View Poll Results: Who will win the 2011 Stanley Cup????
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll
The Official NHL Thread
#2141
06-07-2011, 06:27 PM
I disagree with severity of the suspension, and the reasoning behind the suspension is even more puzzling.
"Mike Murphy, the NHL’s senior vice president of hockey operations, agreed the hit would have been legal if it hadn’t been late. But given its timing and Horton’s subsequent injury, the NHL determined Rome would miss the rest of the series."
Source: Bruins' Horton, Canucks' Rome both done for Cup - NHL - Yahoo! Sports
I guess that clarifies that it wasn't a blindside hit, and Horton should have been paying more attention. It's a shame Rome was a second late.
So if Horton wouldn't have been injured (or as injured) and out for the remainder of the playoffs, then Rome's punishment wouldn't have been as harsh? Since when do the suspensions depend on the extent of the injury? And if that's the case, there's a lack of consistency with other hits/penalties that have caused players to miss the remainder of the playoffs as they weren't always given equivalent punishments (Mike Richards ending Tim Connolly's playoffs earlier this season, yet only receiving a 2-minute minor without suspension).
By the way, I'm not a Canucks or Bruins fan...just looking at it from a neutral standpoint. If it would have been a Bruin taking out a Canuck player and resulting in the same results, I'd still question it.
"Mike Murphy, the NHL’s senior vice president of hockey operations, agreed the hit would have been legal if it hadn’t been late. But given its timing and Horton’s subsequent injury, the NHL determined Rome would miss the rest of the series."
Source: Bruins' Horton, Canucks' Rome both done for Cup - NHL - Yahoo! Sports
I guess that clarifies that it wasn't a blindside hit, and Horton should have been paying more attention. It's a shame Rome was a second late.
So if Horton wouldn't have been injured (or as injured) and out for the remainder of the playoffs, then Rome's punishment wouldn't have been as harsh? Since when do the suspensions depend on the extent of the injury? And if that's the case, there's a lack of consistency with other hits/penalties that have caused players to miss the remainder of the playoffs as they weren't always given equivalent punishments (Mike Richards ending Tim Connolly's playoffs earlier this season, yet only receiving a 2-minute minor without suspension).
By the way, I'm not a Canucks or Bruins fan...just looking at it from a neutral standpoint. If it would have been a Bruin taking out a Canuck player and resulting in the same results, I'd still question it.
#2142
06-07-2011, 06:37 PM
^Idk but the NHL has garnered a lot more outside attention this year than in previous years. Since the Chara hit I think the NHL is becoming more and more concerned with the media and trying to adhere to the standards that other professional sports have in regard to protecting players.
Some long-time-NHL fans even seem to be softening up to me. I mean, nobody has a problem with a guy breaking another guy's nose in a fight but if guy 1 sticks his finger in guy 2's mouth and guy 2 bites guy 1 (allegedly) then guy 2 should get suspended. Give me a break, we're not talking blatant biting (allegedly) like Tyson vs. Holyfield here.
I'm also not a fan of either team, but I am cheering for the Bruins. Go underdog, and more importantly go AMERICA!
Some long-time-NHL fans even seem to be softening up to me. I mean, nobody has a problem with a guy breaking another guy's nose in a fight but if guy 1 sticks his finger in guy 2's mouth and guy 2 bites guy 1 (allegedly) then guy 2 should get suspended. Give me a break, we're not talking blatant biting (allegedly) like Tyson vs. Holyfield here.
I'm also not a fan of either team, but I am cheering for the Bruins. Go underdog, and more importantly go AMERICA!
Last edited by STLG; 06-07-2011 at 06:41 PM.
#2143
06-08-2011, 12:58 AM
