B21

@doom88 << No surprise, Briere didn't get called for stuff until he got to Philly. Hartnell said something similar earlier on. >> Briere was also suspended once for two games while with the Sabres.

@doom88 << You're absolutely right about Briere acting like a little *****. One major difference though, is the issue of Briere getting called for his stick infractions (and there are a lot of them). Crosby largely does not. To go further and blame the Flyers for his actions is total garbage. Schenn retaliated against the golden goose, and Couturier against grape ape. >> Aziz beat me to it. Check out Crosby's PIM vs. Briere. Also, are you saying Vitale's hit on Briere was in retaliation for Schenn's crosscheck? That's a reach. Vitale makes that hit no matter what happened the previous 59 minutes. The Flyers on the ice took offense to a CLEAN HIT and ended up "in over their heads". Nothing that happened there was out of the ordinary at all. Couturier was part of the scrum and got worked over pretty good. << By the way, I could have sworn last game, Bylsma was whining about Philly playing dirty and that not being part of Pitts game. I guess it's okay when Pitt sends messages? >> What message were the Pens sending? The Flyers started that scrum by reacting to a clean hit. I tried to find Bylsma's comments after that game but everything that comes back is for the most recent game. Could be wrong but I recall his problem being the Pens' responding to the Flyers attempts to get them off their game....the retaliation penalties. I guess you could argue that was indirectly complaining about the Flyers "tactics". Don't recall "message sending" being the issue. Still...nothing quite like Laviolette and Briere's comments. << That said, hit on Briere clean, and while classless, Bylsma did nothing wrong by sending a message. It's just frustrating because I know Philly could NEVER get away with that, especially against your scorers. >> Well....which is it? How can a hit be "clean" and "classless" at the same time? And what exactly did the Pens "get away with"? Crosby took a whack at Schenn. Schenn crosschecked back. Big deal. Vitale levels Briere with a totally legal hit, the Flyers took offense and "lost" the scrum so to speak. So tell me...what did the Pens do there that the Flyers "never get away with"? How were the Pens sending a message when the Flyers started that scrum?

LOL. Okay...we can chat about Briere some other time.

Good enough I guess.

@Phillygrump << I'm not even going to read the dribble you spew out in defense of Sid because you're a homer. Milbury said the truth. It was great. You homer Pittsburgh fans don't mind the Crosby worship and then get all upset when someone bucks that opinion. >> Millbury is not the first to accuse Crosby of that. Won't be the last. But the way he said it was out of line. I have no issue with his opinion. << Crosby skates around throwing dirty little jabs all game and then gets a cheap shot back and acts like its the worst thing that ever happened. At least when Malkin gets hit back he just takes it. This is what I'm talking about earlier. He KNOWS he gets all this attention and he uses his attention to chastise others for cheap shots when he is doing the EXACT same thing. >> Really??? If there is ANY Pen who hates getting those shots it's Malkin. That's my biggest issue with him. He (Malkin) doesn't like that kind of stuff at all and too often tries to get back at whoever shotted him right away...many times to the detriment of the play on the ice. Crosby puts up with a lot more than Malkin does...or did before he was sideline this past year. << Your golden boy is a punk. The NHL still tries to paint him as a golden boy but other fans and other players know he's a hypocritical phony. You homers in Pittsburgh just can't see it through your yellow specs. >> Phony...because he answered a question? So using your gorilla rationale, because he's often on the giving end of a "cheap" shot he's not allowed to talk about the ones he's been on the receiving end of? So I guess you have an issue with Briere saying Vitale was trying to hurt him? Talk about dirty players. Back to your rationale, Briere should have "no comment" about the completely legal Vitale hit. But like Briere said, Vitale was "trying to hurt hom". And Crosby is a whining punk? So either admit Briere is a whiny punk or admit your are a hypocrite when it comes to Crosby. Which is it? You are calling out Crosby for "complaining" about a cheap shot. So call out Briere for complaining about a legal hit.

C'mon...THAT was a dive? A guy gets crosschecked from behind and in the split second he rationalizes that if I go down here I might get a call? When you are not expecting a hit, it doesn't take nearly the same amount of force to get you down. I've seen several people call that a dive to which is say....utterly totally O&B goggle BS. When you are standing in front of the net DURING play you are expecting that kind of crosscheck and bracing yourself accordingly. Big difference than skating back to the bench.

@sarsippius << What was wrong the Vitale hit on Briere? Nothing per se, it was a clean check. It would also be the (size wise) equivalent of Shelley flattening Crosby. I think Pens land would be screaming for retribution too. Any fan of a team would. >> I don't have ANY issue with wanting retribution. The Flyers should want it. But people actually having a problem with the hit? "It's legal but..." But what? Sure it would suck if Crosby got leveled with a legal hit. It would suck but it's part of the game...kinda like....the Hedman hit. There certainly was a part of the Penguin fan population that thought Hedman should be suspended. I wasn't one of them. << And I don't buy the line of argument that Crosby does not dish out any more cheap stick work than he receives, but I've grown tired of that discussion and I'm sure you have too. Bring on round 1... >> Grown tired as well but I think we agree on this. Watching all of his NHL career he is often (more than your average player) the target of the after the whistle antics in an effort to get him to retaliate or get him off his game or both (or when the ref is not looking). That's part of the game and always will be. So I don't mind at all when he gives back.

Grump: He was asked and he answered. Period. That's not "whining". The only one whining is your coach...and he doesn't have a leg to stand on. I don't CARE how often Crosby or any other player on any team is shown on NBC, ESPN or any other channel. Your obsession with who gets the most airtime or who gets the most commercials borders on psychotic. As for Millbury, he is supposed to be a professional analyst. Not a Don Cherry wannabe. He can criticize all he wants (as he should) but there is a right way and wrong way to do it...and he was out of line. He can say what he wanted to say a lot differently and a lot more appropriately. If he did, I'd simply disagree and be done with it and so would most Pens fans. Plus, if he does the same interview on a Pittsburgh station, think he makes the same comments? Not a chance. Maybe he's trying to make friends.

I'm betting it's all a show drummed up by NBC to get people to watch the series. Wait until the playoff schedule comes out. Pens/Flyers will be the featured prime time game whenever possible. How can a hockey fan NOT want to see this? Heck, these last two games are practically part of the playoff series. As for the "comments out of Pittsburgh", what has been "that" bad? Shero calling out Millbury? He's right. Doesn't matter much...but he's right. Crosby calling Schenn's cross check a cheap shot when asked about it? It was, wasn't it? Crosby laid a few slashes and took a few, too (as he usually does...does that mean he can't comment on a pretty obvious cheap shot? The bulk of the complaining has come from Laviolette and Briere and frankly, none of it is justified. As aziz pointed out, what did the Pens do that was so bad in that final minute of play? If I had a nickel for every post from a Flyers fan here and on silly.com about sending a message at the end of the game via hitting a guy, I'd be a millionaire. Now it happens to one of your guys and the coach and player think it's a problem? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

Like Schenn did? Just sayin'... Quick: Name the last player suspended for a hit on Crosby. Millbury is an idiot. Always has been. Always will be. Maybe his comments were part of an NBC ploy to drum up ratings for the series? Who knows. Not that I care but he was kinda outta line.

I hope you came out head first.... Brings new meaning to "I can feel him kicking"....

Um....Dan Bylsma? http://www.playerspoll.ca/results/20112012-results/coaches/which-coach-would-you-most-like-to-play-for http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/globe-on-hockey/pens-habs-lead-nhl-in-man-games-lost-to-injury/article2342449/ If the links don't work for you, one is the results of the recent player poll where Bylsma was voted by the players as the coach they would most like to play for. The other is a man-games lost ranking from about 1 month ago showing my guys at the top of the list an no other Cup contender to be found until you get to the Blues at #9. Sorry, Rick. Bylsma > Ruff...

I Not sure which post that is in reply to but I'll take it as we agree to disagree.

"I do."

@terp << You're all wound up with who started the scrum and who punched who in the head blah blah blah. I'm concerned (or at least I was concerned and I'm not sure anymore) with something much more limited which is that if you fail to heed the officials, you are liable to get a misconduct. >> I get that. You are (conveniently) focusing on a single isolated incident. Kudos. That said, there was more to the scrum than just Kunitz not getting off Hartnell when originally told to do so ("told" being the official grabbing him and trying to pull him off). << What happens before the linesmen each grab one of two guys in an altercation doesn't usually result in a misconduct. I'm not saying anything controversial here and it has nothing to do with which team I like. >> Yeah - if something happens "before the linesman grab one of two guys in an altercation" is sure can result in a misconduct. You do realize there was quite a bit of "activity" in this altercation well before Kunitz would not get up off Hartnell. Let me make this easy for you...I am equating Kunitz's actions (the face in the ice and failure to heed the officials) to Hartnell's (punching a player pinned down on the ice and failure to heed the officials). It does not matter at all that one set of acts was mid-scrum and one was at the end. Hence, the example of the Crosby/Valabik incident which you may recall had many posters in the Silly.com days calling for a misconduct for Crosby. Ironically, that happened "mid-scrum" which, in your owns words, "the rest of the information about who did what to whom in the scrum beforehand is irrelevant." You want to pick and choose. I'm looking at the whole kit and kaboodle.

That ridiculous. Everything else that happened in that scrum is irrelevant? Funny...Crosby's infamous shots to the back of the head of Boris Valabik occurred "mid-scrum" and I KNOW most Flyers fans don't consider that irrelevant. Yet Scottie Hartnell gets a pass. This is so typical...pick and choose so you can come down on the other team and conveniently ignore what your own player did. In this scrum, Kunitz and Hartnell were equally malicious. Period.

No problem. I guess you can "steal" the response below, too. Also no problem putting Cooke and Pronger to bed. Points made.

@terp << I call this progress. In a backhanded way, you are acknowledging that you think Kunitz was justified in ignoring the officials because Hartnell slashed Paul Martin. I think players will get a misconduct penalty 19 times out of 20 if they do what Kunitz did irrespective of the provocation, but I guess if someone wants to send a message they can take that risk and maybe sit for 10. >> No - I'd call that taking the point I am trying to make and twisting it. Kunitz was NOT justified in ignoring the officials because Hartnell slashed Martin. He WAS justified in going after Hartnell in the first place. I disagree that gets a misconduct 19 times out of 20. I do feel that Hartnell also ignored the officials attempts to keep him away from Letang. Same offense on only a slightly smaller scale. Like I told X, if you have to analyze the scrum in that much detail to determine who gets what, then they both really do deserve the same punishment which, in my opinion, should have been 2:00 each for roughing. You fail to acknowledge the fact that Hartnell was also throwing punches at Pen while he had that Pen pinned down on the ice. It's in the video and is not really disputable. So tell me...what should be the punishment for that offense? Me, the stricken Crosby fan, is happy with whatever the minutes are given for Hartnell and Kunitz as long as they are even. I do not think either should have been given a misconduct. << The stuff about Hartnell deserving a misconduct if Kunitz did might sound good to a casual hockey fan who's stricken with Sydney Crosby (not referring to you) but I don't think it's going be very compelling to anyone else. Kunitz and Hartnell were the last ones going at it and both linesmen were involved trying to separate the two. The members of the broadcast team were clearly not Flyers fans but even they said this was the signal to stop. As I said earlier, the officials nearly always hand out a misconduct for that without regard to how the altercation started. They have to because if they let it go, the scrums go on too long, viewers tune out and the league comes down on everyone. >> Again - I don't think either deserved a misconduct. But if you want to argue that for Kunitz then I want to see you argue the same for Hartnell for ALSO punching a guy while he's down and ALSO failing to follow the orders of the officials. It's not debatable that BOTH Hartnell and Kunitz were guilty of those offenses.

@xganarchy << face rub? He was ramming his padded elbow down on Hartnell's helmet-less head! And like i said in my other post, I'm still not 100% sold that Hartnell was "punching" a Pens player on the ice, it just looked like a giant pileup at that point IMO >> Ramming? C'mon, X. Pushing...maybe. Looked like a pretty good faced rub to me. Looks like the elbow actually misses and then he gets the glove in there. Again - I am not absolving Kunitz. Just looking for Hartnell to get the same level of treatment. Both didn't immediately disengage when the refs were trying to get them to do just that and both gave another guy the business that was a bit over this line everyone is talking about. So other than a video of Hartnell punching a guy he has down on the ice, what would convince you that Hartnell was punching a guy he had down on the ice? Sheesh. << Oh, and Kunitz was on top of Hartnell from :54 seconds to 1:25 or so...about 30 seconds of shrugging off the linesmen and elbowing, facewashing, kneeing Hartnell while he's on the ice. Compared to what, Hartnell pulling away from a linesman (while standing) for 4-5 seconds, attempting to facewash Letang. Your boy Kunitz was over the line, no excuses. >> This kinda makes my point. If you have to drill down THIS much to decide who deserves "more" punishment (i.e. - who it took the refs longer to keep away/get off the other guy) then really...they both deserve the same number of minutes/discipline.

@Phillygrump I'm condensing your replies. There is a certain psychopathic stalker in the Silly.com Eagles forum who likes to hit you back with 6 replies to a single post. He thinks he gets a free set of steak knives for most posts. Not that is what you are doing here but it's a pet peeve of mine. << I didn't say Kunitz should be suspended. I don't care about stuff after the whistle. I think that stuff is fun for hockey fans. I don't like dirty malicious hits. I don't like the bias in the NHL discipline system. I don't think all teams get the same treatment on in-game penalties. >> I stand corrected and you have my apology. The other 10 Flyers fans killing me all were looking for Kunitz to be hanged, drawn and quartered. Figured you were of the same opinion. I applaud that comment above...at least the first 3 sentences. I don't think the system is intentionally biased....just inconsistent. <<So Kunitz just looked at Hartnell funny? Is that what Cooke used to do too? Ok Burgher, you are showing your true stripes now. >> C'mon now...that's a Kuato response. Obviously that's conscience exaggeration to make a point and not meant to be taken literally. You're better than that.

Actually, I do read a lot hear and that means I read a lot of whoever posts here...i.e. - you. So you are outraged? You wanted Kunitz fined and/or suspended. Funny - I didn't see you calling for Hartnell to be fined or suspended for punching a guy he had pinned down? Your next objective post will be your first. BTW, if I am such a "blind" homer, explain why I was one of the first to say your boy Richards should not be suspended for the Booth hit? That Gonchar should have been suspended for the Clutterbuck hit? That the hit by Nystrom on Letand was not wothy of a suspension? Ditto the Steckel hit on Crosby? Yet a Pen looks at a guy funny and you want to send them to the guillotine. Take your own advice, Grump.

Who started it really doesn't matter....even though I will say that Hartnell's slash was the first action in the whole deal that was worthy of a penalty and it was that action that I would like to think Kunitz was retaliating for. As for who started what...really not an issue here. Every point you make about Kunitz's actions being unusual can also be said about Hartnell's - and I don't mean the slash. I mean the punches thrown at a player on the ice and Hartnell's own disregard for the officials attempts to keep him from getting at Letang. Hartnell was punching a played pinned down on the ice. Kunitz gave a lengthy face rub to a player pinned down on the ice. Which is worse? I'd call it even. The minutes evened up so there really wasn't a break either way.

C'mon...you guys may be dumb but you aren't stupid.

@mojo1917 << You were on the philly site when the Pronger trade took place, the forum was hardly unified in whether or not the trade was good, how much Pronger had left in the tank, and if the price was too steep and the contract too long.... he didn't come into town like jesus on palm sunday B. i bet half of us were skeptical of the move at best, no one was really thinking of what "other baggage" he might bring, he already skates like just born pony and had a personality that in the best light can be described as mercurial. >> That's kinda my point. Skeptical of the move because of the length of the deal, the #1 picks given up, etc. That's a lot different than having a problem with the actual player and his lengthy rap sheet. << that said the hartnell vs the penguins scrum is such a bar fight spilled onto the sidewalk that who knows what the sam hill was really going on, but when the cops got to the scene to break it up kunitz kept on fighting, now in the real world that guy gets thrown in the squad car and worked over for a little ,out of view of the public for "resisting arrest" . and if i'm hartnell in that situation with 3 guys squaring up on me, i'm swinging at whatever i can hit until the cops come. once the cops have a hold of me i'm thinking time to stop, cause i don't want to wind up in the squad car... >> To which I would argue that didn't Hartnell not listening to the refs also contribute to the extended "bar fight"? The swing-at-anything benefit of the doubt has never been afforded to a Pen in a similar situation by a Flyers fan...why does that change now that it's Hartnell? Plus, when Hartnell was throwing punches, he wasn't being threatened and wasn't surrounded by 3 Pens. He was on top of a guy who was down on the ice. << i can appreciate you sticking up for your guy, but i don't like him, i don't like what he did and there's nothing that you're going to post or write that's going to make me see him in a different light, in fact i bet he pokes the sick kids at the hospital when he visits...if he even visits. >> Hey - not for me to tell you who to like/not like and I'm by no means absolving Kunitz either. I just have an issue with the Flyers fan calling for misconducts, fines and suspensions for Kunitz when the video clearly shows Hartnell taking party in equally "punishable" acts.

@terp << I don't think it much matters how it started but I'll humor you. If someone slashes me as I'm leaving the ice, I don't stop to think about whether it is a tap or a two handler. It's a challenge and it's going to get a response that might be disproportionate. This is business as usual, so I think you're not being very objective or very realistic by trying to frame the whole incident with Hartnell's "bad act". It's irrelevant. In fact, Martin did something smart and got his team a power play by goading Hartnell into a penalty. His teammates weren't as smart and reacted disproportionately themselves. >> It's not "irrelevant" what Hartnell did. It was the culmination of a lot of "carelessness" with his stick the entire game. On the Martin slash, I poke you with my stick. You maybe poke back or give me one of those quick cross checks to the mid section. We push and shove...maybe a face rub...2:00 each. Maybe nothing depending on what kind of mood the refs are in...but whatever it is, it's even. The Pens not being able to walk away resulting in the minutes evening up is not an issue to me at all. That was a fair end result to all this. I wish they did walk away but they chose instead to retaliate and that retaliation was appropriate. Hartnell didn't just give Martin a quick poke back. He took a very hard two handed whack. Sorry but that is a big difference than what expected retaliation for Martin's actions "should" be and is part of the reason Kunitz went after him. << You're also not being very objective by saying Hartnell crossed the same line Kunitz did. You don't like what Hartnell did but again, it was business as usual. On the other hand, Kunitz refused to quit for a while after two linesmen got involved to separate him and Hartnell. That almost always crosses a line with the officials. I guaranty the linesmen didn't like it and they would be justified to complain about the lack of consequences because it was not only a pain in the *** to wrestle the two for so long but set a bad precedent. It is very unusual to see a player, especially a player with Kunitz' reputation, get away with continuing an altercation for so long after the linesmen wade in to separate two players. Again, you may not like what Hartnell did, but he didn't cross the line Kunitz crossed. >> "Almost" crosses the line is not grounds for a suspension or even a misconduct. Hartnell also did not quit for a noticeable amount of time when the officials were trying to pull him away from Letang. Hartnell also took a few punches at a guy he had pinned to the ice. Does that not cross a line? I've seen many a poster say it does. I guess not when a Flyer does it though? Also, are you arguing that because it took the refs longer to get Kunitz off Hartnell (in part because Hartnell would not let go) than it did to get Hartnell away from Letang that Hartnell gets absolved and Kunitz doesn't? I could argue that the Flyers fan who keeps omitting the Hartnell punchces is also not being objective...even more so than you say I am being. Bottom line, if Kunitz's actions in that scrum crossed this line then there is no way one can say that Hartnell's didn't either.