Comments on: Kyle Turris won’t be suspended

By: elvispocomo

elvispocomo — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:37:11 +0000

So, being late, and on a goalie who was playing the puck have no impact on suspension or not? It’s just because all the attention has been on headshots and hits from behinds that people weren’t sure how to gauge what would happen, but it was clearly a play where Lucic could have done more to avoid contact.

And as far as precedent goes, it has to start somewhere and if it’s a dangerous or reckless play that shouldn’t be in hockey, I see no reason not to start right then and there.

By: vanchuk

vanchuk — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 04:01:37 +0000

They must just hate everyone…seems plausible, I probably would too if everyone criticized every decision I made at work

By: scottybcboy

scottybcboy — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 01:12:21 +0000

Absolutely stunned by the lack of suspension. I guess I shouldn’t be by looking at Shanny and Colie’s track record over the last few years. No consistency at all. I wonder what Wisniewski thinks of all these non-suspensions after losing out on almost 500k for a suspendable but not heinous act.

By: kitshky

kitshky — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:57:59 +0000

Ya but he said “some borderline plays” …he wasnt necessarily talking about hits like Turris on Corvo. He was just saying there’s a lot of borderline plays that some feel should be supsension worthy that arent.

By: kitshky

kitshky — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:37:40 +0000

@hockinj25

That’s pretty much exactly what I saw. There’s a difference between targeting the head, and contacting the head. Having your feet leave the ice, and jumping to make contact. It was an unfortunate play but it was really just more of an awkward hit as Turris ended up more falling than laying a good hit.

Its too bad it happened … but that was about all that did happen.

(And the Bruins are gonna “annihilate” or “destroy” Turris talk is ridiculous)

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:36:19 +0000

On that type of hit? Yes–or, at least, there was no precedent for doing so.

By: kitshky

kitshky — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:32:31 +0000

@drew

Becaauuusee … you cant get suspended unless you target the head?

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:30:25 +0000

But but but I thought Colin Campbell was in the B’s pocket!!! Whatever shall we do with this new information.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:28:10 +0000

Well, the Lucic one didn’t get a suspension because it wasn’t a hit to the head.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:27:02 +0000

@hockinj25: That’s not what I saw.

By: vanchuk

vanchuk — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:09:54 +0000

You’re starting to sound like one of my fellow Canuck fans…too many conspiracy theorists out there. The ones involving the Bruins usually go the other way, but I guess every team has its kooks (Canucks more than most)

By: vanchuk

vanchuk — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:05:48 +0000

That was meant as a tongue in cheek comment to highlight Thomas’ embellishment and the fact that B’s fans are always spouting off about how their team would “never dive like that” There are many instances that prove them wrong, this one just being top of mind and blatantly obvious, I felt like pointing it out and seeing what type of reaction I got

By: hockinj25

hockinj25 — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 22:11:38 +0000

He was off balance and leaning so his feet came off the ice after he hit him. He didn’t leave his feet to make the hit.

By: matthews4

matthews4 — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:56:45 +0000

Let me also mention another reason “the past history” thing is crap. Players like P.K Suban don’t get even a phone call for a hit to Krejci’s face with an extended elbow, so as a result his “past history” shows one less incident. So let me get this right, Shanny or a committee picks and chooses what they think is worthy of being labeled an incident? Tom Sestito’s hit on Horton is a classic example. Horton hasn’t played since and to say that didn’t fit into the criteria for suspension is absurd. He didn’t even get a phone call from the league. Coincidentally both infractions where against Bruin players, starts to make you think. Epically given how Shanny has handed out suspensions like candy on Halloween.

By: elvispocomo

elvispocomo — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:54:19 +0000

I don’t know about that, I think he’s been reasonably clear. There’s certainly some borderline plays that could land people in hot water but haven’t (say Lucic running Miller), although if people are smart enough to realize those types of plays could earn them a suspension, they’ll be more careful as well as stopping the obviously reckless plays.

By: itsallniceonice

itsallniceonice — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:53:19 +0000

Also Eller blatantly clubbing Krejci in the face. He highsticks to the head on purpose but that guy earlier this year gets suspended or whatever for an accidental high stick when he was check to the ice? Ridiculous.

About Jack Edwards. I love that he’s a homer. What else could you want from your hometown announcer other than a guy that’s a fan and really into? He makes it fun to watch and Brick is there to level it out with some actual hockey knowledge. I can understand why other fans may hate it. I hate the Buffalo guy and his ridiculous goal calls.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:49:41 +0000

The best is that Brick knows how much of a tool Jack is, and makes fun of him over it.

Like you, I’m looking for an explanation for not even a hearing on either Gill or Emelin. Both of those were at least as bad as what Turris did.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:47:50 +0000

You said “reputation as divers”. If every team dives (they do), then “reputation as divers” should mean that the Bruins are starting to be seen as divers above and beyond the usual amount of diving.

Which is totally not true.

By: vanchuk

vanchuk — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:42:43 +0000

Rinne not dinner…stupid auto correct…and lack of PHT edit button, c’mon guys!

By: vanchuk

vanchuk — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:31:57 +0000

Nope, not kidding at all… I’m a Canucks fan and I agree that some Canucks embellish to get calls, as do players on EVERY team. Just trying to point out that the “tough-as-nails”, “play the right way” Bruins pull that kind of garbage too. Do I endorse it? Do I enjoy watching my team do that? No, I don’t. But I’m not so blind to think that they don’t do it, nor am I so stupid to think that every other team in the league doesn’t do it too. When the league is as competitive as it is, players will do whatever they can to gain the man advantage. I can never do it myself, but some players seem to have mastered it…or in TimThom’s case, he puts in a solid effort and it worked! Krejci scored on the PP, the B’s won the game. It worked great. I bet he’ll do it again too. As will Luongo, Schneider, Rask, Dinner, Lundqvist, Price etc. If it helps them win games, they will do it, notnjust the Canucks

By: sabatimus

sabatimus — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:31:13 +0000

I’ll also mention Hal Gill’s kneeing Peverley, which resulted in significant injury (a criterion for suspension as detailed by Shanahan), yet no suspension. Jack Edwards is a total schmuck, but he knows it–I think he admits he’s wrong about something just about every night. He KNOWS his hockey IQ is low, and he regularly sheepishly defers to Brick’s judgment. And when he doesn’t, Brick is more than willing to correct him

By: matthews4

matthews4 — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:22:36 +0000

Personally I like Jack Edwards. The fact that he is a homer is a generic criticism I could make about every play by play guy. Listen to Bobby Taylor for the Lightning, Edwards isn’t that bad by far. The hockey night in Canada crew that labeled David Krecji as “one of the B’s tough guys”. I continue to say there are 2 different set of rules one for the Bruins and one for everybody-else. I don’t want to be a victim here, but Lucic got thrown out of a game and suspended for far less. Past history should not make the act excusable for one and punishable for another. Be honest if Lucic did that it would be 3 games.

By: sabatimus

sabatimus — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:22:21 +0000

BS by Shanahan here: he says the head wasn’t targeted intentionally? What utter crap. Any idiot could see it was. But, it seems, Shanny ain’t just ANY idiot. Neither is Joe Urine, apparently.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:01:40 +0000

Could be due to Ovechkin’s history. I still call shenanigans.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:01:08 +0000

You’re kidding, right? Look a country to the north for the divers.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:00:22 +0000

“we concluded that the head was not targeted intentionally or even recklessly”

Bull. The guy jumped.

By: sabatimus

sabatimus — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 20:36:03 +0000

Totally. Turris targeted the head, left his feet, and initial contact was the head. And nothing from Shanahan? It seems that the consistency players want in enforcing the rules simply isn’t there. I hope the B’s destroy Turris Tuesday night.

By: ravenscaps48

ravenscaps48 — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 20:29:53 +0000

How does Ovechkin get suspended for it but Turris doesn’t?

By: vanchuk

vanchuk — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 20:19:48 +0000

Maybe shanahan was skeptical of the injury sustained on the play, as the B’s may be developing a reputation as divers. Did you see TimThom flop and flail after Colin Greening brushed his jersey??? Arms swinging, head snapping back…what a pansy

By: stratomaticfan

stratomaticfan — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 19:54:47 +0000

Was dirty play. Given his history, it probably should have been a fine or 1 game. But I’d bet dollars to donuts, his “supplemental discipline” will be handed out Tuesday night by McQuaid or Thornton.