WCF - 6/1 Game 1: Kings (0) vs (0) Blackhawks 4:00PM NBCS

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rex" data-cid="198267" data-time="1370144616">

but...his knees were bent!</p></blockquote>

Plus, Chaser, secretly, is a Hawks Homer!

 

[mikita's helmet]

Chris Kuc just tweeted that Bolland will NOT face disciplinary action for his hit on Mike Richards.


https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisKuc

 

[winos5]

<span style="color:#ee82ee;">He will however be disciplined for his haircut.....</span></p>


 </p>


 </p>


 </p>


dude needs to put down the flow-bee</p>

 

[Pez68]

Case closed on the Bolland hit. What a total non-issue.</p>


 </p>


Come out tomorrow and beat the shit out of the Kings again.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="198271" data-time="1370148552">
<div>


Chris Kuc just tweeted that Bolland will NOT face disciplinary action for his hit on Mike Richards.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisKuc</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Yet somehow matt cooke fucking ****** gets off scott free too.</p>


 </p>


cant wait to see chara or lucic break his fucking neck and watch him squirm on the ice next game as he grasps for air</p>

 

[Tater]

Gotta admit, that was not the game I expected to see. I really thought the Kings would come out hitting like the typical M.O. of teams playing the Hawks.</p>


The Hawks took it to 'em.</p>

 

[Variable]

The only reason people are okay with it is because it was the Hawks. Forget about the launching of himself into Richards (which he did) nobody can argue it wasn't a check to the head, and if you can't do that then there really shouldn't be anything left to argue about whether it was a good or bad hit anyways. But again, it was a Hawks player. So yeah. Hawks got lucky there. Both that there wasn't a penalty with less than 2 minutes in the game, (which would actually  be a 6 on 4 after they pull Quick), and that Bolland won't be losing any time.</p>


 </p>


And because the NHL didn't do anything afterwards, that means it must have been a good hit? Okay lol. Because they have such a sterling record of appropriately punishing (or punishing whatsoever) their players for hits like that. Has nothing to do with being an "anti-homer like Eddy" (which makes absolutely no sense here), it's just being able to look at things objectively.</p>

 

[R K]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tater" data-cid="198279" data-time="1370161234">
<div>


Gotta admit, that was not the game I expected to see. I really thought the Kings would come out hitting like the typical M.O. of teams playing the Hawks.</p>


The Hawks took it to 'em.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


IMO the Kings did, unfortunately they missed and the Hawks skated circles around them.</p>


 </p>


This was my take after the game....</p>


 </p>


<span style="color:rgb(55,64,78);font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">What a Dominating performance by the Hawks today. If that's LA's game plan they have another thing coming because no way can they skate with the Hawks toe to toe. Not a chance. Going for the big hit while the Hawks skated circles around them.</span>

<span style="color:rgb(55,64,78);font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">Will be interesting to see what changes Sutter brings tomorrow because today, was Fail. If not for Quick it would have been really ugly.</span></p>


 </p>


<span style="color:rgb(55,64,78);font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">And only an idiot would say that Bollands hit was questionable.  It wasn't even a fucking penalty.</span></p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="R K" data-cid="198281" data-time="1370182593">
<div>


IMO the Kings did, unfortunately they missed and the Hawks skated circles around them.</p>


 </p>


This was my take after the game....</p>


 </p>


<span style="color:rgb(55,64,78);font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">What a Dominating performance by the Hawks today. If that's LA's game plan they have another thing coming because no way can they skate with the Hawks toe to toe. Not a chance. Going for the big hit while the Hawks skated circles around them.</span>

<span style="color:rgb(55,64,78);font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">Will be interesting to see what changes Sutter brings tomorrow because today, was Fail. If not for Quick it would have been really ugly.</span></p>


 </p>


<span style="color:rgb(55,64,78);font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">And only an idiot would say that Bollands hit was questionable.  It wasn't even a fucking penalty.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Torres hit on Hossa wasn't a penalty either.................................... guess there's a lot of idiots on this board after that incident then.</p>

 

[PatrickShart]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="198280" data-time="1370181060">


The only reason people are okay with it is because it was the Hawks. Forget about the launching of himself into Richards (which he did) nobody can argue it wasn't a check to the head, and if you can't do that then there really shouldn't be anything left to argue about whether it was a good or bad hit anyways. But again, it was a Hawks player. So yeah. Hawks got lucky there. Both that there wasn't a penalty with less than 2 minutes in the game, (which would actually be a 6 on 4 after they pull Quick), and that Bolland won't be losing any time.


And because the NHL didn't do anything afterwards, that means it must have been a good hit? Okay lol. Because they have such a sterling record of appropriately punishing (or punishing whatsoever) their players for hits like that. Has nothing to do with being an "anti-homer like Eddy" (which makes absolutely no sense here), it's just being able to look at things objectively.</p></blockquote>


This fucking guy....


You call any possible hit that's boarder line - a suspension. But you're the 'objective' one.


As far as Cooke's. sorry STU but I don't think that a suspension either. I question the game misconduct as well. McQuaid looks right at Cooke before getting to the puck...then proceeds to put himself in that position instead of turning to protect himself


The player with the puck/getting to the puck must not put himself that vulnerable, simply to try to draw a penalty. But what's being taught/tried to do is draw a penalty, stay down like you're hurt to get more...instead of not putting yourself in bad areas/pretext yourself - which is taught as soon as you begin to learn to hit/be hit

 

[Variable]

PMX, if you can't argue that it wasn't a check to the head, what is there to argue about?  It's that simple. I'm not calling him a dirty player, I don't even think he meant to hit his head, but he did. What you're talking about doesn't make sense, the onus isn't just only on the player with the puck. The player coming into the hit is just as responsible, he has to take care not to be reckless. Which Bolland didn't do. May not like it, but that's the way it is.</p>


 </p>


The only thing more inconsistent than the league and the officiating in the NHL when it comes to plays like this are the fans and what they deem was "bad" or not. And, surprise, surprise, it's usually always okay when it's "your guy". I don't know how some people are able to say anything on this.  I mean, if people like RK got all the calls they wanted for the Hawks, it would be a fucking basketball game. </p>

 

[PatrickShart]

Yes, the responsibility is on the player with the puck in that situation...just as McQuaid - where the main reason he got a penalty on Cooke, was his faking to be hurt..so the bleeding hearts could call for Cooke's head


Were you taught how to skate with the puck/how to protect yourself/your responsibility when carrying the puck in certain areas?

 

[PatrickShart]

Torres hit - shouldn't have been a suspension/ or penalty


Abdelkader - not a suspension


Gryba hit - not a suspension/or penalty


But the pansies that come in and don't know the game...force the NHL to have sacrificial lambs to appease them in wanting safety for all..so they can sleep better at night

 

[PatrickShart]

And Cooke, Torres and abdelkader aren't hawks...aren't favorites of anyone - so that's as objective as it gets

 

[Variable]

Whole lot of bad hockey thoughts there. Torres hit no suspension or even a penalty huh?  Oh my, lol, ohhhhh myyyyyy.</p>


 </p>


Haha, just when I thought Grimson stole the crown from you, you come back with that and TOTALLY redeem yourself.</p>

 

[PatrickShart]

Yep


Torres skated through Stolls shoulder - with his shoulder


Again...when and how were you taught how to make hit...and how to take a hit?

 

[PatrickShart]

Knowing your complete lack of hockey knowledge....it's a compliment

 

[Variable]

Torres got suspended because it was a head hit, not a shoulder hit.  Again, even if it's inadvertent, which it may have been, it's still a check to the head Like it or not, the NHL is slowly getting to the point where there will be no more tolerance for head hits whatsoever, blind side, accidental, whatever you want to call it. It's not worth allowing them in the game.  You don't gain anything by allowing that reckless behavior to continue.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Everyone is a pussy about today's NHL.  Remember back when you used to just be able to play?</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rex" data-cid="198213" data-time="1370132294">
<div>


he sure went down easily on that Leddy penalty</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Lets take a look at the great Marian Hossa.........</p>


 </p>


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BTg9seTbxiU</p>


 </p>


Everyone does it, don't be a homer.</p>