartnell practically impaled the guy. Midsection. Nads. Still a BS cheap play by a BS cheap player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 And Hartnells shot was a heckuva alot harder than Lucic's. Hartnell practically impaled the guy. please tell me you're not talking about that "spearing" from G81. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 please tell me you're not talking about that "spearing" from G81. Yes. That spearing. Please tell me you aren't going to try and defend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Fixed. And Hartnells shot was a heckuva alot harder than Lucic's. Hartnell practically impaled the guy. Midsection. Nads. Still a BS cheap play by a BS cheap player.how's this relate to the Seabrook- Backes hit again ? I would really enjoy your perspective a lot more if you took less time railing against injustices performed by Flyers be they real or perceived, and kept to the topic at hand, this is i believe the 2nd place this weekend where the group at large is talking about series and games that have nothing to do with the Pens or the Flyers . this topic and the "lucic love tap" thread devolve from an actual decent conversation about the game's violence into ...you talking about what a douche you think Scott Hartnell is ... you know what . Noted. I hate your team too. and I once saw Chris Kunitz kick a lab puppy let me send you the youtube link. what's your take on this actual event ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yave1964 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 What Kronwall does is usually 10 times worse in regards to interference / charging. It used to be that you have a 3 second rule / 3 step rule on hitting an opposing player after the player played the puck. Not an official rule, but an unwritten rule. You do realize that since Lidstrom retired two years ago that Kronwall has turned into a pussycat don't you? it never fails to amaze me that people continue to bring his name up...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 how's this relate to the Seabrook- Backes hit again ? I would really enjoy your perspective a lot more if you took less time railing against injustices performed by Flyers be they real or perceived, and kept to the topic at hand, this is i believe the 2nd place this weekend where the group at large is talking about series and games that have nothing to do with the Pens or the Flyers . this topic and the "lucic love tap" thread devolve from an actual decent conversation about the game's violence into ...you talking about what a douche you think Scott Hartnell is ... you know what . Noted. I hate your team too. and I once saw Chris Kunitz kick a lab puppy let me send you the youtube link. what's your take on this actual event ? So I make a toungue-and-cheek comment about Hartnell's recent spearing incident and look what happens. If you have a problem with such off topic comments then you are in the wrong forum. Check out any number of threads in the Pens' section and you'll find the same...a lot more of it, too. Try the thread about the Milbury comments after the Orpik hit on Toews. Without really looking I found a few similar "tongue-and-cheek" comments by Flyers fans about James Neal. What did James Neal have to do with the Orpik hit? And nothing gets railed on in this forum more than incidents involving the Pens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 @B21 I didn't really interpret the separate instances of "Hartnell's a douche" baiting as "tongue-in-cheek". I interpreted those posts as deliberate attempts to derail the topic at hand. In the Lucic thread and this one i don't see where the Hartnell incident ...is it even an incident ? is apropos of anything.well maybe the Lucic thread because Hartnell used his stick too... I didn't view those as off-handed remarks to make a greater point or even punctuate a point with a barb but rather what has become your typical trope about how no one likes your team and the Flyers are just as bad...no worse actually... here's a link that proves it . i'd prefer you save that junk for when our teams are playing so then it will be fresh . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Clueless Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) Clean hit. Backes turned at the last minute, and thus deserved a concussion-inducing illegal flying elbow to the face. Deuces. Edited April 21, 2014 by Commander Clueless 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 @B21 I didn't really interpret the separate instances of "Hartnell's a douche" baiting as "tongue-in-cheek". I interpreted those posts as deliberate attempts to derail the topic at hand. In the Lucic thread and this one i don't see where the Hartnell incident ...is it even an incident ? is apropos of anything.well maybe the Lucic thread because Hartnell used his stick too... I didn't view those as off-handed remarks to make a greater point or even punctuate a point with a barb but rather what has become your typical trope about how no one likes your team and the Flyers are just as bad...no worse actually... here's a link that proves it . i'd prefer you save that junk for when our teams are playing so then it will be fresh . The original post? Tongue-and-cheek for sure. If that leads somewhere else? So be it. Happens all the time. It was a deliberate attempt to point out that Hartnell recently had his own Lucic-like spearing incident - and I was curious if the poster (who I think is a good one) thought Hartnell should have been suspended too (he felt Lucic should have been). Thats not "apropo"? Both speared (recently). Both have prior incidents on their resumes. Both fined $5,000. Again - happens all the time to Pens fans here. We get involved in a discussion about whether a certain his is dirty/not dirty or suspendable/not suspendable and like day follows night there will be some random reference to something a Penguin did in the months (or years) prior. I already gave you a few examples from that Milbury thread. Apparently someone dragged Kronwall into this thread as I saw a Wings fan defending him (not tracking that history). But now a Pens fan throws a half-serious "barb" at a Flyers fan about something that same Flyers fan has already acknowledged is basically a cheap, dirty play and you see the response (your own). I guess the Pens are only supposed to take it and not dish it out from time to time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I guess the Pens are only supposed to take it and not dish it out from time to time. And don't forget to say, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?", while you're at it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 And don't forget to say, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?", while you're at it. Well no one told me to assume the position. Or my Delta Tau Chi name for that matter! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The original post? Tongue-and-cheek for sure. If that leads somewhere else? So be it. Happens all the time. It was a deliberate attempt to point out that Hartnell recently had his own Lucic-like spearing incident - and I was curious if the poster (who I think is a good one) thought Hartnell should have been suspended too (he felt Lucic should have been). Thats not "apropo"? Both speared (recently). Both have prior incidents on their resumes. Both fined $5,000. Again - happens all the time to Pens fans here. We get involved in a discussion about whether a certain his is dirty/not dirty or suspendable/not suspendable and like day follows night there will be some random reference to something a Penguin did in the months (or years) prior. I already gave you a few examples from that Milbury thread. Apparently someone dragged Kronwall into this thread as I saw a Wings fan defending him (not tracking that history). But now a Pens fan throws a half-serious "barb" at a Flyers fan about something that same Flyers fan has already acknowledged is basically a cheap, dirty play and you see the response (your own). I guess the Pens are only supposed to take it and not dish it out from time to time. I call bs. (oh and Cooke is still a douchebag) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Or my Delta Tau Chi name for that matter! Well, that's easy...Your Delta Chi name is...."FLOPPER". HE HE HE.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Well, that's easy...Your Delta Chi name is...."FLOPPER". HE HE HE.... I actually got a chuckle out of that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I call bs. (oh and Cooke is still a douchebag) Agree. He's on the Wild now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.