Toggle sidebar

Why is Graves' slash on Lemieux in 92 defended so much?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
No, it wasn't nasty. It was a common play on the PK. Hit the gloves to get the player to drop his stick. Graves just happened to catch Mario where there was no padding. Mario had already had the reputation of being a diver, while Graves not yet cemented himself as the nicest player in the game yet. Mario was either back for Game 6, or the 1st game of the Conference Finals. However, you would have thought Graves attempted to murder Mario, given the reaction of Pens fans and media, (as well as Jiggs McDonald)
 
Crease said:
I forget. Did Graves ever have to answer the bell for that slash?
Click to expand...

Graves was suspended 4 games, which wound up being the rest of that series.

Not sure if he was confronted the following season - I think the Pens got the last laugh by knocking off the President's trophy winner's without their best player.
 
This sort of slashing was par for the course back in the '90s. Remember MacLean's slash on Sundstrom that broke his forearm in the 97 ECSF against the Devils? It was a retaliatory slash at the end of the game and MacLean wasn't even suspended because the league claimed that the on-ice cameras didn't capture it or some nonsense.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
I don't know if it's Deja Vu, but I may have asked this before. If I did, apologies I don't remember the responses.

So according to JD it was a "2 handed chop". I know that the league was different then but I still can't see any scenario it wasn't dirty. Instead you get Rangers fans ridicule the league for suspending him and even more ridiculous to me ridicule Lemieux on that play. The guy was out for the series, it's not like he was faking it. Why can't Rangers fans come to grips that a classy player and grade A human being may have had 1 dirty play and not make excuses? You'd think that everyone but Graves was at fault for that play. I'm not questioning what he meant to the franchise and what a grade A person he is, but I can't figure out how you can excuse that play. I'd say the same thing if Zuccarello, one of my favorite players now did the same to Crosby who I hate with a passion.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

First of all I nominate this for worst thread of the year.

Notwithstanding, in a vacuum I would agree with you that by todays standards it was a dirty play. However, what you refuse to acknowledge is that is how the game was played back then. If we use your standards we should go back and start calling S. Stevens a dirty player? By todays standards his check on Lindros would have been a multi game suspension (something about targeting the head area). The only reason Graves was suspended was because it was Maryooh he hit. Anyone else and its a non issue. BTW if you have time look up what Raymond Bourque had to say about it. Pretty accurately sums up what many thought at the time (outside of Pissburgh). Thats why most fans still cringe when that is brought up.
 
NGgator60 said:
You play to win the game and that includes doing what is necessary in order to ensure victory. If viciousness, brutality, physical intimidation, and even injury are needed to gain an advantage so be it. Is it "ok" to break an opponent's wrist in hockey? No, and the offending player will most likely be assessed a penalty and/or suspension, and I would agree that it amounts to a dirty play. That does not mean it was not a smart play and advantageous. There is a tradeoff and if the utility of taking the opposition's best player off of the ice for a series exceeds that of a 2-4 minute penalty and subsequent suspension, the choice is made.
Click to expand...

"You play to win the game" doesn't justify breaking a guy's wrist or worse take out a guy's knee. I don't understand why otherwise normal well adjusted people turn into savages because of a hockey game (I'm talking about fans more so than players).
 
JerseyRangers said:
First of all I nominate this for worst thread of the year.

Notwithstanding, in a vacuum I would agree with you that by todays standards it was a dirty play. However, what you refuse to acknowledge is that is how the game was played back then. If we use your standards we should go back and start calling S. Stevens a dirty player? By todays standards his check on Lindros would have been a multi game suspension (something about targeting the head area). The only reason Graves was suspended was because it was Maryooh he hit. Anyone else and its a non issue. BTW if you have time look up what Raymond Bourque had to say about it. Pretty accurately sums up what many thought at the time (outside of Pissburgh). Thats why most fans still cringe when that is brought up.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure by what standards is hitting a guy's wrist with a stick not a dirty thing to do. Once again, maybe if he stole your wallet or something. And it's the worst thread because I dare question Graves and think "well everyone else was doing it" doesn't exonerate him? :shakehead
 
It was definitely a normal part of the game at the time. That being said, if the Penguins lose that series, Graves becomes to their fans what Denis Potvin is to us.
 
When I met Graves a few years back I asked him about that slash. He basically said he thought Lemieux was faking it and told him to get up. It was only until after the game when his dad spoke to him and told him that he really hurt Lemieux that he started to realize that it was more than just a friendly chop. That's the jist of it anyway.

That 'slash' is what you would call a love-tap back then. I loved those wars as a kid, the personal battles, the game within the game, behind the play antics- remember there was only one ref.

Our very own Ulf Samuelsson perfected the art of pushing a players helmet over his eyes during puck battles along the boards. Much more personality and a more colorful league. Divisional games were guaranteed to be entertaining even if the Rangers got blown out, because you know there will be messages sent in the 3rd period.

Ahh I'm only 28 but I feel like an old man reading these boards.
 
The Penguins got Graves suspended for the rest of the series and were promised to have a lottery rigged 13 years later.

Let's get over it.
 
Captain Monglobster said:
When I met Graves a few years back I asked him about that slash. He basically said he thought Lemieux was faking it and told him to get up. It was only until after the game when his dad spoke to him and told him that he really hurt Lemieux that he started to realize that it was more than just a friendly chop. That's the jist of it anyway.

That 'slash' is what you would call a love-tap back then. I loved those wars as a kid, the personal battles, the game within the game, behind the play antics- remember there was only one ref.

Our very own Ulf Samuelsson perfected the art of pushing a players helmet over his eyes during puck battles along the boards. Much more personality and a more colorful league. Divisional games were guaranteed to be entertaining even if the Rangers got blown out, because you know there will be messages sent in the 3rd period.

Ahh I'm only 28 but I feel like an old man reading these boards.
Click to expand...

I'm 27 but I didn't start following hockey until 2000.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
I'm 27 but I didn't start following hockey until 2000.
Click to expand...

That makes sense try to check out some games from the 90s if you haven't already to see how the game was different. I wish I was alive to see the games in the 60s and 70s. Obviously after the 2004 lockout the game was changed completely.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
I'm not sure by what standards is hitting a guy's wrist with a stick not a dirty thing to do. Once again, maybe if he stole your wallet or something. And it's the worst thread because I dare question Graves and think "well everyone else was doing it" doesn't exonerate him? :shakehead
Click to expand...

Please, even today guys constantly wack each other with sticks to dislodge the puck. TIme and time again the stick blade makes contact with forearms, elbows, and wrists. Twenty years ago it was even worse.

Taken in the context of play in the 80's this was acceptable, dirty or not. If it makes you feel better to call it a dirty play so be it. Twenty years ago players hit other players up high and were admired for it. Today its called a dirty hit. Don't bring it into todays world and pretend you are shocked about it.

As to the theard; isn't it kinda like me starting a thread about how the Steven's hit on Lindros was dirty. Main point of contact was the head and today he would be suspended. Back then it was a great hit. See my point????
 
The cap--50 player limit of contracts any team can have cuts the ability of a team to absorb a major player loss. Hard as it is to make trades these days the players move around a lot through free agency. There's much more $ involved and a business ethos for all the actors involved in a contract including the players. There's less IMO of players sticking up for their teammates because of that.

The Rangers of the 90's were an extremely talented team and a very tough one. Graves more than any other Rangers player IMO epitomized what it was to be a Ranger. He always had his teammates backs. The slash to Lemieux was hardly an unusual play for the day. Everybody whacked each other all the time. It's surprising that no one's even mentioned the regular business of defensemen crosschecking the **** out of any opposition player crashing their crease. Players would be flattened all night long without a referee raising his hand.

Lemieux was a great hockey player but unless you're a Penguin fan he was a hard person for any die hard fan of any other team to like. The casual fans sure. People ***** about Crosby whining all the time. Lemieux was 5 X worse. He was a very big player but had a habit of falling to the ice as if he was shot dead and it's no wonder that Graves thought he was faking it. His off ice demeanor IMO was terrible--this aristocratic self-centered--'I'm bigger than the game' persona. Didn't like him then--don't like him now and I'm pretty damn sure I'm never going to like the ****er.
 
Eco you are correct Mario was impossible to like outside of Pitts..He might have started whining in the league...He went down like he was shot if you bumped him...He was a prima donna with a world of talent and a trunk full of arrogance
 
Ah, classic Mario. After this incident he went on a tirade to the press and called the NHL a glorified minor league and threatened to retire - same crap he always pulled when he got mad, even as an owner during the Islanders incident.

Along with Richter's 70-foot goal allowed to Ron Francis in the same series, this incident became another legendary part of the 54-year curse. As has been said, the play itself was common for the era. Chopping a guy on the gloves - sometimes repeatedly- was an accepted defensive play. Sometimes you missed and hit a guy's wrist, and a slashing penalty may or may not have been called. NHL playoff series back then were also total wars of attrition. It was accepted that you wore down the other side through any means possible and you had to absolutely kill someone for a penalty to be called. What are called "late hits" today were known as "finishing your checks" back then and were one of the marks of a good player. Slewfoots were a good way to win a board battle. Dirty stickwork behind the play was common (only one ref, so if his back was turned to you then all bets were off). By the time two teams got to the finals, they were both made up of walking hospital beds.

Objectivity on this matter is also affected because Mario and the Pens of the 90's had much the same perception as Crosby and the Pens have today: a privileged organization led by a whining Prima donna who does not want to play by the same rules as the rest of us. Many here might be too young to remember, but for much of Mario's career he was a complete brat. He refused to even go on stage when the Pens drafted him, he chain smoked, had to be forced to exercise, was lazy in practice, constantly chirped the refs, repeatedly criticized the NHL in the papers, and on top of all that he was being force-fed down everyone's throat as the greatest thing to happen to hockey since the Zamboni was invented.

One of my favorite Lemieux moments was when he burst out of the penalty box with the intention of attacking Kerry Fraser over a two-minute minor for butt-ending a guy in the face. Did he get suspended? Nope. He was fined $500 and told not to do it again. He then went off in the papers saying he was fed up with the league and would no longer promote it. The funny thing is, Mario's constant tantrums and complaints directly led to the discussions that ushered in the changes you see in the NHL today.
 
eco's bones said:
I remember hearing that Lemieux took all the padding out of his gloves for greater flexibility.
Click to expand...
He did. And then flopped. And then was miraculously just fine the next shift. And had it not been Maryo, that call does not get made as plays like that happened every other shift back then.
 
jas said:
Mario was either back for Game 6, or the 1st game of the Conference Finals.
Click to expand...
Did she miss the rest of the game? I could have sworn not. But that was a while ago and memory could be faulty.
 
All that slash did was prove how deep the Pens were and how the Rangers weren't there yet.

Graves scored the opening goal IIRC of Game 3 in Pittsburgh. Salt to the wound.

It wasn't a dirty play. It was a slash no different than the hundreds of slashes or stickwork in games back then.

He caught Mario in a perfect spot. **** happens.
 
1. 20-25 years ago waving a stick at a guy's hands was part of penalty killing. Catching a guy on the hands/wrists happened all the time with a 2 minute slashing penalty as the result. It was not a dirty play in any form back then. I realize today with the titanium steel equipment making blocking shots a normal part of the game, actual attempts as harassing point men are long gone remnants of the game.

2. I don't think Mario's wrist was anywhere near broken. It may have been swollen, bruised, and may have caused him to miss a game. I think the Penguins took a chance thinking that they'd trade Lemieux for Graves as the Rangers couldn't easily replace Graves on the 1L LW, while the Penguins could manage without the whining faker as they had during parts of the season. And, if the series went 7, Mario could pull his "Willis Reed". Don't forget, he played in Game 1 of the next series less than a week and a half from the incident and scored two goals. If his wrist was broken, he wouldn't have been able to play.
 
NCRanger said:
1. 20-25 years ago waving a stick at a guy's hands was part of penalty killing. Catching a guy on the hands/wrists happened all the time with a 2 minute slashing penalty as the result. It was not a dirty play in any form back then. I realize today with the titanium steel equipment making blocking shots a normal part of the game, actual attempts as harassing point men are long gone remnants of the game.

2. I don't think Mario's wrist was anywhere near broken. It may have been swollen, bruised, and may have caused him to miss a game. I think the Penguins took a chance thinking that they'd trade Lemieux for Graves as the Rangers couldn't easily replace Graves on the 1L LW, while the Penguins could manage without the whining faker as they had during parts of the season. And, if the series went 7, Mario could pull his "Willis Reed". Don't forget, he played in Game 1 of the next series less than a week and a half from the incident and scored two goals. If his wrist was broken, he wouldn't have been able to play.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely none percent chance that's true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom