How could scoring a show-boating empty-netter in any possible way justify getting punched in the head?
[/QUOTE]
Because it does. My friend, because it does. It’s not new. Spiking a ball at the 50 yard line starts a fight. Flipping a bat on a homer starts a fight. Putting a ball off the back board for a dunk down the stretch in a game that’s done starts a fight. They are all the same thing. Disrespecting the other team.
You know this to be true and are arguing on principle, and it’s wrong.
Like, that is so utterly absurd and beyond what hockey is about. It's sheer lunacy. The reaction you claim is justified is a far far bigger violation of the "code" than the act you want to see punished. As is what Rielly actually did. You are basically saying that the reaction to "breaking the code" should be for someone to break the code in an even worse manner.
[/QUOTE]
Not at all. Reilly should never, no one should ever, get the stick up in the head. Poor move. Deserves suspension, got suspension, proper.
Deserved reaction, punk move. Reilly should have got up on him, grabbed him to toss gloves and fight.
I repeat the stick was bad. Told my son to never do that.
It's like going "so, the guy behind me drove way too fast, that's againt the law, so I pulled out a gun and shot him". The hypocrisy and lack of logic is simply astounding.
[/QUOTE]
I mean that’s not close. Your example is incredibly extreme, one cannot expect to get shot for driving fast, that’s ridiculous. One can expect to get nailed for punking a team in sports.
And again, the head shot with the stick was too much.
That doesn't even deal with the issue that this "code" is little more than made up nonsense that gets used as an excuse to justify pathetic behaviour. If you want to break the rules, just claim that someone broke the code and you will find enough people who will excuse your behaviour. The code then happens to be whatever you want it to be, not something that is actually established or clearly defined. It's on one level with "boys will be boys", an excuse to ignore someone's erratic behaviour, an excuse for someone's immaturity and inability to deal with adversity. Players are supposed to not take stupid penalties, but throwing tantrums is a okay and somehow being considered tough. It is the exact opposite of being tough, and it sure as heck isn't leadership.
The code then turns into a weird amalgation of imaginary violations, most of which are completely irrelevant and harmless, while glorifying actual acts of violence and attempts to injure that no one would ever think of justifying elsewhere.
Bud this guy didn’t just play his first game of hockey. 100% he understands why he got it.
