Matt Cooke hit on Erik Cole: worthy of a suspension?
by Hooks Orpik on May 19, 2009 1:20 PM EDT
in News
Email
PrintHere's one quick look at it via Empty Netters:
It's hard to say much, there's a lot of traffic and players are swooping around everywhere.
Greg at Puck Daddy summed it up thusly:
If nothing else, the Cooke is a reminder why the outcry over Ovechkin's non-suspended knee-on-knee hit was so ludicrous: Either you're going to accept that these things happen on an incidental basis during a game played at (literally) break-neck speed, or you're going to severely penalize any player that "recklessly" uses his body and ends up injuring an opponent.
The bottom line is that if you're a Penguins fan who thought Ovechkin should have been suspended, then you should be a Penguins fan who thinks Cooke should be suspended.
And I think there's a lot of truth in there, especially the first part. There's always going to be unfortunate incidents and it sucks that players get hurt in this seemingly unintended fashion. But it still happens.
For the record, here's what I said about the Ovechkin knee, regarded by James Mirtle as the fairest assement he saw of the hit.
The real question is where will the NHL's "wheel of justice" land? No one seems to no, as there's basically no rhyme or reason anymore...
Donald Brashear hits a defenseless and unsuspecting player with an elbow to the head and it's 5 games suspension. Scott Walker punches a defenseless player in the face with his fist and it's 0 games suspension. Daniel Carcillo got to sit for his use of a butt-end of a game that almost over, Milan Lucic got suspended for stickwork too. But then Mike Cammalleri did rocks a guy in the face and no suspension. Alex Ovechkin knees Sergei Gonchar, no suspension. Matt Cooke does and what will happen?
Does Matt Cooke deserve a suspension? I'm not sure. I don't know what his intent was, Cooke is a devious player that always walks the fine line but I've never seen him hunt for someone's knees before. Cooke said the contact was accidental. We haven't heard for sure (it may not yet be known) the extent of Cole's injury, but as we saw in Ovechkin v. Gonchar that didn't seem to be a big consideration in the NHL's decision to suspend.
So now the ball is in the NHL's court. God only knows what they'll decide.
123 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’d like to see a replay that starts 5 or so seconds sooner. If anyone knows of one, please link it.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 1:49 PM EDT reply actions
Yeah that link was about the best I could find….Puck Daddy has the whole highlight reel, which is like 13 minutes long. If we get anything better, I’ll edit the post.
yeah
it’s the only one I’ve been able to find as well.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
here's one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLX1oKXFJ-o
its at 6:09. they have real time & a slow mo view
there’s also i nice shot of staal pushing fleury’s stick away right before the canes 2nd goal at 8:11
ok, after watching that I think that the ‘Canes fans that are complaining about officials should just stop. they should be complaining about how they’re golden boy whiffed on a puck in front of a wide-open net with less than a minute to play.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions
that was the refs fault too
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions
wow.
it’s so rare that i screw up on their/there/they’re. must have been all hyped up. :)
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 9:25 PM EDT up reply actions
blockquote> My guess is it would be a suspendable offence had it been a lesser, Matt Cooke type player on the offending end, but Ovechkin won’t be penalized.
From Mirtle’s comment on the Ovechkin hit….ironic, isn’t it, that he singles out Cooke as a comparison, and ten days later, it’s Cooke in the keee to knee spotlight….
just imagine that the blockquote function worked like it’s supposed to…that first sentence is Mirtle’s…
No "conspiracy"
just no calls.
Cooke has a history right? Like Avery, if Avery sneezes in the wrong direction he’s given a game misconduct. Cooke’s history doesn’t endear him whenever he’s a play where the other player is worse for it. The ‘Canes play the Caps more in the regular series and really, I don’t like OV but I don’t consider him a “goon”. Cooke even in his days at Vancouver fits that more than not.
As far as “non-calls” go, you really don’t want to go there.
Knowledge is Power!
Power Corrupts!
Study hard,
Become Evil!
well Matt Cooke’s primary reason for being signed was to slide into Jarrko Ruutu’s “instigator” role. He’s more physical whereas Ruutu was kind of a verbal psychological instigator. Mean-spirited, but not the kind of physical presence as Cooke.
so yeah. Cooke’s our goon. Who’s yours?
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I wouldn’t consider Cooke a goon. He’s a pest.
Goons fight. At least to me they do. A guy like Riley Cote, Colton Orr or Eric Godard those are goons.
Cooke’s like a musquito that annoys the hell out of you.
to my point, much like J. Ruutu…but with Godard scratched, Cooke’s the closest thing to a goon on Pittsburgh ice.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
No Penalty
I’m a Canes fan and I’m not going to say there should be a suspension. But, everyone keeps saying there was no intent…..since when does that matter? Guys accidently high stick all the time, but it’s still a high stick, and if the refs catch it, it’s gonna be a 2-4 minute penalty. Everyone seems to agree there was knee to knee contact and that Cooke initated it. Why no penalty?
The Cole interference call was a good one, I have no problems with that.
High sticking penalties state that a player needs to be in control of, and responsible, for the actions of his stick regardless of intent. That’s why it is an automatic call. However, if a player intends to whack someone in the head with a stick, then a 5 minute major can be issued as well.
Kneeing penalties are different. Kneeing is called when a player intentionally sticks their knee out, not when knees accidentally collide. Intentionally = intent. Theoretically, coincidental minors would be called if players kneed each other, since both players have offending appendages.
it think the bigger problem is in the way the nhl enforces rules
for instance, its absurd that the level of punishment given out for things is often based upon the extent of the injury, but not the actions that lead to the injury. you arent punishing a player for injuring another player, you’re punishing him for committing acts that led to that injury.
I don’t think you’ll find any Pens fans, at least not reasonable ones, that thought it shouldn’t have been at least two minutes in the box.
The officiating was bad last night. bad for both sides, for fans, for the game.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 2:22 PM EDT reply actions
agreed, it should have been atleast a 2min minor. but those refs were awefull, once they set a tone for the game then put the whistles away, the whole thing blew up in thier face
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. The lack of penalties on both sides of the ice was horrible for the on-ice product. However, I think coaches just want the officiating to be consistent on both sides of the ice. If it’s called against the Pens, then it should be called against the Canes, and vice versa. Also, what’s called in the first period should be called in the third period. On that account, the officiating didn’t give any team an advantage.
I think whether or not it’s fair, everyone is going to compare this to the Ovechkin hit. I have to say that I do honestly believe that it is at least plausible that Cooke did not intend at all to hit Cole with his knee, but it still happened because it was in a high traffic area, whereas Ovie’s hit was open ice, easily avoidable. With that in mind, I do think that a penalty should come about anytime you hit a guy with a knee-on-knee. However, the fact that there is no strong argument that it was intentional means that a suspension or fine, especially considering Ovechkin’s treatment, would be ridiculous.
Who get’s the kneeing penalty when two (innocent?) knees are involved? Coincidental minors? If there’s an intent to knee, the rules already state a penalty for it. The ref’s assessment of intent is the key word. However, if two knees find each other through sheer bad luck and accidental occurrence with no intent to meet (or injure), then who gets called? For instance, two players are traveling through the neutral zone and try to avoid each other, and knees collide.
Probably doesn’t get called, especially if both players are injured.
But I can’t think of one situation where this has happened off the top of my head.
Over the years I’ve seen accidental knee collisions many, many times. Especially through the neutral zone. The key criteria in kneeing penalties is intent. Did the offending player intentionally stick out a knee to catch his opponent?
I think there’s a huge difference between intent, and accident. Accidental collisions should not be called for kneeing penalties. They might qualify for tripping or interference, though. Kneeing is a completely different penalty than that. For example, in the OV hit against Gonchar, the officials ruled that OV did not intentionally stick out his knee to hit Gonch. However, illegal contact by OV against Gonchar resulted in a tripping penalty.
AO also lined up a guy who was looking at him, with the puck. Cooke lined up Cole after Cole moved the puck and came at him from a blind angle. You cannot possibly conclude that Cooke’s hit was less avoidable than AO’s, nor was AO’s any more malicious.
ok seriously we are over the whole ovie thing
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions
the hits are two completely different animals. two different circumstances leading up to them i for one believe that cooke should have held up because in theory he could have gotten 2 for interferance. however it should also be noted that coles play had gotten under the skin of several pens. see the chuck hall gill into the net moment, the bow on orpick and finally completely ignoring his assignments to go after cooke the next shift. this is a guy who plays a gritty game but cant take it when he get so much as rubbed the wrong way
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Well I was responding jackm, who specifically called out the AO hit. How many times did I ask how you guys would feel if the Jerseys were switched? You had to know I was gonna come find out. I didn’t bring the AO talk to this hit, I’m responding to what was already written.
taps heels togeather
i will not get dragged into the ao hit vs cooke hit comparison. it doesnt equate
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s just burying your head in the sand. You can’t just say “it doesnt equate” when the two hits are so similar.
no they are not, not by any stretch of the imagination. AO had gooch lined up a full head of steam andbegan the process of the hit when gooch dumped the puck away and tried to avoid the check. ao had his knee flared out (intention or not is open to debat, but pahleese not here).
cookes hit looked more like a hip check gone wrong, didnt have hime lined up for an extended period, nor did he have a full head of steam to work with. when it appeared cole would not have possesion of the puck, cooke then shifted and made contact with coles knee. to me i think it was more intentional then the ovie hit but at the same time its still shakey at best
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope. On this one you’re being partisan. AO was chasing down Gooch way before Gooch got rid of the puck. He’s trying to chase down a loose puck before Gooch even gets the puck. Gooch gets the puck so AO switches course to hit Gooch. Gooch moves puck and AO tries to finish his check, and makes knee to knee contact.
Cooke didn’t even move toward Cole until the puck was gone. There wasn’t even a hint of a puck battle there. Cole wasn’t even looking (his fault) and had no clue Cooke was coming. If Cooke was trying to finish a check there the shoulder check is the move to make. Cooke’s foot is splayed outside shoulder length when contact is made, just like Ovechkin’s. Cooke also has an undoubtedly longer history of dirty play (Pensfan histrionics notwithstanding). If you can find it in your hearts to find the good in Matt Frickin’ Cooke then you can find the good in AO.
fehr, please read the game thread or some of the other posts on here. at no point did i condone the hit by cooke. i called it at the time as being a dirty hit and im still leaning that way. but on tha AO thing, with his history of lining folks up (caps histrionics not with standing) its hard to argue he was not lining up gooch from a ways out, particularly given the fact that when the caps are trailing he cranks up the physical aspect of his game. add in that it is the playoffs and i think everyone saw him ratchet up his physical game only when the caps got behind.
also he hit gooch at full speed, cooke was skating backwards/sideways at the time. not anywhere near full speed
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I know you aren’t condoning it, but you can’t resist the urge to justify why it’s not as bad as AO’s. I definitely don’t think Cooke should have been suspended for that. I don’t think it’s any different than the AO hit. I think objectively they were both gray area hits that were at best reckless. It doesn’t have to be full speed to be dangerous, or to injure. Awkward hits can be brutal. The league doesn’t crack down on reckless leg contact so I don’t think either should have been punished.
i…can…resist…the…forces…of…the…dark…side!!!
i’m….not…..a…blind…homer……
lol, i agree about the leg on leg somehting has to be done.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Eaton's Slew Foot of Ruutu Was Worse
I’d venture to say that Eaton was taking liberties with Ruutu more than Cooke was looking to lay a cheap shot on Cole. What do you guys think?
I doubt it. Eaton lost a season to getting slew footed.
I think Eaton was determined to block the shot/pass that was coming in and in the process of getting out to get in the lane he took out a guy who was in his way. In hindsight, shouldn’t have done it, but the game moves so quick it’s a split second decision.
No offense, but that is just dumb! As someone else mentioned before Eaton is probably the least likely candidate of any Penguin player to do something dirty or with intent to injure.
how bout you read up on eaton and everything hes gone through rather then throw out some insane comment about him being a dirty player. cooke? ok i can see that, eaton no way. of course no one on the canes plays dirty at all…….
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions
So The most likely person on Carolina to try to end another players career would be. . . Eric Cole? Cause he knows how to do it right?
Sure he can score goals, but can he cook?
by Phantaskippy on May 20, 2009 7:55 AM EDT up reply actions
and yet another ludicrus comment
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 20, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think your logic is supported by everyday experience. People routinely do stuff to other people even when they know that they have been hurt by the same thing. This happens in hockey, and in life. Nothing Eaton has ever done makes me think he’s a dirty player (maybe because you don’t normally see the cheap shots guys take in the press box) so I’m not making that conclusion (I haven’t seen the hit yet so if someone can direct me to a link I’d appreciate it, I’m just responding to the commentary on the hit).
But i also doubt the hit was intentional. i also didnt see the hit only heard it from the commentators on the feed.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions
It would surprise me if Eaton did something like that, but I’ve been surprised by hockey players before.
true
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think there is a video floating about yet. I think it may be because it wasn’t such a big deal. I don’t specifically remember the specific game moment, so I haven’t been involved in the conversations. Eaton’s a pretty stand-up guy.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought the slew foot by Eaton was really out of character for him, too. However, Ruutu wasn’t moving, there wasn’t any other traffic on the ice, and it was just Eaton skating at him. Instead of going around Ruutu, Eaton took him out.
However, I think the Cole/Cooke incident was an absolute accident. The knee-on-knee wasn’t a deliberate cheap shot.
That being said, nothing was called in the game and the refs allowed the game to play out as it did. The refs set the tone in this one.
I'd just like to see some consistency
The league should mete out discipline equally regardless of team or individual talent level. If the precedent is that coincidental knee to knee contact gets a pass from the league…fine. It’s maddening to see the capricious nature rules intended to protect players.
Speaking of inconsistency — anyone else amused that the refs correctly called the GI on wiping the Canes 2nd goal but gave E. Staal a pass when he cleared Fleury’s stick to the corner? Is there a cap on GI calls they can make in a single game? Did I miss something? It was pretty obvious.
bravo!
its nice to see that both sides feel the officiating was abhorant at best last night.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Cole's swipe
was at the end of the game when the Pens had it relatively well in hand.
The 2nd goal that was wiped by the refs would have made it 2-2 and that seems to be a no-no.
Knowledge is Power!
Power Corrupts!
Study hard,
Become Evil!
The 2nd goal that was wiped by the refs would have made it 2-2 and that seems to be a no-no.
What’s not allowed is interfering with the goaltender. Erik Cole can do wrong, believe it or not. It’s probably hard for Hurricane fans to entertain that thought, since he’s always the “victim”.
funny, i just said that somewhere else
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
lcd2you
I don’t usually say things like this, because while I do enjoy a little in-thread instigating, I don’t like to be a full-out prick…but you are giving me a bad impression of ‘Canes fans that they probably don’t deserve. You harp on the same points and don’t back them up with anything but your own conjecture. After watching the replay now several times I have concluded that you are absolutely wrong that Interference should not have been called on that play. If they had called and even-up diving call on Gill it would have been erroneous. Please watch the replay, and observe the motion of Erik Cole’s elbow. He tossed him. Yes, a 6’7" 250lb. man. Tossed him. Doesn’t matter what the score was/would have been. You can’t toss people when you’re away from the puck, especially not into their own goalie.
You weren’t reffed out of this game. I’ve said it at least 4 times that the game was poorly officiated. But, that said – 2 PP’s to 4 PP’s isn’t exactly a world-breaking difference. Besides, if you’d done any scouting of your opponent you’d know that they are pretty shaky if not downright weak on the PP. Each team scored a PPG. while the refs may be to blame for this game being less entertaining than it could have been(my opinion), they are not responsible for the outcome. Penguins scored three goals, ’Canes scored 2.
If you want to discuss the subject of this article, that would be better, I think.
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
And… the second ‘Canes goal was a gift. It should have been interference when Eric Staal cleared Fleury’s stick away. The ‘Canes second goal on the PP was a direct result of Fleury playing with a D-man’s stick. When Fleury went to stop the incoming shot, it hit the curved blade, and bounced over Fleury.
Or at least, I think I saw it that way. Was I correct in my observation?
Not that it wasn't a PIM
…but man, when was the last time you saw a team hold their sticks weaker than the Pens? They get sticks knocked out of their hands all the damn time. Also, I thought the 2nd goal just beat MAF’s glove, I didn’t see the deflection. Stick or no stick a goalie should catch most anything that hits their glove.
did you watch the play fehr? it was more then a bit absurd to NOT get a penalty called there for goalie interferance. i think maf’s issues with holding onto his stick kept it from being called but that is a must call there.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, see the bold part of my comment. That is a rule on the books that usually gets called. I don’t think knocking a stick out of a guy’s hand should be a per se PIM, but apparently it is. Staal clearly whacked MAF’s stick away and should have been called for it. Maybe the ref didn’t see it. Maybe it was situational reffing. They blew the call and at least it didn’t end up costing you anything but margin of victory and some anxious moments.
yeah but if flower doesnt stone stall with 28 seconds left then there are big issues. but whoops, i just saw the not that it wasnt a pim thingy
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions
The play happened too close to the end for me to rewind and review it, and after the final I didn’t have the motive to, but yeah, questionable on the goal stick flick. I’m not totally clear on the rules in this regard (insert ’Caniac-knows-nothing-about-hockey joke here :), but when a goalies stick is knocked away is it a motive call, similar to a kicked-puck, or is it a clear-cut “stick on goalie-stick resulting in no goalie stick is a penalty” call? The reason I ask, it looked like there was a crossing attempt towards Staahl when he brought his stick towards the goal. I think his attempt was to get a deflection into the net, and the de-sticking of MAF was unintentional.
I would love to get clarification as to the rules in this matter.
by Cardiac 'Canes on May 19, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
heres a link to it
heres a link to the interferance rulings per the nhl rule book
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions
theres a specific part in there that says
C. An attacking player makes incidental contact with the goalkeeper at the same time a goal is scored. Goal is disallowed. The official in his judgment may call a Minor penalty on the attacking player. The announcement should be, "No goal due to interference with the goalkeeper."
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions
also
D. An attacking player makes other than incidental contact with the goalkeeper, however, no goal is scored on the play. A Minor penalty, plus assessment of whatever other penalties may be appropriate up to and including Supplementary Discipline.
E. An attacking player makes other than incidental contact with the goalkeeper at the time a goal is scored. Goal is disallowed, and a Minor and/or Major penalty, plus assessment of whatever penalties may be appropriate up to and including Supplementary Discipline.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions
oh and finally
here is the page with the interferance per the nhl, last link was goaltender interferance. this page goes striaght to the disallowed goal in which hal gill was chucked into maf
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26348
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions
what about pushing an opponents stick away from them when dropped?
i’m guessing its a penalty because you often dont see ppl sliding their opponents stick half way across the ice in an attempt to play keep away. but is it rule?
yes that is also interferance but again its discrecionary
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 20, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
was it Cole or Staal who cleared Fleury's stick?
that’s what I get for listening to Joe Beninati
by chicos_pants on May 19, 2009 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice move if you can get away with it … and what do you have to lose at that point? Still — goalie without stick (followed by goalie with D’man’s stick) kind of screams to refs, and when his stick lands in the corner while he’s in the crease . . . I’m just saying — none of MAF’s defenders were about to clear his stick out of their way. Pretty cheapo, even if MAF needs to do a better job of holding his lumber.
by chicos_pants on May 19, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought there were three different pairs of refs.
One out for each period. Didn’t seem to have a bit of logic to it. The first two calls against the canes were how we were taught to play in Boston. Seemed like they wanted penalties before eight o’clock when everyone started watching comedies on CBS.
Weren’t there like five trips (both ways) in the second?
And how can you say that Cole was interfering with the stick? He was just trying to get rid of a tripping hazard. A little OCD behavior during a hockey game can be a good thing. (Like Samsonov with the puck).
LOL
nice satiric post, +1
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
news flash
im angry again and the new rule thread has been posted, look to the right of your screen.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 4:20 PM EDT reply actions
Agreeing with the general consensus.
Definitely should have been a penalty. Should probably be a suspension…but then, Ovechkin blah blah blah.
Before each game, please remember to feed the bats.
i disagree
I don’t think it should have been a penalty or a suspension. If you watch how Cooke was skating before the hit he had both skates pointing away from center (similar to how crosby skates around the net a lot of times, basically heel to heel) so that he could turn in across the middle. As he recovers from this to straighten up his knee hits Cole. This is a difficult position to control and unless Cooke had thought “i’m gonna knee on knee this guy” before he made the turn I don’t see how he could have intentionally went knee to knee on this hit.
I was pissed about the Ovechkin hit because he was going at Gonchar in which Gonchar moved and AO made a move to try and hit him as a response, but I didn’t necisarily think it was a suspendable offense, but maybe (maybe) a penalty. Just my 2 cents.
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. ~Dave Barry
I disagree with the Ovechkin comparison
Before anybody chokes, yes I’m taking the Pens side on this one. After watching it over and over, I believe Cooke was looking for a bone-crushing hip check, but Cole fired a shot instead of continuing through. I have no idea if he said anything after the game or whatever, but I don’t buy the “traffic in front, accident” theory because he clearly sought out Cole. However, I also don’t think he stuck his knee out either.
The replay to me shows a guy shifting his weight to his toes bracing for Cole to go over his back, not an Ovie-like stick out. (For the record, that’s me saying neither guy should be suspended, but for entirely different reasons.)
by Geoff Detweiler on May 19, 2009 6:56 PM EDT reply actions
we are all going to die
the apocolypse is here, shagg backed the pens. were are dead
d
e
d
ded
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Does this spell the end of the Pens? Are my ‘Canes poised to win based on Shagg’s pro Pens response?! Hell yeah!
P.S. Shagg, thank the Flyers org. for me. We never would’ve won that first cup without Brindy, and to get rid of PrimaDonna to boot?! Priceless!
by Cardiac 'Canes on May 19, 2009 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Ouch. You’re also welcome for Denis Seidenberg and Joni Pitkanen (Through Edmonton). But Brindy is your fourth line center and Primeau single handedly led us to the Conference finals in ’04, then went the way of Lindros. I have not a bad word to say about him, mainly because he was fantastic here.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 20, 2009 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
You jerk. I thought we were friends. I disagree but I’m not going to type it out again. See my argument above with oldtimer if you care.
lol
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions
haha, I agree with: bq. I think objectively they were both gray area hits that were at best reckless. It doesn’t have to be full speed to be dangerous, or to injure. Awkward hits can be brutal. The league doesn’t crack down on reckless leg contact so I don’t think either should have been punished.
But I think the hits were different, if only because (there are other reasons too) Cooke was leaning foward and Cole basically t-boned him.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 20, 2009 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
supposed to be blockquoted, oh well.
by Geoff Detweiler on May 20, 2009 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I haven’t really bothered to review the video of the hit, but the fact that there has been no mention in the press of some sort of disciplinary hearing between Cooke and Colin Campbell and his kangaroo court of supplementary discipline or Gary Bettman over twenty-four hours after the fact I assume that no additional action will be taken, which is hardly surprising. The lack of response by the league in the second round to a blow to the head (that fine, upstanding citizen Scott Walker, who sucker punched Aaron Ward in the face) and two knee-on-knee hits (Ovechkin on Gonchar and some random Hurricane on Marc Savard) has pretty much paved the way for free-for-all approach to the last two rounds in which anything short of Bertuzzi on Moore goes. I suppose you can’t really blame the league, though. I mean, they’re too busy keeping Jim Balsillie out of their clique to properly regulate the behaviour of their players.
agreed
there needs to be direction provided to the ref on what is a must call and what can be allowed to pass. of course that also needs to apply to cloin campbell, the fact that there have been so many cheap shots this playoffs and nothing has come from them other the brash getting 6 games is absurd.i honestly cant remember a playoffs that had this many suspendable offenses commited and nothing done as far as supplemenary action. of course being a pens fan i do remember when adam graves did his best sammy sosa impersonation on marios wrist and nothing came of that either
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions
HAHAHA.
“…they’re too busy keeping Jim Balsillie out of their clique…”
Bingo!
-David
sixminutecynic.blogspot.com
www.piratesmix.com.
by pascaldupweevil on May 19, 2009 9:53 PM EDT reply actions
Sad, but undeniably true. Although I do feel that the NHL has quite enough to be getting on with at the moment with just thirty teams (seriously, what is this – baseball? Football? If we go through another expansion period we’ll wind up with more clubs than any other major league sport in North America), I honestly could not care less about expansion or putting another franchise in Canada. The real victims in this situation are the Coyotes fans, most whom still love their team even after several seasons of constant disappointment and the fanbase does its best to support the Coyotes in these hard financial times. Even though I think that Gary Bettman et. al. have devoted their attention to keep Balsillie from infiltrating their clubhouse to the exclusion of all else, I still hope the league wins the suit because Balsillie is a jerk that had to go and put a damper on one of the greatest times of the year to be a hockey fan by attempting to stage some coup d’etat against the NHL during the playoffs. So not cool.
sounds like a new rule for my new rule thread…….
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 9:57 PM EDT reply actions
Break-neck speed?
I haven’t read all the posts yet, but surely I’m not the first one to question Puck Daddy’s use of terms here. Orpik-Cole: illegal break-neck speed at the wrong time. Cooke-Cole: illegal break-knee speed? I don’t know, it’s hard to judge motives from a video, so I’m not out to cry foul on Cooke’s collision, but really, do we need to bring up “break neck speed” in a game featuring Eric Cole and Brooks Orpik? I hope he doesn’t read Puck Daddy’s blog. I love Cole, but if the hit in the last game and the lingering feelings towards Orpik don’t do it, I’m afraid irresponsible journalism like this could push him over the edge.
As far as the game-as-a-whole, I thought it was a very exciting game, and hope for more of the same. My ‘Canes lost, but that’s nothing new in Game 1. It was very competitive, and with the nature and history of this team, there’s no reason to lose faith after a single game.
Enjoy the series and GO ’CANES!!!
by Cardiac 'Canes on May 19, 2009 11:09 PM EDT reply actions
I sincerely doubt that Wyshinski intentionally phrased what he wrote to take a jab at Erik Cole’s past injuries and cannot help but think that anyone who reads it as such is either overly sensitive or looking for insults where none are intended. Also, Erik Cole is a professional hockey player and as such I would like to believe that professionalism would allow him to put aside any past grudges he may have with Brooks Orpik over something that happened years ago so he could focus his attention on what he needs to do to help the Hurricanes advance to the Stanley Cup Final. If every night he is going over the boards with the intention of seeking revenge for an accident in the distant past then he is not only a detriment to his team but a danger to himself and every other player out on that ice. Let it go. Only bad things will happen if he does not.
the problem is i dont think he is able to do that. after the incident last night with cooke, the next shift he went right after him. once he fond he could hardly skate he went right back to the bench. this guy carries grudges
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 19, 2009 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Well...
If you had a career year ended shortly and only got to play 2 games in the playoffs where your team won the stanley cup and are now getting ready to be out millions of dollars because your numbers have never been the same since that wreckless and irresponsible hit…i’d say you’d be pretty steamed too.
Not to mention he was nearly paralyzed/killed.
and your point is? if he was such the stellar man canes fans seem to think he is he would have atleast listened to what broks had to say. It takes a lot of courage to fess up and say im sorry, it also takes a lot to look at the guy who nearly paralyzed/killed you and say i understand.
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 20, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Orpik lined up Cole and was definitely guilty of boarding. It’s illegal because the recipient is blinded and defenseless, but I find it highly improbable that Orpik saw Cole put his head down and decided to tee off on him. He lined him up and misread it, and unfortunately Cole was in an awkward position when he made contact. It was a “reckless” play, which is why many Caps fans saw some hyprocrisy in Orpik calling out Ovechkin for reckless play.
If he doesn’t get seriously injured, Orpik maybe gets a small fine and no suspension. The suspension was a warning shot from the league to other players as much as penalizing Orpik. If it occurred in the playoffs, the league would communicate that message in smoke signals for ultimate clarity.
by chicos_pants on May 20, 2009 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Simple View
Cooke should be suspended for 1 game. Intent or not, it was a dangerous play. He will not be suspended because they have set the bar pretty high for suspensions in this year’s playoffs.
General Thoughts:
-Game 1 was very sloppy. Exciting but poorly executed.
-The crowd was average at best. Not that I’m impressed by constant noise (i.e. Canes fans) but a little more emotion would be nice. After all, we don’t want to end up like Wings fans.
-Over analysis of the refs/commissioner/league office will generally leave you angry and confused. So far, the refs haven’t decided a game (like the Wings/Ducks) so I’m at peace. “Sometimes you eat the bar, and sometimes, well, he eats you.”
Let’s Go Pens!
You think Wings fans are bad...
…try watching a Devils playoff game sometime.
And I think “constant noise” is an insult to Canes fans’ willingness to try and cheer on our team despite multi-goal deficits where most fans would sit and watch quietly. There is a reason why we have so many dramatic come-back and last minute wins in Raleigh.
If you watch lots of hockey, there are two things you just have to accept:
1. There are LOTS of missed calls. The game is too fast, and the refs are only human beings who have to make penalty calls without the benefit of replay or the elevated view of the ice that spectators and TV cameras get. And, of course, sometimes they’re just incompetent.
2. In the playoffs, teams come at each other REALLY hard, and everyone is trying to gain an edge on their opponent by walking the line between physical and dirty. And players cross that line all the time. Not saying you have to like it at all. But hits like Cooke/Cole and Ovechkin/Gonchar are the kind of thing I’ve seen a million times watching playoff games over the years. It’s a brutal sport, and nasty hits are always going to be part of it.
My problem this year is more with inconsistent officiating than anything else. Am I the only person just baffled by (a) refs calling ticky-tack little plays (or outright non-penalties) while letting absolute muggings go; and (b) refs calling everything in the first period and letting everything go from then on? I think (b) is a real problem: the best way to make sure that players aren’t crossing the line is to make it obvious to them where the line is.
P is for Latrobe.
well said, agree
" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run
by oldtimehockey09 on May 20, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- The Chicago Blackhawks’ losing streak is bad for everybody
- According to NHL, here’s why Dominic Moore escaped suspension for Fedotenko hit
- How Mats Sundin’s no-trade clause controversy made fans reconsider loyalty in NHL
- Nordiques Nation invades Hockey Day in Canada
- Youth hockey coach, parents clash over alleged tirade over 9-year old’s 200th goal puck
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
