Did you see that call on Henrik? Slashing? Like what he did doesn't happen 30 times in a game. And right into the 2nd period. I think it's pretty clear that Bettman made the phone call at the first intermission to remind the refs that last years guidelines apply regarding reffing the Hawks. Give them every opportunity cause they're not going to earn anything themselves.  

It's a shame Hodgeson has to come out after next game but who else are you going to take out. It's pointless putting him on the 4th line. He'll be back though. If they go 4 rounds they'll be injuries. I think he'll be a player though and we should see him next season in Vancouver.

If the Sedins are on the ice with Toews, Sharp, Kane and neither of them score, big advantage Canucks because the Hawks don't have much after that. Good strategy Quienville, hope you do that in Chicago. The Canucks were  equal penalty-calling away from a blowout. 

Congrats Canucks!  

3:05 left.....

Posted by winnerpeg on 4/15/2011 12:24:00 AM (view original):
Congrats Canucks!  

And again Congrats!  

HA HA HA HA?????

Even with Bettman and the REFS in their pocket......

The cheating HAWKS.........still don't win????

Good night CHICAGO!!!!  Sleep well with all your cheating  friends......../????

PAPER CHAMP"S!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Randle44............agree's with my last post's.........


and Randle44......will be back soon???


banned again???

Randle44???


Where are you BUD???


You and Kane are not ???????????? together are YOU???

That could explain why Kane can't hit the net......or score????

Surrey does this to people????

Where oh where is Randle???????

You know, I feel really bad for the Canucks players because instead of giving them credit for earning their wins, their fans continue to de-value them with wild conspiracy theories. The Canucks earned their way to the top of the NHL, and they were the better team in this series. No one was playing against them except the Hawks.

sprusina RT @TSNBobMcKenzie: As per @DarrenDreger, no supplementary discipline for Raffi Torres for his hit on Brent Seabrook. less than 20 seconds ago via web


Legal Hit

Posted by peter_puck on 4/18/2011 1:11:00 PM (view original):
sprusina RT @TSNBobMcKenzie: As per @DarrenDreger, no supplementary discipline for Raffi Torres for his hit on Brent Seabrook. less than 20 seconds ago via web


Legal Hit

Sure it was...ask Marc Savard, or Sidney Crosby, or Keith Primeau, or even ex-Canuck Willie Mitchell if they think this should be suspendable.



The NHL dropped the ball again. Same song and dance. If this was game 40 Torres gets 3-5 games because he just came off a head shot suspension. At least, if anything, this should at least quell all the Canuck/Bettman conspiracy theories.

Posted by andru2797 on 4/18/2011 1:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by peter_puck on 4/18/2011 1:11:00 PM (view original):
sprusina RT @TSNBobMcKenzie: As per @DarrenDreger, no supplementary discipline for Raffi Torres for his hit on Brent Seabrook. less than 20 seconds ago via web


Legal Hit

Sure it was...ask Marc Savard, or Sidney Crosby, or Keith Primeau, or even ex-Canuck Willie Mitchell if they think this should be suspendable.



The NHL dropped the ball again. Same song and dance. If this was game 40 Torres gets 3-5 games because he just came off a head shot suspension. At least, if anything, this should at least quell all the Canuck/Bettman conspiracy theories.

Cmon andru. You are usually fairly non-biased.

He was gliding not skating, the puck was there (but late - interference penalty), no elbow, first contact with chest, it was behind the net, and contact of some kind was unavoidable (he obviously tried to hit him, that's his job).

God forbid the refs know the rule better than yourself and make the correct call (interference).

REPEAT OFFENDER ARGUEMENT IS IRRELEVANT IF NO OFFENSE IS COMMITTED.   

Peter, we've seen dangerous hits not get penalized before (Chara on Pacioretty, Richards on Booth, Cooke on Savard)...It doesn't mean they should be allowed and I don't think this hit was any different.

I am trying to be as objective as I can be...when a player hits another player from the blind side, and makes contact with the head (first or otherwise), the league claimed that the new rule would make it a suspendable hit.

To me, watching all 3, I don't see a difference between Torres gliding into an unsuspecting Seabrook and making contact with his head, Cooke doing it to Savard or Richards doing it to Booth. All 3 should have been suspended and all 3 weren't. That's what I find is ridiculous. The NHL just doesn't protect it's players.

Blindside?? Torres hit the front of his body. Seabrook just wasn't looking. He was looking sideways. How does he hit him in the chest if it's a blindside?

Interesting...all the youtube videos of the hit that were available earlier have been removed, and NHL.com doesn't have the highlight...coincidence?

Look peter, you're asking me not to be biased and I'm asking the same of you. That was a dangerous hit, just like the Richards and Cooke hits. He hit his head with his elbow, not his chest. The evidence is clear in the photo posted above. It didn't come as both players skated towards eachother. Seabrook was looking away from Torres therefor, a blindside hit.