nossagog Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 41 minutes ago, hf101 said: It does appear that way, which (shockingly) is why I started the topic. What does this statement mean to you then by Rutherford? “The league has got to fix it,” To me, that means asking for change of some type. So what is it that he wants fixed? he says it in his next statement... “In other leagues, they protect star players." In other words, Rutherford is asking for the league to fix a problem, as he is stating that Star Players are being abused and need to be protected. Being the fact that the article does not specifically show the questions and answers in full, how can anyone know what the actual questions were. For that matter, when they occurred. This whole argument is based on an article from The Hockey News that quotes bits and pieces. Let me see the full interview and I'll make my own judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted May 29, 2017 Author Share Posted May 29, 2017 8 minutes ago, B21 said: Here is the difference. You see Rutherford saying all players are "abused" equally and that the "abuse" of the stars needs to be policed differently (a big reach to go from his quotes to that). Yeah, Crosby isn't the only one that gets slashes, gloves in the face, knocked over, etc. Rinne was getting run at by the Ducks too. Johansen suffered a serious leg injury, Hornqvist is returning from injury, so is Fisher. None of the above have ever been considered as Stars, good players yes, Stars not quite. 8 minutes ago, B21 said: I see Rutherford saying the "stars" get "abused" more and that the league needs to do something about that. More than before? I'd say it's been going on for a long time. I think calling the games differently in the playoffs compared to the regular season has been going on for a long time. 8 minutes ago, B21 said: I see Rutherford saying this less than a week after the Sens abused (no quotes) Crosby to the point where multiple articles were written about it (not to mention Milbury of all people acknowledging it). Kinda lends credence to the latter of the above points, no? Not really, think about it if you were a coach of another team how would you strategize to beat the Penguins? For me, I'd target their defense and disrupt as much as possible on the Crosby and Malkin lines. Thus what Ottawa tried really didn't surprise me one bit. Pittsburgh on the other hand, tried to disrupt the transition game of the Senators as much as possible, both Phaneuf and Ceci were hurting big time. 8 minutes ago, B21 said: You simply see someone affiliated with the Penguins "complaining" about this and instantly think "whiner". "Sickening". "Ploy". "Deserves untouchable treatment." You're literally taking that from what Rutherford said. So again...wow. I've explained my adjectives in posts above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted May 30, 2017 Author Share Posted May 30, 2017 I guess I'm not the only one who questioned Rutherford's comments. https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1310115-bettman-rutherford-may-be-trying-to-tweak-officials-over-crosby-treatment Quote The NHL commissioner was asked Monday about comments made by the Pittsburgh Penguins general manager on the eve of the championship round. Rutherford implied Sunday that Crosby and Pittsburgh's other stars are being pushed around without adequate consequences and that he might have to add some beef to the roster to protect them. Bettman responded Monday, prefacing his reply by saying he thinks "the world" of Rutherford personally and professionally, but adding that the timing of the Penguins GM's remarks was a bit strange. "The timing of what he said, to me, seems a little odd," the commissioner said, via the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. "That's something you do in a GM meeting, not the night before - or the day of - (Game 1 of) the Stanley Cup Final. Maybe he's trying to tweak the officials a little bit, but in the final analysis, we don't want our players getting hurt." Bettman also pointed out that the Penguins have drawn criticism from other teams for the way they've played. "I think it's fair to say that all of the teams that have been in the playoffs have been very physical," he said. "There are a couple of people who have complained from other teams about some of the things Pittsburgh players have done. Some of that goes in the category of gamesmanship. Some of that goes to the fact we need to be vigilant as a league to make sure players are not unnecessarily and inappropriately hurt. As I said, that is something we continue to monitor and will. Having said that, I take all of the concerns from all of our players, all of our clubs and all of our owners very seriously on this issue.” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 16 hours ago, hf101 said: Yeah, Crosby isn't the only one that gets slashes, gloves in the face, knocked over, etc. Rinne was getting run at by the Ducks too. Johansen suffered a serious leg injury, Hornqvist is returning from injury, so is Fisher. None of the above have ever been considered as Stars, good players yes, Stars not quite. Was Johansen specifically targeted over and over like Crosby was in Game 6? I know Hornqvist wasn't. Just because a player has been injured does not mean he's been targeted by the other team. If Rinne was and you ask Rutherford about it I'd bet he's agree that it needs to stop as well.\ 16 hours ago, hf101 said: More than before? I'd say it's been going on for a long time. I think calling the games differently in the playoffs compared to the regular season has been going on for a long time. And again - this is not about games being called "differently" in the playoffs. That's no secret. This is about things that go even beyond the usual stuff that gets called in the regular season and let go in the playoffs. 16 hours ago, hf101 said: Not really, think about it if you were a coach of another team how would you strategize to beat the Penguins? For me, I'd target their defense and disrupt as much as possible on the Crosby and Malkin lines. Thus what Ottawa tried really didn't surprise me one bit. Pittsburgh on the other hand, tried to disrupt the transition game of the Senators as much as possible, both Phaneuf and Ceci were hurting big time. That's called strategy. X's and O's. That's not what Ottawa was doing. 16 hours ago, hf101 said: I've explained my adjectives in posts above. Not very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 @hf101 From your own article... Bettman: "Maybe he's trying to tweak the officials a little bit, but in the final analysis, we don't want our players getting hurt." Interesting. This is what you find "sickening" and a "ploy" and that it should be above the Pens to even try; if they can't beat Nashville on talent alone then too bad. Funny, where was all your angst when Trotz did it after Game 1? Or when any number of other coaches or general managers did the same in this or just about every other post season? But the Pens? Rutherford? They are looking for preferential treatment. Even O&B goggles can fog up. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted May 31, 2017 Author Share Posted May 31, 2017 9 hours ago, B21 said: Bettman: "Maybe he's trying to tweak the officials a little bit, but in the final analysis, we don't want our players getting hurt." Interesting. This is what you find "sickening" and a "ploy" and that it should be above the Pens to even try "Ploy" Yeah, I do think Rutherford was creating attention to gain some sort of advantage with the officiating. As I mentioned previously that isn't what I find sickening. I used that term for Rutherford's disturbing comment for making a public suggestion of bringing back 1 or 2 enforcers for star player protection. We all know the NHL is in a lawsuit against a large number of past enforcers who are now suffering from CTE, depression, anxiety, and addictions from concussions caused from numerous fights in their careers. Fights that were nothing about player protection, but were about fan entertainment. yeah, it's really a shame that so many lives have been destroyed, and he has the nerve to even suggest going down that path again for a false claim in player protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 10 hours ago, hf101 said: "Ploy" Yeah, I do think Rutherford was creating attention to gain some sort of advantage with the officiating. As I mentioned previously that isn't what I find sickening. I used that term for Rutherford's disturbing comment for making a public suggestion of bringing back 1 or 2 enforcers for star player protection. We all know the NHL is in a lawsuit against a large number of past enforcers who are now suffering from CTE, depression, anxiety, and addictions from concussions caused from numerous fights in their careers. Fights that were nothing about player protection, but were about fan entertainment. yeah, it's really a shame that so many lives have been destroyed, and he has the nerve to even suggest going down that path again for a false claim in player protection. "This whining by the Penguins GM is just sickening, throwing these comments out there right before the Stanley Cup Finals begin. All as a ploy to somehow influence the way the next set of games will be officiated." Kinda makes me think your issue isn't with his thoughts on the enforcer but the general perception that you feel Rutherford is "whining" when all he appears to be doing is the proverbial "planting the seed in the officials' heads"...something that's been done countless other times over the years. If you really had an issue with his comments about bringing back the enforcer/protector (also something many players and coaches are on record supporting) you would have clearly said it. "If the Penguins are going to win another cup it needs to be because they are the better team and that the officiating has fairly called each and every game. Not because Crosby deserves stardom untouchable treatment." Not there.... "Crosby and the rest of the Penguins play like any other team in the NHL with good play and cheapshots. I guess Rutherford didn't see Crosby slice Methot's finger, or Crosby's cheap shot to O'Reilly's groin." Not there... "Jim Rutherford seems to think Crosby needs to be protected. That all superstars in the NHL need to be protected. That the league will need to go back to the 70's style with enforcers to protect its stars." And not really there either... Ploy. Untouchable treatment. I'll stand by my argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted June 1, 2017 Author Share Posted June 1, 2017 12 hours ago, B21 said: If you really had an issue with his comments about bringing back the enforcer/protector (also something many players and coaches are on record supporting) you would have clearly said it. I guess you missed my 3rd sentence of my comment in Post 1. Quote Jim Rutherford seems to think Crosby needs to be protected. That all superstars in the NHL need to be protected. That the league will need to go back to the 70's style with enforcers to protect its stars. You also missed my last statement in my 2nd post in this topic. Quote I'm more annoyed at his suggestion for the need to bring back enforcers to the game with this false sense of need for star protection. We don't need enforcers back in the NHL for any reason. but whatever, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 @hf101 Sorry but as I read your first post you took issue with the "complaining" and this idea that he somehow wants preferential treatment for his star players - not his comment about enforcers. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. #circles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.