Island Nucklehead wrote:, and Thronton will get 6 for his premeditated assault, because he's not a repeat offender (as if that lessens the violent nature of the incident), and Shanahan will use his hit on Eriksson as a reason he deserved to get nearly murdered.
Say what!! ...i guess i just assumed 'cause he crushed poor old MayRays spine that he was a repeat offender. My bad
That was Johnny Boychuk actually.
Speaking of which...Raymond didn't have the puck at all, no interference penalty, no suspension. In a league where injuries are pretty much the yard stick for suspensions. The Orpik hit on Eriksson was 100% clean compared to what Boychuk did to Raymond.
Phaneuf is such a coward....he plays like that all the time hiding behind his visor. Don't forget he also started that shitstorm against Buffalo by crosschecking McCormick after the play, then punching him in the face before hiding behind Orr & McLaren. Total puss. The hit from behind on Miller is his modus operandi.
I do get a kick out of how righteous the Bruins announcers are though. They were aghast in disbelief....yet look at this long history of how their boys play.
Definitely should have been a call on the hit Daniel received tonight. Officiating is brutal all throughout the league. They need to seriously fix this....but they won't because Bettman & Shanahan are just as out to lunch.
There's no comparison between Orpik and Moore. Moore's was a targeted elbow to the head. Orpik's was a clean hit.
I'm sick of the notion of players having to fight over clean but heavy hits, its a stupid thing thats started. Orpik committed to the hit, if he doesn't take it then Eriksson is away. The puck took an unfortunate bounce so I feel for Eriksson w/ his history. In this case I don't see why Orpik is expected to fight a knuckledragger like Thornton. At most it could be a 2 min penalty for interference but Eriksson touched the puck so even that doesn't hold water. If anyone should have to fight I agree w/ HW it should be Phaneuf.
The Moore situation doesn't require any recapitulation. Today it would probably be a 10 game suspension, and if it was back then it would have altered the chain of events that ensued. As it was, in that case yes Moore should have fought Bertuzzi.
The Moore elbow was like the Neal knee to Marchand's head. They both made sure they angled their body to get the head shot in. Neither was accidental or incidental.
The Bert retaliation on Moore is very similar to the Thornton retaliation on Orpik. Big difference in my mind though is Thornton's action were in game, not removed by a week or so, and Bert only retaliated when the game was out of reach. The Canucks did not retaliate during the game of the incident because they had a 1-0 lead and the two points were far to valuable at that time. Bert's actions had over a week of build up and threats. Both were dumb and predatory. What Thornton did was plain wrong but in the emotion of the game it makes more sense to me than what Bert did. Bert's actions also hurt what could have been a long playoff run and screwed up our trade deadline day!
Thornton should get at least 10 and I would not be upset if it were 15-20. This is a perfect chance to send a message but I think because of the circumstances, see Keith only getting 5 because he had been hit earlier by Dank on what Keith thought was a head shot, and up to that point he was not a repeat offender, I think Thornton will get 8 games.
On the Orpik hit I had to watch it several times to see in fact that Eriksson did barely touch the puck. That does negate an interference call. He barely touched it, mostly it bounced and got a piece so his stick, but none the less he touched it. It wasn't a headshot or a blindside hit. It was a hard hit but I agree it was clean. But Orpik is a repeat offender and does have some history of taking cheap shots. But players shouldn't have to fight when they lay out a clean one, unlike Dianna.