Post-Game Talk: Bruins beat Tim Thomas & his Panthers 6 - 2

[LucicIsABeast]

So Thomas intended to hit Soderberg with his stick after Soderberg ran him? Pretty hard to plan that since it's dependent upon knowing Soderberg was going to run him. Based on that, it seemed to me it was a reactionary thing. Soderberg runs him, Thomas reacts. No premeditation or anything. Just a reaction to getting hit while down.

While I wouldn't say Soderberg ran him, he definitely initiated contact with the stick near Thomas face and Thomas simply responded with a "get out of my house" response.

 

[member 96824]

Thomas uses his stick as a club to Burrows in the back of the knees. The garden goes wild!

 

[Fossy21]

So Thomas intended to hit Soderberg with his stick after Soderberg ran him? Pretty hard to plan that since it's dependent upon knowing Soderberg was going to run him. Based on that, it seemed to me it was a reactionary thing. Soderberg runs him, Thomas reacts. No premeditation or anything. Just a reaction to getting hit while down.

So retaliation is not intentional? It's a natural instinct that something hits you in the shoulder, you swipe in that general direction with all you have?

Homer attitude for glossing over why he got hit in the head. He doesn't crash into the goalie, he doesn't get a stick in the face. Seems pretty obvious to me that people here are disregarding the first part of the play and only focusing on Thomas' reaction. So yeah, blatant homer attitude is applicable, IMO.

Oh yeah. That explains why everytime someone is in front of the net they get whacked with a goalie stick. Happens every shift, right? It's only natural. And yeah, no harm was done in the end, but what if he had caught him in the eye or something? That's fine because it's just retaliation.

 

[SerenityRick]

So retaliation is not intentional? It's a natural instinct that something hits you in the shoulder, you swipe in that general direction with all you have?

Spoken like someone who's never been run as a goalie game in and game out.

Yes. As a goalie that's your instinct. Especially when your team has lost and lost big with only 4 seconds left and you're STILL being run.

Oh yeah. That explains why everytime someone is in front of the net they get whacked with a goalie stick. Happens every shift, right? It's only natural. And yeah, no harm was done in the end, but what if he had caught him in the eye or something? That's fine because it's just retaliation.

That's the risk Soderberg took when he crashed the net. Period. Whether he was whacked by Thomas or sucker punched by a defensman.. that's the risk you take crashing a goalie at ANY time but especially when the game is over.

 

[Therick67]

Thomas uses his stick as a club to Burrows in the back of the knees. The garden goes wild!

I have no problem with Timmy defending himself, but I don't think it's unreasonable to wish he would do it a little lower?

Goalies having been slashing ankles and legs forever.

Having said that, I'm fine with the 2 minute penalty.

 

[MaCam]

Thomas uses his stick as a club to Burrows in the back of the knees. The garden goes wild!

Pretty much this. Not saying Thomas was innocent, but I can pretty much guarantee the Garden crowd would have cheered wildly if Thomas was still a Bruin and did what he did last night.

 

[Fossy21]

Spoken like someone who's never been run as a goalie game in and game out.

Yes. As a goalie that's your instinct. Especially when your team has lost and lost big with only 4 seconds left and you're STILL being run.

Okay, so if someone finishes a check on a skater with 4 seconds left of a game, they're entitled to retaliate by whacking their stick in the other person's face if the stick happened to ride up high? No intent there?

That's the risk Soderberg took when he crashed the net. Period. Whether he was whacked by Thomas or sucker punched by a defensman.. that's the risk you take crashing a goalie at ANY time but especially when the game is over.

And do you think that will get players to seek net-front presence? Stand there, you might have a chance to contribute to a goal, but you have to be ready not only for crosschecks from defencemen, but for slashings to the face from a goalie in case you happen to make contact with him at an inopportune time? I thought we wanted guys in front of the net, and more goals. Goalies are too protected as is, let's give them right to cross the line and blame it on circumstance. I don't think it's worthy of a lenghty suspension, I just don't agree that it's nothing, or a 2 minute minor and that's that.

 

[member 96824]

I truly don't believe it's a big deal, worth talking about when it happened? Yeah....the next morning..eh

 

[SerenityRick]

Okay, so if someone finishes a check on a skater with 4 seconds left of a game, they're entitled to retaliate by whacking their stick in the other person's face if the stick happened to ride up high? No intent there?

Nope. Because in that situation you expect to be hit.

Goalies don't like sticks flying around their face or being crashed into at any time.. there's a reason why most scrums happen in and around the crease.

 

[caz16]

Three games with 6 goals - I'm enjoying every minute of these games.

The team is finally getting healthy and all lines are rolling. Bring on the Habs and let's blow them out! The boys are playing confident hockey but my only concern tomorrow is the billion power plays the Habs will be given and our PK being fragile.

 

[LSCII]

Okay, so if someone finishes a check on a skater with 4 seconds left of a game, they're entitled to retaliate by whacking their stick in the other person's face if the stick happened to ride up high? No intent there?

Totally different scenarios since goalies, especially when they're in the crease, are off limits for being hit anyway. A skater is always in play for the most part. But even then, someone lays out a dude with 4 seconds left in a blow out game, there will likely be an issue or at least a response from the other team.

 

[Fossy21]

Nope. Because in that situation you expect to be hit.

Goalies don't like sticks flying around their face or being crashed into at any time.. there's a reason why most scrums happen in and around the crease.

Why should you expect to get hit with 4 seconds left in a blowout? Nobody should be playing at that point.

Totally different scenarios since goalies, especially when they're in the crease, are off limits for being hit anyway. A skater is always in play for the most part. But even then, someone lays out a dude with 4 seconds left in a blow out game, there will likely be an issue or at least a response from the other team.

Söderberg barely entering the crease and accidentally hitting Thomas in the shoulder does not correspond to "laying a dude out", imho. And neither justify slashings to the face.

 

[LSCII]

Why should you expect to get hit with 4 seconds left in a blowout? Nobody should be playing at that point.

Which is exactly why Thomas hit Soderberg. You do realize Carl initiated the contact that precipitated this whole thing, right? Do you need to go back and watch it to get that little piece of info?

 

[Fossy21]

Which is exactly why Thomas hit Soderberg. You do realize Carl initiated the contact that precipitated this whole thing, right? Do you need to go back and watch it to get that little piece of info?

I was sarcastic. Play to the horn. Thornton gets hit by Orpik with 4 seconds left of a 6-2 Pens win. Thornton instantly retaliates with a slash to Orpik's chin. Orpik breaks. Thornton would get how many games? Injury shouldn't play as big a part as it does in suspensions, if any.

 

[amazingcrwns]

I don't see a suspension in Thomas' future for this incident. If the league thinks it deserves more than the 2 minute's for high sticking I could see them issuing a fine.

 

[Fossy21]

I don't see a suspension in Thomas' future for this incident. If the league thinks it deserves more than the 2 minute's for high sticking I could see them issuing a fine.

I'd be fine with that. Just as long as you don't send the message that slashing someone in the face in retaliation is worth as much as lifting the puck over the glass from your own zone.

 

[patty59]

Thomas was the only guy to clear his crease last night.

 

[Artemis]

Homer attitude for glossing over why he got hit in the head. He doesn't crash into the goalie, he doesn't get a stick in the face. Seems pretty obvious to me that people here are disregarding the first part of the play and only focusing on Thomas' reaction. So yeah, blatant homer attitude is applicable, IMO.

I'm not "glossing over" anything. I didn't even refer to that. I stated that a stick to the head is not a good thing. Period. No matter who does it. If it was Rask, I'd state the same thing.

The NHL, according to Brian Burke's interview with Justin Bourne (available on podcast at the Backhand Shelf, and well worth the listen), doesn't excuse a player if a dangerous hit is retaliatory. They consider context, but in their view, two wrongs don't make a right. Does that mean they have a "blatant homer attitude" as well?

To repeat, I'm NOT calling for a suspension. It was a penalty. If that somehow that makes me a "blatant homer," I guess I'll live with it.

 

[SerenityRick]

Söderberg barely entering the crease and accidentally hitting Thomas in the shoulder does not correspond to "laying a dude out", imho. And neither justify slashings to the face.

You don't have to agree with it.. but these people are humans and they get pissed off. I don't understand what's so hard to get about that; losing against your former team, losing BIG, getting crashed into with less than 4 seconds left in regulation...

What it comes down to is that Tim Thomas isn't a dirty hockey player.. all his outbursts have ALWAYS been reactionary. Again, I'd have a totally different opinion if Thomas targeted Carl unprovoked.. but that's not who Tim Thomas is. So that's why I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He was pissed off and protected his crease and his stick happened to ride up on Soderberg's face.. It sucks but Carl is fine so what's the big deal?

 

[BoyntBergie]

I have no problem with Timmy defending himself, but I don't think it's unreasonable to wish he would do it a little lower?

Goalies having been slashing ankles and legs forever.

Having said that, I'm fine with the 2 minute penalty.

That's about where I'm at. You don't slash a guy in the face, pretty much a universal understanding in hockey. Pop him with the blocker, slash the back of the legs- no issue there. Slash a guy above the shoulders? Not really cool.

That said, it appears Soderberg is fine, so no harm no foul in my book.

 

[Fossy21]

It sucks but Carl is fine so what's the big deal?

How about setting a precedent/sending a message? Do whatever you want as long as the guy isn't injured? I know that's not what you're saying, but you can't just ignore plays because everyone was fine in the end. Marchand was fine after being kneed to the head. Doesn't mean I don't care about it or don't discuss it afterwards. Yes, that was obviously intentional and pre-meditated, but it just goes to show that you can do despicable **** and not have it result in an injury.

 

[LSCII]

I was sarcastic. Play to the horn. Thornton gets hit by Orpik with 4 seconds left of a 6-2 Pens win. Thornton instantly retaliates with a slash to Orpik's chin. Orpik breaks. Thornton would get how many games? Injury shouldn't play as big a part as it does in suspensions, if any.

Flawed logic because you're introducing an injury to try and justify, yet Soderberg is fine. Totally different scenarios, which I said initially.

 

[SerenityRick]

How about setting a precedent/sending a message? Do whatever you want as long as the guy isn't injured? I know that's not what you're saying, but you can't just ignore plays because everyone was fine in the end. Marchand was fine after being kneed to the head. Doesn't mean I don't care about it or don't discuss it afterwards. Yes, that was obviously intentional and pre-meditated, but it just goes to show that you can do despicable **** and not have it result in an injury.

Except... Carl initiated the contact.

There's no precedent to set. Thomas got a 2 minute penalty. It's done.

 

[LSCII]

How about setting a precedent/sending a message? Do whatever you want as long as the guy isn't injured? I know that's not what you're saying, but you can't just ignore plays because everyone was fine in the end. Marchand was fine after being kneed to the head. Doesn't mean I don't care about it or don't discuss it afterwards. Yes, that was obviously intentional and pre-meditated, but it just goes to show that you can do despicable **** and not have it result in an injury.

You are unhinged if you truly think this...

 

[Artemis]

That's about where I'm at. You don't slash a guy in the face, pretty much a universal understanding in hockey. Pop him with the blocker, slash the back of the legs- no issue there. Slash a guy above the shoulders? Not really cool.

That said, it appears Soderberg is fine, so no harm no foul in my book.

Agreed.