Jump to content

Add Tortorella to the list that rips Pens, Malkin & Crosby


Guest Digityman

Recommended Posts

i've never heard anyone in any official capacity claim the peguins have rose petals thrown at their feet by the league.

Torts rant does not count? How about Cherry's? If you don't believe they get special treatment, I am not going to waste my time trying to change your opinion and I more often than not agree with your take on most things hockey related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also agree that it’s not becoming to Flyers’ fans to constantly and unstoppably complain about referring.

and you know what, that's the bottom line. where ever you may fall in this discussion, everyone here HAS to know how it comes across to fans of any other team. flyers fans are becoming famous around the league for being the biggest bunch of whining crybabies around. not just from pens fans, or bruins fans, or rangers fans, but in general.

@anyone who's foot fits the shoe: you guys proud? can you do a little more to make this fanbase look even more like a bunch of spoiled 8 yearolds? there was a time where the team and its fan base was proud, had some backbone, and figured kicking and screaming and crying about the unfairness of the world was something way way beneath them. anymore, it's become a primary character trait. grow the fcuk up, people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Torts rant does not count? How about Cherry's? If you don't believe they get special treatment, I am not going to waste my time trying to change your opinion and I more often than not agree with your take on most things hockey related.

? tortorella said the penguins were the most arrogant organization in the league, and crosby and malkin were whiners. not a word about the league taking it easy on them.

cherry, i haven't heard his thing yet. hold on, let me see if i can find it.

ok, done. also, not a word about preferential treatment. matter of fact, he says, "what you've done, you've turned the league and teams against you" talking about the whining, diving, and shots crosby hands out. not only does cherry not say crosby gets special treatment, he says the league is now against crosby. which is even sillier than the idea crosby gets special treatment, but in anycase, certainly does not support your arguement.

basically, you took a bunch of guys saying "A", and somehow came to the conclusion they said "B". which is totally in line with how you guys are drawing your conclusions on this entire thing.

Edited by aziz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, i don't think there is evidence of that at all. i believe the lottery to draft crosby was suspicious, and i think malkin has escaped several suspensions that would have been dolled out to less high profile players. beyond that, i don't see a thing to back up the claim.

educate me, what is the drama of detroit being robbed of a cup? i'm not familiar with that one.

If I may stick my nose into this discussion, I think the league favors PLAYERS, not teams. I'll support this with my own team to illustrate, a team which many on here also feel as if the league favors.

On the protective side, you have guys like Kronwall who throw hits, and at least for now the league lets him do what he does without actually defining the hits as legal and stating why they are judging them legal. Nor did they discipline him even with what I believe could have been an illegal charge on Kesler earlier this year.

However, on the other side of that coin, NOBODY gets more goals disallowed for stupid reasons than Tomas Holmstrom. And I mean nobody! Not even close.

Same team; opposite treatment by the league.

I don't think that Pittsburgh as a team gets coddled by the league, but I'm DANG sure that Cindy Crosby and Evegeni Malkin are favored by Toronto. If you look at the elbows Malkin has thrown, he's deserved supplemental discipline multiple times and received nothing.

And as for Milbury, why on earth would Milbury apologize for his comments except that the league doesn't want announcers mocking their golden boy?

They favor players, not teams. It seems like teams, especially when there are more than one that receive favor on one team.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

educate me, what is the drama of detroit being robbed of a cup? i'm not familiar with that one. i know calgary won a cup that was actually awarded to tampa, but don't know anything about something similar happening with detroit. fill me in.

I think that this is a reference to how in Game 2 of the SCF, Malkin got into a fight with Henrik Zetterberg in the last minute of the game. Now, Carcillo had gotten a one-game suspension for a punch to Talbot earlier in the same playoff season under similar conditions: Less than 1 minute left in a game that was out of reach. At the time of the suspension, the NHL said thus:

'We held a conference call Monday with the general managers and coaches of playoff teams and told them explicitly we would not tolerate attempts by clubs to 'send a message' late in a game when the outcome had been determined,' said Colin Campbell, the NHL's senior executive vice president of hockey operations."

While I can't find the quote, I remember at the time Campbell saying something to the effect that Carcillo had no business being on the ice at that point in time in the game. Stevens and Carcillo were also fined for the incident.

Fast forward to game 2 of the SCF. Detroit's up 3-1, there's 20 seconds or so left. Talbot spears Osgood, a scrum breaks out, and Malkin jumps Zetterberg from behind, throws several punches into the back of his head, swings his stick at Zetterberg's back, throws some more punches, then Zetterberg can finally get turned around and an actual fight starts between the two.

Rule 47.22 states: "A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc..." (At least it did at the time)

Malkin was given an instigator penalty for the altercation, and the requisite 1 game suspension. But the suspension was then pulled back. The league's official statement on the no suspension of Malkin:

"Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded."

Video of the Malkin incident:

Video of what Carcillo was suspended for:

Hence the claim that the league "handed" the pens the '09 cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AJgoal

ah, ok, i'm familiar with that incident. that's one of the ones most on my mind when i concede malkin has avoided suspensions that other players likely would have gotten.

the hyperbole that a single player not being suspended for game 3 of a series that was 2-0 at that point in favor of detroit threw me. it is a far far far cry from that to handing someone the cup. that series went to 7 games, and detroit had two shots at eliminating pittsburgh. the idea that malkin's presence in game 3 handed someone the cup 4 games later...well, come on. everyone has to see the kind of reach that is. terrible call by the league on that, i agree, but seriously. when maddog said that, i figured there was a game 6 or 7 controversial no-goal call i had forgotten about or something...but no suspension in game 3??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@aziz

are you enjoying yourself in this thread? I hope so because at this point you're now calling your favorite team's fans some ugly names, and not just the few who are doing the complaining but "Flyers' fans" in general. I don't know who you hang out with but I never hear "Flyers' fans are the worst babies" or anything along those lines. And my friends are Rags and Isles fans (and a few Flyers' fans of course but I'm in NYC).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AJgoal

ah, ok, i'm familiar with that incident. that's one of the ones most on my mind when i concede malkin has avoided suspensions that other players likely would have gotten.

the hyperbole that a single player not being suspended for game 3 of a series that was 2-0 at that point in favor of detroit threw me. it is a far far far cry from that to handing someone the cup. that series went to 7 games, and detroit had two shots at eliminating pittsburgh. the idea that malkin's presence in game 3 handed someone the cup 4 games later...well, come on. everyone has to see the kind of reach that is. terrible call by the league on that, i agree, but seriously. when maddog said that, i figured there was a game 6 or 7 controversial no-goal call i had forgotten about or something...but no suspension in game 3??

Except that Malkin went on to have a 3 point game in Game 3, getting the primary assists on the first three goals. One could easily argue that without Malkin, the Pens would not have won that game and been down 3-0 instead of just 2-1. It's impossible to tell, of course. But it's a serious possibility. Malkin dominated that game en route to the CS.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AJgoal

I remember saying that when I saw Malkin's game, that he should not have even been playing in that game due to the "new precedent the NHL was setting" concerning late game instigation.

That consistency went out the window once it happened to a Penguin. Its absolutely ridiculous. How bout the ridiculous too many men thing in that series?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you enjoying yourself in this thread? I hope so because at this point you're now calling your favorite team's fans some ugly names, and not just the few who are doing the complaining but "Flyers' fans" in general.

like i said in that post, to those whom the shoe fits. i'm not calling all flyers fans names, but there is that segment, and i'm getting sick of it. years and years now of "the league is out to get us" sharpened to a "the league loves pittsburgh" point, and the volume is rising. it is just embarrasing to watch, and i wish these children would stop dragging the rest of us through their juvenile mud.

i was at my parent's house today, and we had an easter egg hunt for my two nieces, 4 and 2 years old. there was an odd number of eggs, and the 2 year old got the extra one. oh my god how the 4 year old screamed about how unfair it was. no consoling her. of course, you can't explain the reality of that situation to a 4 year old, just have to let her cry herself out. pathetic to see the same thing in grown men, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AJgoal

<< Except that Malkin went on to have a 3 point game in Game 3, getting the primary assists on the first three goals. One could easily argue that without Malkin, the Pens would not have won that game and been down 3-0 instead of just 2-1. It's impossible to tell, of course. But it's a serious possibility. Malkin dominated that game en route to the CS. >>

This may sound like a rant against you...it's not meant to be so apologies in advance. But since you brought up the Malkin non-suspension I need to interject in your discussion. My question is not just for you but for anyone. I hear repeatedly how Malkin not being suspended for Game 3 in a series in which the Wings were up 2-0 resulted in the Pens getting "handed" the Cup since he had 3 assists that day in a win that made the serioes 2-1.

In the same 2009 SCF, Zetterberg got away with covering the puck in the crease not once but TWICE. It happened in the 3rd period in Game 1 with the Wings up 3-1 and over 15:00 left. If happened again in Game 2 with the Wings up 2-1 and over 18:00 left.

You quoted several NHL rules including the suspension that is supposed to be levied against a player deemed to be an instigator with under 5:00 left in a game. The same rule does allow for the suspension to be rescinded pending a review. The NHL chose not to suspend Malkin. They also chose not to suspend Scott Walker of the Hurricanes for a similar infraction. The rule allows for no suspension and the league used that discretion on another player in a similar circumstance.

Now, I just showed not one but two incidents that are also in violation of a rule...a skater cannot cover the puck in the crease.

67.4 Penalty Shot - If a defending player, except a goalkeeper, while play is in progress, falls on the puck, holds the puck, picks up the puck, or gathers the puck into his body or hands from the ice in the goal crease area, the play shall be stopped immediately and a penalty shot shall be awarded to the non-offending team. See also Rule 63 – Delaying the Game.

No ambiguity. No possible grey area. No language that allows the league or the officials some leeway. Cover the puck? Penalty shot. Zetterberg did on two occasions...not even arguable.

Now, you said "one could easily argue that without Malkin, the Pens would not have won that game and been down 3-0 instead of just 2-1." OK, fine. I could argue even MORE easily that the Pens aren't even down 2-0 by Game 3 if those penalty shots are awarded as the rule, without ANY excpetions, states they should be. It's no secret how good the Pens are at converting penalty shots based on their perfomance in shootouts. Now instead of being down 3-1 it's 3-2. Instead of 2-1 it's 2-2...in both cases all the momentum with the Pens. Maybe the series is 1-1 or even 2-0 Pens if those penalty shots are awarded. Huge difference and because of two horrible and clearly missed calls.

The Wings had two chances to win the series including a Game 7 at home. In no way, shape or form did anyone hand the Pens that series. If anything, one could argue the Pens had to overcome MORE as far as officiating. A quick count shows 22 penalties called on the Pens and 15 on the Wings (excluding all miscodcuts and calls that offset). That includes the only two 5-3 chances in the series being given to the Wings. You point to Malkin not getting suspended when the league made the exact same decision on another player earlier in the post season and cited a rule that allows for no suspension to be levied (precedent). I have a pretty uneven penalty count and two penalty shots not awarded at critical times late in games.

I've brought this all up before when having a nice back-and-forth with Flyer fans and it's always conveniently tossed aside or forgotten.

I want to hear a Flyer fan explain to me, knowing all this, how that Cup was handed to the Pens. I'd also like to know how a league fascilitating favoritism for a team via officiating allows two obvious penalty shots to not be awarded in critical spots in early games AND allows the officials to call nearly 33% more penalties on said favored team than their opponent.

The next answer I get on this will be the first.

BTW, I have seen Flyers fans react to a missed offsides in a SCF that "almost" led to a goal. I can only imagine what a Flyers fan would be doing if the officials failed to award them (justly) penalty shots in key situations late in games in the SCF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that Malkin went on to have a 3 point game in Game 3, getting the primary assists on the first three goals.

i agree not having malkin in game 3 probably would have ended the penguins, and ultimately detroit would have closed the series out in less than 7 games. i was furious when that descision came down. i also believe the league would have bent the rules in the same way for any team's elite talent if they possibly could, not wanting the stanley cup finals to be impacted by the punative absense of a key part of a team. i believe they would have wormed their way out of enforcing the suspension had it been zetterberg that did the instigating. i believe they would do the same thing today. i think the league is overly concious of the moment-to-moment salability of the game, and removing talent of malkin's level partway through the finals when they had any kind of option was more than they were willing to do.

so, yes, i think keeping malkin in game 3 prevented detroit from going up 3-0, which would have been too deep of a hole for pittsburgh to climb out of. i don't, however, think it had anything to do with the other 3 loses detroit had through the rest of that series, including two potential elimination games they failed to capitalize on. not enforcing that suspension certainly kept pittsburgh in the series, but it did not hand the cup to anyone. at most, it stretched the series out by one game. the rest, pittsburgh and detroit did by themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@terp

<< Look, you don't need to distort the facts if you have something sensible to say. Laviolette had a problem with Bylsma using the last change to send out the 4th line. >>

You tell me who is distorting facts. Lavi was upset ONLY because the Pens sent out their 4th line? So if Vitale doesn't cleanly hit Briere and Briere is not injured, does Lavi go postal on Bylsma? I think we know the answer.

<< Milbury criticized Bylsma for letting his assistant answer Laviolette instead of doing it himself. >>

I said the same thing...something along the lines of Milbury's panties being in a bunch because Bylsma wouldn't go 10 rounds with Lavi. Want to try again?

<< Torts had a problem with the hit as well he should have as well as a problem with what he calls the Pens' tendency to whine more loudly than other organization for similar hits. There isn't any dispute about any of this except from you. >>

Well...no..since I actually said Torts had a problem with the Orpik hit. Want me to repost it for you? He then goes on his "Pens whine" tangent which I find comical since no other coach in the league whines more than Torts. You expect me to all of a sudden agree that the Pens whine more than all other teams because Torts said so. Fine. Torts also said that NBC and the league colluded to help the Flyers win the Winter Classic. Must be true...after all...Torts said so. How's that for favoritism and conspiracies?

<< Making it about Berube's intelligence is itself mindless. And then, after you call Berube stupid for his supposed lack of originality, you take "gutless" and tag Laviolette and Torts with it. Does that mean we should doubt your intelligence? >>

Really...I take a shot and you want to nitpick? I am sure Berube is of average intelligence. Point is...he really didn't say anything that Milbury and Torts didn't already say. As for Lavi and Torts being gutless? Hell yeah. Both have sent players out at the end of the game to "send a message". I would bet that EVERY coach in the NHL has done that at some point. I've seen many Flyers say they WANT their team to do that. So when Lavi gets upset that "maybe" the Pens did send a message to his team with a legal hit and when Torts rants on and on about Malkin and Crosby and the Pens being arrogant and classless or whatever else he said....the same coach and team that enable Sean Avery for how long?....Yeah...I'll call that gutless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lindbergh31

<< Well it looks like Don Cherry is also getting on the act of telling Crosby to cut out the diving and whining. The facts are the rest of the league and fans see Crosby and the Pens as Bettman's pet project because he put in so much effort in keeping the team in Pittsburgh. Cherry basically said if Crosby wants to be the best player and he keeps playing the way he does then he can't expect a free pass from opposing players. Then he showed the Tortorella interview. But as for calling Torts spiceless because he brought in Crosby into the rant, I disagree due to the fact he was making a point that if it was Crosby who received the knee on knee from a Rangers player then that player would have gotten suspended. >>

I think Cherry feels left out of all this. When was that last time there was a war of words this good NOT involving Don Cherry? Someone needs to assure Don that Mad Mike is not after his job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SpikeDDS

<< And as for Milbury, why on earth would Milbury apologize for his comments except that the league doesn't want announcers mocking their golden boy? >>

Torts apologized for his comments after the Winter Classic. He basically said the league colluded with NBC to the benefit of the Flyers.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=384232

Does that mean the Flyers are the league's "golden team"? (Note: Didn't see any Flyers fans agreeing with Torts then like they are now.)

Renny just got fined for saying the Oilers didn't get calls because the league wants Hollywood (i.e. - the Kings) in the playoffs.

So now the league hates the Oilers and loves the Kings are the "golden team"?

I mean really people...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aziz, Frankly, I agree. I don't believe the Pens were handed the cup. However I can see how some (many?) could argue the point.

In my mind, it's similar to the no goal that gave Dallas the cup over Buffalo - the league bent/broke the rules in order to protect...something. Ratings? Reputation? I don't know. Removing Malkin from the POs, even for a game, would have hurt the league, probably moreso than the bending of the rule did. In the same way, ignoring the skate in the crease did less damage than it potentially might have to review the call and overturn the goal, after the Stars were out on the ice celebrating. How do you go back and reset and say, "No, sorry, it didn't happen?" They should have. I can understand why they may not have, though. And disagree with it wholeheartedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

like i said in that post, to those whom the shoe fits. i'm not calling all flyers fans names, but there is that segment, and i'm getting sick of it. years and years now of "the league is out to get us" sharpened to a "the league loves pittsburgh" point, and the volume is rising. it is just embarrasing to watch, and i wish these children would stop dragging the rest of us through their juvenile mud.

i was at my parent's house today, and we had an easter egg hunt for my two nieces, 4 and 2 years old. there was an odd number of eggs, and the 2 year old got the extra one. oh my god how the 4 year old screamed about how unfair it was. no consoling her. of course, you can't explain the reality of that situation to a 4 year old, just have to let her cry herself out. pathetic to see the same thing in grown men, however.

If you don't like whining, OrangeJulius must have made your head hurt while puking your guts out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you go back and reset and say, "No, sorry, it didn't happen?" They should have. I can understand why they may not have, though. And disagree with it wholeheartedly.

oh, i agree, totally. it's a bunch of crap, customizing the outcome to maximize the product. same thing with the calgary goal in the third period of game 6. would have handed the cup to calgary...but no call on the ice and play continued. no review on the play. as far as i'm concerned, the league wanted an expansion cup win, and figured they could just ignore it and get a better outcome

i hate that stuff, but it isn't there to benefit any specific team, it's the league being heavyhanded in the "protection" of its product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I have seen Flyers fans react to a missed offsides in a SCF that "almost" led to a goal. I can only imagine what a Flyers fan would be doing if the officials failed to award them (justly) penalty shots in key situations late in games in the SCF.

I've seen Flyers fans react to a missed offsides that led to a goal and COST them a Stanley Cup. They're probably a little punchy on that particular subject.

I think you go on every single team's board and you have a vocal contingent that insist that the refs, the league and the Easter Bunny are out to get them. The "traditional" targets of favoritism are Detroit and Pittsburgh (unless, of course, you're a fan of either Detroit or Pittsburgh. Then it's the other one of those and maybe a Canadian team or Phoenix or something).

I do think there's a little bit of a uniformed perception among fans of other teams NOT in Pitt or Detroit that this is the case. I would imagine if I were a fan of either team I would kill myself (no, that's not it) argue pretty strongly against it. And I think I'd be right. While there is enough circumstantial and anecdotal evidence to really run with the claim, of course there isn't bias, but it's the consensus target, so it's easy to go with.

Just like Philly is the consensus target as the fan base that is unruly, mean, vicious, hates Santa, and cheers when wide receivers get hurt. Again, some anecdotal evidence, and it's certainly convenient. But it is belied by tons of anecdotal evidence elsewhere. And as a Flyer fan, the claim ticks me off.

I don't buy the bias stuff and I don't buy that Pitt was handed a cup. They worked hard for it. Now, I'll never quite understand the circumstances surrounding the lottery for the Crosby draft...it smells a little, but even that...if anything nefarious is true...was more about the league being successful and remaining in an established city than a bias toward an organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen Flyers fans react to a missed offsides that led to a goal and COST them a Stanley Cup. They're probably a little punchy on that particular subject.

I think you go on every single team's board and you have a vocal contingent that insist that the refs, the league and the Easter Bunny are out to get them. The "traditional" targets of favoritism are Detroit and Pittsburgh (unless, of course, you're a fan of either Detroit or Pittsburgh. Then it's the other one of those and maybe a Canadian team or Phoenix or something).

I do think there's a little bit of a uniformed perception among fans of other teams NOT in Pitt or Detroit that this is the case. I would imagine if I were a fan of either team I would kill myself (no, that's not it) argue pretty strongly against it. And I think I'd be right. While there is enough circumstantial and anecdotal evidence to really run with the claim, of course there isn't bias, but it's the consensus target, so it's easy to go with.

Just like Philly is the consensus target as the fan base that is unruly, mean, vicious, hates Santa, and cheers when wide receivers get hurt. Again, some anecdotal evidence, and it's certainly convenient. But it is belied by tons of anecdotal evidence elsewhere. And as a Flyer fan, the claim ticks me off.

I don't buy the bias stuff and I don't buy that Pitt was handed a cup. They worked hard for it. Now, I'll never quite understand the circumstances surrounding the lottery for the Crosby draft...it smells a little, but even that...if anything nefarious is true...was more about the league being successful and remaining in an established city than a bias toward an organization.

Well, said.

1980 was a little before my time...too soon on the offsides analogy I guess?

Agree 100% on the Crosby lottery as well. Suspect? Yes. But for this I will put my black and gold goggles on say "probably not".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@aziz

"i think the league is overly concious of the moment-to-moment salability of the game..."

I think this is true. However, I also think the league is well aware that the Pens are perhaps the only NHL team that has wide appeal outside of die hard, "cult" fans. So it isn't implausible to me that this contributed to the league allowing Malkin to play. In other words, he isn't only a marquee player but a Pens marquee player. I know of no other example of a player getting an inexplicable, rule bending pass at a crucial moment like this but if I knew of such an example involving another team (feel free to enlighten me) it would be a lot easier to say sure, it is about marquee players and not a particular team. So under the circumstances, I think it is in fact plausible that the league was looking out for "America's Team"; and, if they did it once, why wouldn't they do it again? In fact, if you are suspicious of the lottery that landed Crosby in Pittsburgh, then you should be open to far more implausible ideas.

I think we can agree that the league has no credibility with supplemental discipline, so it isn't unfair to question motives. You don't have to agree with with the point of view but one doesn't automatically become an epileptic crank for suspecting the league plays favorites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1980 was a little before my time...too soon on the offsides analogy I guess?

LOL, yeah. 32 years later and it still stings a little. Probably not as much as Hull's foot in the crease would bother someone from Buffalo, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@B21

Regarding nitpicking, I'm sure you don't expect everyone on here to just go along quietly while you bash the Flyers on this site, on this thread. In this case, you begged to be "nitpicked" when you left that huge contradiction floating around out there waiting to be slapped down. Glad to oblige.

I've been meaning to mention for awhile that the hit on Briere was incidental; if it hadn't been that it would have been something else. They were sent out there to start trouble and that became very apparent when the Flyers took exception to (as Meltzer put it) a gratuitous albeit legal hit. The scrum featured a lot of immediate and non coincidental punches to Braydon Schenn's head in retaliation for Crosby's flop (interesting to wonder whether Asham was aware he was involved in an altercation because of one of Crosby's dives; maybe he doesn't care). In fact, given the rules about message sending late in a game, the whole thing worked out very well for the Pens. They came out smelling like a rose even though they were sent out to send a message, something that is supposed to result in a suspension. Briere gave them a gift.

I always enjoy these "well your team would do it if it had had the chance" hypotheticals. Hard to argue with a hypothetical. Teams that send out players to send a message are taking a risk that can quickly backfire. The Pens seem to like this type of risk and that was apparent when they called up and dressed McIntyre, who has no business whatsoever in the NHL. The league office probably panicked when they saw that transaction. That was a classless and foolish move by the Pens and again, they were fortunate he didn't do anything crazy (his specialty).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I also think the league is well aware that the Pens are perhaps the only NHL team that has wide appeal outside of die hard, "cult" fans.

i'm not sure that is true. the kings had their thing in the late 90s, the sharks shortly thereafter. snoop dogg wore that penguins' jersey in the gin'n'juice video, but i'm not sure that means he or his posse gave a damn about them. i don't know how to refute or support your claim, other than something like this:

The Top 20 NHL Player Jersey Sales For November 2011

1. Sidney Crosby – Pittsburgh Penguins

2. Alex Ovechkin – Washington Capitals

3. Claude Giroux – Philadelphia Flyers

4. Tim Thomas – Boston Bruins

5. Jonathan Toews – Chicago Blackhawks

6. Patrick Kane – Chicago Blackhawks

7. Tyler Seguin – Boston Bruins

8. Ryan Callahan – New York Rangers

9. Steven Stamkos – Tampa Bay Lightning

10. Milan Lucic – Boston Bruins

11. Pavel Datsyuk – Detroit Red Wings

12. Zdeno Chara – Boston Bruins

13. Nicklas Backstrom – Washington Capitals

14. Henrik Lundqvist – New York Rangers

15. Evgeni Malkin – Pittsburgh Penguins

16. Danny Briere – Philadelphia Flyers

17. Joe Thornton – San Jose Sharks

18. James van Riemsdyk – Philadelphia Flyers

19. Henrik Zetterberg – Detroit Red Wings

20. Patrice Bergeron – Boston Bruins

2 penguins, 3 flyers, 5 bruins, 2 caps, 2 blackhawks and a scattering of others in the top 20. doesn't prove anything, but i'm not sure how you come up with the penguins having some kind of universal appeal that no one else has. hockey fans tend to not be casual, and they tend to have their team regardless of league marketing.

I know of no other example of a player getting an inexplicable, rule bending pass at a crucial moment like this but if I knew of such an example involving another team (feel free to enlighten me) it would be a lot easier to say sure, it is about marquee players and not a particular team.

well, we have feet in the crease situations, blown off sides calls, goals not counted (and not even reviewed). is there specifically another suspension that was waived in the cup finals in favor of a particular elite player? i don't know. don't know of many suspensions in the cup finals at all, really. the situation is rare enough that if it was or wasn't repeated seems besides the point, given the other examples of results engineering the league seems to have been involved in.

In fact, if you are suspicious of the lottery that landed Crosby in Pittsburgh, then you should be open to far more implausible ideas.

not so. the penguins were in real danger of going under before crosby. having a talent of that level be hand delivered to a struggling franchise was a particular kind of motivation for the league. a different situation than trying to hand pittsburgh a cup years later. the team was no longer in danger at that point, and had they lost against detroit would have been positioned to try again in the following years. no clock was ticking like it was for their very survival pre-crosby. there was nothing critical about that particular cup win. as opposed to tampa's, where there was an expansion system that was in dire need of validation, and no real guarantee that one of the southern expansions would be positioned to win a cup anytime soon if tampa failed to in that case. with all the southern expansions coming up short attendance-wise, a championship for one of them had the potential to make at least some of them solvent.

as i mentioned, there were 4 games after the one malkin played in but should have sat out. that decision had effect specifically on that single game. yes, one game impacts the overall series, but you are getting pretty abstracted at that point. malkin playing in game 3 made game 3 competitive, and i believe that was the league's goal. i don't think the series outcome was their point, that single game was what they were looking to not impact with a punative ruling. even with that loss, detroit was still up 2-1, they were still in the driver's seat.

You don't have to agree with with the point of view but one doesn't automatically become an epileptic crank for suspecting the league plays favorites.

fine, but there has to be a reasonable motivation for having favorites in the first place for that to hold water. boston was a favorite for a while because colin campbell's kid was on the team. pittsburgh was a favorite in the crosby lottery because it would literally save a franchise. tampa was a favorite in the calgary series because an expansion system implimented by gary bettman was in danger of collapse and required some kind of validation. pittsburgh was a favorite in the detroit series because....why? what possible reason could the league in general have for wanting a pittsburgh cup bad enough to manipulate the outcome? again, i can see a motivation for not wanting a sub-clause in the rules to deprive a team of it's marquee player for a game in the finals, i can see a reason the league wanted to not suspend malkin...but i can't see a reason for wanting to engineer a result to the series. pittsburgh wasn't going anywhere; if they didn't win then, they'd have a very good shot at coming back for another go for the third season in a row. why would the league get their hands dirty trying to force the issue?

it just doesn't track. i can only conclude the goal was the small picture of game 3, not the big picture of the series.

ok, i'm rambling. this, now, is turning into a discussion. like a real, point-counterpoint discussion. this, i don't mean to complain about. the ranting and raving and endless qq'ing (com'on, dorks, show yourselves) that goes on is a different thing. so, thank you for the even keeled response. even if i threw a wall of text back at you for it. ;)

Edited by aziz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...