brad Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 most have you i think have missed my point. do i think/want malkin to be suspended? No, of course not. am i upset at the league making things up as they go and thinking they know a players intent? hell yes i do. as the rule is written (and it's one of the worst in the game) malkin should be suspended. the nhl would have suspended someone who they thought was a goon and i hate star preferentail treatment. i don't follow the nba all that closely but i remember when a star player was suspended for steping on a court during an altercation in a playoff game. the nba had the balls to withhold a rule and changed it in the offseason, the nhl is full of gutless clowns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teganandsara Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Ummm just because the Wings have more depth in talent than the pens does not mean they are boring. I get pretty excited to see a team like the wings play just because they are so good. I like the way the pens play as well. I think you may be a little angry and that is understandable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 i don't want to post 2 full articles...but just parts i found interesting: NHL uses only rules that are convenient By Jeff Passan. Yahoo Sports ......... Colin Campbell, the NHL’s executive vice president and director of hockey operations, who certainly doesn’t have anything riding on Malkin, the potential MVP, no, sir, and wouldn’t at all let his decision be compromised by the quality of the player involved, no way, no how, because he is a fair and impartial jury of one, yes, indeed. ........... Now, certainly the rule itself is questionable. That’s not the point. The worst kinds of rules aren’t the ones that make little sense. They are the ones levied willy-nilly, or even worse, enforced with favoritism. ................... And he did this knowing that the league would never, ever suspend him. Players realize the NHL is weak in mind and spirit. It could, ironically, learn something about toughness from them. So they’re going to continue to flout the rule until Campbell or commissioner Gary Bettman or someone else steps in and abolishes it or enforces it. The league must make up its mind. If it agrees with the principle of the rule, live with its consequences. Otherwise, get rid of it and mete out punishment in its usual manner: devoid of logic and consistency. Next thing you know, the players will look at the book and wonder what other rules they can break. In fact, that happened Sunday. At the end of Campbell’s statement, the NHL made sure to include this chestnut: “NHL Hockey Operations also determined that Malkin should have been assessed a game misconduct for not having his jersey tied down.” Well, that’s grand. An unnecessary elbow. A few good punches. And the NHL is worried about Evgeni Malkin’s clothing. Like you’d expect anything different. ..................................... Malkin Non-Suspension: The embarrassment continues for NHL By Greg Wyshynski Our second hope is that the NHL dramatically clarifies, or altogether trashes, its "automatic suspension for an instigator in the last five minutes" rule after this season. Because no matter what sort of deterrent it may be for the shenanigans of headhunting thugs at the end of blowouts, it's also making the League look amateurish in its inconsistent application. In some cases, downright idiotic. ............................. But Zetterberg is one of the players checking Sidney Crosby(notes) and Evgeni Malkin into oblivion. He's a reigning Conn Smythe winner for his defensive prowess. That Malkin picked him out of the pile is no coincidence, no mistake. It may not specifically be "retribution for a prior incident," but it sure as hell was a message being sent about the frustration Malkin's feeling this series. Did Malkin deserve an instigator? Yes, even if the spear-and-Chris-Osgood-embellishment sparked the melee. A suspension? No by logical standards; maybe, by the letter of the NHL's law. The referees don't exactly hand out instigator rules like free candy. From the NHL this year: An instigator penalty has been called on only six percent of the 609 fighting majors called this season (through early March). Thirty percent of fights in the 1980s had an instigator penalty called. .................................... At worst, the NHL looks like it's writing another set of rules for its star players. At best, the NHL isn't fairly applying its rules to playoff games because they "mean more" than regular season games. Scott Walker's(notes) sucker punch on Aaron Ward(notes) in the Carolina Hurricanes vs. Boston Bruins series, for example, would have been a guaranteed, no questions asked one-game suspension in the regular season (and perhaps more). .............................. Oh, and when they're done fixing the rulebook, perhaps an explanation as to how a decision that usually takes about 24 hours was made in about 24 minutes last night by Colin Campbell. Gotta love the irony of the NHL expediting its legal process in the Stanley Cup Finals as it tries to wait out the clock in a Phoenix courtroom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Stop reading Wyshynski, you'll be a better person for it. Sammy's right, the Red Wings to play a boring style of hockey. If you're a fan of the team of course you're not going to agree w/ that because winning is always exciting. But for the points he elaborated on, they are rather dull. Teams like The Kings, Blackhawks, Pens, and Capitals are exciting because something is always going on and their stars are at the forefront of that. The casual play of the Wild, Red Wings, etc... is kind of bland because they sit back and wait. It's not necessarily bad hockey, because the goal is to win, but it's not exactly edge of your seat excitement all of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 i don't like the red wings but i don't find them boring at all. they have the best top 4 dman combo in the league and it shows. watching lidstrom is like watching an artist play the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 what Wyshynski says is true though. the nhl is making themselves look stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgoodcore Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 A suspension? No by logical standards; maybe, by the letter of the NHL's law. Even in his bashing he's not sure AND he says he's not sure the rule makes sense. So all that being said, doesn't it make more sense for the NHL to overrule a rule that's nonsensical for the most part anyways? Of course it does, no one would have it any other way and this isn't the first time the instigator in the last five minutes has been overruled. Ummm just because the Wings have more depth in talent than the pens does not mean they are boring. I get pretty excited to see a team like the wings play just because they are so good. I like the way the pens play as well. I think you may be a little angry and that is understandable. But they're not "good" by exciting hockey standards they're good because they play a system that works for their players. They draft guys who'll come in and play their system. They haven't gotten high draft picks or amazing guys for a long, long time. They play passively and disciplined. I admire them for it but its not too unlike the Devils of the 90s. I want in your face, smash-mouth, goal scoring aggressive hockey and I don't get that with the Wings. That's why I dislike watching them and why I wanted desperately for the Hawks to beat them, which coincidentally I think they will in a year or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Isn't the rule stated that the NHL has power to override it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgoodcore Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Isn't the rule stated that the NHL has power to override it? Yep, and its overruled more often than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcm1610 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Let's get back to the fact that it's do-or-die for the Pens tonight. What was that stat, teams who go up 2-0 in the finals won 39 of 40 times or something like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Let's get back to the fact that it's do-or-die for the Pens tonight.What was that stat, teams who go up 2-0 in the finals won 39 of 40 times or something like that? There have been 2 comebacks, the Blackhawks and I forget the other team, but stats like that are meaningless. The Penguins have been pulling off comebacks all season long, be it down a couple of goals in a game or in a playoff series. Win tonight and get the ball rolling! LET'S GO PENS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drabley Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 All this talk of rules and embarrassment is a moot point. The league can do whatever it wants, and no matter what anyone says, including the league, officials will always hold some power as to how those rules are interpreted. Look at the strike zone in the MLB, for example. The way the "rules" are written, a strike must be vertically between the knees and the uniform letters and horizontally cross the plate in some manner, however minute. Now, with that knowledge, when is the last time you saw a strike called vertically above the approximate location of the belly button? As defined above, this is absolutely a strike. Yet is is never called as one. Embarrassing? The league actually confronted the umpires to require them to call the strike zone as written a few years ago. The umpires threw a hissy fit over this request and stated that they would call the strike zone as they saw fit. And here we are -- strike zone remains unchanged. Point being that every umpire has some discretion, the same as each ref in a hockey match. Some are more liberal with certain calls -- or players -- than others. For matters requiring the league's review, same deal. If ref's interpret league rules and participants, so can league officials. There is no embarrassment at all. Those sports writers are, frankly, misguided and likely had nothing better to write about. As for the goon factor Brad likes to mention -- is this not just human nature? Profiling exists in virtually every aspect of our lives, yet in our recreation it somehow holds some importance? Please. I'd focus on having people of Arab or Persian descent not harassed for having brown skin. Or perhaps not having black people pulled over for so called "traffic infractions" simply because they're black. Whether or not Carcillo or Avery or Malkin or Ovechkin get called or suspended is, quite frankly, irrelevant in the grand scheme of life. The only embarrassing part is how much it's been discussed on this board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Great points Drabley! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentgods Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 same results as last year, not even worried slightly. and wtf is with not noticing 6 men on the ice for half a fucking minute? fucking bullshit man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 SUPERSTAR!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zak138 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 That pic is fucking epic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murakami Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 talbot is one of those guys i just love. he is the draper/maltby of the pens, i hope he never leaves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murakami Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 also, the linesmen have such a thankless job. collecting the puck after the whistles, getting crushed on close plays at the blue line and breaking up fights.....i give them major appresh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teganandsara Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 I am glad the Pens did not lose tonight no one wants a sweep in the Stanley Cup Final. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostatsea Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 I am glad the Pens did not lose tonight no one wants a sweep in the Stanley Cup Final.Detroit always looses one on the road so the final game is in Detroit. fingers crossed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Max Talbot is the king of huge goals! He's def. not the type of guy you want on a second line, but he's getting the job done. Pens are 8-0 in the playoffs when he scores. Malkin was huge last night. Crosby really needs to bury a chance or two though. Dats will probably be back for Game 4. I wanted Mario to drop that puck, take Sid's stick and go score a goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Just because your brought it up...and i would like to read your responses this time. All this talk of rules and embarrassment is a moot point. The league can do whatever it wants, and no matter what anyone says, including the league, officials will always hold some power as to how those rules are interpreted. That's the point though. The league is taking it out of the on ice officials hands. the on ice officials called the instigator penalty and the league reversed it. I forget the stat but there was something like only 6 intstigator calls all year, so it's not like the refs hand them out all the time. If the league won't stand by their officials then what is the point? Just because your brought it up...and i would like to read your responses this time. Look at the strike zone in the MLB, for example.The way the "rules" are written, a strike must be vertically between the knees and the uniform letters and horizontally cross the plate in some manner, however minute. Now, with that knowledge, when is the last time you saw a strike called vertically above the approximate location of the belly button? As defined above, this is absolutely a strike. Yet is is never called as one. Embarrassing? The league actually confronted the umpires to require them to call the strike zone as written a few years ago. The umpires threw a hissy fit over this request and stated that they would call the strike zone as they saw fit. And here we are -- strike zone remains unchanged. not even close to the same thing. you can't compare a balls and stike call (that happens what - 200 times a game? - to an instigator call. the closest comparison to baseball would be a bench clearing brawl or something. or as in basketball - they had the rule that if you stepped on the court during a brawl you would get a suspenson. i read a post outling the incident and here it is word for word: If you want to draw an NBA parallel, it's the Amare Stoudemire incident a few years back against the Spurs. In game 4, I believe, Steve Nash was hit into the scorers table by Robert Horry. Amare jumped off the bench and made his way towards Nash to help him up and didn't get himself involved in the altercation. However, the rule clearly states that if a player leaves the bench area he's suspended for a game. The NBA had enough backbone to stand by their rule and suspend Amare for a game despite the fact that his actions weren't really in line with what the league was trying to prevent (bench players getting involved in a fight). The NBA changed that rule a bit in the summer after Amare's suspension, but realized at the time that the only way to represent themselves as a legitimate sports league was to abide by the rules of the game. If the NHL doesn't like the way that the rule is written then they should ammend it after this seasion, but there's no excuse for rescinding the suspension. It's clear as day that: 1) Malkin was frustrated, 2) He was trying to send a message, and 3) He instigated a fight. None of those points can be argued by a reasonable, rational viewer of the game and thus this suspension being rescinded is nothing short of a joke. Point being that every umpire has some discretion, the same as each ref in a hockey match. Some are more liberal with certain calls -- or players -- than others. For matters requiring the league's review, same deal. If ref's interpret league rules and participants, so can league officials. There is no embarrassment at all. Those sports writers are, frankly, misguided and likely had nothing better to write about. again, this isn't about a missed routine penalty. this is about the league turning its back on a call the ref made at the end of the game because a superstar is involved. It is embarrassing that the leauge is showing such little backbone. As for the goon factor Brad likes to mention -- is this not just human nature? Profiling exists in virtually every aspect of our lives, yet in our recreation it somehow holds some importance? Please. I'd focus on having people of Arab or Persian descent not harassed for having brown skin. Or perhaps not having black people pulled over for so called "traffic infractions" simply because they're black. Whether or not Carcillo or Avery or Malkin or Ovechkin get called or suspended is, quite frankly, irrelevant in the grand scheme of life. this is flat out absurd. in the grand scheme of life everything is irrelevant, who cares? the point is...in the NHL (as in a sport - not life) labeling a player isn't fair. you can't measure the intent of a player like the nhl brass thinks they can. Who knows what was going through the players mind? labeling someone as a goon is absurd - especially a player so young. labeling someone as a superstar is absurd as well. if AO or Crosby or Malkin or Timmonen pull a cheap shot should they not get the same suspension as a carcillo, avery, downie or brasher? incidents speak for themselves...or at least they should. The only embarrassing part is how much it's been discussed on this board. think what you want, but i believe that the NHL is making a mockery of itself because of the way they favor "superstars" over goons. I understand that maybe a superstar will get away with a hook or a slash, or something small like that....but for suspensions to apply differently is absurd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 i'm only posting this because if i don't nobody will...i will refrain from commenting, just that it lasted for about 25 seconds. http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/boonyard/ed29eb96.jpg i took the image tags off because i don't know how to make it smaller and I can't stand when a picture is that big. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgoodcore Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 i'm only posting this because if i don't nobody will...i will refrain from commenting, just that it lasted for about 25 seconds.http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/boonyard/ed29eb96.jpg i took the image tags off because i don't know how to make it smaller and I can't stand when a picture is that big. A 6-5 was missed. Take it as a complement for the Wings since the Pens didn't score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Brad talking about refereeing again... what else is new?!?! 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.