bunomatic Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Bun, you have told me in the past you don't like the Canucks. That is why I said that. But come on, if a Sabre makes that hit I applaud. Sorry, but this is a game for men. That hit was perfect. Not a thing wrong with it. Sorry. Seabrook skated right into it. I too am in Canuck country and they are the best team in this league. They may not win it all but they are the top team by far. I agree they are the most complete team in the league and very well may win it all but that has nothing to do with me believing the torres hit was a headshot. I can separate my feelings about the team ( I happen to like them ) from my personal judgement on the hit. Sorry Rick. I feel it was a headshot. If a Sabre delivered the exact same hit I would have the exact same opinion.
rickshaw Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I've been dreaming of the Vancouver-Buffalo final for years. :beer: It would be my worst nightmare. Born in Vancouver, lived in BC my whole life and been a fan of them forever. But I've also been a Sabre fan since I was 10 years old and want them to win their first Cup. But if they meet in the finals, it will suck for me. I'll probably have to move out for that because I don't want to yell at my wife and kids, cuz make no mistake, I will cheer for the Canucks.
rickshaw Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I agree they are the most complete team in the league and very well may win it all but that has nothing to do with me believing the torres hit was a headshot. I can separate my feelings about the team ( I happen to like them ) from my personal judgement on the hit. Sorry Rick. I feel it was a headshot. If a Sabre delivered the exact same hit I would have the exact same opinion. I like that hit. It's hockey.
bunomatic Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I like that hit. It's hockey. Thats fine. I like good hard nosed hockey too. Those Canucks are a machine this year though. I'm not sure they are stoppable.
rickshaw Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Thats fine. I like good hard nosed hockey too. Those Canucks are a machine this year though. I'm not sure they are stoppable. Don't get me wrong, if the elbow comes up, I have an issue. But he just skated into the area where Seabrook was, and let's be honest. Seabrook has been playing the game long enough to know that someone is coming! I bet if you asked him he'd say it was clean. But I'm all for taking the cheap shots to the head. Elbows, hits into the glass from behind, etc but I just don't think Torres did anything wrong. As for the machine that they are, there is still lots of competition out there and it won't be easy. But for now, I cheer on both my Sabres and the Canucks and cross my fingers they don't meet in the Finals. Let's go Buffalo!
OverPowerYou Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 This series would be a lot closer if the Hawks still had Buttfugly Byfuglien. They are missing his physical presence, especially down low in front of the net. I hope the Canucks sweep this series and stick it to 'em. Don't get me wrong I don't hate Chicago, but I don't like it when teams make it in back to back years. Btw is anyone sick of Detroit always getting matched up with the easiest 1st round opponents? Detroit always seems to catch a break. Phoenix might be the worst playoff team this year.
Two or less Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Canucks are winning it all this year. Kinda too early to tell. While, they have owned the Hawks so far despite the Hawks' top players keeping them on their heals, the Hawks don't exactly have any depth on this squad at forward and they are playing with zero physicality. They had Michael Frolik, Ben Smith and Nick Leddy log a bunch of PP minutes.... just to show you what little depth Vancouver is competing against here. Roberto Luongo is playing great though and was the reason Canucks won this game with his 1st period performance.
SwampD Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Don't get me wrong, if the elbow comes up, I have an issue. But he just skated into the area where Seabrook was, and let's be honest. Seabrook has been playing the game long enough to know that someone is coming! I bet if you asked him he'd say it was clean. But I'm all for taking the cheap shots to the head. Elbows, hits into the glass from behind, etc but I just don't think Torres did anything wrong. As for the machine that they are, there is still lots of competition out there and it won't be easy. But for now, I cheer on both my Sabres and the Canucks and cross my fingers they don't meet in the Finals. Let's go Buffalo! 48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted. I doesn't matter if his elbow didn't come up or if Seabrook should have known. The hit fits all the criteria and the head was the principle point of contact. He will sit. Sorry Rick, rules are rules.
Buffalo Wings Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 2 minute interference call, right? I guess they thought Seabrook didn't play it. If Seabrook played it, it is clean. Hard to tell from this . I thought it was clean. Seabrook just didn't have his head up and was focused on the puck, hence the interference call. I agree on Vancouver looking like the real deal. Just loaded. That team is a machine. I picked the Sharks to come out of the west before the playoffs, but only because of the President's Trophy jinx. Vancouver looks solid all around.
LabattBlue Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Canucks are winning it all this year. I've said it before, if our sister franchise wins the Cup before the Sabres, it will be like getting kicked in the balls.
Weave Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted. I doesn't matter if his elbow didn't come up or if Seabrook should have known. The hit fits all the criteria and the head was the principle point of contact. He will sit. Sorry Rick, rules are rules. I guess the only point of contention from me is whether or not that was a lateral or blind side hit. Wasn't it pretty close to head on? Wouldn't suprise me at all if the league lays down a asuspension here. Even if it doesn't meet the full letter of the rule (lateral hit), because it sure does meet the spirit of the rule. Poor, poor Raffe won't have a job soon if he can't be a human missile.
shrader Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I guess the only point of contention from me is whether or not that was a lateral or blind side hit. Wasn't it pretty close to head on? Wouldn't suprise me at all if the league lays down a asuspension here. Even if it doesn't meet the full letter of the rule (lateral hit), because it sure does meet the spirit of the rule. Poor, poor Raffe won't have a job soon if he can't be a human missile. It's a pretty clear case where a vaguely written rule leads to nothing but trouble.
bunomatic Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Clean hit by Torres in my opinion. Not by todays definition. Was the head not the point of contact?
nobody Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Not by todays definition. Was the head not the point of contact? I saw chest/shoulder area. I'll have to keep looking - where's that super slomo?
shrader Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 OctiFine. I understand it but it doesn't seem right. tradition is tradition Detroit fan ejected and fined for Octopus I'm a little late on the reply to this one, but he was the 6th person to throw one. That seems a bit excessive to me.
darksabre Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 My two cents on the Torres hit is that it was a good clean hit. Seabrook knows this is a hockey game right? And that when he's playing the puck behind the net there MIGHT be a forechecker coming to crush him? If Seabrook is paying attention that hit never happens. I might have called it a Double Minor for Interference. Raffi was anticipating Seabrook playing the puck. Was he planning on crushing him? Oh heck yes. Welcome to the NHL. Huge hits are why people watch this game.
X. Benedict Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted. I doesn't matter if his elbow didn't come up or if Seabrook should have known. The hit fits all the criteria and the head was the principle point of contact. He will sit. Sorry Rick, rules are rules. It wasn't blindside or lateral IMO.
X. Benedict Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I've said it before, if our sister franchise wins the Cup before the Sabres, it will be like getting kicked in the balls. Let's qualify that to your balls. I would love to see Vancouver win it.
Weave Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 No extra punishment for Torres. I am pleasantly suprised.
darksabre Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I am pleasantly suprised. As am I. Let em play. Seabrooke needs to quit whining. He sounds like a little kid who doesn't like it when the other kids take his lunch money.
... Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 No extra punishment for Torres. Score one for good-old-fashioned hockey. Kaleta would have been out of a job if that hit garnered punishment.
korab rules Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 I am pleasantly surprised as well. I just wish someone could explain why the last hit was deemed worthy of 5 minutes, a game misconduct and a four game suspension and this one gets 2 minutes. To me, they are nearly identical hits.
Buffalo Wings Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 As am I. Let em play. Seabrooke needs to quit whining. He sounds like a little kid who doesn't like it when the other kids take his lunch money. What was said after the game last night? I know Queneville was yelling for a 5-minute major right after it happened, but that's par for the course to try and get your team a longer PP (whether or not you think it's deserved). If Seabrook was whining about it, maybe he's just trying to get Torres out for a game just to give his team any advantage they can get? I'm re-thinking any whining going on about the huge hits these days. I don't know if the whiner is just being a baby or if he's just trying to goad the league into giving out punishment and getting under the skin of the opponent.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.