| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Guest4271
( )
|
 Posted - 02/10/2011 : 03:27:27
|
Anyboby out there thinking that Mr. Crosby could be in trouble???? The word is, he is out until March, and a case for that is that he is in Cole Harbour as I type. The Canada Games are in town, but I wouldn't think that Cole Harbour's king would be here for that. I hope, as for Canadians, Nova Scotians, and hockey fans, that the Kid is going to be OK. As for the Steckel hit, the more I seeit, the more I know how intentional it really was. Question is how is he going to take out Stamkos, the Sedins, and the rest of the top 10 players in the NHL, so the Ovie is #1. IMO Ovechkin is not even in the top tier of players this year, think the true Russian player has shown up again, LOL
This should get the chatter going
|
|
|
Guest7694
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 03:41:55
|
| Cool story bro. |
 |
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 04:53:34
|
I truly hope Crosby is not done, but the signs are ominous, as you say. When he comes back, it could be in a diminished capacity . . . or, he plays the same way and within a year or two gets another concussion and goes downhill from there.
We have seen this film before.
If the players and the NHL don't care about protecting a Savard or a Crosby by issuing ridiculously stiff penalties and suspensions to prevent further occurrences . . . it'll become a garbage league of goons eventually.
Something has to change. Because I am really, really pissed that someone can tak a cheap shot at Crosby behind the play, and get away with it like Steckel did.
And shame on the Penguins' trainers for not thinking about Crosby's future a bit more during that game and afterward.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest9298
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 05:44:19
|
| Wow you all sound like Crosby. A bunch of whiners. Hockey Is a rough sport and it's not going to change, so stop complaining about it. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 05:48:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9298
Wow you all sound like Crosby. A bunch of whiners. Hockey Is a rough sport and it's not going to change, so stop complaining about it.
(Admin Edit - content removed - personal attack)
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest9298
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 06:19:25
|
| considering I'm the size of Crosby or maybe smaller I wouldn't call myself a meathead... Maybe you should consider the media is milking this issue more then needed. Back in the 50's,60's,70's,80's and early 90's, no one ever seemed to care about the brawls, players would play with concussions or other injuries. Players these days are not as strong mentally, they may be big but they seem to go down easily. Do you that just maybe money has a factor with all of this in the end? I think so |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 06:53:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9298
considering I'm the size of Crosby or maybe smaller I wouldn't call myself a meathead... Maybe you should consider the media is milking this issue more then needed. Back in the 50's,60's,70's,80's and early 90's, no one ever seemed to care about the brawls, players would play with concussions or other injuries. Players these days are not as strong mentally, they may be big but they seem to go down easily. Do you that just maybe money has a factor with all of this in the end? I think so
Fair enough - a real answer, and an opinion! Excellent. I'll take it point by point:
1) The media is milking the issue
So, when Crosby got clipped by Steckel a few weeks back, that must have meant that the media got in a huge uproar, right? I mean, you are talking about a play well away from the puck; a headshot / hit to the head; an injury to the game's biggest and brightest star, with apologies to Stamkos and Ovechkin.
The media must have been all over Steckel, right? Ban him for life!!! Give him a huge suspension!!! Throw the book at him!!!
NNNNNNNNNHHH!!!! Wrong! Nope, the NHL commentators came out and tried to make excuses for the hit - inadvertent, most of them said. Non-suspendable was the view taken by many.
I remember this CLEARLY because I watched the game . . . after all, it was the WInter Classic, it was Pens and Caps, Sydney vs Ovie, and everyone was watching.
No, I would posit actually that the media was cowardly, and took their cue from the NHL to soften it, downplay it, etc, and not give a black eye to the miggest media event for the NHL in the US besides the all-star game.
IMHO, the media shat the bed, and became apologist, as usual. They completely and utterly failed, and I remember shaking my head and wondering why they weren't making a bigger deal of the biggest star in the game getting a dirty hit behind the play, when it was so obvious it was intentional. REALLY obvious, IMHO.
2) Back in the 50s - 70s, no one cared, and there was no big thing about concussions.
Not true - the medie cared a lot about it, actually. Many, many articles were written int he print media about the 70 Flyers and about goon hockey and about how bush league it was . . . maybe you just aren't old enough to have heard about it.
And about the concussions back then . . . I would argue that there were fewer, definitely a lot less - softer equipment, smaller players, going slower. But certainly, they didn't know much about concussions then, and head injuries were certainly not looked upon as seriously.
Not that that has anything to do with Cooke deserving a major and lengthy suspension instead of a slap on the wrist.
3) Players are not as strong mentally these days.
This could be true, but . . . I doubt it. Yes, in some ways, with all of the money involved, trainers, handlers, etc - you could say they are babied a lot more, for sure. But they also have to handle things that players back in those days never had to handle, and for me it sort of evens it out - the incredible pressure associated with all that money riding on you; the intense and rigorous workout schedule; having zero free time for yourself because of the workout regimen, off ice appearances and duties, etc etc - and most importantly, being secluded from the rest of society in a bit of a fishbowl. Yeah, fame and fortune is fun to look from the outside, but it's often lonely and frustrating for the rest of the time, when you can't trust any friend or hanger-on.
I think Crosby is an incredibly strong guy mentally, btw - anyone of lesser stature could never cope with the immense amount of attention and off-ice responsibility and still be positive, happy, and so accomodating to the public demand - which is neverending, and ready to tear you down at a moment's notice.
No, I give Crosby huge props for being a very strong individual.
4) Money a factor?
Definitely. And it makes you wonder then, who's money is it that profits from the game's biggest star being out because of a cheap shot? No one's, as far as I can tell.
I would say ignorance is a bigger factor here.
5) not a meathead
Fair enough, I am sure if we stood face to face I'd be called the meathead, so I will take that back then. 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
TheRC
Rookie
105 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 12:00:12
|
Seeing Crosby injured on a crappy, unnecessary hit after the play had stopped is gross. It shouldn't have happened, and Steckel should have been punished for it. The one bad thing I will say about Crosby is that the guy didn't say ANYTHING when his teammate Cooke was in trouble for some of the nastiest hits in recent memory.
The players of today, thanks to diets and intense training systems are larger, faster and stronger than they were, and equally importantly they play with equipment that allows them to skate faster, shoot harder and hit harder. Both the players themselves and the league have to change their attitude if they want to avoid these crappy injuries. First the league needs to step up the penalties on players who throw ditry hits. Secondly, the players themselves have to speak out against it. It's one thing when you hear guys denouncing players who hurt their team-mates... but imagine how quickly this sort of stuff would dry up if Ovechkin went on record saying Steckel threw a sleazy hit, or if we heard Crosby denounce Cooke as the dirt-bag he is.
The league has made efforts to change the rules that have not gone far enough. Whereas in the heyday of goon hockey the players themselves would handle discipline (and dirty guys would be fair game) now the league has actually made things more dangerous by offering short suspensions for questionable hits, but much larger ones for obvious, targeted retaliation. It is worthwhile for these goons to play on the edge, but not for anybody else to pursposly take them out.
Either way, whether you like hockey rough and tough or not, when you have great players missing months at a time, and in some cases forced into early retirement, we as fans are losing out. You say Crosby is a whiner for complaining about a hit after the play which cost him a good part of the season. Maybe so, but how would Crosby just toughing it out in slience make the NHL game any better? The damage to the fans was done as soon as he hit the ice.
"If at first you don't succeed, you fail" |
|
|
|
Guest4271
( )
|
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 03:14:45
|
| Good news, they say the Kid is getting better, but is coming back to soon the question? And do the Pens make the playoffs with no Kid and no Gino?? I say no way. |
|
|
|
T-RAV
Top Prospect
Canada
75 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 05:26:31
|
Perhaps the concussion Crosby has is Karma for him not calling out Cooke.
Peace and Respect |
|
|
|
Mario 66
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
360 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 08:39:30
|
How can you have Peace & Respect as your slogan and then spew out BS like that. What peace or respect are you showing that you encourage a guy to be injuried because he didn't call out a teammate. If a family members of yours or mine beats someone up who trys to steal there belongings and then gets shot is that karma for them not giving up there belongings? Really think before you speak man as your comments could not be more pretentious & ostentatious. Your teammates are like your brothers and you see how well recieved it is when guys call out their teammates. Championship teams have a army mentality of us a against the world and therefore a need to stick together in all situations. Thus why your team is not a championship team as your coach continues to throw your players into the fire. O i talked bad about the leafs i guest karma is going to get me and then bloody mary is going to come through the mirror and Freddy Kreuger will get me while i sleep. You create your own destiny nothing along that is related to karma or other ficticious BS.
Lemieux owns Gretzky |
|
|
|
Guest0481
( )
|
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 11:24:40
|
The real issue (that everyone refuses to acknowledge for some reason) wasn't the Steckel hit itself. It didn't seem like Steckel was targetting the head, since he wasn't even looking at Crosby. Maybe it was a little dirty, but certainly not that bad on the grand scheme of hits in the league.
The real issue was the penguins allowing Crosby to play the very next game, where (presumably) he got a second concussion from the Hedman hit. Obviously the Penguins medical staff (and Crosby himself) failed to identify the dangers of the original Steckel hit. Once you start stacking concussions on top of concussions, that's how you get to Lindros/Savard levels asap. At least they are letting him take the time he needs now, but it seems a little late. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 11:31:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0481
The real issue (that everyone refuses to acknowledge for some reason) wasn't the Steckel hit itself. It didn't seem like Steckel was targetting the head, since he wasn't even looking at Crosby. Maybe it was a little dirty, but certainly not that bad on the grand scheme of hits in the league.
The real issue was the penguins allowing Crosby to play the very next game, where (presumably) he got a second concussion from the Hedman hit. Obviously the Penguins medical staff (and Crosby himself) failed to identify the dangers of the original Steckel hit. Once you start stacking concussions on top of concussions, that's how you get to Lindros/Savard levels asap. At least they are letting him take the time he needs now, but it seems a little late.
I strongly disagree with your first point on Steckel not being aware that his stiff-arm elbow was going to catch the head of the game's premier player and #1 target. If I were skating by, maybe you could make that argument . . . but not a professional player, not on your life. He knew darn well what he was doing, and if not - HE IS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR IT. A headshot after the play with no puck in site . . . it should have been a huge suspension, period.
I do agree with your second point, however - a key part of this is the Pens trainers totally crapping the bed, and with their #1 golden ticket, to boot. One has to think that someone wasn't doing their due diligence.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 11:41:48
|
I gotta say, I have not watched the Steckel hit in some time. However, when I watched it during the game and watched it afterwards, I see nothing predatory or malicious in the hit. I saw much like the commentatory say in an inadvertent hit. Crosby appeared to turn into Steckel who was skating up ice towards the puck.
If that is the case, how on earth can someone make a sane comment like "He knew darn well what he was doing, and if not - HE IS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR IT." What you are saying is that every player is responsible for the outcome of every action. When Bryan Berard took a stick to the eye, ultimately ending his career, who was responsible for that?? When Kurtis Foster broke his leg and nearly ended his career, who was responsible for that.
Something people need to appreciate is that sometimes crap happens. Sometimes people get hurt when they shouldn't. I sure hope Crosby is ok as I think he is very important for hockey but if he's not I don't think anyone could blame Steckel. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 11:50:23
|
quote:
Something people need to appreciate is that sometimes crap happens. Sometimes people get hurt when they shouldn't. I sure hope Crosby is ok as I think he is very important for hockey but if he's not I don't think anyone could blame Steckel.
I agree - slozo, look at the video of the Steckel hit again, it seems to me that he is doing what he can to avoid hitting Crosby, while still staying in the play. I do not think there is anything malicious about that hit - had Steckel wanted to hit Crosby in that instance, he could have done a whole lot more damage. It certainly should have been a penalty during the game, but a huge suspension? No way.
Most people are focusing on the Steckel hit, but guest brings up a good point - Crosby was not actually knocked out of the lineup until Hedman hit him against the boards in the following game. In retrospect, it seems that PIT trainers might have missed an injury from the Steckel hit, that got a whole lot worse with the Hedman hit. If that is the case, its even harder to pin this all on Steckel. |
|
|
|
Mario 66
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
360 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 12:45:53
|
Slozo, I wish i could agree with you on this one as my pens are s***ting the bed now without the kid and Washington got off scott free although Cooke did his best to even the odds on Oveckin. Just kidding guys regardless as much i would love to blame Steckel i see it as beans & nuxfan simply a freak accident with a sh***y outcome for the pens.
In fairness to the Pens medical staff & Crosby not every player shows the signs of a concussion right away. You have some guys like Savard where the impact was immediate and Crosby where it doesn't hit you for days or weeks later. As the old saying goes when it rains it pours i believe it was Crosby's first concussion throughout all levels and when watching him in Jr's & Pro's i have never seen him get his head driven into the glass or boards like the hedman incident. Again, did not think that was malicious either just amazing that two incidents come up in back to back games that he has never endured in the 1000's prior.
More indications on how messed up concussions are with the 100's of different prognosis on his expected return weeks ago from him being shut down for the yr.
Lemieux owns Gretzky |
|
|
|
T-RAV
Top Prospect
Canada
75 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 12:46:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mario 66
How can you have Peace & Respect as your slogan and then spew out BS like that. What peace or respect are you showing that you encourage a guy to be injuried because he didn't call out a teammate. If a family members of yours or mine beats someone up who trys to steal there belongings and then gets shot is that karma for them not giving up there belongings? Really think before you speak man as your comments could not be more pretentious & ostentatious. Your teammates are like your brothers and you see how well recieved it is when guys call out their teammates. Championship teams have a army mentality of us a against the world and therefore a need to stick together in all situations. Thus why your team is not a championship team as your coach continues to throw your players into the fire. O i talked bad about the leafs i guest karma is going to get me and then bloody mary is going to come through the mirror and Freddy Kreuger will get me while i sleep. You create your own destiny nothing along that is related to karma or other ficticious BS.
Lemieux owns Gretzky
Mario, clearly I hit a nerve. This was never my intention as I usually agree with your posts.(even the ones about the leafs).
Regardless of such, I beg you to show me where I encourage an injury to Crosby, or any of the great hockey players that have been injured this year or any year for that matter.
I also never said Crosby should call him out "publicly". I made no mention of a public service announcement, nor do I think he should take out a full page add in the National Post.
Now, just to make you feel better I will tell you what I think in my very own opinion.(this is where you started putting words in my mouth)
True Karma would be Cooke getting a life long concussion, not Crosby. also I don't understand why you think I'm a retard. If I or You or some random person gets "shot" for fighting to keep my, or your or their belongings, this is a tragedy not Karma. Karma would see the "jacker" get jacked!. Really!
Now that we have that straight, if my sister walks into a bank and and kills people, and I knew she was going to do it, and I did nothing to stop it, not only am I a d***, but also a criminal.(this is where your "mens rea" comes in)
So, I understand that a team is like family, but believe it or not, some people will actually call out their family members for being a DOUCHE.
If your dad was cheating on your mom, would you tell her? This is just a rhetorical question( I really hope all is well at home, in spite of your opinion of me)
I'm glad you don't believe in karma. I hope it helps you sleep. But for you to trash someone else' beliefs just because you don't agree isn't very civil.
So, if you want to attack me because I am peaceful or you read disrespect in my posts, don't hesitate to use big words and call my beliefs BS!!
Peace and Respect |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 14:10:29
|
Karma is clearly a subjective opinion and I think it would be better suited to not be discussed on the site in this fashion. This banter back and forth has definitely become personal in nature so please shut it down.
Back to the topic at hand, looks like I am not the only one who believes the Steckel hit was incidental. That being said, concussions are still a mystery to even the best doctors. My wife struggled with some concussions and they are wierd. In one case, she was hit while playing sports and spilled pretty hard. Got up, finished the game without issue. A couple of days later, she got up out of her chair a little quickly and immediately had a headache. Boom, concussion.
The medical staff in Pitt could have not known just as easily as they could have known. They all take the same physical test and based on the scores they indicate if the players should player or not. Crosby could have been symptom free prior to the Hedman hit.
Now, if we want to point blame at this, the blame should be on on the shoulders of Hedman. That was a dirty hit. |
|
|
|
Mario 66
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
360 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 16:23:22
|
TRAV please emphasize how "perhaps the concussion crosby has is karma for him not calling out cooke" is anything but ignorance and complete disrespect towards someone's well being? Please swing this is a positive light that shows I am overreacting and completely out of context to write the rant i did.
If you are saying to not call him out publicly then how do you know that he didn't tear him a new a**whole in the room or on the phone for commiting stupid acts in back to back rooms? O wait you wouldn't so you just mooted that point
Your examples are not correct in using Mens Rea "guilty mind" as there must also be Actus Reus "guily act" but i get what you where trying to explain and I could of used a better example just your straight comment is so direct i felt it required a direct hard nose example to emphasize the deliberatness in which your comment comes across as.
You explained alot in your beliefs that you justified the old eye for an eye theory which only exists in the middle east today and is not moral in any way since you discuss a moral code. To end someone's livelyhood because they ended yours does not make it right or neccesary. Sure it's what many of us may like to do but it is the resistance of these impulses that differentiate common folks like you and myself and people locked up for 25 to life. Thats why with such a comment your slogan of peace & respect is really shocking when your comment condones ill fortune on others.
Maybe it's just me but there doesn't seem to be much peace
& respect for that particular comment obviously not every post you make. I was speaking to you like an adult that has an understanding of the english language and simply using words i would use on a regular basis. If they are not words you would use so be it but by no means are they big words mean't to undermine your intelligence but if that is how you feel they where intended to be then we are all intilted to our opinions.
Lemieux owns Gretzky |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 17:48:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I gotta say, I have not watched the Steckel hit in some time. However, when I watched it during the game and watched it afterwards, I see nothing predatory or malicious in the hit. I saw much like the commentatory say in an inadvertent hit. Crosby appeared to turn into Steckel who was skating up ice towards the puck.
If that is the case, how on earth can someone make a sane comment like "He knew darn well what he was doing, and if not - HE IS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR IT." What you are saying is that every player is responsible for the outcome of every action. When Bryan Berard took a stick to the eye, ultimately ending his career, who was responsible for that?? When Kurtis Foster broke his leg and nearly ended his career, who was responsible for that.
Something people need to appreciate is that sometimes crap happens. Sometimes people get hurt when they shouldn't. I sure hope Crosby is ok as I think he is very important for hockey but if he's not I don't think anyone could blame Steckel.
I gotta agree. I finally went and looked at a few clips of the outdoor classic game where Steckel hit Crosby, and I am seeing the same type of thing. Inadvertent contact.
One can espouse as much as they would like about how these are professional athletes and yada yada yada, but sometimes, bad things simply happen in a game on ice, on skates with large bodies.
Crosby, without seeing it happen, turned in to Steckel. Steckel was jumping up on the transition and was unable to avoid the collision, even though, in the clips I saw, he did try. Simple as that.
Now the problem, is everyone has a different perception of what they saw, making our 'genius', who suggested a video judge in another thread, downgraded to 'brilliant', like some of us others.
Of course, Slozo has admiringly accused me of being lawyerlike in my video reconstructions in the past, so maybe if the NHL is looking for an eye in the sky??
They better get the the big chair and a goodly supply of peanut butter and bananas first though. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 18:25:08
|
Everyone is responsible for their own actions on the ice, period. Even when you make an inadvertent high stick in someone's face, you can get a penalty if it is deemed careless . . . it is your responsibility to control your stick, your elbow, your knee, your skate . . . you get the point.
Even if you think this professional athlete skater mistakenly took out Crosby in the head well after the play . . . it was his responsibility not to lay him out "by mistake". Should have been a major penalty at the least.
What don't you guys get about that?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 19:01:54
|
You guys are insane. How anyone can say that the hit is inadvertant is . . . well, blind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-vGuHLIPoc
At the 15 sec mark, Steckel starts up from stationary to get going. He is looking up ice at the puck going, sees Crosby ahead, looking away at the puck.
He is looking right in the direction of Crosby.
He takes two powerful strides, and at the 16 sec mark, hits Crosby with his shoulder/arm, and actually puts out the arm as he does so - meaning, he put his body into it, if you dig what I am saying. He gave a stiff shoulder/arm to the head.
How anyone can argue that it was inadvertent is beyond me.
Go ahead, lawyer Fat Elvis, talk me through it.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 19:21:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Everyone is responsible for their own actions on the ice, period. Even when you make an inadvertent high stick in someone's face, you can get a penalty if it is deemed careless . . . it is your responsibility to control your stick, your elbow, your knee, your skate . . . you get the point.
Even if you think this professional athlete skater mistakenly took out Crosby in the head well after the play . . . it was his responsibility not to lay him out "by mistake". Should have been a major penalty at the least.
What don't you guys get about that?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I'm not sure what there is 'to get', and wonder the same albeit it for different reasons.
I could give you the definition for 'inadvertent', but I don't see the need as it is what it is and the blame for it, in this case is perception and opinion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCjafePVUIw
This clip, starting at the 0:02 second mark, clearly shows Crosby blindly turning hard to his right, looking back at the play behind him, and in to the path of a hard striding Steckel. It doesn't show Steckel clearly trying to avoid hitting him, but it doesn't show him taking advantage of Crosby's situation either. That I would think is irrefutable from this particular clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8cQxJvgeJA
In this clip, starting at the 00:15 second mark, you see Steckel, a center coming off the backcheck(with Kunitz in front of the net), move forward with the play and as the announcers even say, 'go for the puck'. I would even ask you to watch his right shoulder and how he dips it and tries to tuck his body in at contact to, what appears to me anyways, avoid a heavier collision, since, as the following play shows he was moving with the play to get himself in to a shooting postion, which is where he was crossing the Pitts blueline, and a heavier collision would have slowed him and prevented this. I wonder if someone more worried about taking the cheap shot would have been so intent on the play following.
Inadvertent in this play is both players responsibility. The inadvertent contact by Steckel, and the inadvertent, accidental, 'pick' play that Crosby got himself in the wrong position for. No penalty is the absolute right call, regardless of the unfortunate result.
Many have pontificated on here about not handing out discipline based on result, but intent. Here is an example of what that actually means, when done correctly. No intent, no penalty. If one was to truly be responsible for their actions and where they are on the ice, it could possibly be argued that Crosby should have got 2 minutes interference, for slowing down Steckel with his face.
I am as big a fan of Crosby as anyone and feel the game is suffering for his loss at the moment as he was truly one of the league's 'feel good' stories when he went on his magnificent tear from the start of the year, but call the play what it really was, an unfortunate incident, nothing more.
|
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 19:32:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
You guys are insane. How anyone can say that the hit is inadvertant is . . . well, blind.
That's why debating with you is always a pleasure, you're such a good listener, alway willing to listen to other's thoughts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-vGuHLIPoc
At the 15 sec mark, Steckel starts up from stationary to get going. He is looking up ice at the puck going, sees Crosby ahead, looking away at the puck.
He is looking right in the direction of Crosby.
I can only assume you must have had a personal communication with Steckel to gain these insights, all I see is the back off his head, he could be a googly-eyed mofo looking in two different directions for all I can tell, but since you say it, it must be so
He takes two powerful strides, and at the 16 sec mark, hits Crosby with his shoulder/arm, and actually puts out the arm as he does so - meaning, he put his body into it, if you dig what I am saying. He gave a stiff shoulder/arm to the head.
You say he stuck his arm out, my clip and this one as well don't support that, but we can let other eyes be the judge as mine are apparently wrong and yours apparently occupy Steckel's skull, since you see what he sees(see above)
How anyone can argue that it was inadvertent is beyond me.
In my previous post I said I didn't have to provide the definition, I guess I was wrong
Go ahead, lawyer Fat Elvis, talk me through it.
Still need more?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
|
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 19:52:24
|
Slozo is correct. For everyone who thinks otherwise answer this: Could Steckel have avoided contact with Crosby?
|
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:01:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Slozo is correct. For everyone who thinks otherwise answer this: Could Steckel have avoided contact with Crosby?
I'll go first, uhhh, maybe?
We would have to know if he saw Crosby, we would have to know when he saw Crosby, we would have to know if he thought he COULD avoid Crosby, we would have to know much more than we know, and until then, I can only surmise what I do, from what I see in the multitude of clips available.
I'll even add an 'in my opinion', to avoid any confusion that what I state is anything more than that.
PS. Do you intend to have your post sound so omniscient with it's directness? If yes, good job, it has that feel to it. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:02:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
This clip, starting at the 0:02 second mark, clearly shows Crosby blindly turning hard to his right, looking back at the play behind him, and in to the path of a hard striding Steckel. It doesn't show Steckel clearly trying to avoid hitting him, but it doesn't show him taking advantage of Crosby's situation either. That I would think is irrefutable from this particular clip.
Inadvertent in this play is both players responsibility. The inadvertent contact by Steckel, and the inadvertent, accidental, 'pick' play that Crosby got himself in the wrong position for. No penalty is the absolute right call, regardless of the unfortunate result.
First paragraph is precisely the type of reasoning and thinking that has the league in it's current predicament with concussions. "Does not show Steckel clearly trying to avoid hitting Crosby". You DO NOT make contact with players who do not have the puck. In fact you DO GO OUT OF YOUR WAY to avoid hits like this. Why? Pretty obvious isn't it? That garbage didn't happen when the players had respect for one another.
Second paragraph. You can't seriously be putting blame on Crosby here. Again same mentality generating the problems we're seeing today. If you don't have the puck you should be able to have a conversation with someone in the crowd if you choose and not be worried about having someone clip you. Yes, it is that simple. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:08:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Slozo is correct. For everyone who thinks otherwise answer this: Could Steckel have avoided contact with Crosby?
I'll go first, uhhh, maybe?
We would have to know if he saw Crosby, we would have to know when he saw Crosby, we would have to know if he thought he COULD avoid Crosby, we would have to know much more than we know, and until then, I can only surmise what I do, from what I see in the multitude of clips available.
I'll even add an 'in my opinion', to avoid any confusion that what I state is anything more than that.
PS. Do you intend to have your post sound so omniscient with it's directness? If yes, good job, it has that feel to it.
The angle from behind Steckel shows what he could see. I don't know of too many people who skate full bore forward without looking what's in front of them. He saw Crosby. I think even Beans could have maneuvered his way around Crosby in that situation. (kidding Beans )
And congratulations on receiving your thesaurus. Making fine use of it I see.
 |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:34:12
|
Didn't even need my thesaurus for that one, I was gonna use god-like, but even I know when to not sound too patronizing, and I'm not even a moderator .
Your forceful rebuttals are full of naught but suppositions. I clearly stated that I couldn't tell where he was actually looking and was just wondering how anyone else could?
I stated, with evidence, that I thought he did indeed at least attempt to avoid heavy contact, again my opinion based on what I saw, not fact, just an observation.
I never condoned the actions, only tried to reason with arguments that had no merit based on fact, I still see it as inadvertent contact with a horrible result. To argue for anything more would be delving in to areas of Steckel's character and culpability, that have no place here, other than opinion, and as we all know, or should, opinions are what make our little forum world go 'round.
I appreciate your opinion as well, but to make statements as succint and well, opinionated, as 'He saw Crosby'. Again, supposition, there is no way we can know that as fact.
I have and will always agree to disagree given sound reason to concede a valid opinion, but I don't think MY opinion should be any basis for 'the type of reasoning and thinking that has the league in it's current predicament with concussions.', or 'Again same mentality generating the problems we're seeing today.' arguement, that sort of rebut starts to get Slozo all 'strawed' up again.
You say intentional, I acknowledge that. I say inadvertent contact, the league acknowleges my opinion. C'est la vie!
|
|
|
|
Guest4271
( )
|
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:34:13
|
| I'm pretty positive that Steckel knew who, what he was doing. Anyone that runs into someone/something inadvertantly usually looks behind to see what it was. Steckel didn't bat an eye and just kept skating onward. He knew what and who he had hit, and nobody can convince me other wise.............and for all of the Mario whinning about todays game, Why did he not feel this way, when Cooke smoked Savard, or any of Cooke's other nasty hits, and now he's complaining about the game being what it has become. When the NHL wont protect its assets, then the players will take care of each other, and I can't wait til Steckel or another Wash. player gets theirs.......Ovie, Backstrom Semin or Green, take your pick |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:59:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
Didn't even need my thesaurus for that one, I was gonna use god-like, but even I know when to not sound too patronizing, and I'm not even a moderator.
Your forceful rebuttals are full of naught but suppositions. I clearly stated that I couldn't tell where he was actually looking and was just wondering how anyone else could?
I stated, with evidence, that I thought he did indeed at least attempt to avoid heavy contact, again my opinion based on what I saw, not fact, just an observation.
I never condoned the actions, only tried to reason with arguments that had no merit based on fact, I still see it as inadvertent contact with a horrible result. To argue for anything more would be delving in to areas of Steckel's character and culpability, that have no place here, other than opinion, and as we all know, or should, opinions are what make our little forum world go 'round.
I appreciate your opinion as well, but to make statements as succint and well, opinionated, as 'He saw Crosby'. Again, supposition, there is no way we can know that as fact.
I have and will always agree to disagree given sound reason to concede a valid opinion, but I don't think MY opinion should be any basis for 'the type of reasoning and thinking that has the league in it's current predicament with concussions.', or 'Again same mentality generating the problems we're seeing today.' arguement, that sort of rebut starts to get Slozo all 'strawed' up again.
You say intentional, I acknowledge that. I say inadvertent contact, the league acknowleges my opinion. C'est la vie!
Shakespeare waxes poetic...
If you felt patronized perhaps that's something in your character.
You simply don't like the answer to the question I posed.
Again, when you take off skating, do you look where you are going? It's just good practice no? I mean, otherwise you could just go around hitting whatever you liked claiming "I just didn't see him, I didn't intentionally make contact." |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 21:42:01
|
Shakespeare?? Hardly. I think I should say thank you, but not sure, I have a feeling it's not necessarily complimentary.
I didn't feel patronized, I don't know your nuances well enough. I still am not sure how you intend your retorts.
I did answer your question.
You just can't accept my answer. Stalemate.
You state absolutes, I answered with variables and unknowns, it could go back and forth forever.
You never asked the other question regarding, 'Again, when you take off skating, do you look where you are going?', until your last post.
Yes, I tried to take off 'heads up' when skating, did I ever make inadvertent contact with players during a game? Not often, because I tried not skating around hitting anything I felt like, but it did happen.
Again, I am not saying anything other than what I opined after watching videos of the incident.
Geez, I take the unpopular stance of opposition, and I get....Bean'd.
Ah well, at least it's not a bunch of nameless guest trolls, I get called Shakespeare and blindly, insane by the moderators!
I would hope all in good fun and in the spirit of hearty debate?
|
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 21:57:22
|
a couple of things.
1. I don't think anyone is arguing that this should not have been a penalty - it should have been. Inadvertent contact to the head should be penalized during a game. The penalty was missed by the refs, the play went on. Steckel absolutely should have received a 2 minute penalty for something (elbowing, charging, something).
2. I absolutely believe that Steckel was attempting to avoid contact with Crosby. The view from behind Steckel shows the play perfectly. Both players are watching the puck, which is along the boards in front of Steckel and slightly behind Crosby. At the same time Steckel starts his stride forward to join they play, Crosby starts to turn to the outside - which when completed, brings him right into Steckel's path. Steckel has taken 1 stride at this point. During the hit, I see this:
- he sees the contact coming (whether or not he knew it was Crosby is debatable, it happens in about half a second)
- he drops his right shoulder, and raises his left arm. This is the exact action you would make if you are trying to sidestep something. Try sidestepping around an object that is moving into your path, you will probably make the same move. Steckel is trying to sidestep around Crosby.
- Crosby completes his turn into Steckel's path - contact is imminent. But Steckel is 7 inches taller than Crosby, which is unfortunate. Were they the same height, the dropping of Steckel's shoulder would mean a shoulder-on-shoulder hit to Crosby. The 7 inch difference means that the shoulder hits Crosby's head.
- once the hit spins him around, he regains his balance and continues accelerating.
The movement of his arms at the time of contact indicates to me that it was incidental. The fact that he is quite a bit taller than Crosby leads to the head contact.
2 minute minor penalty. Hell, maybe a major, because its Crosby. But that is where it should end. |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 01:41:18
|
| I've watched the video now at least 25 times and from multiple angles. I don't see any intent from Steckel. Not even a little. He obviously tried to get out of the way and clipped Crosby. Both players were moving quickly and looking up ice and collided. Sadly, Crosby was in a compromising position and took the worst of it. Simple accident with unfortunate consequences. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 05:24:40
|
Wow. So only Willus and myself see a player skating into the player at his shoulder on purpose, and everyone else sees . . . a player who doesn't have good enough vision to see the world's best hockey player two degrees to his right.
That Steckel probably gets knocked out by hard checks every night, or maybe the other players just ignore him? Because with that lack of vision, he will get killed in the NHL one day . . . skating around totally unaware . . . a menace to himself and others.
Of course, I am being facetious.
Steckel does have eyes that see, forward in a straight line, and many degrees to the left and right. He can also, I presume, know where Crosby is when in close proximity in front of him slightly to the right. I don't think one has to assume some sort of genius cognition, some sort of otherworldly sight that Steckel has to see Crosby 5 or 6 feet away to the front of him. I don't have to see Steckel's eyes and draw lines to prove that this is the case, because it should be obvious by the angle of Steckel's head, the play that is happening, the knowledge of professional hockey player's vision and awareness, and I think it should be obvious to anyone who watches hockey, that a professional hockey player within 5 feet of the game's best player and pointing his head a few degrees to the left of him and suddenly skating hard in his direction . . . sees him.
Again - to me personally, this should be blatantly obvious to all. Apparently, it is not, and I can only shake my head in wonder at what I read to be ridiculous statements trying to justify how Steckel somehow must have skated forward with his eyes closed (it is the only explanation I have for him not seeing Crosby). I can only think that people don't understand the machinations of the game, and how a body looks when they are avoiding a player, how it looks when they are trying to stiff arm / clip a player, and how aware all players at that level are of each other and where they are.
Steckel did not have to be Gretzky here to see Crosby right in front of him.
I am otherwise at a loss for words in trying to say anything more to people who defend a guy skating into another player like this with the puck nowhere near.
And btw nuxfan - have you ever thrown a body check, on the ice or on the ground?!? Putting your shoulder down, then throwing OUT your right arm after it contacts a solid object (Crosby's head, in this case) is the exact opposite of avoiding contact! Seriously, try it on your best bud - do what Steckel did, then try crunching your right shoulder in next time before contact and veering your body sideways . . . tell me which one avoids any major contact, and which one gives your bud bodycheck into the wall.
I am flabbergasted at the total and utter lack of logic and reasoning here.
I don't think I will comment again here in this thread, it is too depressing.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 07:12:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Wow. So only Willus and myself see a player skating into the player at his shoulder on purpose....
I was all refreshed and rested this morning and ready to defend myself against the slanderous assaults questioning my vision, my sanity, my character, my 'utter lack of logic and reasoning', my inability to 'understand the machinations of the game', my apparently newly found ability to use a thesaurus.
Then I realized, you summed everything up for us in one line....thanks. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 07:40:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
We would have to know if he saw Crosby, we would have to know when he saw Crosby, we would have to know if he thought he COULD avoid Crosby, we would have to know much more than we know, and until then, I can only surmise what I do, from what I see in the multitude of clips available.
What the hell. I'll join the fray.
Like Leigh, I've now watched this 25 times (the wife and the kid are away). Here is my take:
1. He probably saw Crosby (or at least that a player was in front of him) - when you pause the clip at the 15 second mark Slozo mentioned, it does seem to me to be hard to argue otherwise.
- Fat Elvis, I'm not being sarcastic or anything here - take a look again and freeze it at 15 seconds and please let me know what you think
2. As to avoiding Crosby, you do see, in only about a second mind you, two or three strides taken after he probably saw Crosby in front of him. Did he think he "could avoid" Crosby? In that one second, my best guess is that he didn't address the question either way (but maybe he should have addressed it - this kind of relates to point 4 below)
3. As to Leigh's point that he "obviously tried to get out of the way," from what I see, the only thing we can say the he did 100% obviously was move forward with full intent of, well, moving forward. Judgments on his intent other than are at least a few notches below 100%, whether it be be Fat Elvis's/Beans/Leigh's view or Slozo's/Willus's view, I think.
4. Putting aside all those judgments on intent, I'll throw this point out. IF it is not a Penguin there but happens to be a Capital, spinning around from the boards for example, even with only that one second or so, are those two or three strides taken in a slightly different way/angle by Steckel? Does the same "inadvertent collision" happen in that case too? If the answer to my second question is anything less than a definitive YES, then, in my humble opinion, the line that "it's a fast game...things happen" loses quite a lot of it's steam. |
Edited by - andyhack on 02/15/2011 07:47:28 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 08:12:03
|
This reminds me very much like the Thorton striking Perron in the neck conversation. It is as black and white as one situation gets.
Here are a few things that I would suggest some of my moderating partners are missing. Firstly, the world does not move in slo-motion. From the time Steckel/Crosby are changing direction to the time Crosby get's hit is literally one second. We can beat up the 40 second slo-mo replay all we want. Even in the slo-mo, I don't see a hit as much as I see a player trying to avound a hit. What I clearly see(as well as others) is Steckel making an attempt to get around Crosby. He does not extend any body part. I see Steckel take one stride to head up ice and tries to tuck his right arm into his body to try to avoid the hit. So to answer the question if Steckel could have avoided Crosby, the answer is no. If Crosby would not have turned back to his right, Steckel would not have made contact. But Crosby did turn and Steckel was already moving up ice.
It's the perfect example of incidental contact.
And yes Slozo, to a certain degree a player is responsible for his action. However, when his actions are within the rules of the game and something bad happens, how can they be held responsible. As I stated, Bryan Berard took a highstick to the eye from Marian Hossa and all Hossa was doing was finishing his shot. Sure, the NHL has said that any time a player's stick strikes another player above the shoulders it is a penalty. However, Bryan Berard almost lost his eye and had to go through various surgeries to even get to 60/20 vision.
Just to clarify, you are saying that Hossa is responsible for that?? Because Hossa turned to take a shot on net and Berard skated into Hossa's follow through, Hossa is responsible???
Finally, in a situation where I completely agree with Brian Burke, this is an issue because of the players involved. There are players who have been out far longer (Langkow, Bouchard, Kariya) involving far more questionalbe plays. This is an issue because it's Crosby. Frankly, I believe people see this differently if Steckel makes contact with Talbot or Cooke rather than Crosby.
|
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 09:37:16
|
quote:
And btw nuxfan - have you ever thrown a body check, on the ice or on the ground?!? Putting your shoulder down, then throwing OUT your right arm after it contacts a solid object (Crosby's head, in this case) is the exact opposite of avoiding contact! Seriously, try it on your best bud - do what Steckel did, then try crunching your right shoulder in next time before contact and veering your body sideways . . . tell me which one avoids any major contact, and which one gives your bud bodycheck into the wall.
yes, I have. when I throw bodycheck, I tighten up the shoulder that I am hitting with, and maintain level or raise it as I make contact, into the body I am hitting. Further, I normally tighten up the other shoulder as well - hell, my entire upper body is pretty tight at that point. I certainly do not lower the hitting shoulder while raising my other arm straight away from my body - that is just asking for an injury to me when the hit is made. Steckel did the latter. The right arm coming out afterwards was simply a result of the contact that was actually made, as he tried to regain balance. |
Edited by - nuxfan on 02/15/2011 09:37:51 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Is Crosby Done?????? 
