Kukla's Korner Hockey
Next entry: Leafs Salary Structure A Mess
Previous entry: Burke Trying To Kick-Start Trades
The Flyers Must Be Stopped
by Paul on 11/04/07 at 07:45 AM ET
Comments (4)
from Bud Barth of the Worcester-Telegram & Gazette,
The Philly hierarchy obviously is condoning, if not encouraging, this caveman mentality that goes far beyond the NHL toughness standard and enters the barbaric sphere of intent to injure — and injure badly.
Downie’s incident could have been excused as an isolated case. After Boulerice’s hit, it smacked of team policy. Now, with Jones’ infraction being perhaps the ugliest of all, how can you not consider conspiracy?
Filed in: NHL Teams, Boston Bruins, Philadelphia Flyers | KK Hockey | Permalink
Tags: philadelphia+flyers, suspensions,
Comments
I agree. It might have caused the most damage, but Jones’ hit was in no way “the ugliest of all.”
Posted by K24 from NYC on 11/04/07 at 07:14 PM ET
In the context of the previous two, it seemed much worse. The problem is evaluating the severity without taking into account the resulting injury, which really rubs the nerves raw. I know I can’t look at a hit like that dispassionately knowing how badly hurt someone was.
There should be some way of penalizing a team if it is judged to foster a dangerous culture, though. Some kind of institutional punishment instead of just the individual.
Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 11/04/07 at 07:34 PM ET
The problem is evaluating the severity without taking into account the resulting injury
I hear you and I feel badly for Bergeron (and no way do I think the hit was his fault). However, injuries should have only a limited amount of sway when assessing the severity of an infraction, assuming that an intent to injure isn’t a consideration. For example, your average tripping call (or race to cancel out an icing) could result in someone sliding awkwardly into the boards and doing severe damage. If 9 times out of 10 there is simply a tripping minor, and the one time there is a broken neck, are they different penalties? I contend that if there is no intent to injure (a sticky, perhaps impossible, thing to determine, I’m aware) then you chalk it up to bad luck and hope the player recovers. If there is a question on intent, then you have to take into consideration the other player’s well-being. How much? I have no idea. The problem with the Bergeron hit and assessing misconduct is that that type of play happens all the time, and most of the time, it is harmless. Watching the replay, you can see that Jones is watching the puck right after the hit, he certainly wasn’t sitting there admiring the damage he had done. The other two Flyers suspensions? I agree with the disciplinary actions.
Any holes in that argument? I haven’t thought through all the possible factors, I’m sure.
Posted by PDXWing from Portland, OR on 11/05/07 at 12:11 AM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Laraque Hit On Kronwall Will Be Reviewed
Blackhawks Play Both Sides Of The Ice
Play Until You Hear The Whistle
#14 Belongs In The JLA Rafters
Filatov Happy To Be In The KHL
About KK Hockey
Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.
From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.
Email Paul anytime at
Kukla’s Korner is always a free service for readers, but it costs some money to maintain. If you’re ever in a position to donate a few dollars to help out, we’d be very appreciative.
Hockey Links
Jones’ infraction is the ugliest of those 3 incidents? Hardly. More likely a case of hometown outrage.
Posted by PDXWing from Portland, OR on 11/04/07 at 06:56 PM ET