The puck was no where near Mason when he was hit?  (Interference=YES)

Mason was in a vulnerable position=YES....

Mason was seriously injured=YES

Mason was wearing a Canuck Jersey=YES  and that is why there was not even a penalty on the play because Mason wears a Canuck jersey.  The league is becoming a joke.  Kicking Rome out for 4 games did not set a presedence, kicking Rome out was to try and hurt the Canuck's.  If Rome's suspention was presedence setting then BOYCHUK would get 4 games and be out of tomorow' line-up.

I'll agree with Juskay.  I have been following the articles Kerry Fraser has been writing on the TSN site.  Basically you start with a penalty (which was missed in the Boynton on Raymond hit, but most comentators seem to agree it should have been a penalty).  If the receiving player suffers a serious injury as a result of the penalty it becomes an automatic 5 min and game misconduct and reviewable offence (regardless of the type of initial penalty).  Then this new guy doing discipline anounces with the Rome hit that the seriousness on the resulting injury will be factored in to the length of suspension.

If you follow the logic there is only one conclusion to make - Boynton should be suspended.

Complete inconsistency on the part of the league.  This is before the fact but looking back the McGinn hit on Rome it should have been a 5 and game - minor penalty resulting in serious injury automatically upgrades the penalty.  Then by new standards probably a suspension but we are in limbo as to how long suspensions will be.

the suspensions have always been inconsistent.  in messier's last season he visciously speared a guy in the gut or chest area.  which at least once in history has resulted in a death.  he got a two game suspension.  shortly after that, a toronto maple leaf (don't remember who) lost his balance and fell over backwards.  his stick clipped a guy in the head (i don't think the guy even bled) and he ended up getting a seven game suspension for it.  it's entirely ridiculous.  :{

I would appreciate it if Boychuk would get suspended.  However, I think it is hard to stop moving when you have a bowling ball between your legs.

I completely agree GM.  I really thought Rome's suspension was excessive (from my earlier post).  I really feel that the NHL f'd up the Burrows situation and it blossomed, so they went overkill on Rome.  Do me proud Vancouver and boo the everliving **** out of Bettman tomorrow night!

The Horton injury and the Raymond injury couldn't be more different. The only thing the two plays have in common is that they both resulted in injuries. That's it.

Aaron Rome targeted Horton's head, which resulted in the injury. Horton was injured because of Rome hitting his head. Period. Case closed. I wouldn't have given Rome 4 games though. I think that was too much. 2 would have been sufficient.

Mason Raymond and Johnny Boychuk skated towards the corner as the puck was going there. The puck bounced off the boards and went towards the middle. Raymond then turned his body and looked down to find the puck, which put him skating backwards into the boards. At that point, both players' momentum threw them into the boards. Boychuk could have really driven Raymond into the boards, or at least pushed him in, and instead they both glided into the boards. Raymond's injury was caused by the way he hit the boards. It was caused by his body position, which he put himself in, not anything that Boychuk did.

I'm not picking on the Canucks by any stretch. This is just how I saw the plays develop. And to suggest there is a conspiracy against ANY team in the NHL is ridiculous. It's the same as some idiot claiming the world's going to end on May 26th or whatever it was. Cmon. Bettman or anyone else in the NHL's head office couldn't care less who wins the Cup as long as everyone in North America watches it happen. If the final was the Panthers vs. the Oilers and the Oilers won the Cup, but each game got 50 million viewers, Bettman would be the happiest guy on earth. He's a businessman, not satan.

Amazing that only Canuck fans are calling the play dirty, when it clearly wasn't.  What makes it funny is that these are the same drips who defend thugs like Torres, Hamhuis and Bieksa each and every time they play dirty.  Of course, they defend a biting hair-puller too.

Vancouver is gonna lose and lose big tomorrow night. 

Posted by vegcity on 6/14/2011 1:10:00 AM (view original):
Is it possible to not get any bounces, breaks or calls for 7 games?  You would think something has to go the Canucks way eventually.

No breaks? lets try 18 seconds left game 1, or how about puck finding Burrows stick in OT game 2? seems to me Canucks have had more than their fair share of "breaks"  Interesting fact, the Canucks have led for a grand total of less than two periods throughout this entire series.

Posted by juskay on 6/14/2011 6:53:00 PM (view original):
The puck was no where near Mason when he was hit?  (Interference=YES)

Mason was in a vulnerable position=YES....

Mason was seriously injured=YES

Mason was wearing a Canuck Jersey=YES  and that is why there was not even a penalty on the play because Mason wears a Canuck jersey.  The league is becoming a joke.  Kicking Rome out for 4 games did not set a presedence, kicking Rome out was to try and hurt the Canuck's.  If Rome's suspention was presedence setting then BOYCHUK would get 4 games and be out of tomorow' line-up.

I would agree with you if for the only reason that by getting rid of Boychuk, the Canucks would be getting rid of the one and only weak link in the Bruins defensive lineup.  Just like trading Rome for Horton benefitted Vancouver,  trading Boychuk for Mason Raymond would benefit Boston.  Pretty ****** attempt to conspiratize a Boston victory by keeping Boychuk in the series.

Posted by holer on 6/14/2011 10:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by vegcity on 6/14/2011 1:10:00 AM (view original):
Is it possible to not get any bounces, breaks or calls for 7 games?  You would think something has to go the Canucks way eventually.

No breaks? lets try 18 seconds left game 1, or how about puck finding Burrows stick in OT game 2? seems to me Canucks have had more than their fair share of "breaks"  Interesting fact, the Canucks have led for a grand total of less than two periods throughout this entire series.

Those were both skill plays, not breaks.

Breaks are guys sticks breaking resulting in goals, pucks deflecting in off of bodies (amazing that this hasn't happened considering the number of times Bruins have had the puck hit them in front of Thomas) or fortuitous bounces.

Can this continue go the Bruins way for a seventh game?

Posted by vegcity on 6/14/2011 11:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by holer on 6/14/2011 10:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by vegcity on 6/14/2011 1:10:00 AM (view original):
Is it possible to not get any bounces, breaks or calls for 7 games?  You would think something has to go the Canucks way eventually.

No breaks? lets try 18 seconds left game 1, or how about puck finding Burrows stick in OT game 2? seems to me Canucks have had more than their fair share of "breaks"  Interesting fact, the Canucks have led for a grand total of less than two periods throughout this entire series.

Those were both skill plays, not breaks.

Breaks are guys sticks breaking resulting in goals, pucks deflecting in off of bodies (amazing that this hasn't happened considering the number of times Bruins have had the puck hit them in front of Thomas) or fortuitous bounces.

Can this continue go the Bruins way for a seventh game?

EXACTLY??? 

You've been outscored 19-8 and you still have a chance to win the series on home ice. Consider that your break.

Posted by mudbone1969 on 6/14/2011 10:44:00 PM (view original):
Amazing that only Canuck fans are calling the play dirty, when it clearly wasn't.  What makes it funny is that these are the same drips who defend thugs like Torres, Hamhuis and Bieksa each and every time they play dirty.  Of course, they defend a biting hair-puller too.

Vancouver is gonna lose and lose big tomorrow night. 

Care to be a cab driver??  Think Twice if any Black  Hawk players are waiting to catch a CAB???  Hair pulling will be the least of your worries???

Posted by andru2797 on 6/14/2011 10:15:00 PM (view original):
The Horton injury and the Raymond injury couldn't be more different. The only thing the two plays have in common is that they both resulted in injuries. That's it.

Aaron Rome targeted Horton's head, which resulted in the injury. Horton was injured because of Rome hitting his head. Period. Case closed. I wouldn't have given Rome 4 games though. I think that was too much. 2 would have been sufficient.

Mason Raymond and Johnny Boychuk skated towards the corner as the puck was going there. The puck bounced off the boards and went towards the middle. Raymond then turned his body and looked down to find the puck, which put him skating backwards into the boards. At that point, both players' momentum threw them into the boards. Boychuk could have really driven Raymond into the boards, or at least pushed him in, and instead they both glided into the boards. Raymond's injury was caused by the way he hit the boards. It was caused by his body position, which he put himself in, not anything that Boychuk did.

I'm not picking on the Canucks by any stretch. This is just how I saw the plays develop. And to suggest there is a conspiracy against ANY team in the NHL is ridiculous. It's the same as some idiot claiming the world's going to end on May 26th or whatever it was. Cmon. Bettman or anyone else in the NHL's head office couldn't care less who wins the Cup as long as everyone in North America watches it happen. If the final was the Panthers vs. the Oilers and the Oilers won the Cup, but each game got 50 million viewers, Bettman would be the happiest guy on earth. He's a businessman, not satan.

WRONG!!!  Bettman=Satan...............period!!  Case closed.........Looks like Napolean and his policies mirror Hitler's...

Posted by andru2797 on 6/14/2011 10:15:00 PM (view original):
The Horton injury and the Raymond injury couldn't be more different. The only thing the two plays have in common is that they both resulted in injuries. That's it.

Aaron Rome targeted Horton's head, which resulted in the injury. Horton was injured because of Rome hitting his head. Period. Case closed. I wouldn't have given Rome 4 games though. I think that was too much. 2 would have been sufficient.

Mason Raymond and Johnny Boychuk skated towards the corner as the puck was going there. The puck bounced off the boards and went towards the middle. Raymond then turned his body and looked down to find the puck, which put him skating backwards into the boards. At that point, both players' momentum threw them into the boards. Boychuk could have really driven Raymond into the boards, or at least pushed him in, and instead they both glided into the boards. Raymond's injury was caused by the way he hit the boards. It was caused by his body position, which he put himself in, not anything that Boychuk did.

I'm not picking on the Canucks by any stretch. This is just how I saw the plays develop. And to suggest there is a conspiracy against ANY team in the NHL is ridiculous. It's the same as some idiot claiming the world's going to end on May 26th or whatever it was. Cmon. Bettman or anyone else in the NHL's head office couldn't care less who wins the Cup as long as everyone in North America watches it happen. If the final was the Panthers vs. the Oilers and the Oilers won the Cup, but each game got 50 million viewers, Bettman would be the happiest guy on earth. He's a businessman, not satan.

I'll agree to disagree.  I don't think "gliding" into the boards would provide enough force to fracture a vertebrea.  This is the type of injury you see in car accidents with speeds of 50km/hr plus or a fall from 3 stories.