fleung22 1 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 If Tie Domi is a clown the city of Vancouver is the circus...Bertuzzi as a member of that team showed what a clown he was...a jackass, and a clown..nice comboBert was a case where the result made him out to be a bigger monster than he is. I watched an almost identical behind-the-back punch about 3 weeks later but since the punchee got up right away and starting fighting the puncher nobody said anything. The penalty was COMPLETELY based on result vs. intent. If I had access to an NHL video library I would bet $1000 that I could find 10+ instances of a similar incident but with no punishment from the NHL execs. Stuff like McSorley where you have two hands on a stick is as blantant as it gets in terms of intent to injure. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 What happened in this incident is acceptable in neither sport nor society.Did you intentionally avoid my question? Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Did you intentionally avoid my question?No. Which question? If hockey made cross checks to the face legal, I think they should make hockey illegal. Or at least be honest, and change the name of the sport to "Gladiators on Ice". Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 No. Which question? If hockey made cross checks to the face legal, I think they should make hockey illegal. Or at least be honest, and change the name of the sport to "Gladiators on Ice".So ultimate fighting is okay because they stay within their own set of rules? How about Nascar...should a driver be charged with vehicular manslaughter if he bumps another car causing the death of another driver? Link to post Share on other sites
Vertigo 0 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 If Tie Domi is a clown the city of Vancouver is the circus...Bertuzzi as a member of that team showed what a clown he was...a jackass, and a clown..nice comboSerge your idiocy never ceases to amaze. Just because Domi is a leaf, he is a total class act in your books. One punch, which obviously did not have the intent to break someone's neck, and this makes Bertuzzi a brute, or a beast. Get a ****ing grip on reality. Bertuzzi's incident and the resulting effects on his career is completely results oriented. Like it's been said, if his neck never broke, or maybe if the other AV didn't jump on Bert's back, it wouldn't have happened. Just because Domi never broke anyone's neck, doesn't make him any less of a piece of ****. Didn't he attack a fan? Link to post Share on other sites
pauld22 0 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Is shooting a hard rubber projectile at someone have a place in civilized society? How about a nice shoulder planted under their chin while they're looking down at the ice? Oh wait, you'll say those things are okay because they are within the rules of the game, right? If we made crosschecks to the face legal would that change your view? The fact is a lot of things that are acceptable in sport are not necessarily acceptable in society.Touche. Yes, general societal rules punish most behaviors seen in sports. The society I was speaking to was the hockey society whose constitutive rules allow for a puck to be shot at someone (goalie, attempted block by a player, etc.) and shoulder checks. Nowhere in the constitutive rules does the game allow for a player to strike another with his stick. Regulatory rules state that cross checks, and other infractions of the constitutive rules be penalized.My only view that would change if cross checks to the face were made legal would be to never watch the sport again.Sorry, I typed too fast to distinguish that I was speaking to hockey society vs. society in general. I figured that was understood considering the context of the thread. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Touche. Yes, general societal rules punish most behaviors seen in sports. The society I was speaking to was the hockey society whose constitutive rules allow for a puck to be shot at someone (goalie, attempted block by a player, etc.) and shoulder checks. Nowhere in the constitutive rules does the game allow for a player to strike another with his stick. Regulatory rules state that cross checks, and other infractions of the constitutive rules be penalized.My only view that would change if cross checks to the face were made legal would be to never watch the sport again.Sorry, I typed too fast to distinguish that I was speaking to hockey society vs. society in general. I figured that was understood considering the context of the thread.Hockey players accept the fact that there is an inherent danger in playing hockey. None of them will condone what Simon did, but I would wager that very few of them (even Hollweg) would want to see him banned for life.And here is what you said...Yes, I have made mistakes. Oops tripped a guy from behind, oops rolled through a stop sign, oops didn't pull out in time. Mistakes happen. Intentionally swinging a stick at someone's head, chin, throat, mouth, whatever is malicious and has no place in a civilized society. Rules govern actions for a reason. Rules that state "if you feel the need to cross check someone in the face, you don't get to participate in our society anymore" would put halt to this crap really quick.Why do you draw the line at crosschecking to the face? What about fighting? It is against the rules and some would say an obvious attemp to injure. If someone gets knocked out in a fight should the other person be banished for life? Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 So ultimate fighting is okay because they stay within their own set of rules? How about Nascar...should a driver be charged with vehicular manslaughter if he bumps another car causing the death of another driver?I don't think that ultimate fighting is "okay".I personally find ultimate fighting to be abhorrent, but yes, they do follow their own set of rules, which everyone agrees to and signs off to before hand. I doubt you'll find a waver form for Hollweg agreeing to be hit in the head with a hockey stick. WThis issue is doing something so far beyond the rules that it is a crime. I personally think using a hockey stick as a weapon, to the head, with the intent to injure is so far beyond the rules of hockey, that it should be a crime. I'd feel the same way if someone took a baseball bat, and charged the mound with it, hitting the pitcher in the head. Do I think someone bumping another driver is a crime in nascar? Don't be absurd. What happened the other night is more analogus of a driver, after he's crashed, stepping out of his car, and walking toward the infield, and having a driver purposely swurve to hit the driver. That's a crime. If someone in UF continues to hold someone in a submission position, choking them to death, or causing them grevious bodily harm, after the man tapped out or the ref intervened, then that is a crime. And so is hitting someone in the head with a deadly weapon. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I don't think that ultimate fighting is "okay".I personally find ultimate fighting to be abhorrent, but yes, they do follow their own set of rules, which everyone agrees to and signs off to before hand. I doubt you'll find a waver form for Hollweg agreeing to be hit in the head with a hockey stick. WYes, he has agreed to play with the knowledge that such things can happen. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Yes, he has agreed to play with the knowledge that such things can happen.I absolutely do not agree. If I go to a poker game at a casino, and suck out on somebody, and the guy comes across the table, and punches me, I did not agree to this. I have the knowledge that this may happen, but it doesn't make it okay, or any less of a crime. Link to post Share on other sites
pauld22 0 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Hockey players accept the fact that there is an inherent danger in playing hockey. None of them will condone what Simon did, but I would wager that very few of them (even Hollweg) would want to see him banned for life.And here is what you said...Why do you draw the line at crosschecking to the face? What about fighting? It is against the rules and some would say an obvious attemp to injure. If someone gets knocked out in a fight should the other person be banished for life?I am not drawing the line at cross checking, it is the topic of the thread (to a degree). Yes fighting is against the rules and is punished because of it. Players are not forced to fight. Skate away and you will not be penalized for fighting. Some goons may think you are a pansy for it but that is their problem. Play within the rules and you should not be punished.The only way to equate fighting to this topic is to bring up a sucker punch. One player has clearly not willingly engaged in the fight and another has taken it upon himself to ignore that. That is intent to injure and should be treated as such. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I absolutely do not agree. If I go to a poker game at a casino, and suck out on somebody, and the guy comes across the table, and punches me, I did not agree to this. I have the knowledge that this may happen, but it doesn't make it okay, or any less of a crime.That's a horrible analogy.A better one would be if you signed an agreement before taking your seat that acknowledged that you may be punched in the face. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I am not drawing the line at cross checking, it is the topic of the thread (to a degree). Yes fighting is against the rules and is punished because of it. Players are not forced to fight. Skate away and you will not be penalized for fighting. Some goons may think you are a pansy for it but that is their problem. Play within the rules and you should not be punished.The only way to equate fighting to this topic is to bring up a sucker punch. One player has clearly not willingly engaged in the fight and another has taken it upon himself to ignore that. That is intent to injure and should be treated as such. Really? You've never seen only one player receive a penalty for fighting? I guess they should banish those players. This is essentially what you are saying.I'll let you or BigD have the last word...go ahead. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 That's a horrible analogy.A better one would be if you signed an agreement before taking your seat that acknowledged that you may be punched in the face.No it's not, getting hit in the head with a hockey stick isn't just "part of the game". The fact that you seem to be arguing this disgusts me. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 No it's not, getting hit in the head with a hockey stick isn't just "part of the game". The fact that you seem to be arguing this disgusts me.People get hit in the head with a hockey stick, intentional or otherwise, dozens of times in each and every hockey game. How is it not part of the game, right or wrong? Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 People get hit in the head with a hockey stick, intentional or otherwise, dozens of times in each and every hockey game. How is it not part of the game, right or wrong?okay, I'm done with this thread. The amount of people standing up for Simon is just staggering. The difference between the type of hit that occurs dozens of times a game, and this sort assault one would think would be obvious, but apparently it's not. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I don't think that ultimate fighting is "okay".I personally find ultimate fighting to be abhorrent, but yes, they do follow their own set of rules, which everyone agrees to and signs off to before hand. I doubt you'll find a waver form for Hollweg agreeing to be hit in the head with a hockey stick. WThis issue is doing something so far beyond the rules that it is a crime. I personally think using a hockey stick as a weapon, to the head, with the intent to injure is so far beyond the rules of hockey, that it should be a crime. I'd feel the same way if someone took a baseball bat, and charged the mound with it, hitting the pitcher in the head. Do I think someone bumping another driver is a crime in nascar? Don't be absurd. What happened the other night is more analogus of a driver, after he's crashed, stepping out of his car, and walking toward the infield, and having a driver purposely swurve to hit the driver. That's a crime. If someone in UF continues to hold someone in a submission position, choking them to death, or causing them grevious bodily harm, after the man tapped out or the ref intervened, then that is a crime. And so is hitting someone in the head with a deadly weapon.this is the bertuzzi/moore debate all over again:No it's not, getting hit in the head with a hockey stick isn't just "part of the game". The fact that you seem to be arguing this disgusts me.it is part of the game. guys get hit in the face all the time. it is not done intentionally, which is why this incident is separate from the others, but getting hit and/or injured, including sticks in the face IS part of the game.no one is arguing that simon didn't do something inexcusable, and deserves severe punishment, beyond typical limits. most of the suggestions here were for a suspension that would've been one of the 5-10 worst in the NHL. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 this is the bertuzzi/moore debate all over again:it is part of the game. guys get hit in the face all the time. it is not done intentionally, which is why this incident is separate from the others, but getting hit and/or injured, including sticks in the face IS part of the game.no one is arguing that simon didn't do something inexcusable, and deserves severe punishment, beyond typical limits. most of the suggestions here were for a suspension that would've been one of the 5-10 worst in the NHL.ty Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 okay, I'm done with this thread. The amount of people standing up for Simon is just staggering. The difference between the type of hit that occurs dozens of times a game, and this sort assault one would think would be obvious, but apparently it's not.you admitted that you don't watch hockey, so maybe that's why you're confused by the differences that are important to us. the main issue is that, while simon's hit was beyond normal bounds, it was within the area of what you can expect to happen on the ice. his punishment should be governed by the NHL, not by outside courts or anything like that. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 okay, I'm done with this thread. The amount of people standing up for Simon is just staggering. The difference between the type of hit that occurs dozens of times a game, and this sort assault one would think would be obvious, but apparently it's not.Where did I stand up for Simon? Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 you admitted that you don't watch hockey, so maybe that's why you're confused by the differences that are important to us. the main issue is that, while simon's hit was beyond normal bounds, it was within the area of what you can expect to happen on the ice. his punishment should be governed by the NHL, not by outside courts or anything like that.That's very possible, I admit that. As an outsider, the hit looked horrific. I just don't see how it was withen the area of expectation of what can happen on the ice. Perhaps that's my issue. Link to post Share on other sites
pauld22 0 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 you admitted that you don't watch hockey, so maybe that's why you're confused by the differences that are important to us. the main issue is that, while simon's hit was beyond normal bounds, it was within the area of what you can expect to happen on the ice. his punishment should be governed by the NHL, not by outside courts or anything like that.Going into a corner and expecting to get bumped with a stick, helmet, elbow, etc. is pretty different form expecting a player to lose his cool and cross check you in the neck, chin, face, head. It's not expected because it doesn't happen.Thanks for the little debate. It took me back to my Ethics of Sport class and I really enjoyed that class. I have to get to writing a paper, I may check out more responsed later.At least we all agree that this was pretty gross and just wrecks a great game. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 That's very possible, I admit that. As an outsider, the hit looked horrific. I just don't see how it was withen the area of expectation of what can happen on the ice. Perhaps that's my issue.fwiw, i actually reacted violently the first time i saw it. nearly puked. it may be more of a condemnation of the state of hockey than anything else that something that violent could be considered not outside the scope of the game, but i guess that's a different argument. Link to post Share on other sites
XXEddie 0 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Please, quote just one post where someone claimed he was "faking it".How about you.... Am I the only one who thinks Hollweg embellished a little? Yes, it was a disgusting act by Simon, but there was no need to embellish the play.Unfortunately, the NHL will probably base their decision on the extent of Hollweg's injury. They continue to miss the point that they need to punish the act and not the consequence.If it were my decision the suspension would be...rest of the 2006-07 regular seasonall of 2006-07 playoffs if applicablefirst 10 games of 2007-08embellish- to enhance with fictitious additions Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 How about you....embellish- to enhance with fictitious additions Faking would imply that he was not injured. Embellish would imply that he was not hurt as bad as he made it seem. Thanks for coming out. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now