All Around The NHL

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
Remember when Philly looked like a team set up for success for a few years? They sure imploded

Sent from my LGL85C using Tapatalk 2

They are a playoff team as of this moment and have been pretty hot since that awful start. Last year was bad, but they're right back in it... albeit as the second seed in the Metropolitan Division against weaker competition with a point total that wouldn't mean playoffs in the Western Conference.
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
St. Louis with 4 goals today..not good enough for Team Canada apparently.
 
Last edited:

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
[video=youtube;vIcdbxzrtbI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIcdbxzrtbI[/video]
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
Torts went after Hartley after the first ended...that's not going to end well for him.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
Torts went after Hartley after the first ended...that's not going to end well for him.

Torts said several times in his press conference that he "knew the other guy on the bench." Never said if he liked him or not, though. Think there may be some bad blood there.

Either way, I thought Torts took the high road with the way he handled his press conference and the whole situation, really.
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
Torts said several times in his press conference that he "knew the other guy on the bench." Never said if he liked him or not, though. Think there may be some bad blood there.

Either way, I thought Torts took the high road with the way he handled his press conference and the whole situation, really.

High road with the press conference, okay, but he did not belong in the Flames's tunnel trying (and shoving) to confront Hartley. That's not high road--he'll get suspended.

And Torts has done the same thing Hartley did (start 4th liners to "set a tone," start a rumble, whatever). Torts's "call out" during the press conference--meh, it's bullshit. And Hartley saying he is starting his 4th liners because they have been playing good...yeah also bullshit.

I did enjoy seeing another example of Bieska being a *****--turning down Westgarth (I think it was) just to fight someone else.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
High road with the press conference, okay, but he did not belong in the Flames's tunnel trying (and shoving) to confront Hartley. That's not high road--he'll get suspended.

And Torts has done the same thing Hartley did (start 4th liners to "set a tone," start a rumble, whatever). Torts's "call out" during the press conference--meh, it's bullshit. And Hartley saying he is starting his 4th liners because they have been playing good...yeah also bullshit.

I did enjoy seeing another example of Bieska being a *****--turning down Westgarth (I think it was) just to fight someone else.

Yeah, I made that comment about the high road before I was aware that Torts had tried to go after Hartley in the locker room. Never mind.
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie
15-day (6 games) without pay suspension for John Tortorella. $25,000 fine for Bob Hartley.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
Not enough for Hartley, in my mind.

But as long as the people involved with the league still cling to that archaic "old time hockey" narrative, these kinds of things are going to go unpunished.

I don't mind a good spontaneous scrap. But these line brawls 2 seconds into the game are just a waste.
 

HawkWriter

New member
Joined:
Aug 18, 2011
Posts:
3,491
Liked Posts:
1,341
Not enough for Hartley, in my mind.

But as long as the people involved with the league still cling to that archaic "old time hockey" narrative, these kinds of things are going to go unpunished.

I don't mind a good spontaneous scrap. But these line brawls 2 seconds into the game are just a waste.

I thought it was plenty at the end of the day. I didn't really blame Hartley in this situation and the embarrassment really comes from Torts end for his response to the 4th line starting and his intermission actions. Sure Hartley tossed out his 4th line to start - but no one knows the reason really. He could have just wanted some energy, or I believe he said he was rewarding them for a solid last game where they popped one in the net. Torts is the one who clearly wanted to engage (same thing happened in a NYR/NJ game with Torts behind the bench) and then decided to engage himself after the first period. Hartley is getting fined because of Westgarth, not his decisions really. Torts gets what he deserves for his idiotic decision after the first period, even more idiotic than tossing out that starting line knowing pretty well what will happen.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
I thought it was plenty at the end of the day. I didn't really blame Hartley in this situation and the embarrassment really comes from Torts end for his response to the 4th line starting and his intermission actions. Sure Hartley tossed out his 4th line to start - but no one knows the reason really. He could have just wanted some energy, or I believe he said he was rewarding them for a solid last game where they popped one in the net. Torts is the one who clearly wanted to engage (same thing happened in a NYR/NJ game with Torts behind the bench) and then decided to engage himself after the first period. Hartley is getting fined because of Westgarth, not his decisions really. Torts gets what he deserves for his idiotic decision after the first period, even more idiotic than tossing out that starting line knowing pretty well what will happen.

This whole situation is different if Hartley doesn't submit his starting lineup (which he did first, by the way) and had it full of his goons. Don't give me that shit about "energy" or those other false reasons. Hartley knew exactly what he was doing. Torts didn't have to respond with his goons, but he did. He's already been suspended, though. Not saying Hartley should get a similar 15-day one, but a fine seems pretty weak to me.
 

HawkWriter

New member
Joined:
Aug 18, 2011
Posts:
3,491
Liked Posts:
1,341
This whole situation is different if Hartley doesn't submit his starting lineup (which he did first, by the way) and had it full of his goons. Don't give me that shit about "energy" or those other false reasons. Hartley knew exactly what he was doing. Torts didn't have to respond with his goons, but he did. He's already been suspended, though. Not saying Hartley should get a similar 15-day one, but a fine seems pretty weak to me.

While the Calgary 4th line is quite different than the Chicago 4th line, I don't think anything happens if the Sedins or any other line is tossed out there...or if Bieksa isn't instructed to take the faceoff, just like Torts had Bickel do in the NYR/NJ brawl. I have a hard time believing that Westgarth goes and starts throwing haymakers with one of the Sedins if Torts decides to try and score a goal instead of fight. Hartley has every right to put out whatever line he wants to put out to start the game. How could Hartley have known exactly what he was doing if he had no idea who the Canucks were going to toss out there? Plenty of teams decide to not start their top line, decide to play matchups, decide to go energy, etc and this doesn't happen. The only reason Torts is suspended is because of his intermission antics, not because of who he decided to put out there - even though that resulted in a brawl. The fine is plenty in my eyes.
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
On the whole Vancouver Calgary situation.

The previous 2-3 games before that the Canucks where getting beat on. They then proceeded to fight a bunch of times especially in the kings game. I think Hartley put that 4th line out to show him if this is how you are going to be then we are going to stand up against you. Torts responded by putting out his guys and it escalated from that.

I also want to say I've never been a bieksa fan. To see him turn down westgarth then go after Smid is ridiculous. He's done stuff like that in the past and cannot stand him.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
I also want to say I've never been a bieksa fan. To see him turn down westgarth then go after Smid is ridiculous. He's done stuff like that in the past and cannot stand him.

Without a doubt in my mind, Bieksa is the biggest piece of shit on the Canucks.
 

Top