| Author |
 Topic  |
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
 Posted - 09/12/2010 : 11:57:36
|
I'm confused Polishexpress . . . you coming around to seeing these third, fourth and fifth chances as condoning and promoting reckless and extremely dangerous behaviour?
Because you mention Steve Downie, as if that might be an example of a guy who has "learned his lesson", and I would totally disagree with that. At the very least, however, Downie has good hockey skill at the NHL level. But he will seriously hurt someone some day.
Liambas has NEVER had NHL skills, except for the potential to be an NHL level "pest" or "goon" with below average OHL skills.
You say Liambas should be and is accountable for his own actions, but he isn't. Rather, the hockey society around him has ignored their moral responsibility to the game, IMHO.
Liambas on Tavares back in the day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow7csCcRSKs&feature=related
Liambas takes a run and misses, fortunately for the Owen Sound player:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd5doNDBZ0c&feature=related
Liambas has been good at one thing in his career, and you can search it out on youtube for tonnes more: taking players out.
He has no place in the game of hockey for me.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
 |
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2010 : 15:39:34
|
It's definitely a difficult topic, and rethinking my posts it's kind of difficult to see where I stand.
I see why you think Liambas shouldn't be in hockey. And whether Downie has/hasn't learned his lesson is another topic.
Yet, I don't see why he shouldn't be allowed multiple chances for hits that are encouraged by the hockey world.
Now, I'm not making a blanket statement that all coaches and leagues promote dirty hits, but they sure haven't taken clear steps to eliminate players like Liambas, Downie etc.
Instituting rules doesn't count, they would need to overhaul the whole mentality of why a check should be applied to a player.
Nowadays, checking is more than simply trying to get the puck back. It used in hockey to instigate, to exact revenge, to intimidate, and in professional leagues it entertains, so it brings in revenue.
Until you change the attitude towards checking, beginning at the grassroots level, back to the original purpose - separating an opposing player from possession of the puck - then players like Liambas will continue to exist and develop.
For that reason, I think Liambas could be given another chance, with proper training, especially mentally and psychologically.
One thing you have made clear, though slozo, and that is what I ignored in previous posts, is that Liambas is not publicly showing any signs of true remorse or comprehension of the results of his style of play.
Thanks for your thoughts slozo, they have helped me clarify my own. |
Edited by - polishexpress on 09/12/2010 15:41:33 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2010 : 10:46:08
|
Polishexpress - very thoughful comments, thanks.
It is a difficult issue, because although I may have helped clarify your thoughts on the issue, the more I think about it sometimes, the muddier the waters become for me.
I wonder to myself whether players like Phaneuf are just a slightly more mature (and obviously way more skilled) evolution of Liambas. I like Phaneuf and the way he plays most of the time, but he certainly has made many "non hockey play" hits, especially in centre ice. Conversely, a player who I always held in the highest regard as one of the best D-men of all time, Scott Stevens, he always made a hockey play, even in his best and biggest hits - at the blueline, or on a player with the puck on the rush.
It's all a very grey area.
You make very good points about the need for any change to start at a grassroots level, for the mentality to change from needing "a big hit", to trying to "seperate the player from the puck" or to "take him out of a scoring play".
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
ToXXiK1
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
696 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2010 : 11:10:23
|
Did I hear somewhere that the Leafs are giving this kid a shot?
Can't see the forest for the trees? BUY A CHAINSAW !! |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2010 : 21:21:29
|
But see, Slozo, that's how ingrained the wrong mentality is that we find it acceptable to hit a player to take him out of the play (not take him out, just knock him off balance, for example...) and that is when hits can easily escalate.
That's where the line gets hazy for me. I love watching the big hits(a la scott stevens), and it is satisfying to make someone go flying and wipe the ice with their butt.
Yet, when I play with friends, I could never think of hitting them with any sort of force that could injure them- but if pros had that attitude, we'd be watching shinny. |
Edited by - polishexpress on 09/13/2010 21:25:03 |
|
|
|
Guest7924
( )
|
Posted - 09/14/2010 : 05:38:47
|
All you guys who say this was a real dirty hit and the guy should be banned from Hockey don't know jack about the game, especially at this level. The only thing that can really be said about this hit was the actual speed Liambas carried into the hit. Ben Fanelli turedn at the very last second to fire the puck around the opposite side once he saw Liambas coming in hard.
I really don't understand how the ,ajority of you can't see that...
This hit happens a dozen times each night. In todays game you see dmen and forwards constatntly turning their back to the checker to protect the puck. this has resulted in an increase in hits from behind. I feel that the guy turning should be held accountable as well for his poor decsion making.
Also, I hate hearing John Tavares name mention in any dirty plays against him. That little punk deserved all the abuse he got. I watched over 40 live General games when he was in town and I've never seen a dirtier player. Behind the play when the refs weren't looking...opposing players had better keep their heads up. Spearing guys in the back of the legs, sticks up between the legs, spears to the gut. Then when he'd get punched and pushed back he'd drop like a soccer player a draw a penalty. Reminded me of Avery. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2010 : 05:45:18
|
Guest 7924 - yeah, I heard Tavares was a real diver in junior - but I really haven't seen a lot of that in the NHL so far. Moot point - an illegal hit is an illegal hit, doesn't matter on who it was or the history. Illegal is illegal, end of story. Period.
So you are saying I don't know jack about the game because I hold the opinion it was a real dirty hit . . . well, say good -bye to your credibility. You have now registered your opinion as totally invalid, congratulations!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 09/14/2010 : 13:26:34
|
I really enjoyed this post, along with the responses, which go back nearly a year.
I happened to watch a TSN special last night on the top ten hitters (bodycheckers) of all time. When watching some (indeed most) of the hits, it's hard not to compare these hits to the Michael Liambas hit, and determine that the Liambas hit on Ben Fanelli was no worse than a lot of hitting which has taken place in the NHL, without any significant consequences issued to the hitters.
Scott Stevens was selected by TSN as the all-time best bodychecker, and watching his hits today, you would have many fans (especially and including many writers in this forum) calling for his head.
His hits on Eric Lindros and Paul Kariya were predatory, and while Stevens usually went shoulder to shoulder on his opponents, there were many occasions when he lifted his elbow to deliver a punishing blow.
That was then, and this is now I suppose, but most hockey fans would put Scott Stevens on a pedestal as one of the best defensive defensemen of all time. (Certainly not a cheap-shot artist.) No one would be suggesting that we ban him for a year (or for life), but if you look at a number of his most violent bodychecks (and they were violent – he might not admit it, but he was looking to hurt people on the ice), the Liambas hit would be an ordinary day in the life of Scott Stevens. And how many games did Scott Stevens miss due to suspensions?
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2010 : 13:44:31
|
Ok, I'll take the bait.
Here is a little something about Scott Stevens:
1635 games played (5th most all time)
2785 PIMs (14th all time)
Here is the kicker.
4 Total minor penalties for elbowing. Pretty low when "there were many occasions when he lifted his elbow to deliver a punishing blow." I can't believe that refs missed that call for nearly 20 years on Steven's if he was so notorious for it.
To compare this hit to a Scott Steven's hit is like comparing apple or oranges. Most of Steven's most devistating hits were guys coming across the blue line with their head down. 9 our of 10 Steven's open ice hits were impactful as the offensive players was at a high speed (a la Lindros and Kariya).
I don't recall ever seeing Steven's stake in from centre ice at top speed and pile into a player not moving behind the net. Maybe I am wrong in that, but I sure don't remember it.
|
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 09/14/2010 : 15:35:52
|
To paraphrase a famous quote: "There are lies, damn lies, and there are statistics."
Nonetheless, I was a bit surprised to see that Scott Stevens took only 4 minor penalties for elbowing. There's no doubt the game is called differently today, compared to when Stevens played, so perhaps this is the reason.
Did he get a few majors for elbowing? Or boarding? Or other major egregious offenses on the ice?
Did he get a penalty for his hit on Lindros? And if you can't see the elbow in that hit, you should watch the video again.
I'm not bashing Stevens. I think he's one of the all-time greats at his position! I just don't think we're seeing hitting any worse than what we've seen in the past. And I think the hit questioned on this post should and can be compared, even if it's "apples and oranges." (I think it's more like comparing Macintosh apples to Spartans.)
One thing for sure – we are inundated with media to the extent where we see things over and over again, so it looks worse when seen (and reviewed, and discussed) in the manner we do so today.
I agree that we never saw Stevens take a run at a guy from centre ice, but this makes obvious sense. Stevens was a defenseman, and defensemen rarely (if ever) forecheck in this manner.
Stevens' best hits came when a forward was entering the defensive zone, and he made them pay, especially when their head was down. Just ask Lindros and Kariya! |
|
|
|
Guest9023
( )
|
Posted - 09/14/2010 : 23:03:28
|
That wasn't a dirty hit, Fanelli turned at the last second, was Liambis supposed to pull out his time freeze that he bought on ebay or something?
I'll agree that the outcome was beyond brutal, but for almost everyone to condemn a player for finishing a check on another player who shows his back at the very last second is ridiculous.
Everyone should have another look, I know what I saw... |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2010 : 07:36:11
|
Guest 4178 - I appreciate your comments and that you took the time to enjoy the comments, but I will have to violently disagree with your take on Scott Stevens.
I brought him up as an example of a player that, while some of his hits were considered "over the line" or slightly "dirty", every single one of them was a HOCKEY PLAY. You admitted it yourself - a player coming over the blueline. With the puck. What is a defenceman's role in the game? To seperate that guy from the puck and get the offense going in the opposite direction! And that is what Stevens endeavoured to do every time.
Many times I have directed people to search out on youtube his greatest hits - and his top ten beat anyone else's I have ever seen, btw - and you will find very few hits, almost none, in the middle of the ice. Most are just inside the blueline in his own zone, and a few just outside the blueline.
Those are hockey plays. Hockey plays that, if the rushing player had his head down or was not paying attention, could be devastating physically as well. But the intention first and foremost was a hockey play.
Liambas was FORECHECKING in the offensive zone, and took a run from the centre ice line, gliding in without check to come in at nearly full speed.
To compare Liambas (and his other similar hits) to Stevens in terms of legality of hits and situation is extremely disingenuous.
When you talk about lies, damn lies and statistics, I would classify your characterisation of Stevens' hits as a "damn lie", with all due respect.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 09/15/2010 : 10:48:25
|
Hey Slozo – to some extent, we will have to (respectively) agree to disagree, but not on all points.
I have no problem with how Scott Stevens played the game (especially for his era), and you're description of his playing style is bang on. ("Hockey plays, and oftentimes catching players with their head down.")
I wasn't really questioning the legality of Stevens' hits, just the violent nature of some of his hits. (And comparing the violence of his most vicious bodychecks with the Laimbas hit.) It is a different game now, and the game is called differently, and I'm sure we agree on that point too.
At the time, Stevens' hits on Lindros and Kariya were judged differently than they would be in today's game. Head shots were rarely called in Stevens' era, but if we saw the Stevens-Lindros hit today (in the NHL or in major junior hockey),
a suspension of some length would be the outcome.
There are many reasons the game is called differently today, and perhaps the Stevens-Lindros hit played a small role, especially when you consider the stature of Lindros as a player, and also, that he was never the same player again, and eventually his career ended as a result of head shots. Of course, there were many other players who were affected by head shots, which further influenced the NHL to deal differently with these hits. (Where a player's head was down, and a bodychecker was looking to separate the head from the body, rather than the puck from the player.)
I genuinely believe that some of Stevens' hits, when viewed today, look bad, and compare in violence and outcome (not necessarily legality, but mostly because of the era) to the Liambas hit. They're different kind of hits for sure, but I have a hard time saying this Liambas kid should be banned from hockey for life, and just a decade (or so) ago, hits like Stevens were lauded and rarely penalized.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a big Scott Stevens fan, but he played the game with meanness and the desire to hurt his opponents. (At least sometimes.) I also agree with you that the majority of Stevens' hits were "hockey plays," at least at the time. If he was playing the game today however, he would have to change his style, or get used to being suspended. In today's NHL, players have more respect for their opponents than in the past, and the rules have influenced them to play the game with more respect.
In this respect (pardon the pun), I don't disagree with you that the Liambas hit deserves some harsh punishment (especially if he is a repeat offender), but where I disagree (I would suggest slightly) is the extent of the punishment.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Brutal OHL hit! 
