UPDATE AGAIN: Horcout!

Jason Gregor
November 04 2009 11:23AM

The injuries continue for the Oilers, and the latest victim is Shawn Horcoff.

We will get the exact extent of his injury after the skate today, but like I said on my show yesterday and Brownlee wrote yesterday, the Oilers will be without their highest paid forward for the next while.

Some will argue that they won’t miss his five points, -5 rating and his 25 shots. Clearly Horcoff has struggled this season, but no other centre has been solid offensively.

Sam Gagner has had a few good games, Gilbert Brule was good until he got sick and Cogliano has had three good games, but otherwise he has been invisible. One, if not two of them has to step up.

Filling Horcoff’s offensive contributions won’t be hard right now, but one of them needs to be better in the draws, and be ready to consistently face the opposition’s best defencemen. Gagner will have the best chance because he’ll be playing with Dustin Penner and Ales Hemsky. It isn’t a surprise that Gagner and Horcoff’s most productive game this year came playing with those two.

Gagner will be the guy to slide back on to the top line, but if this team is going to start winning again Cogliano or Brule need to chip in. They can’t win with just one line scoring, and that has been the case for the past six games.

Players need to grab the opportunity when it presents itself, so which centre will step up?

More injury trouble?

Horcoff is out, but he isn’t the only one hurting. Ales Hemsky didn’t skate this morning and he has an undisclosed injury. He won’t say what it is, but when the rest of the team was getting on the ice Hemsky was coming back to the rink after getting some sort of test done. He says he will play tomorrow, but he isn’t 100 per cent healthy.

Ladislav Smid didn’t practice either and I will fill you in on his status after practice.

Theo Peckham was re-assigned to Springfield after the game in Long Island, because Steve Staios looks ready to play. He practiced today and took part in some contact drills and it looks like he will return tomorrow night.

Mike Comrie was also on the ice, and should be ready against the Rangers as well.

New centre?

Based on practice, it looks like Patrick O’Sullivan will be the other centre now that Horcoff is out. He skated with Robert Nilsson and JF Jacques. Zack Stortini skated in Hemsky’s spot with Penner and Gagner. Cogliano was with Ethan Morean and Fernando Pisani, while Brule centred Comrie and MacIntyre. You have to think if Hemsky plays then Stortini will move down and play with Brule and Comrie.

The defence pairings saw Tom Gilbert with Denis Grebeshkov, Taylor Chorney and Lubomir Visnovsky and Jason Strudwick with Steve Staios.

More on Horcoff...

I spoke with Horcoff, and he says that though his injury will put him out of play anywhere from just the next game to two weeks out, he won't require surgery.

Horcoff was pretty mum on the extent of his injury and wouldn't say exactly what the issue was, but he didn't have a brace or sling on or anything, so it's not super severe... but bad enough that he needs to rest.

Coach Pat Quinn said that Horcoff would be out for 7 to 10 days, "Page two from the trainers' manual."

Kid Gorgeous

Sheldon Souray was scheduled to do a solo skate today, and Quinn has given him the go-ahead to resume light workouts as well.

Ddf3e2ba09069c465299f3c416e43eae
One of Canada's most versatile sports personalities. Jason hosts The Jason Gregor Show, weekdays from 2 to 6 p.m., on TSN 1260, and he writes a column every Monday in the Edmonton Journal. You can follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/JasonGregor
Avatar
#151 Chris.
November 04 2009, 06:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Now I can go back in time; change what I said; and make all the responses irrelevent and nonsensical... Oh the mischief!

Avatar
#152 TDSM31
November 04 2009, 06:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

testing edit button 1,2,3...testing edit button 1,2,3....

hey, cool.

Avatar
#153 Robin Brownlee
November 04 2009, 06:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Chris. wrote:

Now I can go back in time; change what I said; and make all the responses irrelevent and nonsensical... Oh the mischief!

No. We have Bonehead Tracker, a sophisticated bit of software that allows us to monitor people who try to edit past comments in an attempt to hide the fact their initial argument/comment was stupid, incoherent and fell well short of a Grade 4 level of spelling and grammar. It automatically updates responses, making the inital comment irrelevent and nonsensical.

Avatar
#154 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 07:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Edit fun for everyone

Avatar
#155 cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan
November 04 2009, 07:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@TDSM31

bonehead tracker? awww f***

edit: it was by complete accident i replied to the wrong post. bonehead tracker works!!! f*** my life

Avatar
#156 Rigger
November 04 2009, 07:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan wrote:

bonehead tracker? awww f***

edit: it was by complete accident i replied to the wrong post. bonehead tracker works!!! f*** my life

HAHAHAH! I almost chocked on my water there.

Avatar
#157 HansBaurMesserschmittWatson
November 04 2009, 07:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9pNxiHM5kM

this is awesome listen at the 2:30 minute mark, when avery tells gorduchuk and obrien that he is going to make love to their mothers

pure comedy

also comedy

the vancouver fans that use the ( "any-team" suck ) chant as much as canadien fans use the na nana bullcrap

Avatar
#158 Senator Theo
November 04 2009, 07:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

We may come to rue this edit button.

EDIT: This edit button may be the end of us.

Avatar
#159 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 07:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

OK, does anyone else think that kid on the Erie Otters didnt even deserve a penalty, never mind a year long career ending suspension?

I mean, the Commish's explanation was that it was a BIG hit, so it deserved a penalty! ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Avatar
#160 jdrevenge
November 04 2009, 08:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Can we get a unhappy guy montage at the end of the year and maybe make some tshirts?

Avatar
#161 jdrevenge
November 04 2009, 08:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@HansBaurMesserschmittWatson

lol. Gold. Love the Sedin sister just skating around as 10 rangers are gooning Kesler.

Avatar
#162 Robin Brownlee
November 04 2009, 08:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

OK, does anyone else think that kid on the Erie Otters didnt even deserve a penalty, never mind a year long career ending suspension?

I mean, the Commish's explanation was that it was a BIG hit, so it deserved a penalty! ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Not anybody with an iota of common sense. Any injury aside, at the minimum, it was a charging penalty and could easily be called a boarding major. Factor in the nature of the injuries involved and I've got no problem with the suspension.

And, please, for those so inclined, spare me any arguments that it's a man's game or that he turned into the check. I played the game, as well as lacrosse, and there's nothing manly about taking a 20-foot run at an opponent and devastating him. And, in this case, the slight rotation of the victim was a reflex at looking up and seeing a blur coming full speed.

Body checking at the NHL level was orginally allowed, and encouraged, as a way of battling for the puck. It's morphed into something ugly as the decades have passed. Much of the crap that passes for tough hockey now is nothing more than mayhem accepted by an audience that thinks seeing a player laid out on the ice, like dismembered bodies and five-on-one ass-kickings on YouTube, is "kinda cool." It's sickening.

Avatar
#163 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 08:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Robin Brownlee

The charging penalty, perhaps, but that suspension is outrageous Robin. You arent going to hear me say the kid had it coming or anything, but the hit was shoulder to shoulder against the puck carrier. Sorry, but injury shouldnt have any say in the penalty or the suspension, IMO.

Avatar
#164 dragon
November 04 2009, 08:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

In line of that, when do you see this sport heading? Should a father be worried of pushing his son into this??? Questions of a soccer guy at heart...

Avatar
#165 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 08:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
dragon wrote:

In line of that, when do you see this sport heading? Should a father be worried of pushing his son into this??? Questions of a soccer guy at heart...

Cant Soccer players make more money and keep more teeth?

Avatar
#166 Robin Brownlee
November 04 2009, 08:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

The charging penalty, perhaps, but that suspension is outrageous Robin. You arent going to hear me say the kid had it coming or anything, but the hit was shoulder to shoulder against the puck carrier. Sorry, but injury shouldnt have any say in the penalty or the suspension, IMO.

Charging perhaps? Perhaps? That just reinforces how screwed up things are. Shoulder-to-shoulder doesn't mean sh*t when contact is made at full speed to an unsuspecting opponent after a 20-25-foot run at him.

Any incident that begins with an infraction, in this case a charge, is and should be open to supplementary discipline. It doesn't matter in the least if it's shoulder-to-shoulder or hip-to-hip. And when you commit an infraction and injuries like this occur as a direct result, you damn sure deserve what you get.

Injuries shouldn't matter? A legal hit that causes injury doesn't make it a penalty, but a play that begins with an infraction begs to have the result of that infraction entered into the equation. If you drive drunk and get caught without any incident, there's one level of penalty. If you drive drunk and injure somebody, the penalty goes up. If you kill somebody, it goes up again. Same scale in holds true in other levels of stupidity -- hits like this one, assaults, etc. Don't tell me injuries shouldn't factor in.

There are dozens of hits in every game now that should be penalized if the NHL had the jam to go by the book, but that might cut down on fan interest because they wouldn't get their quotient of wow factor and YouTube moments.

Avatar
#167 dragon
November 04 2009, 08:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Yeah, but last time I watched a soccer game on TV I fell asleep on the couch. F#@*ing hockey ruined it for me. The guys messing up the early morning show at 1260, were talking about olymlic-size rinks...Maybe that will bring more skill with less blood and keep hockey the undisputed #1 game in the world.

Go Oil! (Well, maybe next year when Tylor Hall gets here - hahahahhaha)

Avatar
#168 dragon
November 04 2009, 08:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Yeah, but last time I watched a soccer game on TV I fell asleep on the couch. F#@*ing hockey ruined it for me. The guys messing up the early morning show at 1260, were talking about olymlic-size rinks...Maybe that will bring more skill with less blood and keep hockey the undisputed #1 game in the world.

Go Oil! (Well, maybe next year when Tylor Hall gets here - hahahahhaha)

Avatar
#169 dragon
November 04 2009, 09:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Stupid b/berry...:-(

Avatar
#170 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 09:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Robin Brownlee

Ok, so the Erie Player comes in from the right side in plain view of everyone, especially the player coming in from the left towards the Erie player. The kid who gets hit starts to turn at the last second but it's already too late for the Erie player to slow down on what is a forecheck that is destined to go terribly wrong.

The guy did a terrible job of hiding the fact that he was going towards the puck when he hid in plain sight coming in alone, skating directly towards the other guy, while the other kid was facing him. He didnt leave his feet or target a player who was facing the boards.

And No, injuries shouldnt matter in a hockey play gone wrong. This isnt even close to events like McSorely or Bertuzzi where the actions werent the result of an otherwise regular play.

Avatar
#171 Travis Dakin
November 04 2009, 09:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Robin Brownlee wrote:

For the record: As per Canadian Press, as per Brownlee, as per edited version of Brownlee CP story on TSN. I filed that at 3 p.m. and it appeared on the wires and SLAM etc by 4 p.m. Is it only legit after it runs on TSN?

Why do they not credit a writer when it is a CP story? I see those stories every now and then I can usually tell when it is you writing it I think. Are you the "Oilers'" CP writer? Just curious how that works. I mean, you write a story and then it is picked up by every web site and newspaper that wants to publish it.... I'd want my damn credit! ha

Avatar
#172 Travis Dakin
November 04 2009, 09:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

Ok, so the Erie Player comes in from the right side in plain view of everyone, especially the player coming in from the left towards the Erie player. The kid who gets hit starts to turn at the last second but it's already too late for the Erie player to slow down on what is a forecheck that is destined to go terribly wrong.

The guy did a terrible job of hiding the fact that he was going towards the puck when he hid in plain sight coming in alone, skating directly towards the other guy, while the other kid was facing him. He didnt leave his feet or target a player who was facing the boards.

And No, injuries shouldnt matter in a hockey play gone wrong. This isnt even close to events like McSorely or Bertuzzi where the actions werent the result of an otherwise regular play.

You're crazy. It was a needlessly (sp) vicious hit. The guy is in the hospital. How did it affect the play of the game?

I'm all for solid hits but that's too much. Call me a pussy all you want, but a player should not have to worry about getting damn near killed on the ice. Getting put on your ass is highly entertaining and doesn't usually require that kind of a run to make it happen.

Avatar
#173 OvenChicken8 - Team JSBM
November 04 2009, 09:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Off topic but according to the monster man mcquire http://www.ctvolympics.ca/hockey/news/newsid=18960.html?cid=rsstsn Steve Nash will make the canadian hockey olympic team!

I heard he is an amazing playmaker

Avatar
#174 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 09:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Travis Dakin

I'm not calling anyone names here, I just dont think that the kid deserved a year-long suspension. I just dont see how any physical hockey player is not going to go after the puck when it goes behind the net like that.

If there should be any inquiry over this it should be regarding why the CHL lets 20 yr olds play against 16 yr olds.

Avatar
#175 Robin Brownlee
November 04 2009, 09:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Matt Henderson

You think a 20-foot charge is a "hockey play" gone wrong. That's part of the problem.

The play begins with a charge, no matter how you describe it (now it's a "regular play). If the play begins with an infraction and ends with an injury, you pay the price.

But have it your way.

Avatar
#176 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 09:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Robin Brownlee

What is the point of forechecking if the forechecker isnt supposed to engage the puck carrier? That's my problem with this Robin.

How many times was this kid told to go after the puck carrier and force a bad pass or make the defender pay the price for holding on to it? How many? Then when the defender refuses to pass the puck is the kid supposed to turn around and go back to the bench? So when he actually does what he's been told to do his whole life he gets excommunicated from hockey for it.

It was a regular play. Defender goes behind his net and the forechecker goes after him. Happens all the time, in every hockey game.

Avatar
#177 Hemmertime
November 04 2009, 09:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

If that kid doesnt make that hit hes sitting on the bench, I agree he could have let up and not went full speed but who ever told Scott Stevens "no Scott, we want you to guide the player into the boards, otherwise people wont respect you". 1 year is ridiculous. The injured player turned to make the pass around the boards and made it worse. I feel bad for Michael Liambas, career is over due to him skating "too fast" and the other player - who agreed to the possibility of injury by being on the ice - going into the boards awkwardly.

If there wasnt an injury on the play you'd likely see it as a great hit Robin, otherwise saying Stone is needed in our lineup would make anyone a hypocrite.

Avatar
#178 Hemmertime
November 04 2009, 09:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Know what's worse? The Skate to the neck of the Philly player. Thats reckless endangerment right there and should be a 1 - 2 year suspension if going by severity of injury vs the dirtiness of the play

Avatar
#179 Robin Brownlee
November 04 2009, 09:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Travis Dakin wrote:

Why do they not credit a writer when it is a CP story? I see those stories every now and then I can usually tell when it is you writing it I think. Are you the "Oilers'" CP writer? Just curious how that works. I mean, you write a story and then it is picked up by every web site and newspaper that wants to publish it.... I'd want my damn credit! ha

Money spends better than credit . . . Most papers that run my CP stuff use my byline, but TSN never does. Up to the editors at the various media outlets.

Besides, in this case, TSN used only about 20 per cent of the story, so I wouldn't want the byline anyway.

Avatar
#180 Hemmertime
November 04 2009, 09:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Robin Brownlee

Pat Quinn Elbowed Bobby Orr in the head. Plain as day, elbowing was common back then, Howe and Terrible Ted Lindsey for example. If my hockey knowledge serves me correct suspensions were very minimal back then too. Then you have 70s hockey which was bloodlust for some teams. This nostalgia "it shouldnt happen" "its not hockey" is bullspit. Players were dirty before contact and slapshots were even around.

Avatar
#181 BarryS
November 04 2009, 09:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Hemmertime wrote:

If that kid doesnt make that hit hes sitting on the bench, I agree he could have let up and not went full speed but who ever told Scott Stevens "no Scott, we want you to guide the player into the boards, otherwise people wont respect you". 1 year is ridiculous. The injured player turned to make the pass around the boards and made it worse. I feel bad for Michael Liambas, career is over due to him skating "too fast" and the other player - who agreed to the possibility of injury by being on the ice - going into the boards awkwardly.

If there wasnt an injury on the play you'd likely see it as a great hit Robin, otherwise saying Stone is needed in our lineup would make anyone a hypocrite.

Results do have a role to play in punishment. Sorry about that, you hit a stranger and make a bruise, you get a fine at best, unless of course the stranger's friends beat the snot out of you. You hit the stranger and the stranger falls down, hits his head on the curb and dies, you get arrested and go to jail.

In any case the purpose of checking is to seperate the player from the puck, not put him in the hospital. I still say, the way to make hockey safer is to take all the hard parts out of the equipment except the can and the helmet. Given all the injuries to players, there is no actual proof the armour actually works anyway.

Avatar
#182 BarryS
November 04 2009, 10:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Hemmertime wrote:

Pat Quinn Elbowed Bobby Orr in the head. Plain as day, elbowing was common back then, Howe and Terrible Ted Lindsey for example. If my hockey knowledge serves me correct suspensions were very minimal back then too. Then you have 70s hockey which was bloodlust for some teams. This nostalgia "it shouldnt happen" "its not hockey" is bullspit. Players were dirty before contact and slapshots were even around.

You ever see the padding players wore in the seventies? A little cotton padding held with elastic. Orr never wore a helmet either. Guess what, cotton padded elbow against plastic helmet likley results in broken elbow, not concussion. Even shinpads were little more than cotton with a little bit of hardness around the knee, and the skates hardly provided good support to say nothing of actual protection. Now I don't say get rid of modern shinpads, given the way people now shoot, but all that shoulder and elbow armour does more harm than good to the game. If checks hurt the checker just as much as the checked, players might actually learn how to do it.

Avatar
#183 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 10:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
BarryS wrote:

You ever see the padding players wore in the seventies? A little cotton padding held with elastic. Orr never wore a helmet either. Guess what, cotton padded elbow against plastic helmet likley results in broken elbow, not concussion. Even shinpads were little more than cotton with a little bit of hardness around the knee, and the skates hardly provided good support to say nothing of actual protection. Now I don't say get rid of modern shinpads, given the way people now shoot, but all that shoulder and elbow armour does more harm than good to the game. If checks hurt the checker just as much as the checked, players might actually learn how to do it.

Let's not get too crazy, that elbow still probably caused plenty of concussions, they just went undiagnosed.

Avatar
#184 Hemmertime
November 04 2009, 10:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@BarryS

There is a difference between the real world and playing a dangerous game willingly. The boxer that kills his opponent in the ring does not go to jail. The purpose of checking is to seperate a player from the puck sure, it works better when you knock the other player over because then he isnt in your way for you to retrieve that puck. Know how to knock people over? Hit them hard. The way I see it it is a charging penalty with no intent to injure. If you're going to suspend for clean charging hits for 1 year you should suspend ALL charging hits for 1 year - because the offender doesnt tell his victim to turn around and put hit head facing the boards last second. Flip side, the McSorley thing, if Brashear got up immediately should McSorley only have been suspended 2-3 games? Of course not, that would be ridiculous, because of the type of play and intent to injure. The severity of the injury should have no place in decision making.

Avatar
#185 rindog
November 04 2009, 10:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Robin Brownlee wrote:

You think a 20-foot charge is a "hockey play" gone wrong. That's part of the problem.

The play begins with a charge, no matter how you describe it (now it's a "regular play). If the play begins with an infraction and ends with an injury, you pay the price.

But have it your way.

I have to say that I am totally shocked by your position on this hit.

I agree that it was a hard hit (probably harder than it needed to be) but it my opinion it was not a charge at all. You have to move your feet and skate to get on a forecheck.

For you to say it was a 20 foot charge is just plain weird. He hit the guy behind the net and he didn't take a single stride from the edge of the face-off circle on. Of course he built up speed (as we was attempting to execute a simple forecheck - as every player is taught to do) but in now wa did he continue skating to try and explode into the player.

It is unfortuante that the Fanelli got hurt, but if you look at the play - Fanelli looked up and saw that Liambas was coming with speed. It is a contact sport and Fanelli should have prepared himself to be hit. Instead he decided to reverse the play withiout any regard for the player coming in at him.

It is unfair to expect that Liambas should have let up on the play. If he did let up (or skate by) his coaches would have chastised him for not finishing a check on the forecheck.

Avatar
#186 HansBaurMesserschmittWatson
November 04 2009, 10:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

canadian hockey players are raised with no respect for their opponents but some drunken honour towards the game.

that kid could have got there and poke the puck with the stick or lifted the stick since he was there so quick and the other kid was shook.

all the hockey hits from behind are easly avoidiable with a little care and respect.

look at the inigla hit on souray. as souray is coming around the boards the puck is good ways away from him and the stick. inigla comes in to take the body not the puck, which he could have. he comes in to make the hit with his stick on the ice heading into sourays skates. very cowardly and disresceptfull.

there is no respect amongst nhl players and it is seeded deeper then just the league it self.

Avatar
#187 Hemmertime
November 04 2009, 10:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@HansBaurMesserschmittWatson

I find it amusing that you take the time to HTML your spacing but not use capitals... unless you're on a blackberry I just realized.

Avatar
#188 Reagan
November 04 2009, 10:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I have to laugh at most of you. I find it kind of funny that Jason and Robin are entertaining a lot of the stupid ideas, and brain farts put on by fans in general. Really who thinks about the Oiler 24/7...? LOL I'm assuming most of you do.

Avatar
#189 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 10:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@HansBaurMesserschmittWatson

The hit in question wasnt a hit from behind though

Avatar
#190 BarryS
November 04 2009, 10:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

Let's not get too crazy, that elbow still probably caused plenty of concussions, they just went undiagnosed.

That was the time before helmets, so while you are right about concussions being ignored, elbows against plastic are different problem. You think players like punching helmets more than punching bare head? An elbow to a helmet, I bet on the helmet winning.

Avatar
#191 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 10:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Reagan wrote:

I have to laugh at most of you. I find it kind of funny that Jason and Robin are entertaining a lot of the stupid ideas, and brain farts put on by fans in general. Really who thinks about the Oiler 24/7...? LOL I'm assuming most of you do.

Thanks for your insight and opinion. I really admire the way you disassembled my position with lock-tight arguments like stupid and brain fart.

Avatar
#192 HansBaurMesserschmittWatson
November 04 2009, 10:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

The hit in question wasnt a hit from behind though

no, not at all.

im just saying, in my 15 years of watching nhl hockey, it would appear that respect is the biggest thing missing from the game.

Avatar
#193 rindog
November 04 2009, 10:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Just to add to this conversation, the rule book states:

"Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "Charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice."

I have a problem with this call being called a charge when the hitting player didn't take single stride after the opposing player touched the puck.

In fact, as Liambas stopped skating, the opposition goaltender had posesseion of the puck. I highly doubt that Liambas would have used his speed and "distance travelled" to "hit" the goalie? For all he knew, the goalie could have been in the process of getting ready to play the puck himself?

IMO, Liambas was getting in on the forecheck (as he is taught to do), he saw the opportunity to complete a body check and the opposition player put himself in a vulnerable position at the last second. There is no way that Liambas could have avoided contact at the time Fanelli turned??

Avatar
#194 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 10:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@HansBaurMesserschmittWatson

Tough for me to say how much Respect was there to begin with.

Avatar
#195 BarryS
November 04 2009, 10:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Hemmertime wrote:

There is a difference between the real world and playing a dangerous game willingly. The boxer that kills his opponent in the ring does not go to jail. The purpose of checking is to seperate a player from the puck sure, it works better when you knock the other player over because then he isnt in your way for you to retrieve that puck. Know how to knock people over? Hit them hard. The way I see it it is a charging penalty with no intent to injure. If you're going to suspend for clean charging hits for 1 year you should suspend ALL charging hits for 1 year - because the offender doesnt tell his victim to turn around and put hit head facing the boards last second. Flip side, the McSorley thing, if Brashear got up immediately should McSorley only have been suspended 2-3 games? Of course not, that would be ridiculous, because of the type of play and intent to injure. The severity of the injury should have no place in decision making.

Guess what, boxing gloves are soft not hard and boxers often break their hands during fights. Now for your point to make sense, if boxers wore gloves covered with balistic plastic . . . .

By the by, taking twenty foot skates to hit someone is not intent to injure what is? Do so when armoured better than most medieval knights is even less defensible.

Avatar
#196 rindog
November 04 2009, 10:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

that word is supposed to be "possession"

Avatar
#197 Librarian Mike
November 04 2009, 10:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Reagan wrote:

I have to laugh at most of you. I find it kind of funny that Jason and Robin are entertaining a lot of the stupid ideas, and brain farts put on by fans in general. Really who thinks about the Oiler 24/7...? LOL I'm assuming most of you do.

.....

You do realize this site is called 'Oilersnation' because people here like to talk about the Oilers, right? Well, thanks for taking the time to tell us all that you're better. Have fun back at 4chan.

Avatar
#198 BarryS
November 04 2009, 10:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
rindog wrote:

Just to add to this conversation, the rule book states:

"Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "Charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice."

I have a problem with this call being called a charge when the hitting player didn't take single stride after the opposing player touched the puck.

In fact, as Liambas stopped skating, the opposition goaltender had posesseion of the puck. I highly doubt that Liambas would have used his speed and "distance travelled" to "hit" the goalie? For all he knew, the goalie could have been in the process of getting ready to play the puck himself?

IMO, Liambas was getting in on the forecheck (as he is taught to do), he saw the opportunity to complete a body check and the opposition player put himself in a vulnerable position at the last second. There is no way that Liambas could have avoided contact at the time Fanelli turned??

Say Ringdog, so the victim is to blame for his own injury, not the person who hurt him? Guess what, you skate for ten to fifteen years and can not turn at speed on short notice, why are you playing hockey. The player did not turn away because he did not want to, plain and simple.

Avatar
#199 HansBaurMesserschmittWatson
November 04 2009, 10:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

Tough for me to say how much Respect was there to begin with.

probably not much, but i can only imagine how it was playing nhl hockey for the first pilgrims from europe. the time they had, wow.

Avatar
#200 Matt Henderson
November 04 2009, 10:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@BarryS

If you're told for 10-15 years to hit the defenseman with the puck are you supposed to be able to not do that at the last second because the defenseman refues to prepare himself for the hit with just splitseconds before the contact is made?

Of course Liambas didnt turn away, he wasnt supposed to.

Comments are closed for this article.