shabbs wrote:Chris Neil is to "ready to go" as he is is to WIN.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=423688
Funny, I don't think Neil said anything untoward about the hit, yet Orpik seemed yo take exceptions:
"I was going down and I was in a vulnerable position and he gave me an extra shove, which I picked up speed going into the boards," Neil explained on Tuesday. "It is what it is. It's playoff hockey. It's one of those things if he's in that situation I probably would have shoved him there, but it is what it is. The way he plays, he plays a physical game and I don't expect anything less from him."
If anything, almost sounds like he admires him for what he does.
Then Orpik responds:
"My response is it's very laughable coming from him," he told reporters on Tuesday.
"I thought it was a pretty harmless play. I didn't even know he didn't return. He's done his fair share of things to me and everybody else in here. We all know how he plays and he's a guy who plays hard and he's a competitive guy. Everybody knows how he plays. He's out there to agitate and I don't have much to say about it. He gets away with a lot - let's put it that way."
I don't get it. Maybe it's due to this (which I don't really understand):
"It's playoffs - your intensity is high out there. Tying to finish checks, you see a guy down. Put it this way - I wouldn't have done that to him to out him in the situation. I'm just lucky I'm no worse for wear and I'm lucky to keep going.
If someone could translate the bolded part for me I'd appreciate it.
Earlier Neil says "I probably would have shoved him there" and now he's saying else? Or something the same? Or did the article writer make typo -- maybe Neil said "I probably wouldn't have shoved him there"? Or maybe ...
I'm confused.
Why don't they just line up at center ice and beat the crap out of each other, and whoever is bleeding less wins, and the other guy gets to keep his mouth shut.