What is "derp"? This ridiculous jargon contrived by computer whiz kids gets to be a bit much!
How about them Canucks!
- Thread starter #juan
- Start date
talloola'BULLETON' [B said:
That is bullsh*t - you don't jeopardize the whole team's chances for a Stanley Cup, based on the conduct of one player. I'm quite sure Rome didn't intend to maim the guy. Would this be that assh*le Bettman's doing? 8O
Sorry to disagree, JLM, but an obvious LATE hit, with no excuse is the clear indication of vicious intent to harm, hurt and maim. If his action jeopardized the team's chances, so be it! Maybe the coach should caution his players to act like civilized people, not like criminals.
The real a$$h0le was Rome. If he had done what he did on the ice, in a pub or on the street he would be in jail where he belongs.
Isn't that what Rome just did to Boston?
Hits like this, which often end or seriously hurt a players career, should be punished. It was a late hit, and there's nothing wrong with 4 games, ie, the rest of the season.
You can't seriously think that Rome makes a difference to Vancouver's chances, do you?
Rome isn't an 'ass hole' at all, he did not intend to hurt horton, and if you had any inkling how
fast those situations happen, you would see that. There was absolutely no vicious
or intent to injure horton,( eg. cooke hit which was. he skated across the ice and
intentionally elbowed the player,) took about 3 seconds, rome had no ill intent
toward horton at all, just a hit that went bad, and he said the same, and he also
wishes for horton to make a speedy recovery, and said he will speak again at a
later date, but at this point does not want to interfere with the canucks making
their attempt to win in the playoffs.
Now, I just listened to an interview with m. murphy, the person responsible for issueing the
suspension, and something concerns me.
He said that the hit was a fraction of a second too late, fine, I get that, hence the interference
penalty, and he also said that the seriousness of the effects of the hit definitely came into the
scenario, OK then, then he said, and this bothers me, "if he had hit horton a fraction of a second
earlier, the hit would have been 'legal', BUT THE SAME INJURY MOST LIKELY WOULD HAVE HAPPENED,(he didn't
say that, I am,) so what is the point here.
There would not have been a penalty if the hit was a fraction, (less than 1/2 a second) earlier,
so how would they then have reacted to the serious injury, that baffles me, they can't give a
penalty for a legal hit.
Players can get seriously hurt from many different happenings in a game, mostly from hits, but not
always, so, decisions should not be made because of types of injuriesl, but by the legality or
illegality of the hit.
He condradicted himself, and I conclude that 'if' horton had immediately jumped up, there would not
even have been a penalty, even though it was a late hit, SO, it is all about injury.
fast those situations happen, you would see that. There was absolutely no vicious
or intent to injure horton,( eg. cooke hit which was. he skated across the ice and
intentionally elbowed the player,) took about 3 seconds, rome had no ill intent
toward horton at all, just a hit that went bad, and he said the same, and he also
wishes for horton to make a speedy recovery, and said he will speak again at a
later date, but at this point does not want to interfere with the canucks making
their attempt to win in the playoffs.
Now, I just listened to an interview with m. murphy, the person responsible for issueing the
suspension, and something concerns me.
He said that the hit was a fraction of a second too late, fine, I get that, hence the interference
penalty, and he also said that the seriousness of the effects of the hit definitely came into the
scenario, OK then, then he said, and this bothers me, "if he had hit horton a fraction of a second
earlier, the hit would have been 'legal', BUT THE SAME INJURY MOST LIKELY WOULD HAVE HAPPENED,(he didn't
say that, I am,) so what is the point here.
There would not have been a penalty if the hit was a fraction, (less than 1/2 a second) earlier,
so how would they then have reacted to the serious injury, that baffles me, they can't give a
penalty for a legal hit.
Players can get seriously hurt from many different happenings in a game, mostly from hits, but not
always, so, decisions should not be made because of types of injuriesl, but by the legality or
illegality of the hit.
He condradicted himself, and I conclude that 'if' horton had immediately jumped up, there would not
even have been a penalty, even though it was a late hit, SO, it is all about injury.
Thank god Campbell stepped down, or all the Vancouver fans would have a conspiracy to talk about.
It was a late hit, and because there was an injury, he has to suffer the punishment. If it wasn't a late hit, he wouldn't have to suffer the punishment. See how that works?
It's like drinking and driving. If you're drunk, and some idiot pulls out in front of you, and you hit him, you're in big trouble. If you're not drunk, and some idiot pulls out in front of you, and you hit him, it's an accident.
See how that works?
It was a late hit, and because there was an injury, he has to suffer the punishment. If it wasn't a late hit, he wouldn't have to suffer the punishment. See how that works?
It's like drinking and driving. If you're drunk, and some idiot pulls out in front of you, and you hit him, you're in big trouble. If you're not drunk, and some idiot pulls out in front of you, and you hit him, it's an accident.
See how that works?
murphy made a bit of a mistake in the telephone interview on team 1040, as he said he met with people
who were experienced in this department to help him come to a conclusion,
ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WAS BRIAN BURKE,which immediately put fire into the media here, as brian burke
is not a friend of the canucks, hates canucks owner, and has an axe to grind in other situations here as
well, so he should have kept his mouth shut about talking to burke about this situation.
not a good idea, I can just imagine the next statement from tony gallager, and a few of the next
write ups in the province.
The fact is, and murphy said as much,THE HIT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE LEAGUE AS LEGAL, but less than 1/2 second late.
Vineault is upset by the 4 game suspension.
I hate to quote myself, but since what I said earlier proved to be overly optimistic and hopeful, I have to retract.
I lost interest in hockey, because the beauty and skill of the 1972 Canada-Soviet Series in 1972 became the rule of the bully in the NHL, as examplefied by Philadelphia in 1974 and then adding insult to injury, in 1975.
Rome's vicious, wicked and malicious hit, while it may have been only a half a second late, was a late hit, and it reminded me what a sick and violent game hockey is. Half a second would have been, SHOULD have been enough for him to turn his skates. But NOOOO! The bastard had to maim and hurt and hit.
I would still like to see a Canadian team win the Stanley Cup, but after that malicious display of brutality, I don't really care any more.
Somebody please cheer me up by telling me that Rome is in jail where he belongs.
Exactly my point, it was a legal hit except that it was late, and therefore illegal.
You keep justifying it by saying that if only it was a legal hit, it would have been legal.
Indeed, that's quite true.
My point was 'what if' -
My point was this, what would they have called if the hit was not late, just as
serious an injury, from a legal hit? what would the call have been, nothing?,
they contradict themselves, and have no consistency.
Beauty and skill in the 72 series? A bunch of out-of-shape beer guzzling players faced by a very skilled bunch of players who were in shape, and resorting to goonerism and thuggery? That's beauty and skill? I don't think you'll find anyone out there who claims the 72 series involved any beauty or skill by Canada. Even the players admitted that.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad Canada won, but there was no abundance of beauty and skill in most of Canada's play.
Last edited by a moderator:
don't think they can appeal, and they even have to be careful how they disagree with the decision,
vineault was very sneaky cute this morning when he said, "Another coach called me and said. "They
don't know what they are going to call they change it on the fly", way to go alain, they can't fine
you for what 'another coach said', wink wink. lol
You sure do live in the past, and your knowledge of hockey is also way back there, and could be put in
the eye of a needle.
Your view of the rome hit proves that.
Your name calling of him is way off base, but you seem to get great pleasure of trying to make him out
to be something that he is not. He is and has always been a very clean player, this hit according to
the NHL was a legal hit if it had not been (less than 1/2 sec.late), the penalty was for interference, not
anything to do with the type of hit, only that is was late.
If it wasn't late, horton would have received the same injury, with 'no' penalty apparantly, according
to the rules.
You have to bring yourself up to date, and realize that the hockey today is twice as fast as anything
played in 72, those games look like slow mo when watched now, I have done that, very boring, but
nostalgic I guess.
As I write, they just played murphy's interview on 1040 again, and he said, as I stated earlier, the
hit was not an illegal hit, it was just late, and he explained about the east/west blind side hits, and
said this hit does NOT fit into that catagorie, it was a north/south hit, totally legal, a shoulder that
made contact with the head, and IS NOT ILLEGAL, and NO 'attempt to injure' by rome.
I don't know what drugs you're on, but I think you should take one for Alzheimers. Feel free to show me what names I called Rome.
_________________________________________________________________________________
oh oh, maybe I just replied to the wrong post, yukon jack should have been the
receiver.
Last edited by a moderator:
no JLM I would never want to see hitting taken out of the game, it would diminish the game to the level
of women's hockey, or minor hockey.
these players are highly skilled, and without the ability to body check, they would be flying around each
other all the time, scoring many many goals.
It is much much more difficult to play the game while having to avoid, or deal with body checks, that
hitting part of the game is what makes it exciting and extremely difficult.
I love to see a good clean hitting game, and watch how the offense tries to succeed in spite of having
to deal with the bodycheck.
I love to watch the defense figure out how to physically take the player out of the play, legally,
and prevent him from having his way with the goalie.
And, I know none of those players would want body checking taken out of the game, they have fun, they
love all of it.
Of course rules have to part of the game, and with the increase in size of players, and speed of the
game, rules are going thru a change, and they haven't yet reached a sensible conclusion as to how to
call the game, and also how to suspend, or not suspend players, it is ongoing.
Talloola, Alzheimers??????:lol::lol::lol: To about the same extent that I have leprosy. :lol: At least you provided a good chortle for the day. :lol:
I'm exactly the same way, I can remember minute details of events when I was five years old, but some times I'm not sure if I weeded the garden yesterday or the day before. :lol: I think Yukon Jack's opinion of the hit is questionable, but he and I can agree to disagree without hard feelings...............perhaps we can educate him. :lol:
I'm not sure "facts" have much to do with hockey........................fish swim, the sky is blue, water is wet............those are facts. Hockey was put together by people over a period of time tied together with a bunch of rules that get changed continuously, it's pretty hard to be factual when characterizing that hit.............except possibly to say that it hurt. :lol:
oh brother, can't believe that leaked into this thread, those comments are so boring and
stale, and don't belong in this thread, even if it was meant as a joke, didn't notice
a smiley.