Lionbackers.com

I gotta admit they don't look pretty after Torres is through with'em. we need someone on that line that can clean the scene up a bit before the press gets ahold of it. maybe Rob Murphy could help.

1greatmysticbushape wrote:I gotta admit they don't look pretty after Torres is through with'em. we need someone on that line that can clean the scene up a bit before the press gets ahold of it. maybe Rob Murphy could help.

There was no scheduled hearing with the league on Monday. The NHL's Hockey Operations department said that the rule did not violate Rule 48, which provides an interpretation that the area behind the net is designated as a "hitting area".

What a hit, and now the Canucks should feel like they were burned as the penalty shouldn't have been called, which amounted to the tying goal.

Burned is correct... I just watched it again and it was a good hit. The puck was there, so where the penalty comes from who knows. Well actually I do, when a player goes down refs are always looking to penalize for some reason...

Rammer wrote:

There was no scheduled hearing with the league on Monday. The NHL's Hockey Operations department said that the rule did not violate Rule 48, which provides an interpretation that the area behind the net is designated as a "hitting area".

What a hit, and now the Canucks should feel like they were burned as the penalty shouldn't have been called, which amounted to the tying goal.

If it is official that there will be no suspension, that is great news. Torres hits anything that moves.

The rule is far from a done deal; it needs more definition, more time to work it out. For example, more and more players are ducking down a bit prior to contact, or putting themselves in vulnerable positions prior to a hit (so the media has said, and it seems true to me). It looked to me like Torres did not use his elbow; it was shoulder. And if Seabrook was not so low as he dug his skates in, he would have taken the hit on his own shoulder. Quite often it seems guys are bent over and their head is sticking out when a checker/hitter is approaching. It is going to be difficult for the referees for a while longer until evreryone gets used to the rule. IMO ...

Torres certainly gave him a blast, and had him lined up. But some of that kind of contact is still part of the game.

I am not too impressed with Cam Cole, nor with Ed Willes. They were quite ready to throw Torres to the wolves. IMO an impartial observer would see that although Torres wanted to give him a hard shot, he did not use the elbow, and that Seabrook was very low in his crouch. And it was behind the net. And Torres made no effort to direct Seabrook into the boards; he hit him straight across back of the net. I think the puck was in play also. That is a lot of grey area for interpretation, but those two "local" reporters saw only black and white: suspend him.

Torres will have to be careful though. Very careful. Avoid the head. If a guy ducks down, take him with your chest, or not at all.

IMO ...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/dregerreport/

NHL chief of supplemental discipline Colin Campbell does not feel Raffi Torres' hit on Chicago defenceman Brent Seabrook violated Rule 48 and therefore, Torres will not be suspended.

Torres, in his first game back from serving a four-game suspension for delivering an elbow to the head of Edmonton Oilers rookie Jordan Eberle, flattened Seabrook with a shoulder to the head hit behind the Blackhawks' net and in an area often referred to as, "Death Valley."

It's called "Death Valley" by some because - for an unsuspecting defenceman or puck carrying forward hoping to make a play while cutting around the net - they can be vulnerable to the attacking player who's approaching at full speed.

In this case, Seabrook was vulnerable and as video replay clearly shows, Torres made no attempt to play the puck and focused on what he understands his job to be - separating player from puck by administering a thunderous body check.

An important distinction for the NHL is the fact the puck was in the area of the hit last night and Torres stopped skating near the faceoff circle and cruised in before landing the hit.

"My opinion, based on Torres' penchant for hitting people in head, is he probably should be suspended.

But I will be surprised if is." -- Bob McKenzie

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=362700

Bob McKenzie -- "That's my view, but when NHL general managers created Rule 48 a year ago March, they allowed the area behind the net to be a "hitting area" and players need to be more aware than, say, in the neutral zone."

I agree with Campbell's ruling. Most of the media seems to feel Torres should be suspended. Steve Staios and Aaron Ward show more of a tendency to see that Torres was playing hard and tough within the rules.

In March of 2010, a DVD went to players, coaches, and general managers saying exactly that, that there was far more latitude given on hits behind the net on unsuspecting players. In other words, as one NHL GM told me tonight, a hit behind the net is viewed more like a north-south hit than an east-west neutral zone hit.

The other big issue is principal point of contact. Was it a straight-on body check where the shoulder also struck head or a "head shot"? Remember, in the NHL, there are circumstances where a shoulder hitting an unsuspecting or vulnerable player in the head is entirely legal.

..................

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nhl/n ... id=6383058

After the game, Blackhawks captain Jonathan Toews said: "There is a time for everything and we'll deal with it accordingly."

Well that sounds like a threat. It could get ugly.

"Hits like that, I'm usually the first guy to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, but in this situation I just look at the player making the hit and his intent," Patrick Sharp said. "He played eight or nine minutes, and I don't think he touched the puck. His job out there is to create big hits. He got a penalty, so obviously it wasn't a clean hit. I think its pretty clear what his intentions were."

8 or 9 minutes of playing time and he doesn't touch the puck. LOL That is kind of funny. I guess Torres is hockey's "Designated Hitter." Ho ho Sorry about making light of the seriousness of the concussion issue. Because the issue of concussions has risen to a very high level this year. IMO more needs to be done to protect the players. They are bigger, faster, stronger, wearing suits of armour, and more able to deliver power to their hits than ever before.

WestCoastJoe wrote:[ For example, more and more players are ducking down a bit prior to contact, or putting themselves in vulnerable positions prior to a hit (so the media has said, and it seems true to me).

Bingo I notice all too many players turn into the boards for a face plant when they see someone coming in for a hit. Instictive defensive reaction or fishing for a major?

I think it was a clean hit, however I think he should have held up a bit. When a player is in such a vulnerable position you can still lay a good hit on him without jepordising his health and career.

I also feel that given the circumstances they should have given Torres a 1 game suspension just to avoid a potential Moore/Bertuzzi incident

I'm pleasantly surprised at how the first series is going so far......

As for the Seabrook/Torres hit. I thought a suspension was coming for sure, thankfully I'm wrong. IMO, the Blackhawks are grasping at straws because they seem really cheesed. I just can't figure out why Seabrook returned to the ice if the concussion protocol is being followed.

Yesterdays game was fun to watch. There were times when I was saying 'here we go again' but this time the Canucks didn't fold. They took their lumps and kept on skating. I am so glad this will probably be the last season I have to listen to Chelsea Dagger (or whatever that ******* song is).

BTW, I loved the BC Lions print ad with the players taking a football faceoff with Ref Buono, all decked out in their Canuck jersies.

D wrote:I think it was a clean hit, however I think he should have held up a bit. When a player is in such a vulnerable position you can still lay a good hit on him without jepordising his health and career.

I also feel that given the circumstances they should have given Torres a 1 game suspension just to avoid a potential Moore/Bertuzzi incident

As Cam Cole notes, Colin Campbell (Thank God he is not a judge) found a loop hole to this dealing with hits back of the net where this guy gets off.

The code of these athletes which spills over to amateur sports is that is all part of the game. What I find bizarre in that thinking is that who would you want to see in a game - Seabrook or Torres, Crosbie or the clown who ended his season? Exactly. You want to see the best players.

I honestly believe football players in the USA and Canada (certainly at the pro level) demonstrate far more respect for their opponents than do hockey players.

As far as the Canucks are concerned the good news is that their team just needs very good goal tending now and they can win - rather than a guy standing on his head or they lose - this they don't need to seem to need as much now. Not that Luongo has not been very good - he has.

Toppy Vann wrote: I honestly believe football players in the USA and Canada (certainly at the pro level) demonstrate far more respect for their opponents than do hockey players.

Dunno about that, Toppy.

It seems to me football has its share of headhunters, or even guys that go after the legs.

Some players want to hit the opponent as hard as they possibly can without actually wanting to hurt the opponent.

Matt Cooke has expressed a desire to change his ways. Some of his hits seem very obviously dirty, with intent to hit the head with his elbow.

I have some doubts that Torres plays with the nasty intent that Cooke has always done. Not sure at this time. But Torres is definitely a hard hitter.

If he played nowadays, I expect Scott Stevens would come under a lot of criticism for his killer hits, which seem to fit in the still-legal category. Did he intend for his shoulder to rattle their brains? Probably.

If I was coaching Torres, I expect I would direct him to play his game, but pass up some hits that might slip up and contact the head, or to ease up on some hits, as many players do. Take the man out, but it is not always necessary to try to pound the guy. As in the hit on Seabrook who is in a vulnerable position. Same with the Getzlaf hit on Hamhuis. Guy is vulnerable. Pass up the full hit on the vulnerable player. Just take him out of the play, as we see many players do.

And some football players do definitely try to pound the guy into oblivion, legally.

And there are no doubt some malevolent players who do aim to injure, in different sports.

Times change too. I recall Gary Fencik and Doug Plank of Da Bears used to compete to see who could hit guys so hard they would expel snot bubbles, and laugh about it.

I recall a college that tested linebackers' toughness by having them charge each other from five yards or more and butt helmets. Barbaric by today's standards. Primitive.

In any case, we will see as time goes on, how Torres plays. He is under the microscope now, from referees, players and fans. For me the jury is out on Torres. I have not watched his play closely. Now I will.

I had meetings run late and missed yesterdays Blackhawk blowout. I was taking the bus and you could tell the Canucks must not have done well. No cars zipping around honking their horns etc... Oh well, when I got home I found out why. Here's hoping tomorrows game earns the Canucks the rest of the long weekend off too.

Get the Hawk outa here.

notahomer wrote:I had meetings run late and missed yesterdays Blackhawk blowout. I was taking the bus and you could tell the Canucks must not have done well. No cars zipping around honking their horns etc... Oh well, when I got home I found out why. Here's hoping tomorrows game earns the Canucks the rest of the long weekend off too.

That should be a very good incentive to finish the Hawks off tonight. The Canucks can look forward to spending the Easter weekend with their families, sitting back and waiting for their eventual opponents.

Hardly congratulations to Roberto Luongo for his expected finalist selection for the Vezina Trophy, right at a time when he was pulled from two consecutive playoff games.

Time to press the panic button? Perhaps after game 6.

Any chance that the Canucks will turn to their backup goalie for Game 6? Also, does anyone else think that Luongo was injured at the end of the first period of Game 4 and is trying to play through it (unsuccessfully)?

Ravi wrote:Any chance that the Canucks will turn to their backup goalie for Game 6? Also, does anyone else think that Luongo was injured at the end of the first period of Game 4 and is trying to play through it (unsuccessfully)?

Luongo's 12 year multi million dollar contract dictates that he is the starter for game 6. Had Schneider shown any better, perhaps the change would have taken place, but he hasn't been lights out either.