Wheel o' Stephanie (formerly Shanny)

I looked it up and the U.S.A. Newspaper said Engalland got a 5-gamer for that hit on Abdelcader mainly because it was a concussion related hit....

 

I was talking about this one:
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iAr6eBapkE[/video]
There were follow on discussions about when a player is "engaged" with another player from Shanny.
I'm laughing a little bit, my nickname for Kruger is "roadkill" because he gets exploded more than any other player I've watched. I completely forget that hit was against Chicago or Kruger.

 

Did I mention how much I hate Engelland's game enough this year? I don't think I have.

 

Now I'm scratching my head, how did Rupp get 4 (including 2 postseason games) and Engelland get 3 again? Pointless discipline.

 

My first reaction when I see a non hockey player take out a 1st line player on an illegal hit is usually along the lines of sending them to the thunderdome, the Gulag, or for an extended stay at a reeducation camp.

 

Is this the bitch about goons thread?

 

Beeotch

 

I was defending Abdelkader's honor.

 

the thing is, that should be your reaction when a star takes out a nobody with an illegal hit too.

i don't subscribe to the whole "dammit, pronger!" thing, and i hope i never will.

 

Usually it is, like when Keith tomahawks somebody's head or IF kessel successfully lightsabred Scott, but when it comes to my entertainment products, nothing is created equal as long as money and people are involved. In game, I want it uniform from the officials, but once it leaves the ice it's not all worth the same to me or the league.

If you made it this far, you're probably all set.

A single playoff game is worth 8 figures, that's way too much for me to expect uniform discipline across the board once the decision is past the on ice official after the game. Besides, too much trading/swapping among the members of the PA, the gms, and the BoG for me to find a completely black and white standard reasonable in the coming decades given the history of the league and current circumstances.

 

A phoner, eh?

I don't know what to think of that hit. I mean, you gotta sit him a few, but I don't actually believe Seabrook meant it. He got him with his shoulder, it just happened to be a dangerous play. I think he meant to fuck him up, but not to the head. Doesn't matter, really.

I suppose intention doesn't come into play when a dude has his head scrambled like that.

Set guidelines and stick to them.

 

my problem with the hit was that he intentionally came in high. edzo (bob and i are gonna throw down over this asshat) promptly started making excuses for the guy, saying his right skate was still on the ice, and it's inevitable that u come off the ice on a hit like that. ya, but his left skate was already off the ice, and his right skate was barely still there. he deliberately came in high and was on his way up, and there was no need whatsoever to do so. that was a bad hit, period.

 

3 games for Seabrook.

 

Engblom took a chance by calling and condemning a hit without an arm up in the air from the officials. Edzo immediately challenged that opinion because both he and his partner in the booth were unsure if the head was the ppoc, the refs did not initially signal a penalty (implying legality more often than not), and because the obvious penalty call would be a charge because 2 of 3 angles we saw intially did NOT show clear head contact first. The initial replay from the nearside high made it appear and elbow or arm may have caught the head and that's what Edzo made the "if" comments about referring to arm position after giving his take on the skates. The farside low replay showed a pretty obvious shoulder to the head. Engblom pushed his take, said the skates don't matter because ppoc was to the nugget and that was the end of it. Probably because Edzo and his partner saw the low farside angle the same time we did at home, there was no defense of it after that, the crew got it right in less then 40 seconds after the scrum cleared up if I recall.

I thought it's about as good as it gets for a broadcast crew. They covered two perspectives right away and then nailed the call before it was official. The only thing they missed on was the time elapsed after Backes had or didn't have the puck. Head contact was considered, the injury was considered, the charge was considered (Edzo was onto the call that would have to be made talking about skates, why I talk about him being one of the few that can keep up), the replays were commented and the correct perspective prevailed in the conversation quickly and absolutely.

Engblom is awesome, he nailed it, but it was a gamble on his part nonetheless to assert the call before the officials made it unless he heard something. As soon as everybody knew the replay showed hit to the head, I didn't get the feel anybody was defending the hit as legal outside of 30% of the Chicago Tribune poll respondents.

BTW, Edzo had absolutely no problem with Orpik's hit on Toews a few weeks ago even though many thought it was a penalty.

 

i did not see orpik's hit on toews, nor did i hear his comments on it. maybe u viewed this as a scholarly analysis of various officiating perspectives - it struck me as something else entirely.

 

I was trying illustrate Edzo's perspective on the hit as being unbiased on those types of plays. There are plenty of reasons to assume Edzo bias, but that was not one of them in my opinion, and that's why I brought it up. As soon as he commented, I knew many were going to perceive him as doing something I am nearly certain he was not doing.

I'll probably hear him on a couple interviews today, if he argues or implies that the hit was justifiable or clean in anyway, I'll probably agree with what I think your perception of the analysis was.

 

later in that game, towes was called for a high stick after hitting a blue in the face with it. edzo's immediate reaction was to explain how he went for the other guy's stick to lift it, but the guy moved his stick. not one word about anything other than to mitigate what toews had done. nothing about how it was careless use of his stick, or how he put his team in a bad spot by doing it.

i get it, u like edzo - but i don't. u very often condemn other broadcasters for putting the emphasis on officiating, and yet when someone mentions that edzo whined on a national broadcast about the wings getting away with stuff, your first instinct was to say that it was fine, he just needs to be more subtle about it, like doc. this is pretty much identical to what i'm calling edzo out for. you had an opportunity to acknowledge that nearly all announcers do it, and instead u skipped right over that, didn't criticize him at all, and defended him for something u condemn MANY others for.

when edzo was first hired by OLN, or whoever they were at that time, i liked him and complimented him. seems to me that was in 08 or 09. since them, in my opinion, he has gone steadily downhill. at this point, i think he sucks, for many reasons. in retrospect, i suspect he was once on his best behavior to impress his new employers, and as he has become more comfortable, he has reverted to his normal instincts.

 

I'm just glad the hit wound up costing them the game. Hopefully we can get "Big D" Backes back soon and can capitalize on Seabrook's absence. The more physical the play the more it favors us, especially with Seabrook out. Let's take the series and then Reaves can knock his block off next year in the regular season.