Sun-Times' Lazerus Nails the 'Retaliation' Talk

[DMelt36]

Link here

Here's my favorite part:

The initial reaction, the knee-jerk, is to attack. Attack Orpik. Attack Sidney Crosby. Attack everyone. Retaliation. Retribution. Old-time hockey, right?

It would have been immensely satisfying.

It also would have accomplished nothing.

And so while Mike Milbury and Keith Jones called for blood on NBC Sports Network, the Hawks responded to the Orpik hit by playing better. By playing harder. Yes, Andrew Shaw took a quick run at Orpik later in the period, but he didn’t go out of his way, didn’t take a dumb penalty, didn’t go after a random Penguins star to exact some archaic idea of revenge.

The Hawks played hockey. They still lost, because, well, sometimes you lose. But they handled it the right way, no matter what the talking heads said.

I agree with pretty much every word he said in this column. It's a different game now.

 

[southern_cross_116]

I have to admit a lot of the 'comments' on the story in the Trib were a riot to read ... it was like ... "yeah, and if I could get down there... I would stand up to Orpik TOO...!!!"

Yep, you go girls, but it might have helped not to have a profile picture... Take a look at my Big smirk... wait you can't see that, I'm on the internetz...

 

[Diehardfan]

Link here

Here's my favorite part:



I agree with pretty much every word he said in this column. It's a different game now.

Yes, very different. Not exactly sure if that's a good thing, though.

 

[DMelt36]

Yes, very different. Not exactly sure if that's a good thing, though.

In an ideal world, I'd love it if hockey returned to the era you've referencing when (correct me if I'm wrong) 4th line plugs (like, say Raffi Torres) wouldn't take runs at All-Stars (like, say Marian Hossa). When that all changed, I don't know.

What I do believe, though, is that this whole idea of retaliation in hockey died the moment Todd Bertuzzi broke Steve Moore's neck. That was a pre-meditated act based on retaliation for something Moore had done to Canucks' captain Markus Naslund earlier in the season. Did Bertuzzi cross the line? Absolutely. But that one moment is the reason the instigator rule exists and the reason why you'll probably never see the NHL revert back to that era of acceptable retaliation or eras prior to that.

I also think the money involved is a huge factor, just can't quite put the proper words to it. But it's there.

 

[Ares]

I agree with pretty much every word he said in this column. It's a different game now.

I still want to drown Orpik's family in a bath tub and make him watch....

On a serious note, I think the hit was bullshit, they tried to say it was legit but the guy launched himself and left his feet to make the hit. I like the way our boys handled it, but I think its bullshit to say there was nothing wrong with the hit.... he deserved a 2 min roughing penalty.

 

[HawkWriter]

I've been on the ice with junior hockey when these situations have happened and from personal experience I have my thoughts and feelings on it.

If a player makes a hit that is clearly illegal...he should be prepared to drop the gloves. Big hits from behind, head hunting, etc fall into this category. If you are going to take that chance and deliver those hits, you need to drop the gloves.

If a player makes a big hit that is clearly legal...he should not have to drop the gloves. I don't believe there is a "code" when it comes to this. He may get confronted but if he doesn't want to drop the gloves, too bad. Hitting is part of the game.

The person getting hit, needs to take more blame. Toews deserves some blame in this situation. Everyone has been there when the puck gets caught up in the skates and you get caught with your head down...and that is what happened. Toews put himself in this situation with his head down and Orpik took advantage of it. That is part of hockey.

In this case, I believe that Orpik did not need to drop the gloves. He made a big hit that I thought should have been called as a charging. It wasn't a suspend-able hit, it wasn't clearly illegal...it was sort of a grey area. Not a dirty hit, not the cleanest of hits.

What would I have liked to see? No fight was needed as the players should have known that Orpik wasn't going to drop the gloves (prior incident earlier this year would indicate that). Any time you have a chance to hit Orpik cleanly, you do it. Any time you have a chance to get in his face, give him a love tap after the whistle etc, you do it. Just let him know you are there and that you haven't forgotten. That's what I would have liked to see. Keep playing the game and playing it hard (like the Blackhawks did) but just don't forget about the hit.

 

[Raskolnikov]

I've been on the ice with junior hockey when these situations have happened and from personal experience I have my thoughts and feelings on it.

If a player makes a hit that is clearly illegal...he should be prepared to drop the gloves. Big hits from behind, head hunting, etc fall into this category. If you are going to take that chance and deliver those hits, you need to drop the gloves.

If a player makes a big hit that is clearly legal...he should not have to drop the gloves. I don't believe there is a "code" when it comes to this. He may get confronted but if he doesn't want to drop the gloves, too bad. Hitting is part of the game.

The person getting hit, needs to take more blame. Toews deserves some blame in this situation. Everyone has been there when the puck gets caught up in the skates and you get caught with your head down...and that is what happened. Toews put himself in this situation with his head down and Orpik took advantage of it. That is part of hockey.

In this case, I believe that Orpik did not need to drop the gloves. He made a big hit that I thought should have been called as a charging. It wasn't a suspend-able hit, it wasn't clearly illegal...it was sort of a grey area. Not a dirty hit, not the cleanest of hits.

What would I have liked to see? No fight was needed as the players should have known that Orpik wasn't going to drop the gloves (prior incident earlier this year would indicate that). Any time you have a chance to hit Orpik cleanly, you do it. Any time you have a chance to get in his face, give him a love tap after the whistle etc, you do it. Just let him know you are there and that you haven't forgotten. That's what I would have liked to see. Keep playing the game and playing it hard (like the Blackhawks did) but just don't forget about the hit.

all that needs to be said is contained here.

 

[ClydeLee]

Sharp and Shaw actually both got a combo hit on him. But they didn't go out of the way to do something that wouldn't matter or end the games chances.

Sent from my LGL85C using Tapatalk 2

 

[nwfisch]

What would I have liked to see? No fight was needed as the players should have known that Orpik wasn't going to drop the gloves (prior incident earlier this year would indicate that). Any time you have a chance to hit Orpik cleanly, you do it. Any time you have a chance to get in his face, give him a love tap after the whistle etc, you do it. Just let him know you are there and that you haven't forgotten. That's what I would have liked to see. Keep playing the game and playing it hard (like the Blackhawks did) but just don't forget about the hit.

Bingo. Agreed 100%.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Guys like Brouwer/Laddy/Buff from 2010 would've went after Orpik.

Not this charmin soft team. Your captain gets smoked & not one Hawk is there to step in.

 

[Ares]

Guys like Brouwer/Laddy/Buff from 2010 would've went after Orpik.

Not this charmin soft team. Your captain gets smoked & not one Hawk is there to step in.

:smh: .... ohhh bitchypants

 

[DMelt36]

Guys like Brouwer/Laddy/Buff from 2010 would've went after Orpik.

Not this charmin soft team. Your captain gets smoked & not one Hawk is there to step in.

Is there a polite way to tell someone they're out of their fucking mind? Asking for a friend.

 

[Diehardfan]

In an ideal world, I'd love it if hockey returned to the era you've referencing when (correct me if I'm wrong) 4th line plugs (like, say Raffi Torres) wouldn't take runs at All-Stars (like, say Marian Hossa). When that all changed, I don't know.

What I do believe, though, is that this whole idea of retaliation in hockey died the moment Todd Bertuzzi broke Steve Moore's neck. That was a pre-meditated act based on retaliation for something Moore had done to Canucks' captain Markus Naslund earlier in the season. Did Bertuzzi cross the line? Absolutely. But that one moment is the reason the instigator rule exists and the reason why you'll probably never see the NHL revert back to that era of acceptable retaliation or eras prior to that.

I also think the money involved is a huge factor, just can't quite put the proper words to it. But it's there.

Yeah, that was probably the trigger but now it's way out hand with the NHL actually hiring an ex-player to dole out punishment. The problem is that the punishment in most cases doesn't match the crime. Oh sure, it hits them in the pocket book but injured players can be gone for weeks even months with broken bones and even worse with concussions. Most perpetrators are back in a few days, meanwhile the other team is trying to put the pieces back together. Back in the day, even though they didn't wear all of today's protective gear, there didn't seem to be that many big time injuries....but then most teams only had 4 or 5 really good skaters and they were usually smaller guys. Today, teams go 10 or 11 deep on good speed and the players are bigger and taller. Heavier collisions make the extra padding a necessity.
I always felt that a strong detriment would be to match the injured players time out of the lineup and make it without pay. You'd have to be a real dumbass to intentionally hurt someone with that kind of punishment hanging over your head.

 

[DMelt36]

Yeah, that was probably the trigger but now it's way out hand with the NHL actually hiring an ex-player to dole out punishment. The problem is that the punishment in most cases doesn't match the crime. Oh sure, it hits them in the pocket book but injured players can be gone for weeks even months with broken bones and even worse with concussions. Most perpetrators are back in a few days, meanwhile the other team is trying to put the pieces back together. Back in the day, even though they didn't wear all of today's protective gear, there didn't seem to be that many big time injuries....but then most teams only had 4 or 5 really good skaters and they were usually smaller guys. Today, teams go 10 or 11 deep on good speed and the players are bigger and taller. Heavier collisions make the extra padding a necessity.
I always felt that a strong detriment would be to match the injured players time out of the lineup and make it without pay. You'd have to be a real dumbass to intentionally hurt someone with that kind of punishment hanging over your head.

Yeah, you're right about the quality of skaters on the ice these days. It's amazing to see how much better 4th line guys are at moving around the ice now as opposed to 20-30 years ago.

The NHL definitely needs to do a better job with how it doles out suspensions, too, IMO. The Wheel of Justice method they've been using lately hasn't seemed fair. Being too strict or too lenient wouldn't be as mind-boggling to me as long as they'd remain consistent.

 

[Capt. Serious]

For the last time, the hit was fucking clean.

LOL at people who think it was fine that the Hawks did nothing.

That's your fucking captain, go help him.

 

[DMelt36]

For the last time, the hit was fucking clean.

LOL at people who think it was fine that the Hawks did nothing.

That's your fucking captain, go help him.

Yeah, it was clean. I agree on that. What's the point at retaliating for a clean hit? What good comes out of putting a lethal Penguins power play on the ice? What does that accomplish? How does that help the Blackhawks win the Stanley Cup, which is the ultimate goal here?

 

[Jntg4]

For the last time, the hit was fucking clean.

LOL at people who think it was fine that the Hawks did nothing.

That's your fucking captain, go help him.

Fighting or hitting Orpik would not have helped Toews in any after the fact. Still would be out of the game, still would have the same injury and same timetable for return.

(Just a statement of fact, perhaps you intended to use a different word)

 

[southern_cross_116]

... for the last time ... that hit was -not- clean ... and deserved a minor. Refs miss calls all of the time - it is not exactly a new thing. Oh well.

And it would not have changed the result of the game one bit.

Although I do sorta wish when a baseball player gets knocked down by a pitch that the next time he takes a swing -he sorta lets go of his bat in the direction of the mound ... damn pine tar malfunction....

 

[DMelt36]

Twitter blew up this morning with more arguments about this whole scenario. David Kapman and Len Kasper, in particular. I'd recommend checking it out.

Also, there's this from Bollig after today's morning skate, pulled from Mark Lazerus' Twitter account:

Bollig called the Orpik hit on Toews "a clean hit." Said winning the game was the priority and there "wasn't the right time" to retaliate.

 

[DMelt36]

The weirdest part is that now the narrative is shifting to refer to the Blackhawks as a "soft" team, which is fucking hilarious.

Everyone hails Boston as the toughest team in the NHL. How'd that work out in the Cup Final last year?