TGDT: WCQF - 4/19 Blackhawks (0) @ Blues (1) 2:00PM NBC

[Pez68]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimsäväinen" data-cid="226475" data-time="1397955667">
<div>


I don't know... I sure as hell enjoyed it.  I'll be the asshole that actually admits it.  I was actually laughing out loud watching him try to get up.</p>


 </p>


Couldn't have happened to a better person, **** BACKES.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


I was right there with you.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

Win the next two games on home ice and nothing else matters, lose one the series is over. thats pretty much the point they have put themselves in now by blowing the games the way they have. still impressed with how they have come back in both games but deeply disappointed in how they have ended the 3rd periods.</p>


 </p>


Never going to find agreement on the seabs hit. some think its clean some think it was a dumb time to go for that type of hit (like myself). has nothing to do with intent to injure.. thats not what guys like I am suggesting. very well know that seabs doesn't play like that. Has everything to do with settling the **** down late in the 3rd which this team did not do once again. I dont agree with Variable much but yah team had their brains sucked out late in the third today. Let the emotion get the best of them at the wrong time. There are moments in games where you just have to settle the **** down. Hawks are usually really good at doing just that. Mental balance does have its place.</p>


 </p>


if people can't see that the Blues are sucking the Hawks into their style then that's a problem..because they are. Hawks aren't playing overly well because they aren't really playing their game. hope home ice and last change fixes that. still not hearing many talk about that disgusting first period by the hawks today. was disgusting bad.</p>

 

[cplmac]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226458" data-time="1397948828">
<div>


 </p>


 but i expect a bunch of bias fans to be just that bias. esp around here. might be time for me to take a hike again. hawks can do no wrong around here i keep forgetting that.</p>


 </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


It's a Hawks message board Eddy.</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="226473" data-time="1397954203">
<div>


The problem with that is Seabrook saw him the entire way. He saw an opportunity for a huge hit on an unsuspecting player near the boards and was going to hit him no matter what, as you say, there was no way of avoiding contact. And I'm assuming you're saying there was no way for Seabrook to avoid contact, but look at it from Backes point of view, and I loathe having to "defend" a piece of shit like him, but there's no way he could've reacted fast enough to do anything to protect himself, whether he had the puck or not. He was going into the boards extremely hard no matter what happened with the puck.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Just because a player isn't aware that a check is coming, doesn't make it a dirty hit, in fact a huge hit on an unsuspecting player are usually the best hits like Hammer on Backes last night, Keith on Oshie, and some of Bickell's hits tonight. And it was Backes who turned towards Seabs while also lowering his head, thus making himself vulnerable at the last second, and too late for Seabs to stop contact, and I further note Seabs had his shoulder and elbow tucked into his body. </p>

 

[Spunky Porkstacker]

Yep. </p>


 </p>


Blues had 9 pp Hawks had 4</p>


 </p>


Watching Hitchcock in postgame, the guy is creepy :sad-teareye:</p>

 

[Variable]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="226479" data-time="1397956208">
<div>


Just because a player isn't aware that a check is coming, doesn't make it a dirty hit, in fact a huge hit on an unsuspecting player are usually the best hits like Hammer on Backes last night, Keith on Oshie, and some of Bickell's hits tonight. And it was Backes who turned towards Seabs while also lowering his head, thus making himself vulnerable at the last second, and too late for Seabs to stop contact, and I further note Seabs had his shoulder and elbow tucked into his body. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


We can argue all day over what's considered "dirty" and get nowhere. Personally I don't believe Seabrook was trying to head hunt, that's why I called it a bad decision. But whether people see it as dirty or not,  that hit, whether Backes had the puck or not, was a deserved penalty and Seabrook has to know better than that in that situation, especially when they are already short handed. </p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="226479" data-time="1397956208">
<div>


Just because a player isn't aware that a check is coming, doesn't make it a dirty hit, in fact a huge hit on an unsuspecting player are usually the best hits like Hammer on Backes last night, Keith on Oshie, and some of Bickell's hits tonight. And it was Backes who turned towards Seabs while also lowering his head, thus making himself vulnerable at the last second, and too late for Seabs to stop contact, and I further note Seabs had his shoulder and elbow tucked into his body. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


sadly thats what the league is trying to change. the league doesn't want the unexpected hit and thats what these rule changes are going for in the long run. is it right? not in my opinion as i like the unexpected hit. will probably never be able to be officiated  properly either. but what i like doesn't trump the rules and what the rules are trying to accomplish. </p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226477" data-time="1397956149">
<div>


Win the next two games on home ice and nothing else matters, lose one the series is over. thats pretty much the point they have put themselves in now by blowing the games the way they have. still impressed with how they have come back in both games but deeply disappointed in how they have ended the 3rd periods.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


If we can hold serve at home, we just need to win one on the road, which is why these first two games have been hugely disappointing.  Lose one at home and we're in trouble.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Spunky Porkstacker" data-cid="226480" data-time="1397956255">
<div>


Yep. </p>


 </p>


Blues had 9 pp Hawks had 4</p>


 </p>


Watching Hitchcock in postgame, the guy is creepy :sad-teareye:</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Honestly hawks were lucky they didn't give away more powerplays. Keith alone could have been called for 3 in the third. Again blues are sucking the Hawks right in.</p>

 

[Pez68]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226477" data-time="1397956149">
<div>


Win the next two games on home ice and nothing else matters, lose one the series is over. thats pretty much the point they have put themselves in now by blowing the games the way they have. still impressed with how they have come back in both games but deeply disappointed in how they have ended the 3rd periods.</p>


 </p>


Never going to find agreement on the seabs hit. some think its clean some think it was a dumb time to go for that type of hit (like myself). has nothing to do with intent to injure.. thats not what guys like I am suggesting. very well know that seabs doesn't play like that. Has everything to do with settling the **** down late in the 3rd which this team did not do once again. I dont agree with Variable much but yah team had their brains sucked out late in the third today. Let the emotion get the best of them at the wrong time. There are moments in games where you just have to settle the **** down. Hawks are usually really good at doing just that. Mental balance does have its place.</p>


 </p>


if people can't see that the Blues are sucking the Hawks into their style then that's a problem..because they are. Hawks aren't playing overly well because they aren't really playing their game. hope home ice and last change fixes that. still not hearing many talk about that disgusting first period by the hawks today. was disgusting bad.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


That's what you have coaches for, right? To settle guys down when they need it, and to rile guys up when they need it? To provide guidance and provide perspective on the situations?</p>


 </p>


That wasn't the time for Seabrook to be imposing his will on the opposition. You do that early in the game.</p>


 </p>


Again, I hate this coaching staff.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="226486" data-time="1397956784">
<div>


That's what you have coaches for, right? To settle guys down when they need it, and to rile guys up when they need it? To provide guidance and provide perspective on the situations?</p>


 </p>


That wasn't the time for Seabrook to be imposing his will on the opposition. You do that early in the game.</p>


 </p>


Again, I hate this coaching staff.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


agree pez</p>


 </p>


q is being outcoached</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226482" data-time="1397956613">
<div>


sadly thats what the league is trying to change. the league doesn't want the unexpected hit and thats what these rule changes are going for in the long run. is it right? not in my opinion as i like the unexpected hit. will probably never be able to be officiated  properly either. but what i like doesn't trump the rules and what the rules are trying to accomplish. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


It's the vulnerable hit, more than the unsuspecting hit, IMHO (that the league is trying to curb), and also, IMHO, Backes turn, at the last second, made it impossible for Seabs to avoid him.  I thought Seabs deserved two minutes, just like Reaves got last night, when he hit, with intent, again IMHO, our captain's head into the glass and drew blood.</p>

 

[Pez68]

On the subject of Q, seeing Pirri and Hayes tweeting #freemorin gives me a pretty good idea of what prospects think of him. He's a stubborn asshole and his double standards when it comes to young players may cost the Hawks quite a few of their promising prospects. Wouldn't be surprised to see Morin somewhere else next year as well.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="226488" data-time="1397957028">
<div>


It's the vulnerable hit, more than the unsuspecting hit, IMHO (that the league is trying to curb), and also, IMHO, Backes turn, at the last second, made it impossible for Seabs to avoid him.  I thought Seabs deserved two minutes, just like Reaves got last night, when he hit our captain's head into the glass and drew blood.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Ahhhh i get it. Okay i have been seeing the hit different than others. I see Seabs lining up that hit far before Backes even turned to Seabrook. This is where I am getting confused then. Im seeing the hit lined up while Backes is turned. Wouldn't that make the hit even worse? Wouldn't that be boarding?</p>


 </p>


UGH Im so confused by everything. Ill never be able to understand these hits now they are all so subjective and abastract.</p>


 </p>


The fact that the penalty wasn't called on the ice when it happened makes it more confusing to me. Esp with the official standing right there.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226491" data-time="1397957603">
<div>


Ahhhh i get it. Okay i have been seeing the hit different than others. I see Seabs lining up that hit far before Backes even turned to Seabrook. This is where I am getting confused then. Im seeing the hit lined up while Backes is turned. Wouldn't that make the hit even worse? Wouldn't that be boarding?</p>


 </p>


UGH Im so confused by everything. Ill never be able to understand these hits now they are all so subjective and abastract.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Go home you're drunk.</p>


 </p>


Or come over here and keep on drinking.</p>

 

[Spunky Porkstacker]

Morin had 4 goals in the last 5 games of the season, with that he was feisty and edgy with lots of energy and speed. But we get Handzus who does win face offs and brings that old slow guy effectiveness to the PK who can block a shot.</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226491" data-time="1397957603">
<div>


Ahhhh i get it. Okay i have been seeing the hit different than others. I see Seabs lining up that hit far before Backes even turned to Seabrook. This is where I am getting confused then. Im seeing the hit lined up while Backes is turned. Wouldn't that make the hit even worse? Wouldn't that be boarding?</p>


 </p>


UGH Im so confused by everything. Ill never be able to understand these hits now they are all so subjective and abastract.</p>


 </p>


The fact that the penalty wasn't called on the ice when it happened makes it more confusing to me. Esp with the official standing right there.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


I thought Backes was sideways to the boards when Seabs "lined him up" and then Backes turned left making his head, instead of his left shoulder the point of contact.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Spunky Porkstacker" data-cid="226495" data-time="1397957836">
<div>


Morin had 4 goals in the last 5 games of the season, with that he was feisty and edgy with lots of energy and speed. But we get Handzus who does win face offs and brings that old slow guy effectiveness to the PK who can block a shot.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Did you see Handzus board himself today?  Was fucking hilarious when he stepped on that broken stick.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Serious question BTW... let's flip the script.</p>


 </p>


Let's say Backes did that identical hit on Kane or Toews... how would you feel?  I can reply honestly that I would be crying bloody murder.  Yet I can see the Seabrook thing both ways.</p>


 </p>


It's the gray area with rule 48.1 that puts all of the discretion in the officials' hands.</p>


 </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A hit resulting in contact with an opponent's head where the head is targeted and the principal point of contact is not permitted. However, in determining whether such a hit should have been permitted, the circumstances of the hit, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the hit or the head contact on an otherwise legal body check was avoidable, can be considered.


 </p>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Too much gray area with the NHL.</p>


 </p>


The thing that bugs me most is that the officials' called the penalty based on the result of the play and not the action.  The penalty was not called until 2 minutes after the hit.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="226499" data-time="1397957943">
<div>


I thought Backes was sideways to the boards when Seabs "lined him up" and then Backes turned left making his head, instead of his left shoulder the point of contact.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


yah i can see that point of view too now.</p>


 </p>


this is why these new rules are so hard for me to wrap my head around. I can see the cases from all sides now. Too subjective. ugh. i dont know what to think anymore.</p>


 </p>


handzus is too old now and sucks? we all can agree on that right? not subjective?</p>