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.
The only HW the Canucks need