| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest8888 |
Posted - 12/22/2006 : 15:32:42
Scott Nichol recently recieved a 9 game suspension for his hit on Jaroslav Spacek. Is this suspension reasonable? |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Blubberboy |
Posted - 12/25/2006 : 18:32:58
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4689
You know what. This is all a load.
Bertuzzi got suspended because his hit for a whole season!!
They said BERTUZZI broke his neck. Fake. They jumped on Bert so that is what broke his neck. I don't get it. I don't get it.
Anyway, I picked yes.
Go Canucks
|
| leigh |
Posted - 12/25/2006 : 13:52:09
No, no, I'm not saying it was the injury that was the difference (although it's hard to think that the NHL didn't take it into consideration) I'm saying that Bertuzzi actually "planned" to go out and take it too Moore. To us laymen there are 3 levels of criminal activity, each progressively more serious:
- accidental (3rd degree)
- reactionary or passion (2nd degree)
- pre-meditated (1st degree)
Bertuzzi's was pre-meditated because he came off the bench and hunted Moore down, and even after Moore cowardly refused, Bertuzzi committed the crime. Nichol, on the other hand, acted out in a crime of passion; what I mean is that he struck out immediately in reaction to having been taken out into the net. If he had not reacted right away but waited and planned his attack then his crime would not have been any different than Bertuzzi's.
As a side note, I personally think that both suspensions were too heavy for first time offenders. |
| Guest0309 |
Posted - 12/25/2006 : 13:10:19
Too me, that was the exact thing that Burtuzzi did. Sure Spacek didn't get hurt but it was the intent that matters. They say that burtuzzi's was suspended because of the intent not on the fact Moore was injured. The NHL needs to find some consistancy in givin out suspentions. Not give guys suspentions depending out if the victum was injured or not. Clearly burtuzzi and Nichol wanted to hurt Moore and Spacek and it was aimed for the head therefore the suspention should be handed out according to those facts. Not if the victum is injured or not. |
| leigh |
Posted - 12/25/2006 : 00:34:39
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4689
You know what. This is all a load of crap!!
Bertuzzi got suspended because his hit for a whole season!!
They said BERTUZZI broke his neck. Crap. They jumped on Bert so that is what broke his neck. I don't get it. Screw this crap. You suk NHL. Anyway, I picked yes.
The difference (besides the obvious injury) was that Bertuzzi's was pre-meditated whereas Nichols' was reactionary. It's the difference between 1st and 2nd degree. |
| Guest4689 |
Posted - 12/24/2006 : 22:22:25
You know what. This is all a load of crap!!
Bertuzzi got suspended because his hit for a whole season!!
They said BERTUZZI broke his neck. Crap. They jumped on Bert so that is what broke his neck. I don't get it. Screw this crap. You suk NHL.
Anyway, I picked yes. |
| framer87 |
Posted - 12/23/2006 : 12:48:02
Thats a good punishment I'd say
Go pens |
| Trevman12 |
Posted - 12/23/2006 : 06:48:12
I think that it is pretty reasonable. |
| Guest6575 |
Posted - 12/23/2006 : 05:40:16
Sounds about right for his unexplainable betuzzi type actions, luckily spacek wasn't that badly hurt, but it was selfish and dirty, and they should lift the instagator rule, so someone could come and defended their player in need. And send Nichol a phsical punching of a life time, since that is what he deserves. Eye for an eye, Nichol you pansy, can't wait for someone to sucker you right back in the jaw. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 12/22/2006 : 18:19:40
Yeah, I said it's reasonable too. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 12/22/2006 : 17:40:06
This should be in the "User Polls" section. I will move it.
My answer is yes. |
