yave1964 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Last night the folks went to Vancouver to watch a fight and a hockey game broke out. Straight out of slapshot or out of the seventies big brawling games, the Flames started every big brawling type on the roster and Hartley seemed surprised that John Tortorella replied in kind. The result was inevitable, it was a perfect storm. The Canucks have been falling on hard times, including a 9-1 loss earlier in the week to the Ducks followed up by a 1-0 loss to the Coyotes. No life. Absolutely no life. The Flames after a surprisingly good start have also fallen off, never really in contention but a tough club to play early in the season, they have needed a spark as well. Hartley started Westgarth, McGrattan, Chris Butler, Ladislav Smid and Blair Jones, not exactly household names anywhere outside of their own homes, only Smid could be considered a real semi-impactful player, the others, especially McGrattan and Westgarth are in the lineup for one reason only. Hartley said after the game that he started this line because they scored a goal in the previous game and his team has been having a difficult time scoring lately and he felt they earned the right to start the game. He seemed surprised that Torts started his big bodies instead of his Sedin line. Really. The coolest part of the night to me, even more than Torts trying to go after Hartley in the visiting locker room between periods was Kellan Lain of Vancouver making his NHL debut, playing all of two seconds and getting 15 minutes worth of penalties including an ejection. For those of you who do not like fighting this was not the game for you. Alexandre Burrows, fresh off missing six weeks with a broken jaw was punched square in the face by Mark Giordano in his first game back. Torts went after Hartley in the runway leading to the Flames locker room between the first and second period. The last time this happened was in 1999 and George McPhee of Washington was suspended for 30 games, although the situation was a bit more out of hand in that game. Nonetheless, I fully expect Torts to get suspended for his actions. This was my kind of game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nossagog Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 (edited) I expect Torts to get punished somehow by the league, not sure if they don't just fine him for it instead of suspending him. I also think that the league may have something to say to Mr. Hartley. I also expect Torts to complain about it bitterly, claiming that it was all the other teams fault, and that he and his team are just victims. That will never change. I wonder if he's apologized yet for the fights in the Anahiem game his team started while they were getting throttled, probably not. Not sure how I'd respond seeing the beef on the ice for the opening faceoff, Remember the whole Jon Scott thing off of a faceoff going after Kessel regardless of the fact that Kessel didn't want to go. Its easy to say, "Hey, just put out your top line and score a goal". Was Torts smart, or a contributing factor? I'm not a Fonzie fan, so my opinion is biased. Edited January 19, 2014 by nossagog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Hawkie Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 @nossagog "I wonder if he's apologized yet for the fights in the Anahiem game his team started while they were getting throttled, probably not." I wonder if he will pull an Alain Vigneault and say the Ducks were trying to run up the score ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Hawkie Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 @yave1964 That does sound like a 1970s-era game ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Hartley has facts on his side though... they scored a goal and he was rewarding them. Easy to say and hard to prove otherwise. Torts has a hearing I understand, so we'll see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nossagog Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 @nossagog "I wonder if he's apologized yet for the fights in the Anahiem game his team started while they were getting throttled, probably not." I wonder if he will pull an Alain Vigneault and say the Ducks were trying to run up the score ... Actually, pretty classic Torts as he was asked by one of the reporters about his team getting two instigators when they went for the big fight. His post game comments then were like, "Ya know, it doesn't do me or the team any good to dissect and comment on what happened . . . .". So when he sees it as his teams fault, he blows it off and doesn't talk about it. But when he sees it as the other teams fault, he has plenty to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nossagog Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Hartley has facts on his side though... they scored a goal and he was rewarding them. Easy to say and hard to prove otherwise. Torts has a hearing I understand, so we'll see what happens. Polaris, I can see that a coach would do that. But if you are being rewarded for hustle and scoring in your last game, you don't just drop the gloves off the faceoff, grab the guy that hasn't dropped his gloves, and start to fight. You go out and try to repeat what you are being reward for. Now, that being said, Torts puts in Bieska to take the opening faceoff, someone should have asked him about that? I wonder how many faceoffs Kevin Bieksa has taken in his career? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 @nossagog I'm not arguing what the real intent probably was.. I'm just saying Hartley's defense is simply that and nobody will ever be able to prove otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nossagog Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 (edited) @nossagog I'm not arguing what the real intent probably was.. I'm just saying Hartley's defense is simply that and nobody will ever be able to prove otherwise. DoDon't get me wrong. My point is that IMHO, both coaches knew exactly what was going to happen, and both are also playing dumb. As my dislike for Torts goes, its pretty easy for him to play the part. Edited January 19, 2014 by nossagog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Now, that being said, Torts puts in Bieska to take the opening faceoff, someone should have asked him about that? I wonder how many faceoffs Kevin Bieksa has taken in his career? Torts didn't really put Bieska in to take the face-off. Liam in his first game lined up to take the draw. Something must have been said on the ice as then Bieska moves up to take the draw. Looking at the video more. Liam ends up getting a game misconduct for roughing? I thought the rules were miconducts on the opening face off for fighting? :unsure: I think Bieska did the right thing moving up as you wouldn't want Westgarth destroying Liam in his NHL debut. He also won the face off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ladyneat Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I like how Hartley started the 4th line again today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.