The verdict is in

[caesar]

You might be right that the league deals with these things reactively, but I believe they are reacting not to the extent of the injury, but to the extent of negative publicity.

That's about right. We were all shocked when he didn't get up. Live it was quick and simple except for the dogpile. That is why they have a third man in usually given a harsher penalty; as it makes any fighting much more prone to serious injury. In this instance; it was a Colorado player and they didn't call a penalty on him. Without his involvement; things may not have gone so badly.

Bertuzzi elicited negative publicity from the press who resent him for never talking to them; particularly about his personal life. The fractured vertabrae became a broken neck (technically correct but certainly paints another picture) The concussion is now "brain damage" again technically correct but again paints a more serious picture. Naslund accepted his injuries without complaint and played injured without whining. Steve Moore until recently seemed more intent on a civil suit than in whether he would fully recover. In fact, instead they immediately started saying "that he may never play again" always a possibility but not usually a fact that is consider publically until it is likely to be a fact.

Granato should never have sent him on the ice with the way the game was going. Did he send him as a sacrifice in the hopes of getting a Canuck star suspended???

[greyhound]

Have you noticed the triangle of whiskers on Tom - oops ... Todd Bartuzzi's chin in his last court appearance?

The first thing that came to my mind was that it made him look like a professional wrestler.

What an asshole I thought, still trying to look like a tough guy after what he did to Steve Moore.

But after a moment or two I came up with the most likely reason why he grew that triangle of whiskers to make himself look like a professional wrestler.

And I'm willing to bet a bundle on that!

Why, you ask?

He's letting us know, without having to spell it out, that that's what profesional hockey's partially about these days and that that "tough guy look" was his part to play.

I don't think he ever meant to hurt anybody any more than professional wrestlers do. Accidents happen.

[caesar]

Don't bet a bundle on anything you have a strange imagination. Wrestlers are not "tough" gys; they are gymnasts and buffoons. Any real wrestling is a thing of the past. Wrestling is now all about acting. Bertuzzi'a look is just his style; did you want him to come into court looking like a wimp? His look is just fairly normal

[greyhound]

Don't bet a bundle on anything you have a strange imagination. Wrestlers are not "tough" gys; they are gymnasts and buffoons. Any real wrestling is a thing of the past. Wrestling is now all about acting. Bertuzzi'a look is just his style; did you want him to come into court looking like a wimp? His look is just fairly normal

You're drunk!!

[Cartman]

You're drunk!!

Well...it was a great thread. :angry:

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear kimmy,

These are (aside from Bertuzzi) the most notorious recent hockey incidents I could think of. And in all of them, the victim was back playing hockey before the offender. I don't think the severity of the injury was the determining factor. I think the one thing the Bertuzzi incident shares with all of these incidents is that it looked horrible on TV.

I do not think that the 'length of IR time' should be a factor in disciplining offenders. I think some consideration should be given to 'how far from normal play' any attempt to injure actually was. A punch to the head while battling for a puck in the corner is rarely even called as a penalty, but if you skated over to the players bench and did it, there might be (and should be) disciplinary action.

A few years ago Claude Lemieux (of the Colorado Avalanche) hit Chris Draper (of the Detroit Red Wings) from behind, and drove him face first into the boards. He crushed the side of Drapers face, and reconstructive surgery was needed. Should that surgery have been a mitigating factor in the disciplinary action? No, I don't believe so. Should he have gotten a lesser suspension if no surgery was needed? Again, no. Should the law have been involved? Absolutely not.

Bertuzzi should have been suspended 1 year for his actions, minimum. But there is no way in hell it should have gone to court. I have seen plenty of things in the NHL (and indeed even in my own beer-league and shinny hockey) that would constitute assault. Heck, every slashing infraction is technically 'assault with a deadly weapon'.

When I see crack-heads fighting on the street in front of my business, and I call the police, they tell me "There isn't much we can do unless one of them wants to press charges". Well, if Donald Brashear didn't seek to press charges against Marty McSorely, how can the police decide to do it for him? Same for Steve Moore vs. Todd Bertuzzi. If Moore chose to press charges, fine. It will set a precedent for the league, sure, but otherwise the laws are clearly defined by the NHL on the ice, and enforced by the refs. Disciplinary action is for the league, not the gov't.

[caesar]

There is absolutley no precedent for that type of suspension for Bertuzzi. His action was not any different thab we see nearly every game; just the end results were worse.

Moore has suddenly backed off on the civil suit; probably told by the league to shut up if he ever wants a chance to play again. He sure whines enough for someone who was on the ice for his "hitting abilities" rather than any professional hockey playing abilities. Note; how Colorado has stood behind him and did not re sign him after using him as a sacrificial goat!!!!

Naslund's injuries had just as seriously career ending injuries but we didn't hear him whine nor even discuss the wrist injury until playoffs were over for Vancouver.

The hit on Naslund may have been legal; unneeded for sure as Naslund could not have reached the puck. Moore expressed or showed not a speck of regret over his injuries.

[greyhound]

You're drunk!!

Well...it was a great thread. :angry:

Well, ONE of us was drunk!

I'm sorry!

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear caesar,

There is absolutley no precedent for that type of suspension for Bertuzzi.

There is, actually. It was years ago, but I recall seeing an interview with an 'excommunicated' NHLer. He had been accused of swinging a stick at the head of a rival player. He claimed he had just been checked, and lost his footing, with his swinging stick just missing the head of the player as he was skating away. The replay I saw was inconclusive with regard to intent, but the player was kicked out of the NHL permanently.

I have seen much worse since then, with the league allowing a lot more than they ever have in the past. In fact, it is often said, 'the less you plan to do about something, the more you talk about it'. New penaties such as 'obstruction-something' are ridiculous. All the penalties are there if the refs would hust call them Interference is interference, holding (including holding the stick) is holding.

All these new names for penalties are just to give the illusion that the league is 'cracking down' when they could have easily done so with the existing set of rules.

[theloniusfleabag]

I stand corrected, perhaps it was another league and not the NHL. There has only been 1 lifetime suspension in the NHL, and it was not from the incident I described.

[caesar]

And this was hardly the worst attack seen. Bertuzzi did not use a weapon. He has to take a lot of cheap shots every game.Except for the third man in and the dogpile; he would have gotten a major. Others have gotten much less.

[greyhound]

And this was hardly the worst attack seen.

It was premeditated and THAT'S what made it the worst attack seen, IMHO.

Bertuzzi is an asshole to say the least!

[caesar]

Nonsense and BS Just about every hit IS premeditated. Give me a break. Bertuzzi is a better man than you or Moore will ever be