(Report) NHL spoke to the Canucks about Gudbranson threatening Martin

[Hairy Kneel]

On 11/9/2016 at 10:56 PM, Twilight Sparkle said:

print on coasters :3

 

Are we launching a product boycott at home games?

[aqua59]

On 11/9/2016 at 1:07 PM, PhillipBlunt said:

Report: NHL spoke to Canucks about Gudbranson threatening Martin

by Sean O'Leary 19h ago

 

 

John E. Sokolowski / USA TODAY Sports

Erik Gudbranson's threat toward Matt Martin reportedly caught the attention of the NHL.

Following a chippy 6-3 loss to the Toronto Maple Leafs on Saturday, the Vancouver Canucks blue-liner said Martin's "f-----g dead."

NHL executive Colin Campbell reportedly spoke to Canucks general manager Jim Benning, saying Gudbranson better stay in line when the two clubs meet again Dec. 3 or he'll face "harsh repercussions," according to TSN's Darren Dreger.

Dreger reports the issue isn't on the league's front burner, but it takes a "threat of that magnitude" very seriously.

The Canucks and Leafs combined for 171 penalty minutes in the contest, including 10 for Gudbranson and 19 for Martin.

 

Kadri nearly concusses Daniel Sedin, and Matt Martin attacks Troy Stecher...........nothing.

Gudbranson makes an offhand comment regarding meting out some in game justice...........Colin Campbell slithers up and takes notice.

 

I wonder when the NHL is going to stay in line?

[ice orca]

6 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Are we launching a product boycott at home games?

All the beer snobs hate bud until there is no other beer around and slam it back like there is no tomorrow...kind of like not talking about that slumpbuster you banged years ago.

[-DLC-]

16 hours ago, coastal1 said:

You make many good points but you totally downplay what he did. It was  a lot more than a tug of the jersey and a punch.

Warning:  this will be long.

 

You are absoutely right...that bolded part is important.  But don't just go back to that moment (and after).  That's hardly fair or complete.  In a situation where someone's been hurt, you look at how it ALL played out to get answers.  It's why  we investigate car crashes rather than simply awarding victims.  Even in assaults, there are witnesses and statements and an overall big picture look at things.  And Steve Moore wasn't the only one injured here....but we've chosen to dissect things and extract that part.  Because the rest can be neatly rolled into the game.  But why?  

When some hot shot rookie is trying to make a name for himself and TARGETS someone as part of that, it sets the stage for follow up.  And the league's responsibility in that was to send a strong message, but they failed to.  Instead, they sold tickets fueled on emotion and the very payback/rivalry that would ensue.  But they didn't count on a twist of fate that had a (blindside) punch result in injury.  But hey....blindside HITS are ok?   Like that somehow addresses things and will eliminate further risk.   (They still haven't .... which is why Kadri is building momentum).

Let me break it down for you. 

In a game where rookie brainiac Steve Moore is trying to establish himself, there is a loose puck in front of him.  The goal in the game is to:  GET THE PUCK AND SCORE.  He had a chance to go for a puck....what he should be trying to do.  But he isn't focused on the puck....he is going to blindside someone....lines him up.   That's only, really. supposed to be part of getting the puck or protecting the puck.  He wasn't one bit interested in it from what we can see in these pictures.  

He bindsides Nazzy and rendered a concussion and a hospital stay.    But that kind of blindsiding is ok...it was then and it continues to be.  But should it?   If we truly are attempting to ensure player safety?   Or is that just a banner that we wave?

So this one is ok....because blindside HITS that take a guy's head off are acceptable.  No monster here.  No big bad Steve Moore.  Even though he didn't really try to get a puck and score...the name of the game....he had other ideas.  And blindsided a guy and hurt him. 

FTR:  before that blindside hit, Nazzy'd averaged 43 goals in the previous 3 seasons.  After that hit:  27.

A year before that he was a +24 player...the year following this blindside hit?  -19  (literally).


So let's put all the big bad players who dole out blindside hits/punches in the same category.  Not just one guy, because his "victim" didn't fare "as well" as others.

As much as some focused on BIG BAD BERT, he was an angry guy in an angry game (Kurt Sauer ring a bell?) who blindside punched someone who had blindside smashed someone else.....someone he cared about.  His friend and teammate.  No excuses...but he's but one of the BIG BADS in this story. 

 

The innocent Avs put goons out there...could have ended ugly on many fronts.  And....did.  And the league STILL is giving a green light to blindside head hunts.  The settlement sought and awarded to Moore isn't the end of the story, it's only part of it.   There's a before and....unfortunately, an after.

 

It started here....with a puck up for grabs that Steve Moore seemingly had NO interest in.  The game is all about getting the puck, isn't it? 

 

This one, in particular.  Come on Steve, reach out and snag that puck.  No?  (Hint:  Steve doesn't really want the puck...he wants a piece of our Captain)

 

A "hockey play" would be to grab that puck and go.  But....no.

 

 

IT'S RIGHT THERE, STEVIE....GET THAT PUCK AND SCORE LIKE THE SUPERSTAR YOU'D BE PAID OUT AS.

 

No?

 

 

Hey Steve....why are you letting the puck float past and launching yourself away from it?  GET THAT PUCK

 

Nazem...you taking notes? 

 

 

Oh.

 

That's why.   You weren't ever going for the puck.

But that's ok...it's part of the game.   A "hockey play", even though hockey is all about the puck.  And Steve didn't seem interested (at all) in the puck.  I don't think it was a hockey play at all...I think it was dirty and should have been addressed as such.

 

 

 

And we all were supposed to live happily ever after.

[chon derry]

if a martin/gudbranson fight doesn't happen because of Dops warning ,oh well . personally id like the team to come out hitting hard ,every game !   revenge against the leafs can only come playing within the rules. Dops deliberately failed to suspend kadri ,subsequently followed up with a warning to gudbranson, setting up an expectation from everyone that the canucks should come out dirty , they can't ,they have to beat them on the board i believe  Dops message was to the canucks team as a whole, with Dops full knowledge of the leafs only having martin as any kind of deterrent , if martin instigates then guddy has no worrys about suspension , the focus should be against these 2 guys if any other situation that may arise with ANY leaf then you do it . Dops knows that the leafs are just wimps ,and their doing their best at showing their true bias. when you look at some of the leaf players it is easier to understand Dops concern LOL

[-DLC-]

I like (most of) Yahoo Sports' take on things....

 

Quote

3. The Kadri non-suspension

I give the Department of Player Safety a lot of stick on here, but this was a call they pretty obviously got right.

Nazem Kadri hit Daniel Sedin in the head, absolutely. But he clearly made contact with the shoulder first before exploding up and into Sedin’s noggin. And by the NHL’s rules, that’s not a suspendable play.

However, there are those who have beef with the fact that any head contact like that in the first place, myself included. It shouldn’t be allowed. This isn’t a “get checking out of the game” thing, it’s a “don’t sit idly by while guys get concussed” thing. If a player makes contact with another player’s head on an east-west hit like that, it should be suspendable. Not to say it would be in all cases, or should be. But it should at least be written into the rulebook that this is a thing for which you can be suspended. I would have liked to see Kadri suspended for that hit because while he didn’t pick the head, he came as close as he could without going over the line.

It’s impossible to read intent, etc. etc., but the league should always be on the lookout for ways to protect its players, and this would be a good place to start.

The league gives tidy explanations but I think they need to factor in targeted head hunting (not in relation to where someone is hit but more in how they are honed in on and targeted from across the ice).  That was the case in Kadri and Moore's hit....had nothing to do with the puck.  Was directed solely at taking a guy out and unrelated to possession or protection of the puck.   So to allow these punks to run players like this and then "excuse" it because?  Massive failure to address concussions and head injury OR the aftermath that ensues when there is unresolved, unaddressed "stuff".  Boils over....you don't warn your full pot as it hits a rolling boil, you turn down the temperature.  Warning a team doesn't do that....hearing them and getting to the root of a problem does.

And it seems rather biased and unfair to warn ONE side?  Ha, cute.


(Who do they call to weigh in on decisions again?    Oh yeah, Toronto...surprise!!)

[EdgarM]

1 hour ago, debluvscanucks said:

Warning:  this will be long.

 

You are absoutely right...that bolded part is important.  But don't just go back to that moment (and after).  That's hardly fair or complete.  In a situation where someone's been hurt, you look at how it ALL played out to get answers.  It's why  we investigate car crashes rather than simply awarding victims.  Even in assaults, there are witnesses and statements and an overall big picture look at things.  And Steve Moore wasn't the only one injured here....but we've chosen to dissect things and extract that part.  Because the rest can be neatly rolled into the game.  But why?  

When some hot shot rookie is trying to make a name for himself and TARGETS someone as part of that, it sets the stage for follow up.  And the league's responsibility in that was to send a strong message, but they failed to.  Instead, they sold tickets fueled on emotion and the very payback/rivalry that would ensue.  But they didn't count on a twist of fate that had a (blindside) punch result in injury.  But hey....blindside HITS are ok?   Like that somehow addresses things and will eliminate further risk.   (They still haven't .... which is why Kadri is building momentum).

Let me break it down for you. 

In a game where rookie brainiac Steve Moore is trying to establish himself, there is a loose puck in front of him.  The goal in the game is to:  GET THE PUCK AND SCORE.  He had a chance to go for a puck....what he should be trying to do.  But he isn't focused on the puck....he is going to blindside someone....lines him up.   That's only, really. supposed to be part of getting the puck or protecting the puck.  He wasn't one bit interested in it from what we can see in these pictures.  

He bindsides Nazzy and rendered a concussion and a hospital stay.    But that kind of blindsiding is ok...it was then and it continues to be.  But should it?   If we truly are attempting to ensure player safety?   Or is that just a banner that we wave?

So this one is ok....because blindside HITS that take a guy's head off are acceptable.  No monster here.  No big bad Steve Moore.  Even though he didn't really try to get a puck and score...the name of the game....he had other ideas.  And blindsided a guy and hurt him. 

FTR:  before that blindside hit, Nazzy'd averaged 43 goals in the previous 3 seasons.  After that hit:  27.

A year before that he was a +24 player...the year following this blindside hit?  -19  (literally).


So let's put all the big bad players who dole out blindside hits/punches in the same category.  Not just one guy, because his "victim" didn't fare "as well" as others.

As much as some focused on BIG BAD BERT, he was an angry guy in an angry game (Kurt Sauer ring a bell?) who blindside punched someone who had blindside smashed someone else.....someone he cared about.  His friend and teammate.  No excuses...but he's but one of the BIG BADS in this story. 

 

The innocent Avs put goons out there...could have ended ugly on many fronts.  And....did.  And the league STILL is giving a green light to blindside head hunts.  The settlement sought and awarded to Moore isn't the end of the story, it's only part of it.   There's a before and....unfortunately, an after.

 

It started here....with a puck up for grabs that Steve Moore seemingly had NO interest in.  The game is all about getting the puck, isn't it? 

 

This one, in particular.  Come on Steve, reach out and snag that puck.  No?  (Hint:  Steve doesn't really want the puck...he wants a piece of our Captain)

 

A "hockey play" would be to grab that puck and go.  But....no.

 

 

IT'S RIGHT THERE, STEVIE....GET THAT PUCK AND SCORE LIKE THE SUPERSTAR YOU'D BE PAID OUT AS.

 

No?

 

 

Hey Steve....why are you launching yourself away from the puck?  Nazem...taking notes? 

 

 

Oh.

 

That's why.

But it's ok...this is part of the game. 

 

 

 

And we all were supposed to live happily ever after.

 

Very good description Deb. People seem to forget about this when  talking about the Bertuzzi incident. The problem stems from two different standards in the NHL. We see an infraction and we can summize from seeing similar incidents that a certain punishment will ensue. The problem is that the league has favorites for whatever reason(probably $) to sway the judgements one way or another. Take Duncan Keiths assault on Daniel and his punishment ensured he was still available for the playoffs. Did Bertuzzi get that same consideration? I remember edler getting suspended for hitting whats his name from San Jose. The excuse was that although he hit his shoulder first the players helmet did come off and so it was a hit to the head. Daniels helmet came off didn't it? Didn't Kadri leave his feet, remember that used to part of the explanation too. Did they use that for Kadri? How about the explanation that if a player was being blind sided and could not see the player coming. Was that excuse used on Kadri? Again a big fat NO!!!

I am cool with the Canucks getting whatever infraction they deserve but it has to be CONSISTANT with every team in the league and every other similar incident before that. Apparently the repeat offender has no bearing either and we can go on and on with this but it is useless.

Lets see a couple of TO players take a couple of blind sided hits come December 3rd and watch the suspensions get handed out like candy on Halloween.

[CanadianRugby]

2 hours ago, chon derry said:

personally id like the team to come out hitting hard ,every game !  

Same.  But I don't think they have the players to do it.  As far as hitting goes almost all our forwards are soft.  If you don't have skill you have to have physicality.  Canucks don't have either. 

[chon derry]

18 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

Same.  But I don't think they have the players to do it.  As far as hitting goes almost all our forwards are soft.  If you don't have skill you have to have physicality.  Canucks don't have either. 

your not wrong ,but comparable to the leafs we are .or at least have more potential to be physical, if only for this particular game. 

[SilentSam]

3 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

I like (most of) Yahoo Sports' take on things....

 

The league gives tidy explanations but I think they need to factor in targeted head hunting (not in relation to where someone is hit but more in how they are honed in on and targeted from across the ice).  That was the case in Kadri and Moore's hit....had nothing to do with the puck.  Was directed solely at taking a guy out and unrelated to possession or protection of the puck.   So to allow these punks to run players like this and then "excuse" it because?  Massive failure to address concussions and head injury OR the aftermath that ensues when there is unresolved, unaddressed "stuff".  Boils over....you don't warn your full pot as it hits a rolling boil, you turn down the temperature.  Warning a team doesn't do that....hearing them and getting to the root of a problem does.

And it seems rather biased and unfair to warn ONE side?  Ha, cute.


(Who do they call to weigh in on decisions again?    Oh yeah, Toronto...surprise!!)

 

This is where the league has failed players, and the league will stand to pay for it, in a court of law.

 

They walk the line of ignorance with intent.   It is the difference of being "active" to stop concussions,. Which they are, they are active and have a system to check and monitor symptoms after the fact.

They also have a DOPS to watch and discipline those that break their "rules".

 

..But neither of these systems are "Pro-Active",.  

Pro-Active would be getting those plays which are extreme, out of the game, and quite possibly those players that make those plays out of the game at this level as well.

This is not about what is, or isn't "legal contact", it is about the play..  and every player needs to understand what the NHL means by "player conduct" at the moment of making the decision to make a hit like that of Moore on Naslund (and others more recent)..

Not a "players conduct" after the fact of an incident like it, death threats, etc.

This is where the NHL has failed for years, they are ignorant of correcting it, and by doing so, the League will pay.

[darkpoet]

19 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

Just speakin' his language...seems fair enough. 

 

This league is so dysfunctional.  A headhunting repeat offender punk walks but let's focus/warn someone else.  Sure, that'll fix things. 

 

This dirtbag'll get his.  And it'll be worth the suspension the league will dole after the fact.  They owed it to everyone to act sooner, but still have their heads in the sand.  Or, elsewhere.

 

The worst part is, if the Leafs actually end up being a decent team this year (or very soon) this little turd is going to be even more emboldened.

He's like Matt Cooke... but since he plays for the Leafs he gets a pass, apparently. 

pathetic.

I've played with guys like this. They're usually hopped up on Suddies or something and can just snap on a whim. Often not liked even by their own teammates (i'm sure some of you know what I'm talking about).

 

[riffraff]

24 minutes ago, darkpoet said:

The worst part is, if the Leafs actually end up being a decent team this year (or very soon) this little turd is going to be even more emboldened.

He's like Matt Cooke... but since he plays for the Leafs he gets a pass, apparently. 

pathetic.

I've played with guys like this. They're usually hopped up on Suddies or something and can just snap on a whim. Often not liked even by their own teammates (i'm sure some of you know what I'm talking about).

 

 

 

 

 

Lol absolutely.  Had a team mate once like this but a hypochondriac over reactor as well.  One game he fell over clutching his wrist and play went on for

minutes, even the refs more or less ignoring him.  I finally skated over and he actually legit had a very badly broken and misshapen wrist.

[darkpoet]

5 minutes ago, riffraff said:

Lol absolutely.  Had a team mate once like this but a hypochondriac over reactor as well.  One game he fell over clutching his wrist and play went on for

minutes, even the refs more or less ignoring him.  I finally skated over and he actually legit had a very badly broken and misshapen wrist.

Man, you had a double helping from that dude. One is enough, I can't imagine being force-fed seconds, lol

 

[Hairy Kneel]

I have no problem with the leafs being ahead of us Heck they got top picks up the wazoo, Matthews Marner and Nylander has the room now (not the focus) to develop and is doing better.

What I do have a problem with is our lack of response to this new chippier league. Why were we so late to add Tryamkin?Why keep Larsen in there when we all saw Stecher do a better (physical too) job. 

Chaput took us a bit to find but is fast and hits. LaBate is fast and hits. 

I would love to see Baers sit for a game if he's not going to score and have LaBate in to bodycheck. A player like LaBate needs to come in if a winger is underperforming ie Baers Burr and Granlund DON"T SCORE THAN SIT and let a bodychecker fill your spot for a game.

I love Biega but he needs to be in Utica playing and helping we could use his spot to keep another PTO or whatever.

#hateteamtoosoft

[NewbieCanuckFan]

meh, Guds was smart enough not to yap those comments in front of a camera.  Kadri wasn't so smart when he did that throat gesture.

 

 

[PhillipBlunt]

8 hours ago, chon derry said:

if a martin/gudbranson fight doesn't happen because of Dops warning ,oh well . personally id like the team to come out hitting hard ,every game !   revenge against the leafs can only come playing within the rules. Dops deliberately failed to suspend kadri ,subsequently followed up with a warning to gudbranson, setting up an expectation from everyone that the canucks should come out dirty , they can't ,they have to beat them on the board i believe  Dops message was to the canucks team as a whole, with Dops full knowledge of the leafs only having martin as any kind of deterrent , if martin instigates then guddy has no worrys about suspension , the focus should be against these 2 guys if any other situation that may arise with ANY leaf then you do it . Dops knows that the leafs are just wimps ,and their doing their best at showing their true bias. when you look at some of the leaf players it is easier to understand Dops concern LOL

They look pretty good for making it all the way to Mordor and back. 

[Alflives]

Just now, PhillipBlunt said:

They look pretty good for making all the way to Mordor and back. 

Nylander looks like a boy who likes holding pockets  could he be more pretty? 

[PhillipBlunt]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Nylander looks like a boy who likes holding pockets  could he be more pretty? 

I think he might be wearing lip gloss in that picture. 

[TimberWolf]

8 hours ago, chon derry said:

 

 

 

Is it just me or does he look like Mary Lou Retton?

[PhillipBlunt]

2 minutes ago, TimberWolf said:

 

Is it just me or does he look like Mary Lou Retton?

Meg Ryan.