Cherry defends Rinaldo

[ruxpin]

@radoran Well, we differ there, even the criminal act Bertuzzi pulled should have been handled from within. Keep the game out of the courts unless a death occurs.

Players should be allowed to carry guns on the ice.

[jammer2]

@ruxpin "Players should be allowed to carry guns on the ice."

Or, at least a stick with a scope.

[ruxpin]

@ruxpin "Players should be allowed to carry guns on the ice."

Or, at least a stick with a scope.

Ha! Briere could use a scope.

[B21]

@Phillygrump

<<< I did give you the example and you agreed. Cooke doesn't belong in the NHL. Are you talking about a specific incident or something? >>>

I said Pronger, too (using your own rationale). You forgot him. Not important though. Moving forward...

So - let's take this from the top. Thread starts out about Rinaldo and his reputation hurting him...all these calls that are are unfairly made against him. I give you a laundry list of things he's gotten away with. You drag Cooke in as an example of a guy with a history/reputation that no longer is held against him because he "reformed" his game. So I asked you to give me an example of something Cooke as gotten away with since that 17 game suspension.

Now - somewhere during this thread the "incident" versus the Senators occurred where Cooke's leg came down on Karlssons' leg while they were fighting for a puck along the boards slicing Karlsson's achilles tendon. Other than fans and media in Ottawa, the general consensus is that it was completely accidental. Knowing you will try to use that as your "example" (and assuming you had seen it), I point out you can't stating that his (well earned) reputation is the reason this incident is being disected so much...a guy with his history will be a lot more scrutinized when something like this happens than say a guy who just won the Lady Byng. In short, Cooke's reputation HURTING and not getting him a "pass".

Unless you've been living under a rock, you would have heard something about this incident. Maybe you have been living under a rock or just not watching a lot of hockey as you say (which doesn't help you argument either). Feel free to read up on it.

Back to basics - you argue Rinaldo's reputation is unfounded and unfairly held against him. I gave you lots of examples that prove otherwise. You said Matt Cooke's new and undeserved reputation that he is "reformed" has gotten him a pass. Fine...simple question. Tell me when.

<<< If you're suggesting I go back over every Penguins game and watch plays where Matt Cooke had questionable-illegal hits and no penalty even though he has a reputation for being a dirty goon with intent to injure I'm just not going to do that. >>>

Well you don't really get to make a statement like that and offer "becuase I said so" as proof. Everyone in the hockey world knows Cooke and his history. If he's involved in anything remotely questionable it's going to get coverage. If there has been an incident where he's gotten a pass, surely it would at least have been discussed in this forum. So again...give me an example of Cooke getting a pass.

<<< So don't ask me to point out to you things you have already seen but will deny as a Cooke fan. I have every right to be biased toward a guy like him who has intentionally tried to hurt at least 3 guys in his career. Your bias is based on the fact that he plays for your team. That is not as justified. >>>

Of course I have seen Cooke's antics. Saw them all. All terrible. I've never argued that. No bias at all on my end. What I HAVEN'T seen and what you have yet to give me an example of is Cooke getting a pass on something that he should have been penalized/disciplined for since his big 17 game suspension.

<<< By the way, Pronger may be a fringe guy who jabs and does stuff after the whistle and plays games with the puck, but shame on you for trying to compare him to Matt Cooke who INTENTIONALLY tries to injure people. >>>

Fringe?? Pronger never tried to intentionall injure anyone?? Aren you nuts??

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs2007/news/story?id=2891998

Let's see. Hit's Pat Peake in the throad with his stick fracturing Peake's thyroid cartiledge. Takes a swing at Roenick's head with his stick. Kicks Ville Niemenen. Elbows Holmstrom in the head. Elbows Dean McAmmon in the head. (Check that one on Youtube...looks a lot like Cooke's, eh?) Stomps on Kessler's leg with his skate.

But like you said he's "fringe" and has "never tried to intentionally injure anyone".

If there's is any shame it's your blindness to your little angel Chris Pronger. At least I can accept what my guy is. You seem to struggle with yours despite a laundry list of incidents laid out for you here.

[jammer2]

@ruxpin "Ha! Briere could use a scope."

Better than Pitkanen, that mouth breather just needs scope...period....ha ha!

[canoli]

Did you guys hear about this - or know about this "18-month" rule? I never heard of it before till now. Kinda goofy imo..a guy goes hog-wild for years then calms down for a season-and-a-half and he's got a "clean slate." Jeezuschrist. Only in the NHL boys...only in the NHL.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/22099/penguins-matt-cooke-has-a-clean-slate

According to CBA rules, Matt Cooke is no longer considered a repeat offender. Despite his five suspensions, Cooke’s last suspension was March 2011 -- 23 months ago. The rule is your repeat offender status gets cleared after 18 months without infraction.

Now, obviously Brendan Shanahan couldn't possibly ignore Cooke's past if he did something the disciplinary committee ruled was illegal, but the rules state that Cooke is no longer a repeat offender.

[jammer2]

@canoli Did not know that can, a clean slate you say?? WOW.

[radoran]

They certainly do go ot of their way to defang their enforcement policies.

[B21]

Did you guys hear about this - or know about this "18-month" rule? I never heard of it before till now. Kinda goofy imo..a guy goes hog-wild for years then calms down for a season-and-a-half and he's got a "clean slate." Jeezuschrist. Only in the NHL boys...only in the NHL.

http://espn.go.com/b...s-a-clean-slate

According to CBA rules, Matt Cooke is no longer considered a repeat offender. Despite his five suspensions, Cooke’s last suspension was March 2011 -- 23 months ago. The rule is your repeat offender status gets cleared after 18 months without infraction.

Now, obviously Brendan Shanahan couldn't possibly ignore Cooke's past if he did something the disciplinary committee ruled was illegal, but the rules state that Cooke is no longer a repeat offender.

Wow. Good find. I can't say I mind a rule like that but it should be a lot longer than 18 months (maybe even increasing for each subsequent suspension so a guy like Cooke has to behave longer than a 1st-time offender) and the time elapsed should be based on games played (i.e. - no "credit" for the lockout).

Any idea it it were the owners or players (or both) who wanted this?

[Phillygrump]

@B21

I've explained my opinion regarding the situation. You're looking to pick a fight and defend Cooke. I've since researched the Karlsson incident and I guess I see why you got so defensive.

I have not watched much hockey this season but I have watched it plenty last year and in the past. The only people that can defend Matt Cooke are blind homer Pittsburgh fans and I didn't think you fell into that category Burgher.

Get real. You are trying to make a defense of a guy that you know is a dirty classless thug. He hasn't changed.

Its funny. You think he's changed, but every year theres one or two incidents that make the rest of the league ask "Why is Matt Cooke even still allowed in the NHL?" Its not like he does an extra shot in or a dirty slash that breaks an arm. It is stuff that is career threatening and physically very damaging. You want me to argue that point with you? I am not going to do that. It would be like trying to argue that the sky is above when someone is convinced it isn't.

Sorry man. I just don't see how you can defend him and not think that the simple fact that he is even still playing in the NHL is evidence that his reputation is being overlooked. Now everyone wants to buy into the fact that he is a changed man? That hit of his on Volchenkov is enough to atleast warrant a penalty from a guy with Cooke's reputation and it didn't which is fine. I've seen other questionable hits form Cooke and I've asked myself "How does a guy like that with his reputation not even get a penalty from that when others would." You want me to go back and point them all out to you? I can't do that. If its not a football game I can't remember all that stuff that specifically. Either way, I don't mind the lack of penalties based on reputation if its a league wide thing. But thats not what happens.

Like I said, the mere fact that Cooke is still in the NHL is an example of the leniency he has been given. I don't really know what else you want to argue about.

[jammer2]

They should have some type of rule in effect where once you reach a certain amount of suspensions in a certain time frame you automatically are a repeat offender. You should not be pegged for life, but 3-4-5 offenses in a one or two year run should get you listed for a half a decade or so...there is NO WAY Cooke should be getting off scott free for his previous transgressions. 18 months is outrageous. A disgustingly dirty player should not be painted with the same brush as a clean player based on a year and a half of good behaviour....this is a dirty, dirty rule. Shame on the NHL.

[Phillygrump]

They should have some type of rule in effect where once you reach a certain amount of suspensions in a certain time frame you automatically are a repeat offender. You should not be pegged for life, but 3-4-5 offenses in a one or two year run should get you listed for a half a decade or so...there is NO WAY Cooke should be getting off scott free for his previous transgressions. 18 months is outrageous. A disgustingly dirty player should not be painted with the same brush as a clean player based on a year and a half of good behaviour....this is a dirty, dirty rule. Shame on the NHL.

I haven't seen the Karlsson thing. I knew he got hurt but only just heard that Cooke was involved at all. My first impression was he must have done something intentionally. Maybe he did or he didn't I didn't see it because achilles things give me the creeps, but I assumed that Cooke was guilty. Why does no one else?

[Phillygrump]

Right or wrong, I assumed he was guilty because when you have that kind of reputation and that many attempts to injure people you start to assume that is a player's goal.

[TedZep]

Players should be allowed to carry guns on the ice.

An armed ice rink is a polite ice rink?

[B21]

@Phillygrump

<<< I have not watched much hockey this season but I have watched it plenty last year and in the past. The only people that can defend Matt Cooke are blind homer Pittsburgh fans and I didn't think you fell into that category Burgher. >>>

Show me where I defended anything that Cooke has done in this thread. Go ahead. That’s your accusation now find it.

<<< Get real. You are trying to make a defense of a guy that you know is a dirty classless thug. He hasn't changed. >>>

Show me where I said he’s changed. I’ll wait on that one, too.

<<< It’s funny. You think he's changed, but every year there’s one or two incidents that make the rest of the league ask "Why is Matt Cooke even still allowed in the NHL?" It’s not like he does an extra shot in or a dirty slash that breaks an arm. It is stuff that is career threatening and physically very damaging. You want me to argue that point with you? I am not going to do that. It would be like trying to argue that the sky is above when someone is convinced it isn't. >>>

So what were those 1 or 2 incidents last year? How about this year? Back to ‘pre’ and ‘post’ suspension. You specifically said that this supposed new reputation of his has allowed him to get a pass THIS YEAR on things he would have been suspended for in the past. THAT is the ONLY point I am arguing against. Not that he’s not a dirty player based on what happened before that big suspension. I’ve never once disputed that. So again…what has he done this year (or last for that matter) that he should have been suspended for?

<<< Sorry man. I just don't see how you can defend him and not think that the simple fact that he is even still playing in the NHL is evidence that his reputation is being overlooked. >>>

Easy – there are players who have done much worse who are still playing (or at least have not yet retired). You traded for one. Remember him?

<<< Now everyone wants to buy into the fact that he is a changed man? That hit of his on Volchenkov is enough to at least warrant a penalty from a guy with Cooke's reputation and it didn't which is fine. I've seen other questionable hits form Cooke and I've asked myself "How does a guy like that with his reputation not even get a penalty from that when others would." You want me to go back and point them all out to you? I can't do that. If it’s not a football game I can't remember all that stuff that specifically. Either way, I don't mind the lack of penalties based on reputation if it’s a league wide thing. But that’s not what happens. >>>

It took a few posts but apparently it’s the Volchenkov hit where he was shown leniency? Gimme a break. That’s real weak. So what other questionable hits or calls? I’ve seen you itemize incidents before but now when asked you can’t remember. Maybe because since his last suspension THERE HAVEN’T BEEN ANY.

It’s kinda ironic that you are alleging that Rinaldo doesn’t get the benefit of doubt on questionable calls because of his reputation and you see that as being unfair yet you WANT the exact opposite for Cooke…penalties and suspensions “just in case”.

<<< Like I said, the mere fact that Cooke is still in the NHL is an example of the leniency he has been given. I don't really know what else you want to argue about. >>>

Well that’s an entirely different point then. You go from last year and this you back to his entire career. Now the NHL was too lenient back in 2011 or even sooner. You’re literally changing the topic mid-argument. Probably since you can’t come up with ANYTHING after that 17 game suspension was handed down.

<<< Get real. You are trying to make a defense of a guy that you know is a dirty classless thug. He hasn't changed. >>>

Kinda like you defended Pronger? He only is “…a fringe guy who jabs and does stuff after the whistle and plays games with the puck.” That statement is the biggest example of blind homerism I’ve ever read. Funny, too. Nothing from you in response to him never having intentionally tried to injure someone either. Maybe because admitting he has on severeal occasions (not really debatable) means he too should have been tossed from the league like you think Cooke should have been? But we can't admit to having a POS like that in O&B, can we?

[Polaris922]

If you're suggesting I go back over every Penguins game and watch plays where Matt Cooke had questionable-illegal hits and no penalty even though he has a reputation for being a dirty goon with intent to injure I'm just not going to do that.

I won't even commit that much time to the Flyers post lockout. But I have seen it happen with my own eyes and so have you.

So don't ask me to point out to you things you have already seen but will deny as a Cooke fan. I have every right to be biased toward a guy like him who has intentionally tried to hurt at least 3 guys in his career. Your bias is based on the fact that he plays for your team. That is not as justified.

By the way, Pronger may be a fringe guy who jabs and does stuff after the whistle and plays games with the puck, but shame on you for trying to compare him to Matt Cooke who INTENTIONALLY tries to injure people.

Hahaha! You don't know Chris Pronger very well, do you? Lol

[ruxpin]

Hahaha! You don't know Chris Pronger very well, do you? Lol

Agreed. Although I think if the majority of your exposure to Pronger was his Flyers' version you might not realize he very much played that way.

[jackhole]

Players should be allowed to carry guns on the ice.

The only way to stop a bad player with a gun.. is a good player with a gun

[Polaris922]

I'm not defending Cooke's history. I am defending Cooke on the Karlsson hit. I think he HAS made a conscious effort to change his game, and the league has let him stay so until he deserves otherwise again, I'll defend his change. He scored 19 goals last season on a third line, and cut his penalty minutes in half and then some. When he does something suspendable, I'll say as much and hope for proper punishment or even banning from the league. Until then, I'll hope he HAS changed and root for him to make it last.