Who will be the first person to call for a lifetime ban of the Flyers Scott Hartnell for checking a player who dropped to his knees to stop a puck. Coincidentally, it happened to be against the Bruins.
I will state my point of view now, I have seen it at full-speed and slo-mo. The major+game misconduct was warranted but I see no reason for a suspension unless Hartnell has an incident already on his record for this.
2007-11-26 12:44:19 · 11 answers · asked by Lubers25 7 in Sports ➔ Hockey
CME: No, not yet. It literally just happened. Bruins d-man goes to his knees in the neutral zone to stop a puck. Hartnell had committed to the hit and ended up opening his head up off the edge of the boards.
2007-11-26 12:55:07 · update #1
CME: Wasn't from me, I gave you your thumbs up.
2007-11-26 13:10:51 · update #2
Chris: No shot at a 20 game suspension. Hartnell committed to the hit, Alberts dropped to his knees and Hartnell made contact with him. Put Ray Bourque in the exact same situation and he doesn't go to his knees because he has the skills to stop the puck without going to his knees at all. How is Hartnell supposed to project that Alberts is going to drop to his knees? I could have played that puck on my feet and I haven't played competitive hockey in 15 years.
2007-11-26 14:26:56 · update #3
If Alberts does not go to his knees there is no discussion at all, he doesn't even get hurt.
2007-11-26 14:34:39 · update #4
Chris: I see your point, but a player from one team should not be punished for the actions of another player on his team. I cannot believe that the Flyers are telling their players to do this, it seems to be circumstantial. If Campbell does what you predict I will be very, very surprised.
2007-11-26 14:37:13 · update #5
Just like LITY to come in and put a question in perspective.
2007-11-26 14:46:18 · update #6
Two game suspension for Hartnell. Campbell said in his statement that he felt Harnell let up but still delivered a blow to the head.
2007-11-27 11:13:57 · update #7
That was a HORRIBLE HIT! It was Alberts i believe, was it not? he was on his knees against the boards and Hartnell just came out of no where and smashed his head right into the boards.
weather Alberts (or whoever it was) Exaggerated the injury or not is a factor too, but when someone gets hit like that it is super easy to exaggerate it even if you aren't that hurt, but it was a pretty dirty hit on Hartnells part.
Though i only saw a replay once, i still think it was a horrible hit!
(If you are not custom to reading my rants, please help yourself and stop reading)
A hit in hockey is about Eliminating a player from the play! Hartnell took it too far! He was already eliminated from the play, the puck already went loose, he was on his knees (in a non perverted way) and out of the play, THEN DONT HIT HIM. Someone with as much experience as Scottie should not be hitting like that, He had All the damn time in the world to let up on that hit! He didn't have to do it.
I suspect a fine and 5-10 game suspension.
2007-11-26 14:22:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
First of all, I just want it to be known that I'm not without sympathy; I don't want to see anyone get hurt...
But anyone who thinks it's OK to go along the boards with your knees out in the "snowplow" position (like Bergeron) or on your knees (like Alberts) SHOULDN'T PLAY the kind of hockey where contact is involved. It is one of those fundamental habits to keep your head up and a) be MENTALLY AWARE ("head on a swivel" or however else you've heard it) AND b) be PHYSICALLY AWARE by not being in a vulnerable position.
Even if you have your back turned ACCIDENTS or PUNISHABLE INCIDENTS do occur. Whether or not an incoming hit will be legal or not, you are still PUTTING YOURSELF IN JEOPARDY. If the Bruins can't instruct their players to do so because they believe that regardless of the position a player is in, a dirty hit is a dirty hit... at least they can save their players from INJURY. Wow.
I don't see Penguins players doing that kind of stuff along the boards when playing the puck. Not even Sidney Crosby or Evgeni Malkin, to make a fancy play. Why? Because it's not smart and they don't want to risk injury.
At the moment, I don't believe the Flyers are encouraging their players to aim for the head. Those two hits on Bruins players weren't in a situation where the player was upright and the Flyers player went out of his way to hit the guy in the head. If both players had been in upright positions, then there'd be no doubts, but right now it's PURE speculation.
2007-11-27 12:14:40 · answer #2 · answered by Erica 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are we missing something? Does hockey need better helmets? There have been a lot of injuries over the years in the game and I wonder if helmets just haven't advanced enough.
I had a concussion playing hockey years ago. I woke up in the ICU two days later with no recall of the incident. It took me weeks to piece it all back together. My helmet was destroyed in the collision and Cooper replaced it for me no charge. I always hoped it was so they could figure out why the helmet failed but maybe they were burying the evidence. I don't know.
Do they need better helmets? Maybe something like the helment Steve Tasker wore after his concussion playing for the Bills. It made him look like the Great Gazoo but, it was effective.
Zap? Are there better helmets on the way?
LMAO@Awesome Bill - love the Habs reference. Too funny.
2007-11-26 23:27:36 · answer #3 · answered by PuckDat 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I was waiting for this. LOL
All replays with the exception of one made the hit look incidental, not malicious. Hartnell looked like he was going at the puck, put on the brakes and his momentum carried him into a prone Alberts.
The one super-slo-mo angle from the fan side of the glass just looked like Hartnell indiscriminately squeezed Alberts head between the dasher and his right cheek.
The one thing I take from this..."kids, never go to your knees at the blueline".
2007-11-26 21:08:12 · answer #4 · answered by zapcity29 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
It's funny how Bostonites forgot about the "Big, Bad Bruins" of yesteryear whenever a Flyer gets a little too rough on their players.
It's hockey dammit, not golf.
What's next? A game misconduct to the next Flyer forward whose slapshot happens to find its way to bruise a Bruins goalie?
Maybe they should whine about how the Habs usually end their playoff runs. (Not directed at you, Lubers)
2007-11-26 22:08:05 · answer #5 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I hate to say this, but they really need to break up the Flyers, and put Briere, Timonen, Lupul, Richards, and Jason Smith on the Black Hawks.
It's the only 'right' thing that can come of this situation
2007-11-26 22:42:22 · answer #6 · answered by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Saw it Lubers so I decided to check the board and low and behold, the first question I see is "I hate the Flyers?" If you want to call it a question. LMAO
The whole world is becoming sissified. We are going to have to start teaching our junior players not to finish their checks I guess.
The whining for lifetime bans has not even started yet.
2007-11-26 21:11:41 · answer #7 · answered by Bob Loblaw 7 · 7⤊ 2⤋
no lifetime ban but philly needs to get some kind of punishment for having way to many major, and questionable penalties this year. someone has to do something hockey is rough but it should also be clean.
2007-11-26 20:58:20 · answer #8 · answered by russell a 1 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I'm waiting for the day they call a pim on you if you're too fugly, then Rod Brinda horse will have to retire.
2007-11-26 22:14:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Missed it Lubers, got a link?
2007-11-26 20:48:14 · answer #10 · answered by cme 6 · 8⤊ 1⤋