Bodee Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Rome's hit on Horton was LATE and ill timed. It even looked late in real time let alone slowed down. (even worse then obviously) It WASN'T a play that was born out of good defence or good solid hockey. It was a play (hit) that occurred because Rome overcommitted to laying the body on Horton and standing him up at the blue line, (one track mind) instead of realizing that Horton could very well pass off, go around Rome, and receive a return pass (give and go) once he saw Rome heading towards him. Once Rome realized what was happening, (obviously too late) he had two choices. Look like the goat he was and possibly give Horton a semi breakaway by not hitting him, or "take him out" as he did and run the risk of a penalty or worse. Players aren't stupid. Especially the elite ones. Horton and just about everybody on Boston (and most likely Vancouver for that matter) knew that Rome's hit on Horton was an attempt by Rome to save his ass when he overcommitted. At the very least it was interference, and the very most it was blatant, stupid, late, and chicken crap. He got what he deserved with the suspension and AV got what he deserved for playing the bozo in the first place. No cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperReverb2 Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 I totally agree with much of this It has been an aspect of our play in the two subsequent playoffs HITTING FO HITTING'S SAKE and it has cost us dearly in penalties and players drawn out of position. Anyone who doubts it should look at the Sharks playoff series. It is not smart play and if anything is just to curry favour with a certain type of fan. I felt sorry for Rome in two respects though. Firstly he saw it as a way to give Boston some payback for the pounding we were taking and secondly I guarantee Boston would not have received the same sanction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 At the very least it was interference, and the very most it was blatant, stupid, late, and chicken crap. He got what he deserved with the suspension and AV got what he deserved for playing the bozo in the first place. No cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Rome was playing at the top of his game as a Canuck and was an integral part of the D corps at that time. When Bieksa was injured with that two-handed Peverly slash was there supplemental discipline? There was no call.No penalty. No discipline. Why did the NHL not review that two-handed axe swing after the game if they fairly administer discipline? What about Eddy receiving a slash brutal enough to break multiple fingers in game six? What about Raymond with having his back broken ? I guess that is not even worth a game in this league. But a D man stands up a Bruin at the blue line and he gets the longest suspension in Stanley Cup Finals history and because he is a Canuck we are supposed to sit down ,shut up and accept it as being fair or equitable ? Smoke seeping uncontrollably from the NHL Discipline (Department of Player Safety) Dept. and some posters orifices in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Doctor Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Why we kept Alberts and not Rome is a mystery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthMelvin Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 No Rome actually started to play with emotion late in his tenure with the Nux..a little to late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqua59 Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Aaron Rome was a great defenseman for the Canucks. He delivered punishing hits, sound defense, and no one can forget his goal scoring streak he went on, where everyone was starting to nominate him for the all star game! He is the big, 3rd pairing LH defenseman the Canucks are lacking. He can shut down the other team's lines quite easily. He was very underrated by Canucks fans but he brought a lot to the team, and I could see him being a very good player under Tortorella. Check out the PPG stat. He was ahead of the likes of Brian Campbell, Kris Letang, Alex Edler and Erik Karlsson, your Norris winner from a year ago. I just posted this thread to say, I truly miss you Rome. You're one of my favourite defensemen in the league and I thank you for your service to the Canucks organization. Videos of Rome: I miss you Romesy! The players agree too: I shed a tear to this day that you're not with the team :'(. I'll always love you Romesy. Go get em' kid. "Better to have lost and loved than never to have loved at all."– Ernest Hemingway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Have you been listening? The spot will be taken buy a young player, a player that needs to be developed from with in their own system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt kilgore Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 I never said anything about the severity of the suspension did I? The hit was late. He didn't make a move towards Horton until well after the pass was made. It was a cheap shot with a player in a vulnerable position. Horton "admiring his pass" doesn't justify it. As far as the severity of the suspension, I can understand it. I don't necessarily agree with it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 .07 seconds is "well after"? A "cheap shot"? History being rewritten here. Murphy said at the time: http://www.cbc.ca/sp...nucks-rome.html "This is just an interference penalty, an interference hit. If it was immediate after he released the puck, it would be a legal hit. We have them all the time." It was a "north-south" hockey play carried out a split second late. A hockey play like that was routine almost for players like Scott Stevens a few years back. What is unbelievable is how it went from nothing to 4 SCF games in that time period. And now I suspect its back to something in between. That ruling was a one-off meant to hurt the Canucks chances. No other way to look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Bieksa's MCL, Edler's hand and broken fingers,Raymond's broken back and Alberts undisclosed injury that all followed the Rome hit say hello to Mr. HHOF Shanahan and the owners,specifically US owners. The Rome suspension is all about hypocrisy while handing out the longest suspension in Stanley Cup FInals history while serious injuries were not even reviewed,never mind coated with the appearance of 'supplementary discipline' by the NHL warlords' representative/lackey. Bieksa Rome Edler Alberts That pretty much decides the Finals in and of itself. Throw in a Raymond broken back ,for good measure. Sami had a groin injury and Hamhuis was out in game 2. The only two d men left in the stable was rookie Tanev and Ballard,whom AV had put into the mental toilet with whatever for Keith's sins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edlerberry Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 LOL Rome @ $2m.... you cant be serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 I agree for the most part kilgore, but I honestly believe that Shanahan intended for the new standard to be carried forward. Early in 2011-2012 season, there were suspensions of 5, 10, 7, 12 and 9 games handed down. According what I have heard and read since then, there was a loud hue and cry from NHL GMs and owners that the supplementary discipline being doled out was "too severe". Rumor had it that Shanny was told to "tone it down", which for the most part, he did. (a couple of suspensions to Andy Sutton and one to Dan Carcillo being the notable exceptions) I'm of the opinion that if not for the intervention of BOG members, the stiff sentences would have continued. I think that now Shanahan is in a very tough spot. He has to give the impression that he's trying to eliminate dangerous plays, but keep GMs and owners happy at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 .07 seconds is "well after"? A "cheap shot"? History being rewritten here. Murphy said at the time: http://www.cbc.ca/sp...nucks-rome.html "This is just an interference penalty, an interference hit. If it was immediate after he released the puck, it would be a legal hit. We have them all the time." It was a "north-south" hockey play carried out a split second late. A hockey play like that was routine almost for players like Scott Stevens a few years back. What is unbelievable is how it went from nothing to 4 SCF games in that time period. And now I suspect its back to something in between. That ruling was a one-off meant to hurt the Canucks chances. No other way to look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck'nAnimal Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 ~snicker~ do I see a trade from the Stars to the NYR? Hey, then AV gets his fav player back again. ~dripping sarcasm~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edlerberry Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 ~snicker~ do I see a trade from the Stars to the NYR? Hey, then AV gets his fav player back again. ~dripping sarcasm~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 Please no It brings AV back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 so no, I don't buy the whole "shanny tries to be strict but GMs won't let him." theory. Double standard calls like this happened way too often in the past 5 years and it's getting worse. The league won't even try to hide how bad some calls are anymore because hockey fans will find whatever ridiculous reasons to justify the calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 This guy isn't even a Canuck anymore, why am I reading this in Canucks talk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 This guy isn't even a Canuck anymore, why am I reading this in Canucks talk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.