OV hit on Campbell

[Taro T]

"When a player or goalkeeper has played in 41 consecutive regular League games without being assessed a boarding and/or a checking from behind major and a game misconduct according to Rules 42 and 44, he will have the previous game misconduct penalties removed from his current record."

 

http://www.nhl.com/i...ge.htm?id=26306

Thanks for the info. I stand corrected.

 

The rulebook DOES have a reset button.

[Stoner]

Thanks for the info. I stand corrected.

 

The rulebook DOES have a reset button.

 

Check one off the old bucket list. Catching Taro T in a goof. :)

[Stoner]

Back to the Crosby play. Brutal. But no penalty? Again, a real disconnect from reality for the old school refs.

[shrader]

Back to the Crosby play. Brutal. But no penalty? Again, a real disconnect from reality for the old school refs.

 

It's really awkward and could easily pass as Downie losing his balance. I'm still not completely sure what I saw in that video.

[carpandean]

It's really awkward and could easily pass as Downie losing his balance. I'm still not completely sure what I saw in that video.

Watch the shot from behind at around the 0:50 mark and tell me that Downie has any reason to lift his leg up like that. That doesn't look like losing balance, at all. It's a very deliberate motion. Then, he just falls full weight on the ankle. You are welcome to have doubts, of course, but I don't.

[matter2003]

Surprised no one is talking about Downie's attempt to injure on Crosby.

 

Crosby wears a skirt. What did Downie do, take his purse and beat him over the head with it?

[carpandean]

Crosby wears a skirt. What did Downie do, take his purse and beat him over the head with it?

Funny ... but what he did was try to end his season. ;)

[DR HOLLIDAY]

If Campbell had gotten up uninjured, it wouldv'e been zero.

 

Little chance that was gonna happen considering the force of impact.

[inkman]

Crosby wears a skirt. What did Downie do, take his purse and beat him over the head with it?

If Sid wears a skirt then 3/4 of the Sabres wear pink leotards with frillies and lace gloves. :rolleyes:

[deluca67]

If Sid wears a skirt then 3/4 of the Sabres wear pink leotards with frillies and lace gloves. :rolleyes:

100% agreed. To go a step further, the Sabres don't have one player who plays with his intensity. :thumbsup:

[shrader]

Watch the shot from behind at around the 0:50 mark and tell me that Downie has any reason to lift his leg up like that. That doesn't look like losing balance, at all. It's a very deliberate motion. Then, he just falls full weight on the ankle. You are welcome to have doubts, of course, but I don't.

 

It just doesn't add up. The leg rise was a bit awkward, but that's going to happen from time to time with two players in close contact like that. I just can't see how that would be an attempt to take him out. If he wanted to do that, straight out falling into his leg probably would've been more effective instead of first lifting Crosby's leg off the ice. An attempted slew foot I can buy, but I get the feeling that the fall was accidental. These guys tend to take a far more controlled approach when they try to take someone out.

[nobody]

Downie seems to have wrapped his leg around Crosby's leg on purpose in my opinion. Was he trying to injure him or just take out of the play I don't know.

[SwampD]

It just doesn't add up. The leg rise was a bit awkward, but that's going to happen from time to time with two players in close contact like that. I just can't see how that would be an attempt to take him out. If he wanted to do that, straight out falling into his leg probably would've been more effective instead of first lifting Crosby's leg off the ice. An attempted slew foot I can buy, but I get the feeling that the fall was accidental. These guys tend to take a far more controlled approach when they try to take someone out.

Stamkos was shoved dangerously into the corner not 10 seconds before that play. Looked to me like it was a little of that self policing everyone is talking about, "Take out our 1st overall pick? We'll take out yours."

[shrader]

Stamkos was shoved dangerously into the corner not 10 seconds before that play. Looked to me like it was a little of that self policing everyone is talking about, "Take out our 1st overall pick? We'll take out yours."

 

Now that's an important little detail that is always left out with these "check out this dirty hit" videos that are so popular lately.

[gomper]

Swamp D makes a great point. Kennedy launches Stamkos head first into the boards just seconds before. For me, it's a tough call whether Downie intended to break Crosby's leg or was just trying to wall him off. If it was intentional he gets points for creativity. Image though, the firestorm that would have erupted if he did take out Crosby and used the "self policing" reasoning.

[carpandean]

Now that's an important little detail that is always left out with these "check out this dirty hit" videos that are so popular lately.

It's at about the 0:08 mark of the video that I posted. I should have pointed it out, but thought people would see it.

[Stoner]

Now that's an important little detail that is always left out with these "check out this dirty hit" videos that are so popular lately.

 

Why is it important?

[nobody]

Why is it important?

 

An eye for an eye. You know old testament - you're time period.

[SwampD]

Why is it important?

I think it's important because in this case, this guy is painted as a villain for doing exactly what we all want players to do, police themselves. But why should they have to? The league should do it, but they won't. They would rather put the onus on the players.

[shrader]

It's at about the 0:08 mark of the video that I posted. I should have pointed it out, but thought people would see it.

 

I originally saw a shorter clip than what you posted, from a different broadcast.

 

Why is it important?

 

In the big picture, it's not. But it may give you reason to think that it was indeed a revenge move. As just a single play, to me, what Downie did looks accidental. Knowing that Stamkos was run previously does put a little doubt in my mind.

[Stoner]

In the big picture, it's not. But it may give you reason to think that it was indeed a revenge move. As just a single play, to me, what Downie did looks accidental. Knowing that Stamkos was run previously does put a little doubt in my mind.

 

I gotcha. Good point. I thought you might be suggesting that what happened beforehand should argue against a penalty/suspension, and that surprised me.

[Stoner]

I think it's important because in this case, this guy is painted as a villain for doing exactly what we all want players to do, police themselves. But why should they have to? The league should do it, but they won't. They would rather put the onus on the players.

 

But is that how "policing" the game used to work? Was a cheap shot answered by another cheap shot? I would think it was answered by a tap on the shoulder, and two guys go, and no penalty for the instigator.

[nobody]

But is that how "policing" the game used to work? Was a cheap shot answered by another cheap shot? I would think it was answered by a tap on the shoulder, and two guys go, and no penalty for the instigator.

 

 

The "cheap shoter" would be pummeled by whoever was closest by and then everyone else on the ice would square up and start fighting. Then if you were lucky the benches would clear.

[carpandean]

But is that how "policing" the game used to work? Was a cheap shot answered by another cheap shot? I would think it was answered by a tap on the shoulder, and two guys go, and no penalty for the instigator.

I don't know. I hear an awful lot like "if they ran our goalie, we would have run theirs" or "you wouldn't cheap shot a star, because you knew the next shift they'd take a shot on your star." I always thought that was a key part of the code.

[Eleven]

Wisniewski on Seabrook last night was disgusting.