I haven't heard anything but positive feedback from everybody that has talked to me. People that have talked to me, if they thought it was dirty they would tell me.
That was Raffi Torres talking about his hit on Jordan Eberle. The NHL's feedback was slightly different than that of his bosom buddies - the league has decided to suspend Torres for four games, including two playoff games.
Aside: How clutch is Eberle? Even from last place he's trying to make sure the Canucks lose in the playoffs. If that's not clutch, I don't know what is.
about 1 year ago
Scott Reynolds
21 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Did anybody think he was going to get that much? I thought possibly the last two games of the regular season, and not likely to even be that.
I thought we would definitely get the last two games of the regular season because it was so convenient. The games are meaningless for the Canucks and the league can “take a stand”. It turns out that they actually did want to take a stand! (Alhough I’d bet that Torres’ insistence that it was a clean hit cost him at the hearing.)
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Apr 7, 2011 4:18 PM MDT up reply actions
The problem for Torres is that it was a clean hit.
Last year.
Yes I know Eberle was bent over and reaching for the puck, but if Torres aims for the Shoulder instead of the head, it’s just as effective. Eberle has to field some of the blame here because he did put himself in an akward position, but Torres had time to make a clean (according to the new rules) hit and didn’t.
To be honest, I would have been happy with the 5 minute major and no suspension. It wasn’t malicious (didn’t seem to be anyways), Torres didn’t change his angle to get his head. He just didn’t do enough to avoid the head.
I just hope that when a player ducks into a hit that the NHL is smart enough to recognize that and not punish the hitter.
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
I think the main problem is that Torres was in position to play the puck, and instead ignored it and whacked Eberle in the noggin.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
I wouldn’t have even given him a penalty yet alone 5 games yet alone a suspension! What’s funny is that I’m a big Eberle fan and could care less about Torres…
Why not?
Is it just the fact that you don’t like the new rule?
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
I just didn’t see anything illegal about it.. if anything Eberle needs to be smarter, he put himself in a hell of a position.
It was definitely illegal. For one, it was interference because Eberle hadn’t played the puck. Second, it was a hit targeted to the head to a player in a vulnerable position.
Yes, Eberle need to keep his head up in that situation, but it was a predatory hit and the NHL is trying to get rid of that stuff.
The Edmonton Oilers - All we do is win!!
Torres swerved into Eberle after Ebs stretched out to tip the puck. He wasn’t just finishing the check, he was starting and finishing it and he targeted the head in the process.
This hit was very similar in certain respects to Steve Moore on Markus Naslund that had everybody in Canucks Nation up in arms about how filthy Moore was. That time the league’s failure to penalize or suspend Moore served to escalate the matter into the ugly mess it became.
I’m glad they are being proactive about things finally, To me that was definitely a suspendable offence and the fact that it extends into playoffs as did the Cooke ban shows they are serious.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Apr 7, 2011 11:26 PM MDT up reply actions
At the time it wasn’t an illegal hit though so why would they have to penalize it?
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Because Naslund never even touched the puck and Moore hit him in the head. It was a dirty hit.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Apr 11, 2011 1:39 PM MDT up reply actions
The head has nothing to do with it. That wasn’t illegal at the time.
Should he have gotten an interference penalty? Probably. Naslund missed the puck by an inch so he technically never had possession of the puck and that is grounds for interference.
The hit to the head was not a penalty at the time though.
I won’t disagree that the NHL took way too long to put the rule in place, but the rules at the time of the 2 incidents were completely different.
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Maybe this is the league starting to hand out bigger suspensions on head shots, intentional or not. With the major outcry about it this year its only a matter of time
Insert Witty Comment Here
by VanillaAcid on Apr 7, 2011 5:19 PM MDT via mobile reply actions
Since when is hitting someone without the puck, who hasn’t touched the puck, a clean hit?
When did interference become a “hockey play”?
Torres had the option to play the puck (and the player), or interfere with the player (and try to decapitate him with an elbow to the head), and he chose the latter.
I’ve never really liked the interference rule in that regard. He’s clearly about to play the puck and is in position to play the puck. Whether you hit him a second before or the instant he touches it doesn’t really change anything.
In lacrosse (field anyways), when the ball is on the ground you can hit anyone within 9 feet of the ball. I don’t see why hockey can’t use a similar rule with a shorter distance (say 1-2 feet). I mean we allow a hit a couple of seconds after releasing the puck, why not a second or two before possession?
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
This isn’t fucking lacross dawgbone98 you have to wait until the puck is touched before you nail someone, and ill explain why…..When you are about to receive a pass, or touch a loose puck and you notice someone is about to murder you, you let the puck go by, thus saving your life. You’ll often see guys being lined up for a SUICIDE pass, realize it at the last second, and let the puck go by.
By ur logic, if the puck has crossed the line by 2 inches it’s a goal, then should a puck that is two inches away from crossing the line also be a goal???
by One_Roy_Save_On_The_Calendar on Apr 7, 2011 6:47 PM MDT up reply actions
This isn’t fucking lacross dawgbone98 you have to wait until the puck is touched before you nail someone, and ill explain why…..When you are about to receive a pass, or touch a loose puck and you notice someone is about to murder you, you let the puck go by, thus saving your life. You’ll often see guys being lined up for a SUICIDE pass, realize it at the last second, and let the puck go by.
You can still do this. What it prevents is the guys who see a hit coming, act like they are going to play the puck and then don’t in an attempt to draw a penalty. When you are in a position to play the puck you should be allowed to be hit.
But again, you can hit a guy a couple of seconds after he passes the puck (see every hit JFJ has ever thrown), why not just before he touches it as well?
By ur logic, if the puck has crossed the line by 2 inches it’s a goal, then should a puck that is two inches away from crossing the line also be a goal???
What do goals have to do with this? It’s completely unrelated. There are different rules for different aspects of the game. You are awae of that right?
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Since people decided to get all contrarian and shit as backlash against Rule 48.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
This is like Havlat getting wrecked by Kronwall without touching the puck.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Beauty comparison, i’ve never seen this hit until today. Havlat think’s he’s being clever by not touching the puck, and he is, but he sure payed the price.
by One_Roy_Save_On_The_Calendar on Apr 7, 2011 9:38 PM MDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on The Copper & Blue
Related FanShots on The Copper & Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Oilers Schedule
Last 5 Games
@
Vancouver
|
Sat 04/07 | L 0 - 3 |
|
Anaheim
|
Thu 04/05 | OT - L 2 - 3 |
|
@
Los Angeles
|
Mon 04/02 | L 0 - 2 |
|
@
Anaheim
|
Sun 04/01 | W 2 - 1 |
|
Los Angeles
|
Fri 03/30 | L 1 - 4 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Trending Topics: In praise of Jeff Carter, Mike Richards; ‘While The Men Watch’ criticism
- The John Tortorella origin story, including ground balls to the face
- NHL investigates Coyotes; Shane Doan explains tense Game 5 handshake with Kings’ Brown
- NHL Playoff Beard Watch: Blood, Sweat and Beards of unsung unshaven heroes
- Devils guarantee they’ll downplay 1994 conference finals for Game 6 vs. Rangers
