SwampD

I don’t think the resulting injury should ever play a part in punishment, ever. A penalty is a penalty because it’s a penalty, not because a guy might have a prior injury history.

And if he didn’t already have a cracked peanut, we wouldn’t even be talking about this.

Again, I didn’t think it was a charge.

See edit. So, now we are asking players to consider the injury history of the player they are about to check, and dial in the force of those hits accordingly? Basing the punishment on the result is absolutely ridiculous.

He played later in the series, no? EDIT: sorry, he didn’t return.

I’m guessing this is your first summer on SabreSpace.

Rome’s hit on Horton in the finals. Another BS call. If the jerseys were reversed, all the announcers would be pleasuring themselves while touting “big bad Bruin hockey...”

Again, I’ll wait to see if he’s really hurt. Remember the Bruin that got carted of the ice leading to a suspension for the Vancouver player, only to play in the very next game?

I just did a needle drop on two random games and found instances of a guy making a hit directly after skating the length of the ice on a back check. I didn’t really even have to try. You don’t like the hit. I do. You think he should be suspended. I don’t. I’m fine with that. What will be interesting is if it becomes a distraction for Montreal, in which case it will have been a good hockey play.

https://www.nhl.com/tv Pick any game. 😂

This is Bs. Guys get hit after skating the entire length Ice all the time. Skating the length of the ice is how a player backchecks. They do it every shift. He was backchecking. He was late to stop the goal. Then he hit him. It was the severity of the hit that is the is the issue here (and only because he got hurt), not the distance traveled, IMO.

He stopped skating at the top of the circle. Charging was a bs call. If you are not allowed to hit that hard, which it looks like you are not, the call should have been roughing. They didn’t even get that right.

Absolutely. No one disagrees with this. Good on him for thinking about the series. The question is, would there be a suspension if the guy didn’t get hurt? If the answer is no, then there should be no suspension. Punishment based on the result is one of the most ridiculous things the NHL does.

I’m drunk.

Booooooo!!!!!

I hope his goes til 4am.

Sure it does. It was a Boston player, so it was a penalty. Change the jerseys and it’s just another zone entry interference that doesn’t get called.

That hit wasn’t even close to being dirty. It was a completely routine play where a guy got hurt. bad example.

So, you say favoritism isn’t real, the give an example of it. k

Find a flaw, then find one clip that shows it. Ugh.

The NHL is so biased it makes me want to puke. if that was a Bruin or Lightning player that made that hit, they would be touting what a great hockey play it was and that’s just the playoffs,... and blah blah blah,... it’s just unfortunate that he he got hurt. ***** off you disingenuous bunch of sycophants.

My exact thought. Curtis has an agenda.

But because the NHL is stupid, the result matters, and he was injured (maybe. We’ve seen gamesmanship before). So he will probably get a game.

He didn’t skate the length of the ice to hit him. That’s just BS. He skated the length of the ice to stop him from scoring. He didn’t get there in time. He then hit him. There is a difference. If he didn’t get injured we wouldn’t even be talking about this and there wouldn’t even have been a penalty. God bless the NHL.

I really didn’t think that hit was that big of a deal. Just because a guy gets hurt, doesn’t mean that the play was bad. I ***** hate that like everything else in the NHL, the outcome matters more than the intent. If he just got up after that hit and wasn’t injured, would there be this outcry? i guess he should have just let him score and say, “hey buddy, great game.”