rares
Winning. Duh!
so does he announce these now because the heat is on Torres and he can hide it under that hate?
That's what I was just about to post (catching up on the action and posts)...
so does he announce these now because the heat is on Torres and he can hide it under that hate?
The puck was right on the other side of Couturier. Unless you have much better screen resolution than I have, you can't tell if Neal is looking at the puck or Couturier.
And by way better, I mean government spy quality.
I think we are getting bogged down in a weird tangent.
Neal made a very obvious, very blatant attempt to take off Giroux's head. He mostly missed, but it could have been devastating if he had landed that shot. That should be a 2-3 game suspension for the attempt alone. Then factor in that he committed this second offense less than a minute after the first, and it looks like a player out of control and out for blood, tack on another game for that. 4-5 games would be fair, regardless of whether the first hit was "accidental" or not.
Dumb question....do suspensions carry over?
There is evidence that Neal was targeting Couturier intenionally.
There is also evidence that he wasn't.
You guys seem to completely negate all of the latter.
1) Neal only turned towards Couturier once the puck was turned over - if his intent had been to hit him the whole time, why wasn't he going for him while he had the puck in the first place?
2) Neal was in perfect position to deliver a shoulder-hit, generally regarded as the most devastating. Neal has demonstrated before that he knows how to hit. Why then did he turn at the last second?
I don't think Dacks and I are arguing that the hit was absolutely, unarguably accidental. We're just saying it is possible, and in Shanahan's position, when there is evidence which suggests either is possible, the player's word does need to be considered.
I don't think Dacks and I are arguing that the hit was absolutely, unarguably accidental. We're just saying it is possible, and in Shanahan's position, when there is evidence which suggests either is possible, the player's word does need to be considered.
I don't think Dacks and I are arguing that the hit was absolutely, unarguably accidental. We're just saying it is possible, and in Shanahan's position, when there is evidence which suggests either is possible, the player's word does need to be considered.
There are just too many factors that I see that tell me that it wasn't completely accidental, which means it needs to be punished. Intent can mitigate or enhance, but I don't see how you can take a guy completely at his word ESPECIALLY with what he does 40 seconds later.
Put it in the context of how NHL discipline works.
We all want consistency. They're not punishing right now for not being in control of your body.
Darren Dreger just tweeted to expect 1 game for Backstrom. So he gets the same as Neal and Carkner.....alright....