Why did nobody respond to the hit by Adam Mair ---I mean, Radko Gudas?

[Lobster57]

None of the responses from McQuaid or Randell will result directly in wins or losses and fighting Randell isn't going to change how Reaves plays but you can either be a team that responds to your guys getting run or not. It is quite simple.

As a player, I know what team I would want to be on.

I also know what team i want to be a fan of. This is the Boston Bruins we're talking about. I'm not from anywhere near Boston, i became a fan of the team entirely based on the hard-hitting, don't take any **** way they played the game

 

[HiyaGeorgii]

This should always be the response. There is never an excuse where it shouldn't be. That's what teammates do then or later in the game.. I can easily see which people I'd hate to have on my team here.

Strange that this wouldn't be the first, natural reaction of some people.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

This should always be the response. There is never an excuse where it shouldn't be. That's what teammates do then or later in the game.. I can easily see which people I'd hate to have on my team here.

Strange that this wouldn't be the first, natural reaction of some people.

This is not an easy issue for me because I am an "old school" guy, but let me ask you something...did McIlrath's response to the hit on Vesey have any effect on Gudas?

The fact that he went out and delivered an equally questionable hit less than a week later on Czarnik should tell you all you need to know about how affective jumping a repeat offender like Gudas is in keeping him from doing it.

 

[NeelyDan]

This is not an easy issue for me because I am an "old school" guy, but let me ask you something...did McIlrath's response to the hit on Vesey have any effect on Gudas?

The fact that he went out and delivered an equally questionable hit less than a week later on Czarnik should tell you all you need to know about how affective jumping a repeat offender like Gudas is in keeping him from doing it.

If it didn't now, it didn't in days of hockey past. Maybe it's more than preventing future occurrences. Maybe, it was never about that to begin with.

 

[Over the volcano]

If it didn't now, it didn't in days of hockey past. Maybe it's more than preventing future occurrences. Maybe, it was never about that to begin with.

Would have loved to see him lose some teeth and then get suspended 10 games. Neither are likely to "teach" him anything but both are well deserved.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

If it didn't now, it didn't in days of hockey past. Maybe it's more than preventing future occurrences. Maybe, it was never about that to begin with.

How did it prevent a future occurrence? He went out and did it again a few days after D-Mac jumped him. I don't think it ever did, or ever will, prevent these hits from happening. Certain guys are just wired like that, and you need to make it not worthwhile for teams to employ them. That's the only way to get rid of guys like Gudas.

 

[Fenian24]

The game is as soft as it has ever been and people posting here want it softer still. When will the pacifists be happy? Total elimination of fighting and physical players? Hitting and checking being made illegal? The league is heading there quickly, I have no enthusiasm for this upcoming season. I was looking forward to watching David Backes but the game has become so soft and so wimpy that I just can't get excited for the season.

So fans of soccer on ice and speed skating enjoy, I'll get my old tapes out of storage and watch hockey when it was a great sport, not the wussified thing it is now.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

The game is as soft as it has ever been and people posting here want it softer still. When will the pacifists be happy? Total elimination of fighting and physical pkayers? Hitting and checking being made illegal? The league is heading there quickly, I have no enthusiasm for this upcoming season. I was looking forward to watching David Backes but the game has become so soft and so wimpy that I just can't get excited for the season.

So fans of soccer on ice and speed skating enjoy, I'll get my old tapes out of storage and watch hockey when it was a great sport, not the wussified thing it is now.

This is completely false

I don't want the game softer, all I am saying is that having Randell jump Gudas is not going to prevent him from cheap-shotting B's players or another team's down the road.

It's not a deterrent, period.

 

[Oates2Neely]

This is not an easy issue for me because I am an "old school" guy, but let me ask you something...did McIlrath's response to the hit on Vesey have any effect on Gudas?

The fact that he went out and delivered an equally questionable hit less than a week later on Czarnik should tell you all you need to know about how affective jumping a repeat offender like Gudas is in keeping him from doing it.

It's NOT about deterring Gudas from delivering future dirty hits, it's about your wounded teammate getting up in a daze but realizing his teammates had his back. That's a glue the helps hold teams together & want to battle for one another.

 

[NeelyDan]

How did it prevent a future occurrence? He went out and did it again a few days after D-Mac jumped him. I don't think it ever did, or ever will, prevent these hits from happening. Certain guys are just wired like that, and you need to make it not worthwhile for teams to employ them. That's the only way to get rid of guys like Gudas.

It didn't - that's my point. You're asking if it did, and no, it didn't - and I'm suggesting that's not the objective, nor was it ever.

 

[NeelyDan]

it's not about deterring gudas from delivering future dirty hits, it's about your wounded teammate getting up in a daze but realizing his teammates had his back. That's a glue the helps hold teams together & want to battle for one another.

yes.

 

[Fenian24]

This is completely false

I don't want the game softer, all I am saying is that having Randell jump Gudas is not going to prevent him from cheap-shotting B's players or another team's down the road.

It's not a deterrent, period.

Wasn't directed at you was more of a general statement on how much of this board seemingly feels

 

[GloryDaze4877]

It's NOT about deterring Gudas from delivering future dirty hits, it's about your wounded teammate getting up in a daze but realizing his teammates had his back. That's a glue the helps hold teams together & want to battle for one another.

A question for the people talking about "chemistry" on the team and how sticking up for teammates affects it one way or another. And I'm asking this honestly and not trolling. I would have liked to have seen a B's player at least try to get to Gudas after the hit on Czarnik, but it got me thinking.



On November 1st, 2008, the B's played a pretty famous game against Dallas where there was a bunch of fights. During one of these incidents, Marc Savard (who was not a fighter) jumped a Star's player after a questionable hit and a brawl ensued. I have no idea how popular Savard was in the room, but it was clear that he had his teammate's backs.



Fast forward to March 2010 when the very same Marc Savard that stuck up for his teammates was concussed on a dirty hit by Matt Cooke. There was literally no response, other than a shove by Michael Ryder. I distinctly remember a thread very similar to this one raging on for quite some time about what the lack of response meant.


The following season, a team made up of many of the same players on the team in March of 2010, won a Stanley Cup.


What should I take away from these events?


Was Savard not well-liked in the room? Is Czarnik not liked by teammtes? Is there no correlation between teammates "sticking up for one another" and winning?


What is the correct answer? Is there one?

 

[BklyNBruiN]

I don't know.

On one hand, Couturier responded to Backes' hit but did it help his team win?

On the other hand, I'm a big believer in the things that are hard to quantify. As a coach (who dreams about being 1/10th as good as these guys) I see it in the locker room and on the bench. I see how our team takes it personally when a player is hurt on a cheap shot. I see how it can deflate our team if we're getting pushed around. I also see how our players play with more courage and drive when we are the ones imposing our will and playing physical. The little guys have a little more jump and moxie. The big players are chirping and playing with swagger.

I read a study about the hardest sport in the world to play and sports like hockey and boxing were near the top. The reason wasn't because of the skill involved in skating and stick handling (though that is a big part of it), but the article talked more about the psychology of composure. Making plays in the face of physical harm. That the body has a very real reaction when you know you're about to get hit. Pulse quickens, emotions run high, it affects you cognitively. The players (and sports that required players) who can manage all that internal chaos AND STILL make plays got higher marks. I think I might have mentioned some of this in the thread about the value of hitting.

At any rate. I would have liked to see a response... Don't know if that's the old cave man in me or what. I also don't know how many wins it gives you, it's just a pride thing I guess. There will always be hitting in hockey and if there's hitting then there will always be late hits. Do you stand together or not?

Maybe it's enough, in this kindler, gentler, "enlightened" age that the players are vocal about it and respond by playing hard and winning a game. Even a meaningless one. It is practice for the regular season. You play how you practice. Do you want your team to start a fight after that happens in the regular season or do you want them to get angry and play harder? That's the way we have to teach it at the amateur level because A) we're coaching kids and we OBVIOUSLY can't/wouldn't ever encourage them to go out and hurt another kid and B) fighting = automatic suspension for players and coach. So you try to teach them to channel that anger towards playing harder. Doesn't always work, but I think that's the direction they want to go with all this.

Very very good post Playmakers.. I like what you said about seeing it for yourself on your team.. Everything you said was rite on..

 

[xStanleyCupsFor]

It's NOT about deterring Gudas from delivering future dirty hits, it's about your wounded teammate getting up in a daze but realizing his teammates had his back. That's a glue the helps hold teams together & want to battle for one another.

Bingo. Where did this "deterrent" stuff come from? You can't deter stupid.

 

[BklyNBruiN]

I don't know what there game plan was, and what Coach Julien wants out of his team when these situations happen, but again I wish that someone would of responded to that dirty azz hit! Anything would of been better than nothing.

I hope this isn't how we respond in the regular season to opposing teams going after our guys. Its going to happen again believe that..

 

[BklyNBruiN]

It's NOT about deterring Gudas from delivering future dirty hits, it's about your wounded teammate getting up in a daze but realizing his teammates had his back. That's a glue the helps hold teams together & want to battle for one another.

Correct Bingo! Exactly my point.. I am not going to argue with folks about it. It is what it is.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Correct Bingo! Exactly my point.. I am not going to argue with folks about it. It is what it is.

See post 138.

 

[BklyNBruiN]

This should always be the response. There is never an excuse where it shouldn't be. That's what teammates do then or later in the game.. I can easily see which people I'd hate to have on my team here.

Strange that this wouldn't be the first, natural reaction of some people.

Wow I just saw this.. Well said and thanks for the video which is what our response should of been against that Gudas/Cooke Prt 2.
Good for the Rangers.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Wow I just saw this.. Well said and thanks for the video which is what our response should of been against that Gudas/Cooke Prt 2.
Good for the Rangers.

I bet Gudas won't ever hit a Ranger again after that beatdown...lol.

 

[BklyNBruiN]

A question for the people talking about "chemistry" on the team and how sticking up for teammates affects it one way or another. And I'm asking this honestly and not trolling. I would have liked to have seen a B's player at least try to get to Gudas after the hit on Czarnik, but it got me thinking.



On November 1st, 2008, the B's played a pretty famous game against Dallas where there was a bunch of fights. During one of these incidents, Marc Savard (who was not a fighter) jumped a Star's player after a questionable hit and a brawl ensued. I have no idea how popular Savard was in the room, but it was clear that he had his teammate's backs.



Fast forward to March 2010 when the very same Marc Savard that stuck up for his teammates was concussed on a dirty hit by Matt Cooke. There was literally no response, other than a shove by Michael Ryder. I distinctly remember a thread very similar to this one raging on for quite some time about what the lack of response meant.


The following season, a team made up of many of the same players on the team in March of 2010, won a Stanley Cup.


What should I take away from these events?


Was Savard not well-liked in the room? Is Czarnik not liked by teammtes? Is there no correlation between teammates "sticking up for one another" and winning?


What is the correct answer? Is there one?

Sorry GloryDaze, I don't know what the answer is either GloryDaze. But I feel something should of been done, and maybe something was said, and we just don't know. I hope something was said to the Flyers team. For me the past is well the past, and with that our Bruins team should be a TEAM. Its about TEAM and I didn't see that when our kid was crawling on the ice.

Look at that video clip with the Flyers and Rangers and Gudas doing the same thing there, and they're response.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Sorry GloryDaze, I don't know what the answer is either GloryDaze. But I feel something should of been done, and maybe something was said, and we just don't know. I hope something was said to the Flyers team. For me the past is well, the past and with that our Bruins team should be a TEAM. Its about TEAM and I didn't see that when our kid was crawling on the ice.

Look at that video clip with the Flyers and Rangers and Gudas doing the same thing there, and they're response.

I saw the clip, and I don't think it will deter Gudas in the slightest.

I would have liked to have seen something from the B's, just not sure it would have meant anything?

 

[BruinDust]

Sorry GloryDaze, I don't know what the answer is either GloryDaze. But I feel something should of been done, and maybe something was said, and we just don't know. I hope something was said to the Flyers team. For me the past is well the past, and with that our Bruins team should be a TEAM. Its about TEAM and I didn't see that when our kid was crawling on the ice.

Look at that video clip with the Flyers and Rangers and Gudas doing the same thing there, and they're response.

Yes, but look at the Vesey hit.

Every player on the ice had their eyes locked on the play, as they puck was on Vesey's stick. They all saw the hit, clearly, and seen it was dirty.

Now go back to the Czarnik hit. It was late, the puck was no where in sight. How many Bruins actually "seen" the hit to be able to respond.

The Savard hit where only Ryder responded was much the same thing. All most of them seen was their teammate laid out, not what or who caused it.

Now that doesn't get them off the hook about confronting Gudas after he got out of the box. But it could explain why their wasn't an instinctual response when the whistle blew after the hit.

 

[BklyNBruiN]

I saw the clip, and I don't think it will deter Gudas in the slightest.

I would have liked to have seen something from the B's, just not sure it would have meant anything?

I think it means a lot, but would it change anything maybe not. But you can be sure that opposing players would think twice the next time if they know they're going to have to answer for it, compared to nothing happening at all.

I bet the next time the Flyers play our Bruins we will dress a Randell or someone like him.

 

[Dr Quincy]

A question for the people talking about "chemistry" on the team and how sticking up for teammates affects it one way or another. And I'm asking this honestly and not trolling. I would have liked to have seen a B's player at least try to get to Gudas after the hit on Czarnik, but it got me thinking.



On November 1st, 2008, the B's played a pretty famous game against Dallas where there was a bunch of fights. During one of these incidents, Marc Savard (who was not a fighter) jumped a Star's player after a questionable hit and a brawl ensued. I have no idea how popular Savard was in the room, but it was clear that he had his teammate's backs.



Fast forward to March 2010 when the very same Marc Savard that stuck up for his teammates was concussed on a dirty hit by Matt Cooke. There was literally no response, other than a shove by Michael Ryder. I distinctly remember a thread very similar to this one raging on for quite some time about what the lack of response meant.


The following season, a team made up of many of the same players on the team in March of 2010, won a Stanley Cup.


What should I take away from these events?

Was Savard not well-liked in the room? Is Czarnik not liked by teammtes? Is there no correlation between teammates "sticking up for one another" and winning?


What is the correct answer? Is there one?

Exactly. I'm not saying that someone SHOULDN'T go after Gudas. All I"m saying is that the handwringing about it is too much.

Even the proponents of it are now saying that it wouldn't stop anything in the future.

So then it's a case of "Building camaraderie". But then many who are saying that are not saying that the lack of response will result in fewer wins this season.

So ultimately, what does it accomplish? I get that many fans like to see it. "It's the way I want the game played and it's what I want to see when I watch." Which is perfectly fine as a fan. I totally get that. But this thread started with the (I think, I'd have to ask Colt) premise that this was bad for the team itself. And in the end I don't really think it has one iota of an impact on the season.

I go back to this summer with Brady and Garappolo. Felger and Mazz were making all kinds of comments about Brady shunning Jimmy G and refusing to look at him. Does that hurt the team's camaraderie? Maybe, but ultimately it didn't hurt Jimmy's play and it didn't hurt Brady's. I came to the realization that Tom Brady's job isn't to be a mentor or be a big brother to Jimmy. It's to shred opponents to death and lead this team to wins. If he's an A-Hole to Jimmy (not saying he is) then I really don't care. They are professionals and they have a job to do.

It has nothing to do with being a pacificst or wanting to watch soccer or ice skating. It's questioning what the value of it would be and if it's purely for aesthetics, then I really don't think it's a big deal.