King Knut Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Sorry Boss, I didn't write the damn rule book. He came from behind and Grabovski couldn't see him coming no matter how "up" his head was. END OF STORY. I don't claim that every other person here is looking at the situation as clearly as I am. I'm about as objective an observer as you can find in this situation. I'm not an Islanders fan or a sharks fan. I don't give a whit about Grabovski and I have no opinion of Scott either. I don't honestly care if either guy ever plays again or not, but I don't wish either harm either. I could honestly care less about either team or either player. I have no dog in this hunt. Can you say the same? It's the integrity of the game at play and I have seen cleaner players than Scott be suspended for much cleaner hits than this many times in this league. Hits like this going un-penalized have a ripple effect on the entire league and the fact that this kind of thing goes unpunished puts the players I do care about and thus the fortunes of the teams I follow at increased risk. What if it were Crosby or Getzlaf or Giroux or Kane or St. Louis or Thornton any other "elite" scorer? Would the league or the refs have ignored it this way? And ultimately, I don't care what the refs think about it, but if Scott did that to my team mate, clean hit or not (and it was dirty according both the rules and commons sense), I'd have jumped the punk and shoved his face into the ice and my team mates should have joined me in doing so. If there is NO deterrent to this kind of thing, we'll keep seeing careers cut short and worse due to these traumatic brain injuries. It's just stupid and arguing for it is about as ridiculous a thing as I can imagine. Checking from behind is also called "hitting him on the numbers" for a reason, and is almost exclusively called only when it propels a man into the boards. He hit his shoulder. End of story. John Scott is a guy who has every hit come under scrutiny, Yet, not a single person other than you is calling foul here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0e Th0rnton Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Hit happened with 6 minutes left in the 1st. TOI for John on the game. 5:16, just about a minute under his average. So, no, he was not held back.Mostly because he is not very good at Hockey and his icetime has to be severely limited in away games. The opposing coach getting last line change will lick their chops and throw Tavares out if they see John Scott on the ice in the defensive zone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 @King Knut If you think that was a dirty hit maybe you should watch nerf hockey. The only thing dirty there was the size differential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0e Th0rnton Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Sorry Boss, I didn't write the damn rule book. He came from behind and Grabovski couldn't see him coming no matter how "up" his head was. END OF STORY. I don't claim that every other person here is looking at the situation as clearly as I am. I'm about as objective an observer as you can find in this situation. I'm not an Islanders fan or a sharks fan. I don't give a whit about Grabovski and I have no opinion of Scott either. I don't honestly care if either guy ever plays again or not, but I don't wish either harm either. I could honestly care less about either team or either player. I have no dog in this hunt. Can you say the same? It's the integrity of the game at play and I have seen cleaner players than Scott be suspended for much cleaner hits than this many times in this league. Hits like this going un-penalized have a ripple effect on the entire league and the fact that this kind of thing goes unpunished puts the players I do care about and thus the fortunes of the teams I follow at increased risk. What if it were Crosby or Getzlaf or Giroux or Kane or St. Louis or Thornton any other "elite" scorer? Would the league or the refs have ignored it this way? And ultimately, I don't care what the refs think about it, but if Scott did that to my team mate, clean hit or not (and it was dirty according both the rules and commons sense), I'd have jumped the punk and shoved his face into the ice and my team mates should have joined me in doing so. If there is NO deterrent to this kind of thing, we'll keep seeing careers cut short and worse due to these traumatic brain injuries. It's just stupid and arguing for it is about as ridiculous a thing as I can imagine.NOBODY is looking at it the way you are. Every NHL analyst is out there calling it a clean hit. The player safety commitee are not even going to review it because it was so cut and dry clean. The Isles announcers are calling it clean. There are 100 pages on the other big hockey forum, and I have yet to see a single person call it dirty. If he hit him in the head, you would have a case. Given how you are interpreting the rules wrong while preaching you did not write the book, you might want to dig a bit to understand them better. If you and your teammates jumped on John Scott, you would end up being the ones beat up while he walked away without a blemish. But by all means, try haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 And not a single player on the Isles would dare challenge John Scott haha really, why should they. Despite the fact he is a behemoth, there was no reason to. If there was anyone to challenge him and he pounds that player into the ground, that is adding salt to the wound. The guy plays 6 minutes a night. It was a 0-0 game at that point. A retaliation would have put the Iles in the hole- and for what? Because their player got hit cleanly. Its hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 @King Knut I can appreciate the point you are trying to make by throwing in "what if it were Crosby, Kane..." etc...but THAT is an entirely different matter. Like it or not, the league will look to protect it's perceived 'star players'.....a major hit could be clean as only Mr. Clean, Pine-Sol, Scrubbing Bubbles, Resolve, Ajax, AND Formula 409 can make them, but if its on a major star player, the hit would most likely be looked at. But that has nothing to do with this particular hit being dirty or not (which it really wasn't)....but more to do with WHO was getting hit and by whom.Double standards? Of course. But that's just the way THAT is. Different players do have a certain interpretation of the rules than others.....not fair, but that's how it is. But has nothing to do with Scott's hit on Grabo being dirty or clean. If Scott hits Crosby like that, yea, maybe the league looks at it, not because the hit MAY have been dirty, but because it's a star like Crosby getting hammered.Hit would have been just as clean had it BEEN Crosby though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Sorry. There was no buildup of speed. He took no strides and there was no acceleration. He floated in there like a Hindenburg blimp and the weight difference is what the factor was Exactly and Gabs forgot he was playing in the nhl (always remember your surroundings). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Checking from behind is also called "hitting him on the numbers" for a reason, and is almost exclusively called only when it propels a man into the boards. He hit his shoulder. End of story.John Scott is a guy who has every hit come under scrutiny, Yet, not a single person other than you is calling foul here. I find it humorous and ironic that some folks might look at that and consider it foul play, yet the cross check to Duprious was a clean hit. I hope Duprious (sp) is ok. That was a blatant cross check. It would not have stopped the injury, but should have been a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 @King Knut If you think that was a dirty hit maybe you should watch nerf hockey. The only thing dirty there was the size differential. So many places I could digress to with that comment. Sheep come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 @Vanflyer Go for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Sorry Boss, I didn't write the damn rule book. He came from behind and Grabovski couldn't see him coming no matter how "up" his head was. END OF STORY Not to beat a dead sheep, but unfortunately it is not the end of the story.First, it is categorically not charging. John Scott can barely skate as it is. Second, he could scarcely avoid "coming from behind" given Grabovski's choice to pick the puck up the way he did and skate backwards into the slot (kids: not advised).I appreciate the spirited argument you have presented, but you are wrong. I'm wrong all the time, it's ok to admit it. Why, I was wrong just this morning: I should have stayed in bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0e Th0rnton Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 @King Knut If you think that was a dirty hit maybe you should watch nerf hockey. The only thing dirty there was the size differential.Effectively, it was like a 160 pound adult hitting an 80 pound kid full on. Size matters in the results. The hit was clean, but that is the kind of size difference we are engaged in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Why, I was wrong just this morning: I should have stayed in bed. With your wool comforter?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 @Vanflyer Is that what we're calling them now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 With your wool comforter?? She has a name! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Is that what we're calling them now? I don't even know which direction to go with that. Just don't call me late for dinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Yeah, I don't see anything wrong with the hit. Scott wasn't striding, he hit Grabovski in the shoulder from the front, he's just a really, really big guy. Was Grabovski unaware of his presence? Maybe, but that's on Grabovski, not Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 She has a name! Baaaaaaaaarbara? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Baaaaaaaaarbara stop it, I am trying to eat dinner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Are you having baaabaaa ganoush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 And then wash it down with baabaa waawaaaAnd now I am going to be sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Are you having baaabaaa ganoush? you will have to ask Pods, he never told me what her name was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nossagog Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 @King Knut I can appreciate the point you are trying to make by throwing in "what if it were Crosby, Kane..." etc...but THAT is an entirely different matter. Like it or not, the league will look to protect it's perceived 'star players'.....a major hit could be clean as only Mr. Clean, Pine-Sol, Scrubbing Bubbles, Resolve, Ajax, AND Formula 409 can make them, but if its on a major star player, the hit would most likely be looked at. But that has nothing to do with this particular hit being dirty or not (which it really wasn't)....but more to do with WHO was getting hit and by whom.Double standards? Of course. But that's just the way THAT is. Different players do have a certain interpretation of the rules than others.....not fair, but that's how it is. But has nothing to do with Scott's hit on Grabo being dirty or clean. If Scott hits Crosby like that, yea, maybe the league looks at it, not because the hit MAY have been dirty, but because it's a star like Crosby getting hammered.Hit would have been just as clean had it BEEN Crosby though. Have to hop in here been out of town, just catching up. 1) Hit was perfectly clean, there was no need for a penalty or for retaliation. Jon Scott is just big. No check from behind, No high hit, elbows down, No charge. He just coasted in and plasterd Grabs with his body frame.2) The "If this happened to Crosby" argument. Please, don't make me laugh. Did anything happend to Steckel after he "accidently" contacted Crosby's head. No. it was an accident and not deemed not illegal. Did anything happen to Hedman the game after that after he put crosby into the glass from behind, which actually WAS illegal, and finished him off for the year? No. Using the "Well if it happened to player X, it would have been different" just doesn't stand the test of proof. Show an example please if you want to claim this. Hockey's a contact sport, if you deem this hit as illegal the league is in big trouble. Teams should be showing this video of the exact way to put a but hard hit on an opponent without taking a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Using the "Well if it happened to player X, it would have been different" just doesn't stand the test of proof. Show an example please if you want to claim this. While there should not be a double standered, there is. Pronger will change all that. :-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 She has a name!EWE!!!!!!!! At least I hope it is a ewe......I would hope you don't prefer your sheep by the horns....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.