| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Guest9085
( )
|
 Posted - 04/16/2010 : 23:39:33
|
did anyone else see the cheap hit ny crosby what is above
the rest of everyone
|
|
|
Guest7502
( )
|
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 10:23:15
|
| i saw it. ruutu looked like a complete idiot launching himself into the boards and then pretending he was knocked out like leopold was |
 |
|
|
Guest4303
( )
|
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 10:50:12
|
| It was a dive. nice try crosby hater aka Guest9085 |
|
|
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 11:42:15
|
I'm a sensfan and even I can say that it was a dive but I still think the only reason their was no call is because it was Crosby. I will also admit that the goal Crosby set up was nice but it wasn't that good all he did was skate back and forth and now it's going to get shown 100 times a day for the next week on Tsn
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky |
|
|
|
Guest4882
( )
|
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 13:31:26
|
As it should be shown 100 times...he busted his butt to create something......they scored...bonus
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 13:38:45
|
Cheap hit Crosby?
How about that cheap hit by Andy Sutton knocking out Leopold? I absolutely couldn't believe Leopold was able to skate off after that one, made me cringe to watch . . . yet another play not meant to just separate someone from the puck, but to injure them badly.
The level of english coherence to this topic should be a solid indicator of allegiance . . . so I guess Guest 9085 must be a Sens fan? I kid, I kid . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 15:41:56
|
I agree the Sutton hit, although not against this new rule the NHL has put in, was charging and definately should have been called. Although, it seems like a nuclear bomb going off is required to call a charging penalty in the NHL today.
43.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.
A minor, major or a major and a game misconduct shall be imposed on a player who charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease.
A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
|
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2010 : 17:56:33
|
You would think for all the abuse I have taken in other posts regarding my stance on some of the hits that have happened this year, I would be all over this hit....sorry.
It was a clean, albeit violent, hit, thrown cleanly, there was no charge, Sutton came across somewhat sideways as if setting up for a hip-check, but instead, was able to lower the boom, due to Leopold not being aware of that potential.
He didn't hit him into the boards, he wasn't striding when he made contact, his elbow was tucked, etc.
I agree that there was no penalty there, and shouldn't have been. These are nasty hits, but they are clean, and these are the big hits that others condone, I'm not sure I disagree in this particular case...
Before the rash of questionable, cheapish hits took over late in the season, I argued that there are times when, throwing a hit with malice, is a good hockey play, this was one of those plays.
In my opinion only of course.
PS. Every time I see Beans' new avatar, I giggle, sophmoric I realize, but I can't help it.... |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 04/17/2010 17:57:55 |
|
|
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2010 : 04:49:03
|
Okay it was clearly a clean hit even some of Leopold's Pittsburgh teammates said so. The only person who thought it wasn't clean was that reporter. Sutton has a hit like that once a game this is nothing new.
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky |
|
|
|
Utemin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
451 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2010 : 09:33:52
|
| Was that the cross check he should have been suspended for; or the Stupid weak Crosby hit, not aloud but harmless? |
|
|
|
Guest8437
( )
|
Posted - 04/18/2010 : 09:49:59
|
The reason there is no call is because it was on Ruutu. Ruutu does not get the benefit of the doubt with refs, players or fans alike, and he shouldn't.
I wish Ruutu and Cooke (both Canucks bred wimps) weren't in the series. They are embarassing hockey players. |
|
|
|
Guest0975
( )
|
Posted - 04/20/2010 : 05:08:18
|
I'm tired of this head shot buls*** where every hit is a f***ing penalty. How is it charging when Sutton was coasting in to hit him. Leopold had his head down and got destroyed, that's what the games all about.
I love watching guys get destoyed when it's a clean hit, when the hitter is 6'5", the hittee is gonna get hit in the head.........solution keep yur head up. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
cheap hit crosby 
