Baggins Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 I guess a gold medal makes everything alright..Kieth was one of the most hated guys on CDC for the last year,,,I saw the play, looked intentional to me. Oh it was intentional. But there's a difference between intending to cause pain and intending to concuss a person. He did it in retaliation to Daniel's early hit on him in that shift where there was contact to his head. Did he actually intend to injure Daniel? I don't think so. Just as I believe Bertuzzi wanted to cause Moore pain as opposed to the actual result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
touchable Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Oh it was intentional. But there's a difference between intending to cause pain and intending to concuss a person. He did it in retaliation to Daniel's early hit on him in that shift where there was contact to his head. Did he actually intend to injure Daniel? I don't think so. Just as I believe Bertuzzi wanted to cause Moore pain as opposed to the actual result. That's the stupidest argument I've ever hurt. Pain comes from injuries. Keith wanted to cause Daniel a lot of pain. It's the exact same thing as saying he wanted to injure him. Are you saying he wanted to maybe just fracture his jaw, or break a few of his teeth, but not concuss him? You're just making excuses for an intentionally dirty play, it's ridiculous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 That's the stupidest argument I've ever hurt. Pain comes from injuries. Keith wanted to cause Daniel a lot of pain. It's the exact same thing as saying he wanted to injure him. Are you saying he wanted to maybe just fracture his jaw, or break a few of his teeth, but not concuss him? You're just making excuses for an intentionally dirty play, it's ridiculous. Does a person get injured on every hard hit? Does a hard hit hurt? You piss me off and I punch you in the arm and I cause you pain. I doubt I'll break your arm in the deal. If I did it certainly wasn't my intent. I'm not saying it wasn't intentional, or that it wasn't dirty. I'm saying I doubt he intended to concuss him. Just as I doubt Bertuzzi intended to break Moores neck. In both instances I believe the intent was to teach a lesson. In both cases it turned out worse than intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
touchable Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Does a person get injured on every hard hit? Does a hard hit hurt? You piss me off and I punch you in the arm and I cause you pain. I doubt I'll break your arm in the deal. If I did it certainly wasn't my intent. I'm not saying it wasn't intentional, or that it wasn't dirty. I'm saying I doubt he intended to concuss him. Just as I doubt Bertuzzi intended to break Moores neck. In both instances I believe the intent was to teach a lesson. In both cases it turned out worse than intended. So you agree that it was intentional, and that it was dirty. Given that, it's hard to argue that he wasn't intending to injure him. Players know that dirty hits to the head result in concussions. Maybe a bonehead like John Scott is too stupid to realize, but Keith is a smart man and a smart player and he knew exactly what he was doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 (edited) So you agree that it was intentional, and that it was dirty. Given that, it's hard to argue that he wasn't intending to injure him. Players know that dirty hits to the head result in concussions. Maybe a bonehead like John Scott is too stupid to realize, but Keith is a smart man and a smart player and he knew exactly what he was doing. You've obviously never played the sport before, He has less than a fraction of a second to make a decision, he didn’t take the time to say “hmm this is the perfect opportunity to hit Sedin up high and (hopefully) concuss him, with the potential of him never coming back as the same player” The puck was there, Daniel decided not to play the puck, by that time the pass was made to Daniel, Keith already made the decision that he was going to hit move up and hit Daniel. He got his arms up high to get a piece of him as Keith was going to be caught out of position if he missed him. Seriously people, you can’t over analyse every play on the ice. Players are taught not to think when they are on the ice, you let your instincts make your decisions. If it was truly his intension to hurt him then why didn’t he go into Daniel with a cross check in the face. Edited February 24, 2014 by ForsbergTheGreat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
touchable Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 You've obviously never played the sport before, He has less than a fraction of a second to make a decision, he didn’t take the time to say “hmm this is the perfect opportunity to hit Sedin up high and (hopefully) concuss him, with the potential of him never coming back as the same player” The puck was there, Daniel decided not to play the puck, by that time the pass was made to Daniel, Keith already made the decision that he was going to hit move up and hit Daniel. He got his arms up high to get a piece of him as Keith was going to be caught out of position if he missed him. Seriously people, you can’t over analyse every play on the ice. Players are taught not to think when they are on the ice, you let your instincts make your decisions. If it was truly his intension to hurt him then why didn’t he go into Daniel with a cross check in the face. I have played the sport before. Yes, I was taught to play with my instincts, but that never results in my elbowing someone in the head. Are you suggesting that Keith is instinctively a dirty player? Why didn't he go after him with a cross check? Because he thought he could get away with the elbow, that's why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Duncan Keith had far more time to pass up the opportunity to nail Daniel, than say Aaron Rome on Horton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 You've obviously never played the sport before, He has less than a fraction of a second to make a decision, he didn’t take the time to say “hmm this is the perfect opportunity to hit Sedin up high and (hopefully) concuss him, with the potential of him never coming back as the same player” The puck was there, Daniel decided not to play the puck, by that time the pass was made to Daniel, Keith already made the decision that he was going to hit move up and hit Daniel. He got his arms up high to get a piece of him as Keith was going to be caught out of position if he missed him. Seriously people, you can’t over analyse every play on the ice. Players are taught not to think when they are on the ice, you let your instincts make your decisions. If it was truly his intension to hurt him then why didn’t he go into Daniel with a cross check in the face. Your first paragraph is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 I have played the sport before. Yes, I was taught to play with my instincts, but that never results in my elbowing someone in the head. Are you suggesting that Keith is instinctively a dirty player? Why didn't he go after him with a cross check? Because he thought he could get away with the elbow, that's why. Sometimes anger does take over your emotions, a player just hit him and caused him pain, he wanted to return the favour. Was it his intensions of concussing Daniel? No. If you’ve played the game you should understand this. Think about when you were battling in front of the net with a D. They cross check and stick you to get you out of position. Sometimes you get a little bit frustrated and give the player a hard love tap back to “return the favour”. What happens if you hit his ankle in the right spot and break it. Was that your intentions? Are you instinctively a dirty player? As I’ve said, it was not his intentions of concussing Daniel, he wanted to get back at him and it resulted in Daniel being hurt. It wasn’t a thought out process where he his plans going into that shift with a sole target of removing Daniel from playing the remainder of the season. I guarantee if Keith had the opportunity to hit Daniel with a clean hit in open ice where he doesn’t get concussed, he’d take that over than what happened. Your first paragraph is ridiculous. Yep, Your completely right Duncan Keith went out on that shift with intention of knocking Daniel out for the remained of the season with a concision, just like Bertuzzi went out on the shift with intentions of breaking Steve Moores neck effectively altering his life. Heck why did Bert even come out the apology, that was his plan from the get go, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Sometimes anger does take over your emotions, a player just hit him and caused him pain, he wanted to return the favour. Was it his intensions of concussing Daniel? No. If you’ve played the game you should understand this. Think about when you were battling in front of the net with a D. They cross check and stick you to get you out of position. Sometimes you get a little bit frustrated and give the player a hard love tap back to “return the favour”. What happens if you hit his ankle in the right spot and break it. Was that your intentions? Are you instinctively a dirty player? As I’ve said, it was not his intentions of concussing Daniel, he wanted to get back at him and it resulted in Daniel being hurt. It wasn’t a thought out process where he his plans going into that shift with a sole target of removing Daniel from playing the remainder of the season. I guarantee if Keith had the opportunity to hit Daniel with a clean hit in open ice where he doesn’t get concussed, he’d take that over than what happened. Yep, Your completely right Duncan Keith went out on that shift with intention of knocking Daniel out for the remained of the season with a concision, just like Bertuzzi went out on the shift with intentions of breaking Steve Moores neck effectively altering his life. Heck why did Bert even come out the apology, that was his plan from the get go, obviously. I dont think anyone in the NHL would go out and intentionally concuss anyone like a hired hitman.... However, it's hard to argue that Keith is a bit irresponsible in the "dirty" play department. I agree that sports are instinctive when it comes to some hits tho.. I think a lot of the canucks fan are still bitter with that hit because they compare to what happened to Rome and his hit in the cup final... :/ one hit resulting in some meaningless games before the playoff, and another hit, which is far less serious than Keith's, result in the longest suspension in the cup final history.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 I dont think anyone in the NHL would go out and intentionally concuss anyone like a hired hitman.... However, it's hard to argue that Keith is a bit irresponsible in the "dirty" play department. I agree that sports are instinctive when it comes to some hits tho.. I think a lot of the canucks fan are still bitter with that hit because they compare to what happened to Rome and his hit in the cup final... :/ one hit resulting in some meaningless games before the playoff, and another hit, which is far less serious than Keith's, result in the longest suspension in the cup final history.. Agreed, i'm not trying to argue that it was a clean hit, just pointing out that players do make dumb mistakes and it wasn't his intenstion of what the end resulted in, so for people to still hold grudges, like not cheer for him in the olympics, or wish career ending injury, it is a bit childish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 it's just that keith has dirty plays so often that it's hard to argue that "dirty" is not his M.O. at this point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Some of Duncan Keith's finest work: This is an incredibly reckless player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Some of Duncan Keith's finest work: This is an incredibly reckless player. don't think a lot of people will argue that he's not a reckless player... but that's the style that earn him his pay cheques, and people will be complaining about him declining if he plays more safe... there will always be players in the league that will play reckless. The problem is not the players themselves, but it is the league that gives different treatments to reckless play on players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 no, the problems are the players themselves AND the league refusing to punish them because they are "big name" players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 no, the problems are the players themselves AND the league refusing to punish them because they are "big name" players. how is it the player's fault when all they want is to give their team the best chance to win at the cost of playing reckless? did the canucks fans ever complain about Torres being too aggressive on his hits? Did they complain about Kassian? Did they ever refuse to cheer for the canucks when Cooke play fo us? the players are not the problem... they are just doing their jobs... if the punishment is there, then it will change the way they play in order to get a win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 The players playing with reckless abandonment is putting everyone at risk, and they are the ones pushing the limits and causing these injuries in the first place. The responsibility lies on the players first, then it's the leagues responsibility for not punishing these acts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 The players playing with reckless abandonment is putting everyone at risk, and they are the ones pushing the limits and causing these injuries in the first place. The responsibility lies on the players first, then it's the leagues responsibility for not punishing these acts. but it's kinda a bad cycle.. there are so many people doing this in the league now that if your team would be in disadvantage if you dont do it. by no mean I approve what they are doing. I am just saying that they are just pushing the limit that the league gave them in order to win. It is the exactly the same reason why so many ppl complain about the canucks get push around in the playoffs. in a perfect world, everyone in the league would play with each other with respect... but we all know how the fans call the canucks "country club" when they do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Sometimes anger does take over your emotions, a player just hit him and caused him pain, he wanted to return the favour. Was it his intensions of concussing Daniel? No. If you’ve played the game you should understand this. Think about when you were battling in front of the net with a D. They cross check and stick you to get you out of position. Sometimes you get a little bit frustrated and give the player a hard love tap back to “return the favour”. What happens if you hit his ankle in the right spot and break it. Was that your intentions? Are you instinctively a dirty player? As I’ve said, it was not his intentions of concussing Daniel, he wanted to get back at him and it resulted in Daniel being hurt. It wasn’t a thought out process where he his plans going into that shift with a sole target of removing Daniel from playing the remainder of the season. I guarantee if Keith had the opportunity to hit Daniel with a clean hit in open ice where he doesn’t get concussed, he’d take that over than what happened. Yep, Your completely right Duncan Keith went out on that shift with intention of knocking Daniel out for the remained of the season with a concision, just like Bertuzzi went out on the shift with intentions of breaking Steve Moores neck effectively altering his life. Heck why did Bert even come out the apology, that was his plan from the get go, obviously. You dont have to even play sports to know what forceful contact directly to the head generally results in.Keith intended to headshot daniel, to hurt him. Otherwise he woukd have played the puck. Did he intend to cause brain injury? Maybe not, but hes experienced and smart enough to be aware of the potential for injury with a hit like that.To separate intent from result is naive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Yet if Keith was say traded to the Canucks, I doubt many of you would complain and/or leave and cheer for someone else. No player intends to take someone out long term. Yes, he intended to elbow him. This is an "emotional" game and tempers run high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now