Comments on: Sutter's side of the story http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/ In-depth coverage of the Los Angeles Kings. Wed, 08 Sep 2010 21:25:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: mike http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29559 mike Thu, 31 Dec 2009 23:21:21 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29559 love seans comments... but guess what, dion is a canadian playing in a canadian city, even though he's a dumbass the fans there dont see it that way... the fans in calgary have been called the best fans in hockey, but after they started booing kopitar for no reason what so ever, i think that description should change.... just what the hell do you know about hockey calgary? play the puck. love seans comments… but guess what, dion is a canadian playing in a canadian city, even though he’s a dumbass the fans there dont see it that way… the fans in calgary have been called the best fans in hockey, but after they started booing kopitar for no reason what so ever, i think that description should change….

just what the hell do you know about hockey calgary?
play the puck.

]]> By: Belexes http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29558 Belexes Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:08:33 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29558 It's no wonder the Flame's fans don't get it. Did you see them in the stands? They're a bunch of kids (literaly). It looked more like a Myley Cyrus concert than an NHL game in the stands. pathetic.... It’s no wonder the Flame’s fans don’t get it. Did you see them in the stands? They’re a bunch of kids (literaly). It looked more like a Myley Cyrus concert than an NHL game in the stands. pathetic….

]]> By: Slapshot http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29557 Slapshot Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:06:21 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29557 The intermission show for the Calgary broadcast was more than fair and I the panel was less than supportive of Phanny. In fact they were big on our guys reacting the way they did. The hit fits nicely into the the definition of boarding in the rule book. Had Phanny at least tried for the puck it would be a bit different. It was pretty clear what his intent was. I do not blame Kopi for trying to sell it like he did, as that is just taking one for the team in a way. But the boofest was well deserved. Browns penalty shot mishap was sad, but I swear Calgary's Zamboni was actually an aerator, the pucks were bouncing all over the place. And sadly when he went to stick handle it, the damn thing went up on its side and just dropped back out of reach. The intermission show for the Calgary broadcast was more than fair and I the panel was less than supportive of Phanny. In fact they were big on our guys reacting the way they did. The hit fits nicely into the the definition of boarding in the rule book. Had Phanny at least tried for the puck it would be a bit different. It was pretty clear what his intent was. I do not blame Kopi for trying to sell it like he did, as that is just taking one for the team in a way. But the boofest was well deserved.
Browns penalty shot mishap was sad, but I swear Calgary’s Zamboni was actually an aerator, the pucks were bouncing all over the place. And sadly when he went to stick handle it, the damn thing went up on its side and just dropped back out of reach.

]]> By: I'm Just Saying" http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29556 I'm Just Saying" Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:04:23 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29556 Right and Rodney King and Reginal Denny did not need their last shot either Sutter. Right and Rodney King and Reginal Denny did not need their last shot either Sutter.

]]> By: khanon http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29555 khanon Thu, 31 Dec 2009 20:59:43 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29555 The hit was clean, I don't know what everybody is talking about. Phaneuf should not have been ejected, but instead, he would have been forced to deal with it the good old fashion way, i.e., scrap. Did anybody else notice how wimpy Purcell looked in the scrum??? The hit was clean, I don’t know what everybody is talking about. Phaneuf should not have been ejected, but instead, he would have been forced to deal with it the good old fashion way, i.e., scrap.

Did anybody else notice how wimpy Purcell looked in the scrum???

]]> By: Dolly http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29554 Dolly Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:51:28 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29554 I agree with Bako, although it was a dirty hit, allowing that contact will lead to injury. On a side note: Go Parse! I agree with Bako, although it was a dirty hit, allowing that contact will lead to injury.

On a side note: Go Parse!

]]> By: scvdad http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29553 scvdad Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:51:27 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29553 The discussion re a suspension is a two-parter...a case of what is just as opposed to the reality of the NHL being incinsistent with regard to suspensions. What is central in this case is that this was not a borderline call in any way. There is intent and there is malice in Phaneuf's actions. If those things do not result in suspension, then what is the criteria? If a stiff suspension is not levied, then do we assume that the requirement becomes a what (injury) and a who (depends on who the player is)? It is obvious what is justified. Would we be having this conversation if Phaneuf hit Crosby? The discussion re a suspension is a two-parter…a case of what is just as opposed to the reality of the NHL being incinsistent with regard to suspensions. What is central in this case is that this was not a borderline call in any way. There is intent and there is malice in Phaneuf’s actions. If those things do not result in suspension, then what is the criteria? If a stiff suspension is not levied, then do we assume that the requirement becomes a what (injury) and a who (depends on who the player is)? It is obvious what is justified. Would we be having this conversation if Phaneuf hit Crosby?

]]> By: What's the frequency, Kenneth? http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29552 What's the frequency, Kenneth? Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:36:22 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29552 I'd say it's a 50/50 chance he gets a short suspension. Frankly, the attitude out of Calgary <i>after the fact</i> is the best reason why he should get a suspension--<i>they still don't get it!</i> I’d say it’s a 50/50 chance he gets a short suspension. Frankly, the attitude out of Calgary after the fact is the best reason why he should get a suspension–they still don’t get it!

]]> By: DLB http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29551 DLB Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:32:19 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29551 I wish each booing Calgary fan could be divided into three parts like Gaul... I doubt he'll get a suspension here, but the game misconduct was the correct call -- and he'd better watch it: "Any player who incurs a total of two (2) game misconducts for Boarding under Rule 44 (b), in either Regular Season or Playoffs, shall be suspended automatically for the next game of his Team. For each subsequent game misconduct penalty the automatic suspension shall be increased by one game." http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule44.html I wish each booing Calgary fan could be divided into three parts like Gaul…

I doubt he’ll get a suspension here, but the game misconduct was the correct call — and he’d better watch it:

“Any player who incurs a total of two (2) game misconducts for Boarding under Rule 44 (b), in either Regular Season or Playoffs, shall be suspended automatically for the next game of his Team. For each subsequent game misconduct penalty the automatic suspension shall be increased by one game.”

http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule44.html

]]> By: What's the frequency, Kenneth? http://lakingsinsider.com/2009/12/31/sutters-side-of-the-story/#comment-29550 What's the frequency, Kenneth? Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:25:18 +0000 http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=2824#comment-29550 My first though on the play (before the hit happened) was "OMG, he's not going to go for icing the puck--he's going to try to injure Kopitar." As someone else pointed out, his use of the stick made it obvious to everyone watching (and surely not Kopitar) that he was going to try to leave a mark on the boards with his check. @ Mike: OD's not running off about how Ivanans is Einstein or through a "clean" elbow. He's responding to similar comments the Flames have the audacity to make. From <i>your</i> comments, you make it sound like you want people to try to injure each other again. <i>Talk about not bright!</i> This BS about how everyone on the planet is supposed to know <b>icing is waved off</b> is insane. Obviously, there's a good chance someone concentrating on getting to the puck isn't going to get the instant message while he's skating on a bee line for the puck. That's how these things happen. I think it's pretty obvious a sportsman doesn't take a shot at someone who may not have gotten the telegram. ...and what's this crap with <b>booing Kopitar?</b> Was it because he was hit or because he wasn't injured on the play? Kopitar did look pretty dazed when he got back to the bench. I really doubt he was in the state of line to "milk it." So what if he was, anyway. What gives the Calgary fans such gaul? Didn't they notice that the officials evened it up for them by giving OD an effing double minor--I know giving a crap about his teammate was a <i>horrible crime!</i> WTF? WRT <b>Rob Blake</b>, I don't boo him, but I understand why he does. He went for the cash and the trophy instead of trying to earn one here. It would serve him right for the Kings to win the cup without him. My first though on the play (before the hit happened) was “OMG, he’s not going to go for icing the puck–he’s going to try to injure Kopitar.” As someone else pointed out, his use of the stick made it obvious to everyone watching (and surely not Kopitar) that he was going to try to leave a mark on the boards with his check.

@ Mike: OD’s not running off about how Ivanans is Einstein or through a “clean” elbow. He’s responding to similar comments the Flames have the audacity to make. From your comments, you make it sound like you want people to try to injure each other again. Talk about not bright!

This BS about how everyone on the planet is supposed to know icing is waved off is insane. Obviously, there’s a good chance someone concentrating on getting to the puck isn’t going to get the instant message while he’s skating on a bee line for the puck. That’s how these things happen. I think it’s pretty obvious a sportsman doesn’t take a shot at someone who may not have gotten the telegram.

…and what’s this crap with booing Kopitar? Was it because he was hit or because he wasn’t injured on the play? Kopitar did look pretty dazed when he got back to the bench. I really doubt he was in the state of line to “milk it.” So what if he was, anyway. What gives the Calgary fans such gaul? Didn’t they notice that the officials evened it up for them by giving OD an effing double minor–I know giving a crap about his teammate was a horrible crime! WTF?

WRT Rob Blake, I don’t boo him, but I understand why he does. He went for the cash and the trophy instead of trying to earn one here. It would serve him right for the Kings to win the cup without him.

]]>