Seabrook hit

[Old School Hockey]

Sorry, but since I was a pee wee hockey player, there were two basic fundamentals to playing the game: Keep you head up and your stick on the ice. I am just completely floored at how many people think that was a cheap shot and not a hockey play. Not that matter much, but Backes is FAR from an angel and would have made the exact same hit given the opportunity. 

 

I feel like I am arguing the Lindros - Stevens hit all over again, but from the opposite side. The difference in this is that there was ZERO flying elbow / forearm shiver. It was a shoulder. Backes is the same height as Seabrook. Shame on him for not knowing he was in a playoff game and looking at his skates coming from behind his net with the puck. I take / make that hit every day of the week. I don't direct this to you personally, but for all that thinks this is a bad hit, go watch baseball (sorry TFG), table tennis or any other sport that is non-contact.

I have a solution! Take off the armor that players are wearing. Make hurt if you choose to make the big thundering hit. Not a popular opinion but effective.

[J0e Th0rnton]

The bush comments from Keith after the hit were just that! Bush league!

Wakey Wakey Backes

And your name is old school Hockey?

 

Your comments seem to be very new school

[canoli]

Take off the armor that players are wearing. Make hurt if you choose to make the big thundering hit. Not a popular opinion but effective.

 

that really is the solution. Or at least part of it. These guys are wearing bullet-proof helmets and visors now and they feel indestructible - and who can blame them?

[Old School Hockey]

And your name is old school Hockey?

 

Your comments seem to be very new school

In my day when you hurt someone you looked to see if they were ok. That's called respect. A lost art.

[Podein25]

Sorry, but since I was a pee wee hockey player, there were two basic fundamentals to playing the game: Keep you head up and your stick on the ice. I am just completely floored at how many people think that was a cheap shot and not a hockey play. Not that matter much, but Backes is FAR from an angel and would have made the exact same hit given the opportunity. 

 

I feel like I am arguing the Lindros - Stevens hit all over again, but from the opposite side. The difference in this is that there was ZERO flying elbow / forearm shiver. It was a shoulder. Backes is the same height as Seabrook. Shame on him for not knowing he was in a playoff game and looking at his skates coming from behind his net with the puck. I take / make that hit every day of the week. I don't direct this to you personally, but for all that thinks this is a bad hit, go watch baseball (sorry TFG), table tennis or any other sport that is non-contact.

 

You realize who you are talking to eh? Anybody who knows me on this forum knows that I'm no shrinking violet.

 

people think that was a cheap shot and not a hockey play.

I never called it that. It used to be a hockey play, still is I guess, but he targeted the head. It's also borderline intereference and/or charging, both of which are penalties (so not hockey plays?)

 

Backes is FAR from an angel and would have made the exact same hit given the opportunity.

I don't see how that is relevant

[talloola]

yes, it is the size of todays players, and the speed and intensity with which they are playing.

 

there will be this type of incident happen, can't be helped, and it doesn't solve anything to side with either player.

 

but seabrook could have accomplished what he wanted to accomplish with half the hit, all he has to do is prevent the

player from doing what he wants to do, and that doesn't take a hit with that power.

 

my  husband, who played hockey and coached for years, and i worked closely with him, talk about these things all the

time, the hit just didn't have to be that hard, even if it was clean.

 

the rules are now there to protect the head area, that is very important, so if the person being  hit made a mistake, and the

player doing the hit, was travelling into him at a more controlled speed, he then can adjust his hit.

 

it does nothing to help protect serious head injuries by just saying it was the fault of the person who was hit.

we see it all the time, eg. the hit on toews a few weeks ago caused injury, apparantly a clean hit, but had orpik controlled the

power behind that hit he would have accomplished his task, and toews would not have been injured, that hit was far too hard for

the situation, no need for it.   just take the player out, don't try to injure him, and orpik is good for those 'i'm going to hurt you' type

of hits.

[Samifan]

Per TSN, Seabrook gets 3 games.

[hf101]

Video from the league.

 

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=715650

 

Considering that the old rule of thumb was approximately  2 playoff games = one regular season game,...  Seabrook really got the book here in his first offense.  

 

Yet I agree with the call and the suspension.  We don't want the playoffs to be about taking out the best players on the ice with deliberate head shots.

[Polaris922]

Think about this...

Seabrook bends his knees and his shoulder hits Backes' shoulder, we're not having this discussion. Backes didn't suddenly duck. Seabrook elevates his shoulder into Backes' head. That's intentional and dirty.

I've been a Pens fan for 35 years. We have James Neal. I know dirty. . That's dirty.

[Vanflyer]

You realize who you are talking to eh? Anybody who knows me on this forum knows that I'm no shrinking violet.

 

90% of my post was not directed at you, just I choose to expound on your post. 

 

I never called it that. It used to be a hockey play, still is I guess, but he targeted the head. It's also borderline intereference and/or charging, both of which are penalties (so not hockey plays?)

 

What Kronwall does is usually 10 times worse in regards to interference / charging. It used to be that you have a 3 second rule / 3 step rule on hitting an opposing player after the player played the puck. Not an official rule, but an unwritten rule. 

 

I don't see how that is relevant

 

It really is not relevant. 

[B21]

Midsection, not let me hit you in the gonads hard enough that they protrude from your ears.........and that was the 2nd time Lucic has done that to someone in the last 2 weeks......I laughed at his Zac Rinaldo Defense..."I don't know what I was thinking It was as much his fault as it was mine."

 

Fixed.    And Hartnells shot was a heckuva alot harder than Lucic's. Hartnell practically impaled the guy.

 

Midsection. Nads.  Still a BS cheap play by a BS cheap player.

[canoli]

And Hartnells shot was a heckuva alot harder than Lucic's. Hartnell practically impaled the guy.

 

please tell me you're not talking about that "spearing" from G81.

[B21]

please tell me you're not talking about that "spearing" from G81.

 

Yes. That spearing.

 

Please tell me you aren't going to try and defend it.

[mojo1917]

Fixed.    And Hartnells shot was a heckuva alot harder than Lucic's. Hartnell practically impaled the guy.

 

Midsection. Nads.  Still a BS cheap play by a BS cheap player.

how's this relate to the Seabrook- Backes hit again ? 

 

I would really enjoy your perspective a lot more if you took less time railing against injustices performed by Flyers be they real or perceived, and kept to the topic at hand,  this is i believe the 2nd place this weekend where the group at large is talking about series and games that have nothing to do with the Pens or the Flyers . this topic and the "lucic love tap" thread devolve from an actual decent conversation about the game's violence into ...you  talking about what a douche you think Scott Hartnell is ... you know what . Noted. 

 

I hate your team too.  and I once saw Chris Kunitz kick a lab puppy let me send you the youtube link.

 

what's your take on this actual event ? 

[yave1964]

What Kronwall does is usually 10 times worse in regards to interference / charging. It used to be that you have a 3 second rule / 3 step rule on hitting an opposing player after the player played the puck. Not an official rule, but an unwritten rule. 

 

You do realize that since Lidstrom retired two years ago that Kronwall has turned into a pussycat don't you? it never fails to amaze me that people continue to bring his name up......

[B21]

how's this relate to the Seabrook- Backes hit again ? 

 

I would really enjoy your perspective a lot more if you took less time railing against injustices performed by Flyers be they real or perceived, and kept to the topic at hand,  this is i believe the 2nd place this weekend where the group at large is talking about series and games that have nothing to do with the Pens or the Flyers . this topic and the "lucic love tap" thread devolve from an actual decent conversation about the game's violence into ...you  talking about what a douche you think Scott Hartnell is ... you know what . Noted. 

 

I hate your team too.  and I once saw Chris Kunitz kick a lab puppy let me send you the youtube link.

 

what's your take on this actual event ? 

 

So I make a toungue-and-cheek comment about Hartnell's recent spearing incident and look what happens.  If you have a problem with such off topic comments then you are in the wrong forum. Check out any number of threads in the Pens' section and you'll find the same...a lot more of it, too.  Try the thread about the Milbury comments after the Orpik hit on Toews.  Without really looking I found a few similar "tongue-and-cheek" comments by Flyers fans about James Neal.  What did James Neal have to do with the Orpik hit? 

 

And nothing gets railed on in this forum more than incidents involving the Pens.

[mojo1917]

@B21

 

I didn't really interpret the separate instances of "Hartnell's a douche" baiting as "tongue-in-cheek". I interpreted those posts as  deliberate attempts to derail the topic at hand.  In the Lucic thread and this one i don't see where the Hartnell incident ...is it even an incident ? is apropos of anything.

well maybe the Lucic thread because Hartnell used his stick too... 

 

I didn't view those as off-handed remarks to make a greater point or even punctuate a point with a barb but rather what has become your typical trope about how no one likes your team and the Flyers are just as bad...no worse actually... here's a link that proves it .

 

i'd prefer you save that junk for when our teams are playing so then it will be fresh .

[Commander Clueless]

Clean hit. Backes turned at the last minute, and thus deserved a concussion-inducing illegal flying elbow to the face.

 

 

 

Deuces.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Commander Clueless

[B21]

@B21

 

I didn't really interpret the separate instances of "Hartnell's a douche" baiting as "tongue-in-cheek". I interpreted those posts as  deliberate attempts to derail the topic at hand.  In the Lucic thread and this one i don't see where the Hartnell incident ...is it even an incident ? is apropos of anything.

well maybe the Lucic thread because Hartnell used his stick too... 

 

I didn't view those as off-handed remarks to make a greater point or even punctuate a point with a barb but rather what has become your typical trope about how no one likes your team and the Flyers are just as bad...no worse actually... here's a link that proves it .

 

i'd prefer you save that junk for when our teams are playing so then it will be fresh .

 

The original post? Tongue-and-cheek for sure.  If that leads somewhere else? So be it.  Happens all the time.  It was a deliberate attempt to point out that Hartnell recently had his own Lucic-like spearing incident - and I was curious if the poster (who I think is a good one) thought Hartnell should have been suspended too (he felt Lucic should have been).  Thats not "apropo"? Both speared (recently). Both have prior incidents on their resumes. Both fined $5,000. 

 

Again - happens all the time to Pens fans here.  We get involved in a discussion about whether a certain his is dirty/not dirty or suspendable/not suspendable and like day follows night there will be some random reference to something a Penguin did in the months (or years) prior.  I already gave you a few examples from that Milbury thread.  Apparently someone dragged Kronwall into this thread as I saw a Wings fan defending him (not tracking that history). 

 

But now a Pens fan throws a half-serious "barb" at a Flyers fan about something that same Flyers fan has already acknowledged is basically a cheap, dirty play and you see the response (your own).

 

I guess the Pens are only supposed to take it and not dish it out from time to time.

[DaGreatGazoo]

I guess the Pens are only supposed to take it and not dish it out from time to time.

 

And don't forget to say, "Thank you, sir.  May I have another?", while you're at it.  

[B21]

And don't forget to say, "Thank you, sir.  May I have another?", while you're at it.  

 

Well no one told me to assume the position.

 

Or my Delta Tau Chi name for that matter!

[flyercanuck]

The original post? Tongue-and-cheek for sure.  If that leads somewhere else? So be it.  Happens all the time.  It was a deliberate attempt to point out that Hartnell recently had his own Lucic-like spearing incident - and I was curious if the poster (who I think is a good one) thought Hartnell should have been suspended too (he felt Lucic should have been).  Thats not "apropo"? Both speared (recently). Both have prior incidents on their resumes. Both fined $5,000. 

 

Again - happens all the time to Pens fans here.  We get involved in a discussion about whether a certain his is dirty/not dirty or suspendable/not suspendable and like day follows night there will be some random reference to something a Penguin did in the months (or years) prior.  I already gave you a few examples from that Milbury thread.  Apparently someone dragged Kronwall into this thread as I saw a Wings fan defending him (not tracking that history). 

 

But now a Pens fan throws a half-serious "barb" at a Flyers fan about something that same Flyers fan has already acknowledged is basically a cheap, dirty play and you see the response (your own).

 

I guess the Pens are only supposed to take it and not dish it out from time to time.

 

 

I call bs. (oh and Cooke is still a douchebag)

[DaGreatGazoo]

Or my Delta Tau Chi name for that matter!

 

Well, that's easy...Your Delta Chi name is...."FLOPPER".

 

HE HE HE....

[B21]

Well, that's easy...Your Delta Chi name is...."FLOPPER".

 

HE HE HE....

 

I actually got a chuckle out of that one.

[B21]

I call bs. (oh and Cooke is still a douchebag)

 

Agree. He's on the Wild now.