Skip to content

Brad Marchand defends his hit on Salo, takes shot at Vigneault

Jan 10, 2012, 8:23 AM EDT

Sami Salo, Brad Marchand AP

We’ve heard from just about everyone else concerning Brad Marchand‘s low-bridge hit on Sami Salo that earned Marchand a five-game suspension, but the one voice we were missing out of all this was Marchand’s.

Marchand broke his silence via a blog on and he did his best to explain himself, the hit, and the big talk coming his way out of Vancouver.

On the hit itself:

“It technically wasn’t a clip. Clipping is when you hit someone at the knees and I did not hit him at the knees. Anyone that has seen the video will see that I hit him in the upper thigh under the buttocks. They can call it a clipping, but they obviously don’t know the rules of hockey.”

Referees are going to love this. We’re sure that comment is going to endear him to the men in stripes the rest of his career. Marchand also might need an anatomy lesson out of all this. Thanks to this, a lot of conspiracy theorists will be borne out of this in Boston every time Marchand winds up in the box.

On Alain Vigneault’s comments that he is out to hurt people:

“He obviously wanted to take a shot at me and stir the pot for the hearing [Monday]. It just shows the class he has or lack thereof. I really am not going to respond or bite into what he’s trying to feed me there.”

Smart move to not dish it back to the coach, but bad for our business. Giving a shot back to him would’ve been a lot more fun and helped drag this soap opera on a bit longer. Marchand also said he doesn’t care what his reputation is and he’ll keep playing the same way no matter what. If you think this is the last we’ll hear from Marchand in his career, I’ve got a bridge in New York I’d like to sell you.

Speaking out like this will make him more of a hero in Boston and more reviled around the rest of the league and that’s just the way he wants it to be.

125 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:53 AM

    Brad Marchand or any other Bruin talking about class is enough to make anybody sick. They are a team full of sucker punchers and cheap shot artist. (Their fan base confuses this with toughness). Looks like their past goon work is finally catching up with them. The league can no longer turn a blind eye. Oh, they will still get the calls, afterall, Greg Campbell’s daddy Colie is still in the front office. But its going to be much harder for them to get off scott free in the future.

    • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:56 AM

      Oh god, cry us a river. Why don’t you go call 911 again and have a 6 month investigation into it.

      • redmosquito16 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:14 AM

        Habsman is exactly right. All you have to do is watch ANY footage of Andrew Ference. He’s 1 of the worst offenders. You don’t think the Bruins were given any kind of favor because Greg Campbell’s on the team? If you don’t then you’re just in denial.

      • guypatsfan - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:26 AM

        Love to hear all the fingerbiters whining!

      • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:32 AM

        The worst offender, right. I prefer him flipping the unintentional bird myself.

      • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:43 AM

        Ferrence also hit Halpern in the head with his shoulder when he wasn’t looking last year. A clear dirty hit. But no penalty or suspension. Thank goodness for Colin Campbell. There have been dozens of cowardly cheap shots by the Bruins that have gone un-punished. Just ask Tampa or Sabre fans for example. It’s getting harder for Bruin fans to “spin”, just too many cheap shots to defend.

      • madtolive5 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:48 AM

        habsman are you talking cheap shots or flops?
        When a player gives a legal hit on another one, who then falls to the ground like he was shot, that is pretty dirty.

      • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:50 AM

        Has Roman Hamrlik gotten up yet from that flop that led to the Kelly goal? I figured a sniper got him or something.

      • madtolive5 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:59 AM

        Also you know CC did not rule on any games involving his son?
        So when he played in Florida or Boston, he was not involved in the ruling.

      • travishenryskid - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:16 AM

        I literally could not read rdurk’s post without hearing a Boston accent.

      • ajsjr40 - Jan 10, 2012 at 3:48 PM

        Could you please change your moniker to habswoman.

      • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 3:49 PM

        @guypatsfan I’m very surprised to hear a pretty obvious Boston fan bringing up Marc Savard amidst all this. I haven’t heard any comments from him around the game or the suspension, or his past as a connoisseur of fingers (gloved or otherwise).

        Oh, my bad you must have forgotten about Savard and meant Burrows. Silly me for bringing the delicate subject that Boston players have done the same thing up.

    • jfish6797 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:12 AM

      habsman the only you are hating is because of your passion for montreal! dont be mad because we embarrassed you in 7 games last year. Where have you guys been the past few years? you guys suck! dont be jealous of the bruins success it was a dirty hit, but just one so relax. The bruins are tough grinding hockey players who have the right to have that cocky swag. we are the Hub of Hockey. and Montreal are the queers of hockey.

    • jfish6797 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:21 AM

      Oh yeah habsman your team is such a bunch of pussies that you had montreal create an investigation when chara accidently bumped pacioretty into the timekeepers pole.

      • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM

        “don’t be mad because we embarassed you in seven games last year.”

        As soon as I read that, I knew beyond a shadow of doubt, that you were an idiot.

    • fitzzzz - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:57 PM

      habsman my dude you really gotta chill

    • drewsylvania - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:51 PM

      I don’t think habsman knows what a hit looks like, unless he’s been to Habs’ practice.

  2. sippindasyzurp - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:54 AM

    When the NHL eventually does re-alignment… They have to put these two in the same conference, who cares about geography, suck it up and do it for the good of the NHL!

    • bcjim - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:05 AM

      Agree, sir! This petty bickering is most amusing. I suggest a Bos-Mtl-Van-Phi-Stl division. The latter 2 for their general goonery, Mtl for post game police investigations and Fernch insults.

      Imagine the glorious carnage during and after all division games..

      • cardsandbluesforever - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM

        no thanks, you guys can have the eastern division all to yourselves. Chicago and Detroit are our mortal enemies. you’re more than welcome to Vancouver if you want them, they dont really fit in the Western Conference, a.k.a. “The Man’s Conference”

      • foreversoftsolution - Jan 13, 2012 at 11:15 AM

        Flyers are goons? LOL Vancouver’s worse but get’s away with it and Boston is a group of thugs “protecting” themselves while their victims are getting CT scans

  3. jimyritz - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:07 AM

    There’s just no consistency in the rulings and that to me is the problem…I love hearing all the whining coming out of Canada…How about all of the stick work from Burrows, Sedins, Ballard, Kessler? How about Weise showing how much of a pussy he is by not dropping his gloves…How anyone can be proud of the soft euro style the Canucks play is a joke…They won the game, congrats….The B’s beat you in 7 and the canucks had 4 games on their own ice including game 7….Enjoy the win!

    • comeonnowguys - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:25 AM

      I doubt the Europeans would claim them.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM

      So do you have a specific point to make? Or is this just the typical hate-filled rambling we see so much of under posts involving the Canucks and Bruins?

      “Theres no consistency in the rulings”

      Maybe there is none but most people’s comments that this is the best season for supplemental discipline in years would seem to suggest that there is at least some.

      “How about all the stick work from… How about Weise not dropping his gloves”

      Well none of those are suspendable so I guess you’ve moved onto another subject, and with much ingenuity and originality you’ve decided to trot out ‘the Canucks are women/foreigners’ because they don’t fistfight like you expect them to.

      “The Bruins still won the Stanley Cup”

      This has nothing to do with either of the things you touched on so far so I guess you are rambling again. Yeah I am pretty sure this is what everyone knows, hell even the Canucks coach said it in advance of the game. So your point in making this comment under a story about how Brad Marchand was suspended for a dangerous, predatory hit is…..

      Maybe you guys should just drop all pretense of having anything to say on the subject at hand.

      • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 4:29 PM

        db, they don’t have anything they can use in an argument other than calling Canucks names and pointing out they won the cup. Well, that and denying what was clearly explained by Shanahan and saying he clearly doesn’t know the rules.

        They are lucky they didn’t have suspensions for the types of things they do like to argue against though, as they likely would have lost Ryder after his hit on Blair Jones in the Tampa series:

        Or Peverley for his slash on Bieksa in game 2:

        Or that Marchand for making the same hit in game 4:

        Boston fans, if you want to complain about inconsistent reffing and point to examples in your defence, be prepared to have plenty of video thrown back at you. Us Canucks fans are well aware we aren’t choir boys, but it’s time for Boston fans to realize they aren’t any worse that the Bruins, who are often lauded as “hard-nosed” and “tough” by anyone wearing their colours.

      • drewsylvania - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:19 PM

        He’s making a point – the same one I was making. It’s too bad you and many of the other Canucks fans won’t see it.

    • vanfoodman - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:50 PM

      Oh yes, bring on the xenophobia. Especially funny when Chara, Krejci, Rask and Seidenberg are all ‘euros.’ Heck, Lucic is Serbian!

  4. polegojim - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:17 AM

    What’s the debate? M went low, clearly clipping exactly according to the definition of clipping. It was a clipping clinic – a perfect penalty.

    The whole point of the no-clipping rule is to prevent a player from being projected out of control, unable to protect himself from serious injury while flying through the air, esp from landing on the head. Enjoy the time off and take your body checks like a man.

    It will never be perfect, but this is by far the best season of ruling consistency in many years.

  5. solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:22 AM

    Looking forward to watching Emelin hip check random Bruins into the stanchion on Thursday.

    Bet Krejci still feels the last one.

  6. solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    This is how it’s done:

    • fantasyhockeyguru - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM

      If “That os how it’s done” then this again is a “clip”. Although Versteeg is kind of hunched because he is skating, the hip makes direct contact to his knee/upper thigh, which again is below the waist. The only difference here is that he is hitting the front of body and not the back where it comes off as a “blindside”. I am not a B’s fan by any means, but as someone already posted, Shanahan needs to be more consistent with his rulings and suspensions he lays down, whomever the player is or whatever the offense. The Canucks had plenty of things they could have been suspended for as well. I’m just waiting for Salo to play again or the report he doesn’t have a concussion now, just cause they wanted Marchand gone for an extended period of time

      • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:56 AM

        WHAAAAA!!! Call 911!

      • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 4:51 PM

        I thought the tinfoil hats were only out in Vancouver? Salo’s injury a fake? Just goes to show.

        The hit is a little low as well but the clear difference is Versteeg is the player having touched the puck offensively and Emelin is defensively checking him. Marchand claims he was defensively reacting to a offensive hit coming from Salo, which was clearly not the case. Isn’t it simple when you explain it like that? 😛

        But Emelin’s (and Hamhuis’, and Ballard’s) are hip checks where a player without the puck hits a player with it. Marchand’s is not a hip check because he drops down shoulder first. He was also the player with the puck (would have gotten to it before Salo but avoided playing it) initiating contact but with a low hit after almost the exact play happened less than 20 seconds beforehand. There are lots of clearly identified factors that forced Shanahan to suspend him for what he did, not the least of which was it was an extremely dangerous play.

        Hip checks can be low (and clipping as a result) but the circumstances aren’t often so dangerous and irresponsible as this one, which has to factor in (and I’m not talking about the resulting injury). Players who will continue to hip check have to make sure they aren’t bent so much at the knees to ensure it’s hip to hip contact for the most part.

  7. rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM

    I love how Marchand gets the max suspension for the type of hearing and the Habs fans still find a way to complain about something.

    • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM

      If Chara doesn’t get a free ride, the Habs win the first round series and the Bruins still think there’s a conspiracy to get them.

      Instead, NHL Chairman and George Bush supporter, Jeremy Jacobs renewed Bettman’s contract and the rest is history.

      • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:01 AM

        The Max suspension? The little coward should have got ten games. And he still has the nerve to run his mouth at the league and Vineault. He will eventually get whats coming to him. And I’ll pour a nice glass of scotch to celebrate.

      • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:59 PM

        Yes the max suspension for a phone interview is 5 games.

        We know one thing, it won’t be a Canuck or Canadien taking the shot.

      • drewsylvania - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:21 PM

        OMG fuck all you whiny full of shit hab fans.

    • hystoracle - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:08 PM

      He will be lucky not to get an extra fine tacked on for his diatribe about hte officials. Basically saying the refs on the Ice and Shanahan don’t know what they are talking about. League generally doesn’t like players or coaches questioning the officials or the league office. (See: Torterella after the Winter Classic).

  8. matthews4 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:42 AM

    I am sorry guys, but come on. The problem here is the fact that most of Canada hates Boston. I could put together a 20 minute montage of dirty hits by the Canucks that are all worse than what Marchand did. Hell the hit by Hamuis on Lucic in the SCF was more of spear. By the way, is Vigneault french for hypocrite. Players trying to hurt players? Two words Raffi Torres. The fact of the matter is Vancouver only won after the NHL admittedly threw Lucic out of the game for the wrong reason, and Marchand out for something far less than what Hamuis already has done.

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:52 AM

      Most of Canada hates Boston? Is that what you think this is about? Better check your line-up, all your so called tough guys are Canadian. This is about dirty play and your efforts to “spin” and deny any wrong-doing by your “tough guys”. The best move the Bruins made in the last ten years was signing Gregory Campbell. You know it, I know it, and the rest of the leagues fan base know it.

      Congrats on winning the Campbell Cup!

      • fantasyhockeyguru - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:57 AM

        “MOST” was the key word, just because the players are Canadian doesn’t mean most Canadians dont hate Boston. You think they are going to turn down a paycheck and a better chance at winning a cup than any team in Canada? The fact of the matter is, the Canucks fans and the rest of Canada are just hating still because Boston has their number still and probably will for a while. And the Toughest guy on the B’s is Chara, and he is far from Canadian

      • fitzzzz - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:42 PM

        habsman, youre clearly the idiot in this one. honestly, do you really believe boston won the stanley cup because of campbells dad? no, im pretty sure they won because of how they played. it wasnt won through rulings or stuff like that. oh yeah, still feel so sorry watching your beloved subban fall on his ass when he tried to fight marchand last time you were in boston. its crazy, you should at least know how to skate if you play hockey.

      • drewsylvania - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:22 PM

        You. Are. So. Stupid.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:13 AM

      Most Canadians cheered for the Bruins during the Final.

      But it seems there is a race on here for who can lay claim to the biggest persecution complex so I’ll let you get back to it.

      • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:18 AM

        I only cheered for the Bruins because I had wagered a few hundred on the series being fixed in their favor.

        Thanks for the easy money!

      • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:51 AM

        Look at all the sore losers who lost money on games 1 and 2 and then decided to run a martindale system on the the first month of the Red Sox season.

        I laugh at the way the MLB season ended where they took all your money again.

        The curse of the Bambino is back!

    • thatsdoinit - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

      I cheered for Boston because I hate the Canucks.

    • drewzducks - Jan 10, 2012 at 3:11 PM

      And don’t forget Hansens attempted circumcision of McQuaid. Next time those hooligans burn down their city do us all a favor and let it burn.

  9. matthews4 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:47 AM

    • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:53 AM

      The difference is that Marchant’s hit was interference since he pretended to play the puck.

      • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:56 AM

        Doesn’t Lucic go indirect behind Hamhuis, then try to go up the boards, and he cuts him off? Sounds like both are interference.

      • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:00 AM

        rdurk86, you mean like the Chara hit?

      • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:38 AM


        Looks like rdurk86 is having a hard time responding to the Chara reference.

      • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 2:03 PM

        Chara was interference too, obviously. That’s why he got booted. I didn’t see where in the rule book interference required a police investigation though.

      • rdurk86 - Jan 10, 2012 at 2:04 PM

        So we’re having a conversation about the two Van/Bos hits, and we have to keep going back to Chara/Pacioretty. Not surprising people can’t let that go, seeing as the “police investigation” took months.

      • foodforthesoul28 - Jan 11, 2012 at 8:16 PM

        How can you pretend to play the puck of you play the puck?

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:01 AM

      Cute video, but even if you totally ignore context (ie. who had possession of the puck, the fact that Brad Marchand was punching this player in the head seconds earlier, etc) Hamhuis’ butt hits Lucic from about his hip to this thigh, whereas Marchand’s shoulder/upper body hits Salo in the back of the knee.

      They are absolutely not the same hit, it’s either foolish or disingenuous to suggest that they are.

      (As an aside, I hate when people make an extremely dubious statement by phrasing it as a question – eg “Aren’t these the same hit?” – if you don’t even have the grapes to stand by your statement maybe you should keep your trap shut.)

      And of course when you add context into the mix it’s clear that Hamhuis was attempting to make a hockey play and extremely probable (and the NHL seems to think it is true) that Marchand was attempting to put the hurt on a player.. it is obvious at least that he had no interest in making a hockey play, since he turns his back on the puck.

      • fantasyhockeyguru - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:02 AM

        Just because his butt hits there means nothing. He lead with his shoulder/arms and got under his knees and propelled upwards

      • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:11 AM

        Hamhuis did?

        Seriously, am I misreading you or did you not watch the video? Hamhuis went into the collision ass end first, if you have a problem with that then you are complaining about a textbook hip check and perhaps should think about lobbying the NHL to change its rules.

        It was Marchand that did nearly exactly what you’re describing (hit a player with his shoulder, under his center of gravity/near the knees, then came up to upend the player).

      • fantasyhockeyguru - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:25 AM

        Please freeze frame that and tell me how his shoulder doesnt make initial contact with his leg closest to center ice

      • fantasyhockeyguru - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:27 AM

        personally, I say they need to keep all these hits legal, because its tougher to distingiush how these referees can make the right and logical call with the penalty minutes assessed as well, on top of Shanahan giving out proper suspensions

      • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:34 AM

        So you want to see still images because you think they are going to confirm that Dan Hamhuis hit Milan Lucic in the knee with his shoulder? Uhh, okay:

        Here is Dan Hamhuis initiating contact with Lucic. Lucic has just chipped the puck out of the frame and they are engaged in a battle for possession. You can see both of Hamhuis’ shoulder patches and you can see his butt making contact with Lucic’s hip (see the blue jersey touching Lucic’s stripes at his waist).

        Here is the still of Lucic going over Hamhuis. It looks low right now because by this point Lucic’s momentum is carrying him over Hamhuis but you can still see Dan Hamhuis’ shoulder patches (honestly I don’t know how anyone can claim Hamhuis led with his shoulder, is this a subtle yet masterful work of trolling?)..

        For the heck of it, let’s contrast this with Marchand:

        Here is one angle of Marchand hitting Salo. Salo is right in tight to the boards so the only way we’d see Marchand’s head and shoulders at this angle is if he led with one of them. You can see that Marchand has already cut into Salo and yet still their jerseys aren’t touching – in other words Marchand has taken out Salo entirely by the legs and the POC is down near the knee.

        Another angle, a bit earlier – this time you can see Marchand’s shoulder hitting Salo, and you can see almost all of the left leg of Salo’s pants – from this angle it is clear that Marchand has led with his shoulder and hit Salo in the vicinity of his knee.

        Oh and here’s a bonus for all the folks who think Salo was coming in backwards, or some other damn fool thing. Here’s one of Marchand going down to submarine Salo while Salo is still facing him:

        Maybe it’s news to Bruins fans, but you have to turn sideways to hit someone cleanly with your shoulder – that’s what Salo was doing on the play.

      • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:37 AM

        Soo PHT apparently doesn’t like my image tags. Here are the direct links:

        First Hamhuis/Lucic image
        Second Hamhuis/Lucic image
        First Marchand/Salo image
        Second Marchand/Salo image
        Bonus Marchand/Salo image

        Let’s hope that works.

      • hystoracle - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

        The only thing Hamhuis had left to do was wrap the arms and that would have been a textbook tackle. He hit center of gravity and took his man down.

        The Hoodie could use this video to get his team ready for TebowMania.

        Would have to say Marchand’s hit was lower and a clear attempt to injure his opponent. Running his mouth about it later won;t win him any popularity contests with the Refs. No more “benefit of the doubt” calls for him going forward.

    • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 6:57 PM

      To play along with this post, please pause the video that matthews4 posted and go to the 15 second mark (the closeup of the intial contact on Hamhuis’ hipcheck). We’ll be using that as our reference point going forward. This is also a good time to note the camera angle isn’t level with the play, it’s up higher, basically from the stands area. Hopefully I haven’t caused any Bruins fans to disagree yet.

      You can see Hamhuis’ head appears slightly lower than the stripes on Lucic’s jersey, which are at the top of or above his hips. If you consider that camera angle I talked about before, his head must be closer to level with those stripes and at least level with his hips. Obviously his head is attached to his torso, so that’s where we’re going next – stay with me on this.

      His torso isn’t quite parallel to the ice – his shoulders are slightly higher. They are also angled towards Lucic meaning that’s more the initial point of contact than the hips. That doesn’t make it *not* a hip check, as he’s still travelling towards him with the hips like he’s angling into his path going backwards to initiate the contact (pretty much the definition of a hip check). Let me know if you disagree with that assessment.

      You can see the back of his sweater is actually in contact with Lucic’s elbow (now, no one start calling Lucic a monkey and say his arms hang lower than a regular human’s, that’s not true or nice). Stand up and put your arms to your side – are your elbows above or below your hips? Lean forward a little even, like Lucic is doing, and then keep leaning down until you can finally get your elbows at your hip level. For me, that’s maybe halfway towards being bent over 90 degrees at the waist and Lucic clearly isn’t bent over even halfway. Now, if you can, bend over 90 degrees and you’ll find your elbow is almost at your knees when you let it hang down. Take it easy coming up, I don’t want anyone passing out from being lightheaded.

      If you look at Hamhuis’ left arm at the 15 second mark as well, you’ll see it’s hanging mostly down (maybe 45 degrees out from his body at highest) from his side, versus parallel to his side and perpendicular to the ice. His elbow is about the same level as Lucic’s trailing knee (don’t forget that camera angle, and note Hamhuis has his knees bent, otherwise his elbow would be higher compared to Lucic). His knee closest to Lucic is also only a little lower. Just using your eyes on that one, no exercise.

      Remember when I had you bend over about half way before? Now bend over to almost 90 degrees and put your arm out a little from your side and let you hand hang down. One more step, bend your knees like Hamhuis has in the paused video. Where is you elbow in relation to your hip, above or below? For me it’s lower than my hip, which is level with my tricep. No worries, no more exercise after this, unless you consider thinking exercise.

      Alright! For those that stuck with me, congrats, you’re really a trooper. Your last task is think about where Hamhuis’ hip (the lowest point that would make contact in a hipcheck) must be if his elbow and knee are lower than his hip, and his elbow is level with Lucic’s knee, and Hamhuis’ back is touching Lucic’s elbow and his head is above or at least level with Lucic’s hip?

      If you’ve done the math right (and you are a human that isn’t horribly disproportionate to the average), you’ve figured out that his hip is at worst in full contact with the thigh. Remember, that’s his lowest point of contact and much of the contact was with the lower part of his torso (top of the hips and under the ribs).

      Now, there’s a super secret step, but it doesn’t require a decoder ring, and it’s all on you. Repeat the above steps we just went through with the 31 second mark of the video and post your results here. I’ll send the first trinket I can find in my desk (ooh, a deck of playing cards) to the winner!

      • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:01 PM

        And since I see people asking for stills of the video, here’s the two times I mentioned:

      • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:10 PM

        And I’m not going to send out a prize, unless you ask really nicely and genuinely followed all those steps.

  10. lameasish - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:54 AM

    Lol, people need to stop with all the Canada hate. You do know half your team is Canadian right? Including pretty much every good forward you have. You even have a very good French Canadian. If anything, Boston is more Canadian then Vancouver.

    • fantasyhockeyguru - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:59 AM

      Just because a roster is made up of more Canadians doesn’t mean Boston is more Canadian than Vancouver. The Locale and the fan base are what makes the difference

      • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:20 AM

        The statement “Most of Canada hates Boston” is untrue, unfounded, and stupid. You are not that significant. The issue is the Bruin fan base and their attempt to “spin” the numerous, cowardly cheap shots to justify the dirty play of their team. Good luck with that going forward. The spotlight is on the Bruins now. Even Greg’s dad Colie will have trouble covering for them.

  11. botlecap - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:55 AM

    i’m ok with the ruling, and with marchand sticking up for himself. it’s obvious he’s wrong, but the guy has a right to speak his mind. the chiarelli statement i think was made in the same manner as julien’s “we’re stupid” comments. the whole “nowhere near the knee or quadricep” part is demonstrably incorrect and the bruins generally seem to want to make a point about the ridiculousness of the media war (remember this isn’t the first time they’ve had to deal with this). i’d like to see the nhl put something into place where teams are not allowed to comment on an incident or potential disciplinary action prior to the league making a ruling. all the back and forth in the media is just ridiculous.

    i have to say though, i thought julien made a really interesting and smart comment about players protecting themselves and it’s a shame that it got lost in the war of words. the current atmosphere is leading players to behave as marchand did and it’s something worthy of an honest discussion. players are not able to trust that the other guys on the ice will take an adequate measure of concern for their safety, and it’s hard to think league administered discipline is going to fix that (since it hasn’t). what then are guys supposed to do except to take it upon themselves to make sure that, whatever happens on a play, they aren’t the ones who wind up injured?

    was marchand protecting himself? i think he was, but i don’t agree with the method. it’s pretty clear he was worried about taking a big hit after all the crap that took place in the middle of the ice seconds before and in a highly emotional game already full of dirt, and so he decided to partake in a little preemptive action rather than risk being clobbered. i think we can all agree that’s not the kind of thing we want to see in the league.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:08 AM

      Even accepting for the sake of argument that Marchand was just trying to protect himself, look at what you are saying:

      “it’s pretty clear he was worried about taking a big hit after all the crap that took place in the middle of the ice seconds before”

      Do you mean when Brad Marchand punched Sami Salo in the head twice behind the play after a perfectly legal collision?

      Unless I am misunderstanding you, that is just amazing. Now a player can punch a guy in the head, be scared of the repercussions (from a guy who has all the feistiness of a Lady Byng winner) and pull something even more dangerous and nearly as blatantly against the rules?

      • redrew - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:57 AM

        The pussification of Canada continues. Keep worshipping that European brand of ice dancing you froggies embrace. You want your hockey just like your football…no contact. Might as well make the goal larger too…just like that ridiculous 20 yard endzone. No wonder Russia mopped up on your national team……the whole culture has softened.

      • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:23 AM

        Look if you’re going to be a clown you might as well not bother responding to me – its clear you have no interest in any kind of discussion.

        Then again, maybe I shouldn’t bother responding to you either – I’ve noticed when they clean up the comments here yours tend to be the first to go. It’s not clear whether that’s because of your xenophobia, your misogyny or your embarrassingly poor reasoning.

  12. 8man - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:56 AM

    It was a bad hit. Brad needs to own it, take a deep breath while he’s off and then come back ready to kick ass.

    As for the rest of you, keep shining those glass houses….

  13. solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:15 AM

    Bill Simmons (typical bandwagon Bruins fan circa 2008)

    “I mention this only because, for the past two weeks, I have been watching hockey. It started innocently enough — the Bruins were pitted against the Canadiens in Round 1 of the playoffs, and even though I couldn’t have named five Bruins, I found myself flicking over to Versus for Game 1 just because I enjoyed seeing the uniforms so much. The Bruins were wearing their white, black and gold, the Habs were wearing their red and blue, and they were playing in Whatever-The-Hell-The-Forum-Is-Called-Now. Just like old times … right down to the part when the Bruins lost. Game 2 happened on a Saturday and I caught the third period and overtime; we blew that one, too. But it wasn’t until Game 3 that I found myself getting hooked — not for the excitement of the games as much as the ignominy of Montreal fans infiltrating Whatever-The-Hell-The-Garden-Is-Called-Now and cheering on the visiting Habs. Even worse, they had no problem throwing down with Boston fans in the stands. I mean, this was like something that would happen to the Atlanta Hawks or the Tampa Bay Rays.”

    • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

      “No matter what has happened to hockey in Boston over the years, this was an unforgivable turn of events — nearly as violating as hundreds of British people randomly showing up in Charlestown dressed in 1770s garb, heading over to the Warren Tavern and starting to push locals around. I don’t care what’s happened to me and the Bruins over the years; the fact that (A) Montreal fans felt safe enough to come to a playoff game in Boston and (B) they could get THAT many tickets to a playoff game had to rank among the saddest moments in recent Boston sports history. It’s one thing to see the dead body of someone you used to love; it’s another thing to watch vultures picking away at it. Like everyone else who cares about Boston as a sports city, I was completely horrified.”

  14. bostonhasrealhockey - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:24 AM

    Still the champs to bad habsman 😦 theres a few 911 lines open if you want to talk to someone about it.

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:01 AM

      Wow, a phone joke. Aren’t you clever.

      That doesn’t change the fact that Chara should have been suspended. Would he be suspended if the hit on MaxPac happened today? I think you know the answer. Gregory Campbell was the MVP of last years playoffs. Hell he was the MVP of the regular season as well. Best signing by the Bruins in the past10 years.

      • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:04 PM

        Shanahan still reports to Campbell, who reports to Bettman, who reports to NHL Chariman & Bruins’s owner Jeremy Jacobs.

        If Marchant’s hit happened in this year’s finals, there would be no suspension.

      • fitzzzz - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:49 PM

        bro chill with campbell. its none of my business but if you wanna jerk off to him dont do it on here. its getting weird.

  15. redrew - Jan 10, 2012 at 10:51 AM

    In June it is a clean play…in January it is a 5 minute major, game misconduct, and 5 game suspension.
    In Vancouver, it’s a shining example of tough hockey. In Boston, it’s dirty thugery.
    In Vancouver, aiming at the knees is clean. In Boston, hip checking the back of the leg is an assault.
    There was no issue with knees here. the Canuck was coming at Marchand ass first.

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:16 AM

      Nice try redrew, but the video doesn’t back you up very well. But keep up the good work. Your showing everybody what “spin” doctors you are.

      By the way, why don’t you take some time and meet up with your precious goons Horton, Lucic and Thornton and tell them they’re Canadian pussies. Let us know how that works out for you.

      • redrew - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM

        He fell over backwards because he was hit from behind. I know that Canadian eyesight is defective….the wide apart eye issue… find an American with 20-20 vision to recap the hit…and maybe they can explain how physics well

    • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:19 PM

      You’re right about June, there was no call on Marchand’s lowbridge on Daniel in game 4 either.

  16. lameasish - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:05 AM

    I do not even know where to begin with redrew.

    • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:08 PM

      I find it better not to start.

  17. matthews4 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:22 AM

    Habsman Do you hate the Bruins, and are you Canadian? So let me get this right you are a shining example of what I am talking about., yet you are trying to dispute the very essence of what you are. That’s really what is stupid. Please don’t say Hamhuis didn’t go to low, he suffered a concussion because his head hit Lucic’s knee. Fact. Come on guys let’s try to be objective here. I am not saying there should not be a suspension, I am saying if there is a conspiracy theory, it’s not in favor of the B’s. Yes i feel pretty comfortable saying most of Canada considering 3 teams are in the same division and considered rivals.

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:09 PM

      To my knowledge,Hamhuis did not suffer a concussion from the Lucic hit, he suffered a knee injury. There is no comparison to the that hit and the attempt to injure by Marchand. To say so makes you look foolish.

      Born in Canada, lived in Mass for 15 years, back in Canada. Dual citizenship. Having said that, yes I hate the Bruins. Never liked their style of play and never will. Where I live, there are three strong fan bases: Habs, Leafs and Bruins. I have some very good friends who are Bruin fans and we enjoy some friendly banter when we get together for games. The difference is, as hockey fans, they know the difference between good tough hockey and cheap shots. The Bruin fan base on this site for the most part do not. Read some of your fellow B’s fans posts and tell me honestly that they’re dealing with reality.

  18. matthews4 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:27 AM

    I will field the Chara hit no different than the Hall gill hit on Jon Sim.

    • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:45 AM

      Gill is backing-up and can’t see the stanchion.

      Don Cherry confirmed that Chara “knew what he was doing.”

  19. bostonlovescanucks - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:46 AM

    Oh yeah, well you Canadians are stupid….
    Oh yeah, well, well you Bruins fans suck….
    Oh yeah, well Canada is pussified…
    Oh yeah, well Bruins are all dirty players
    Oh yeah, well the Canucks all pee sitting down….

    I thought this app would be an interesting place to exchange ideas …..didn’t realize it was a 12 and under App.

    Deleting the App in …3….2…..1…..dele……………..

    • bcousy - Jan 10, 2012 at 4:11 PM

      Awesome. This is the best post I’ve read in a Bruins-Canucks thread since checking out this site. I still love PHT for how they stay on top of the news (even if they do love stirring the pot), but I’m with you — I’m done with reading the hate-filled comments section.

  20. matthews4 - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:10 PM

    So Don Cherry can read minds amazing,not that your reaching for straws or anything. Yeah and Gill while backing up was well past the stanchion when he threw the hit. Watch it again. See where he is when he makes contact. I’m just saying let’s stop looking at the who and start looking at the what. Nothing is ever going to be 100% the same, but if there are significant similaritie,s rulings should be more consistent. When the NHL has to come out and admit they threw out a 30 goal scorer erroneously, 5 minutes into what ended up being a one goal game Yeah there is a problem.

    • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:18 PM

      You mean like the time when Tootoo was suspended for Lucic running over Miller?

  21. bostonhasrealhockey - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:26 PM

    Listen i watch every game there is no way i disagree when its said that marchand is a punk,he is. But to call the whole team thugs because they play a physical style is just stupid. If all they do is what you accuse them of they would have a hard time winnig games at all. The way suban flopped last year was one of the most degrading acts to the game . Thatdeserved a 911 call.

  22. tommybrady - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:31 PM

    It wasn’t Marshmonts finest moment. Yes, it was a dirty player by a player who plays on the edge. He stepped over the line and should have been suspended…2,3,5 games…whatever. He deserved it.

    However, the bruins aren’t really “goons”. They handle their business physically and try to be intimidating. In no way do they go out and try to cheaply hurt other teams. Newsflash: They won the stanley cup because they play this way, and guess what…if they didn’t play this way they would have never won the cup.

    So everyone who hates this style of hockey go watch another sport because most teams who play physical and on the edge are the teams waiting to win it at the end of the year…Boston, Chicago, Philly, Pittsburgh…It’s not a coincidence that these teams have been in the cup or won the cup in the past few years.

    It’s clear though that the Canucks are bitter about losing a cup to this team and their coach is a crybaby. All of this stuff has been made clear since the game. I’m not mad, it just shows how one team will respond in bad situations..Complain and cry aka vancouver…Boston…go hit you in the mouth (hopefully its not a cheap shot which usually isn’t)

    I’m mad that Boston didn’t focus as much on the hockey side of Saturdays game as they should have. They played right into Vancouvers hands and lost…if this was a playoff game however I don’t think they would have gotten sucked into the stupid stuff. Vancouver is a good team but can’t see them winning it with the attitude they have. Buncha whiny (but very talented) jokes.

  23. solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:43 PM

    What all Bruins fans secretly wish for:

    • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:07 PM

      Lol at all Bruins fans giving thumbs down to their own commercial.

      Everybody knows Montreal girls are way better looking that what you guys have to settle for.

  24. mgp1219 - Jan 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

    well said, tommybrady!

    bad decision by Marchmont (love that). it probably cost the Bruins the game, so why do the Cannots fans need to whine about it, especially since he got a 5 game suspension. (deservedly so) do they think he should be bannished from the league? like someone else already pointed out, raffi torres is far worse than Marchand ( i know he plays for Phoenix now), but they had no problem when he was taking cheap shots all of last year, and continues to do so this year. it really does sound like sour grapes to me. also, what about Weis backing out of a fight after accepting the challenge fro Thornton. That’s as cheap as it gets. luckily the refs got him for it. typical Vancouver hockey…

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:22 PM

      I don’t know about other Canucks fans (in fact this comment section seems to be littered mostly with back and forth between Bruins and Habs fans.. must be a time zone thing), but the only thing I am in here arguing about is that the Marchand hit on Salo was not a hip check, it was illegal and he deserved his suspension because it was a dangerous, predatory play.

      As for Raffi Torres, I loved his hard-hitting style but I thought he became a distraction and a hindrance when he abandoned the play to hit a guy, or hit a player in the head when he could have avoided it.

      • solador78 - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:39 PM

        Habs fans are just jealous that the Bruins have a bigger man-crush on the Canucks these days.

  25. thatsdoinit - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    It doesn’t matter guys. Canucks fans are all delusional. Their organization talks about integrity yet they do cheap dirty garbage. They say Marchand had it coming, yet Raymond did the same thing to him in the finals. They have a few rats of their own. Burrows being the biggest. The fans think their team plays with class, but refuse to take their blinders off. It’s a lost cause.

    Remember these are the same fans that said what Bertuzzi did to Moore was a fair play because “He had it coming.”

  26. hardheadcountryboy - Jan 10, 2012 at 1:41 PM

    The perfect way to solve this would be for someone to drive this little puke head first into the boards…then he can spend a few months in a darkened, quiet room as he is dizzy, vomiting, with a never ending headache…then he can contemplate his actions … When he returns, keep doing it until he doesn’t return…..might take a couple of years but then he’ll be out of the NHL as he should be!!

  27. matthews4 - Jan 10, 2012 at 2:24 PM

    Habsman you just confirmed everything I said so how do I look foolish? To say you hate a team clearly shows you have lost the ability to be objective. I have not disagreed with the suspension, I am saying it is not consistent. I just think the Bruins cross the line no more than the biting, slashing, cheap shot Canucks , but its always “Different” that excuse is old and usually the differences are not the principle point of contention. You want to be objective tell me honestly you could not replace Hamuis’ name with Marchands during Shanahan’s description. Just because Lucic was on the receiving end makes it no less of a spear. Bruins fans are delusional?Check your own fan base it was a conspiracy by Colin Campbell that the B’s won the cup. Really dude? Yeah and I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll.

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:39 PM


      You made a stupid statement earlier that Canada hated Boston. You tried to make this about nationallity. Its not. Half the Bruin roster is Canadian. Its about Bruin fans, like yourself, who try to defend cheap shot artists like Marchand in order to justify the way your team plays. They are dirty. And that is the reputation they are desrvedly earning around the league. Sorry, thats just the fact.

      • fitzzzz - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:53 PM

        bro really chill! youre a freak on here and your arguments are all stupid

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 9:03 PM

      I’m not your bro, bro.

  28. redrew - Jan 10, 2012 at 2:36 PM

    When did Canadians become so passive.? I realize their ancestors are cheese-eating surrender monkeys that never met a war they didn’t surrender in. So clearly their is genetic truth into the transformation. Three down football with head starts for WRs, so they can score more easily in their 20 yard endzone….physical contact be damned….just like this new brand of ice dancing they pretend is hockey. I grew up believing Canadians were tough. I still want to believe. I’m just looking for any hint of truth that the Queen Mum is not in charge of this docile population.

    • redrew - Jan 10, 2012 at 2:44 PM

      Bruins/Canadians tonight. Just spotted the direct hotline from the Hab bench to the league office. Will the frenchies get their muffins are lathered if your coach speaks in the Queens English to Shanahan during their multiple conversations tonight.
      I suspect the Bs are so friggin pissed off by the Marchand/officiating crap that the Habs will get pounded to a 6-2 loss.

      • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:05 PM

        What channel is the game on? Lol.

    • habsman - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:50 PM

      Your ignorance is truely breath-taking. Pick up a history book and look up the war of 1812. Then check out WW1 and WW2 and see who was fighting in Europe and who was sitting on their arse when it broke out.

      But hey, its not really your fault. You are the product of the American education system. I bet you would have a hard time finding Europe on a map.

      As to Canadians being passive. Would you call your precious Canadian goons Lucic, Horton, Thornton etal passive? You see you cant have it both ways. Any other stupid questions?

      • fitzzzz - Jan 10, 2012 at 8:56 PM

        bro chill

      • solador78 - Jan 11, 2012 at 1:08 PM

        D-Day: Juno vs. Omaha beach

        Pretty much says it all.

  29. lameasish - Jan 10, 2012 at 3:48 PM

    Redrew you seriously are a sad little boy. All you do is try to get a rise out of people by making untrue statements. Did mommy and daddy not love you enough. No one thinks you are cool, I know high school was hard for you but a comment section is not the place to become cool. Keep chirping buddy, you are almost there..

  30. badgerbok - Jan 10, 2012 at 4:30 PM

    Guys correct me if I am wrong,
    wasn’t it Salo that initiated the hit?
    didn’t Marchand duck to avoid it?
    I have watched it over and over, sorry Salo for the injury but there was no intent on Marchand’s part to inflict, only to defend.
    No punishment should have been awarded, not even a penalty.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

      Your ignorance of the rules doesn’t change the fact that Marchand was correctly penalized, given a misconduct and then a suspension.

      Marchand can’t “duck to avoid” a hit if it means he’s putting his shoulder into an opponent’s knee, and Salo attempting to initiate a completely legal check doesn’t change that.

    • kitshky - Jan 10, 2012 at 5:50 PM

      Ok … we’ll correct you.

  31. stickbewooden - Jan 10, 2012 at 5:49 PM

    Rest up Marchie…

    Bruins are so loaded with talent this will just be another tempest in a teapot.

    Nuck fans can be happy they “won” this years season series 1-0. Whoop Tee Doo, now put down your lighters and flammable material.

  32. theagitator1691 - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM

    Hey what do you know another bruins player complaining about a suspension what a shock!!!! bunch of Goons quit your whining and deal with it the leagues suspended him for it feeling it was deserved leave it at that and quit your bitching

  33. nepatriots128154 - Jan 10, 2012 at 7:27 PM

    Hey guys remember that time the Bruins won the Stanley Cup and Vancouver burned itself?

  34. drewsylvania - Jan 10, 2012 at 11:24 PM

    Having all these new (and idiot) haters can only mean one thing.

    We won the Cup.

  35. vanfoodman - Jan 11, 2012 at 12:17 AM

    Xenophobia and misogyny rule the ProHockeyTalk comments! Simply astonishing ignorance!

  36. drewsylvania - Jan 11, 2012 at 11:23 AM

    “thatsdoinit – Jan 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM
    It doesn’t matter guys. Canucks fans are all delusional. Their organization talks about integrity yet they do cheap dirty garbage. They say Marchand had it coming, yet Raymond did the same thing to him in the finals. They have a few rats of their own. Burrows being the biggest. The fans think their team plays with class, but refuse to take their blinders off. It’s a lost cause.

    Remember these are the same fans that said what Bertuzzi did to Moore was a fair play because “He had it coming.””

    Mind if I just repost this in response to every irrational ‘Nucks fan?

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (1824)
  2. P. Kessel (1401)
  3. M. Richards (1190)
  4. N. Backstrom (1102)
  5. M. Giordano (1049)