All Playoff Talk, All the Time 2011

Torres with another head shot? Hmmmm.... we'll see...

What did you think of the hit Shabbs? I'm not sure what to think. Torres was just going for what would normally be a solid hit but Seabrook put himself in a compromising position.

Dash wrote:What did you think of the hit Shabbs? I'm not sure what to think. Torres was just going for what would normally be a solid hit but Seabrook put himself in a compromising position.

It's that crazy grey area... I like the hit... it's old school... will be interesting to see if the NHL takes a closer look at it.

Now Seabrook goes off for a look... he got rocked by Torres and should have gone off at that time... instead, he stays in, gets banged a few more times and then goes off... hmmm, sound familiar?

It happened really fast and I couldn't tell but I didn't think Torres threw his elbow. Again Seabrook was in a bad spot.

That's the coach and players fault Shabbs. Very dumb. I know it is the playoffs (Crosby's wasn't obviously and now he is missing them), but they got to be smarter when it comes to health of the players.

Dash wrote:It happened really fast and I couldn't tell but I didn't think Torres threw his elbow. Again Seabrook was in a bad spot.

For sure... skating behind the net, looking back for a pass and POW... rock you like a hurricane. Head contact for sure... elbow or shoulder - not sure...

Where's John Scott in all this? Torres is on a mission to put Seabrook in the hospital...

Dash wrote:It happened really fast and I couldn't tell but I didn't think Torres threw his elbow. Again Seabrook was in a bad spot.

Not exactly the matter here. It was blindside.

I don't even understand the argument here....that hit was from the blindside and that should have been a match penalty.

You want to see an awesome hit? see the one delivered by Hamhuis? wow. Canucks are really taking it hard to the hawks.

sandysensfan wrote:

shabbs wrote:Preds win 4-3. Fisher with the GWG. Preds lead the series 2-1.

First time in a long time Fisher is actually healthy for the playoffs. That makes a big difference. He's playing great. Carrie almost had a fit when she saw his fight with Getzlaf... it was funny.

Yeah, the guy that took Fisher in our pool is loving life. Who knew?

Also, that Torres hit....Wow....KERBLAMMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Dash wrote:It happened really fast and I couldn't tell but I didn't think Torres threw his elbow. Again Seabrook was in a bad spot.

I think the shoulder went right for the head. Good hit in the old NHL, suspendable in the new one. And if he got 4 the last time I think he could get more this time, except it's the playoffs and Campbell has already made playoff games worth more in the past.

MacKenzie's take on the hit:
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=362700

He says rule 48 allows some latitude on blindside hits behind the goal, so he doesn't think he will get a suspension. However his opinion is that, as a repeat offender, he should.

I don't buy that, because he's a repeat offender, he should be suspended. Being a repeat offender would certainly play a factor in determining the LENGTH of a suspension, but it should NOT be the determining factor in deciding whether or not he should be suspended in the first place. A hit is suspendable, or it's not. The rap sheet of the offender shouldn't determine if he's charged with the crime in the first place.

Saw the video of the panel from whee McKenzie's quote comes from. Kerry Fraser says it's a clear case of rule 48.

Even if the rule itself allows for more latitude for hits behind the net, I can *only* see that latitude being applied on the "blindside" part. They slowed it down and paused it on the moment of contact, and it's a clear case of shoulder to the head, even though there is plenty of room for Torres to hit the shoulder. If this is a head-on, shoulder to chest or shoulder to shoulder hit I'm fine with it, but this was a clear targeted head shot.

tim1_2 wrote:I don't buy that, because he's a repeat offender, he should be suspended. Being a repeat offender would certainly play a factor in determining the LENGTH of a suspension, but it should NOT be the determining factor in deciding whether or not he should be suspended in the first place. A hit is suspendable, or it's not. The rap sheet of the offender shouldn't determine if he's charged with the crime in the first place.

Of course it does. It goes to supporting intent.

The whole "benefit of doubt" defense goes out the window.

Wow. Chara is questionable for game3.