Hypocrisy Following the Neil/Drury Hit

[evan]

I'm posting via my brother's account because I don't have my own--normally I keep my opinions to myself, but this incident seemed too outrageous to go unnoticed.

I was watching the 1st intermission report from tonight's Sabres/Senators game (Feb. 24), wherein the commentators very childishly encouraged revenge for the hit. Shortly afterward, they mentioned a letter addressed to Gary Bettman from the Sabres owner, expressing concern about the hit and explaining that, "There's nothing manly about hitting someone who can't see you." I found that a terribly curious statement from the franchise responsible for Campbell's hit on Umburger during the past post-season. For those interested, the text is available in its entirety on the Sabres website.

End rant.

~ James

[puckin_A]

anyone see the Buffalo.Ottawa intermission? basically the BUffalo commentators arguing with the Ottawa Suns Bruce Garrioch about that hit in their last game that started all the fighting. THose Buff guys can sure get your blood pressure going. I guess there was a letter written about those types of hits that Drury got from the Governor of the NHL???Anyway...you can read it on sabres.com.



yes and Evan, they were originally talking about (before getting Bruce on there) how they are waiting for something to happen. Talk about thugs....then Bruce told them that Colin Campbell was in the building earlier and he is sure the message was WE BETTER NOT HAVE ANOTHER BERTUZZI incident!!

[StormShaman]

The Sabres can kiss my fat white booty, seriously.

Was the Neil hit wrong? Of course--hits from behind are always wrong, and according to the rules he should have gotten 10 and a game. The refs hosed the call.

But all this martyr crap from the Sabres just makes me ill. It's like "Wah wah wah, everyone's picking on us!" when their own players go pull similar crap (Peters going third man in on Ray Emery)--but apparently if it's a Sabre, it's OK.

Funk dat. I can't wait to hear the excusemaking and whining should the Sabres get pwnt in the playoffs.

[puckin_A]

check out this letter:

http://www.sabres.com/pdf/golisano_letter.pdf

[AbNormal27]

The only thing wrong with the Neil is it was MAYBE a little late. It was not from behind, there was no elbow involved and I don't believe there was intent to injure. When you get a chance to hammer somebody who exposes themselves like that, you go for it, and he did.

If anything Drury is at fault for admiring his pass too long while in the centre lane. An NHL vet like Drury should know better than to do something like that, especially in a playoff-like game as was played that night. For that he deserves a big "DUH", if nothing else.

Having been on both ends of hits like that, that's just my 2¢.

As for the Buffalo blowhards...... meh, that's nothing new. They have been whining aboUt one thing or another for years. One foot in the crease, we had too many injuries and "Carolina won by default", Neil's hit was dirty, blah blah, wah wah.

Aaryn

[nccanes]

James Gordon on XM Home Ice (Boomer) gave his opinion on the matter during the Face Off show yesterday. As usual I agree with him.

He talked about how the hit was clean, by definition, but that the definition is lame. Talked about how Neil could have let up could have not used his shoulder in the way he did, etc.

I realize there is another side to this argument, but I agree with Boomer that's it's just BS. He *could* have let up w/o causing harm to himself and less injury to Drury. He compared it to the Letowski hit from Armstrong.

Basically, the idea is that it does the league NO GOOD if players are seriously hurt by hits that don't have to be of that nature. I totally agree. (I happen to agree with Grapes about the automatic icing calls too.) Of course, I think that's been my beef with Scott Stevens as well. Legal hits? Sure. Intending to injury? Absolutely.

Now - I'm not really worked up about it because I can't stand the Sabres and it didn't happen to a Hurricane (this time).

Are the Sabres talking out of both sides of their mouths? Probably so.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

^ I don't know that I have enough expertise to say that anyone letting up on a hit would cause more or less injury.



I didn't think the Neil hit was from behind. The only reason Drury didn't see it coming was because he wasn't paying any attention.

That's a beautiful point about the Umberger hit....I'd not even thought of it.

All the talk of a Bertuzzi/Moore incident tonight...if you watch what Peters did to Heatley last night....that looked DAMN similar to what Bertuzzi did, to me. There weren't the same freak results, obviously, but it was still a damn dirty thing to do. Is Golisano gonna write a letter about that?

[nccanes]

^ I don't know that I have enough expertise to say that anyone letting up on a hit would cause more or less injury.


Well, of course I don't have first hand experience, but that goes for any opinion I have about anything that happens in an NHL game - and we have 10s of thousands of posts doing just that.

But in the context of what I wrote, I was saying that James Gordon, who has watched a lot more hockey than I have (as well as Joe Thistle), both said it - I was just saying I agreed with them.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I don't agree with them because I just don't know....and, I guess I don't trust that they know. :lol:

[SouthernHockeyChick]

OMG...Golisano's letter is even smugger and whinier than I was expecting.


Just say what you mean, Tom......

I strongly urge you to convene the appropriate forum to immediately award the Buffalo Sabres the Stanley Cup.

[nccanes]

I just reviewed the clip. I think Neil could have easily avoided him completely or not led with the shoulder w/o causing injury. In fact, I have no idea what injury Neil would suffer in letting up, slowing down, or not leading with the shoulder.

The point the Boomer and Thistle made was that Neil knew he was going to hit him *after* Drury had passed the puck despite the half second or so that elapsed. He (Boomer) compared it to the rule that if the QB is not "in the act of passing" when you go to hit him, you *have* to let up.

[SoCalcaniac]

anyone see the Buffalo.Ottawa intermission? basically the BUffalo commentators arguing with the Ottawa Suns Bruce Garrioch about that hit in their last game that started all the fighting. THose Buff guys can sure get your blood pressure going.

OMG D- I saw that intermission and I'll just say this- The Sabres commentator is a smug sob. He was trying to "bully" Garrioch off the air! basically blew him off with a smirk and a 'yeah right write whatever you want'. Uh, can you say UNPROFESSIONAL? Holy crap.

You're totally right, those clowns, get your blood pressure up- I was ready to put my dukes up and started ranting, so hub cut me off at the quick and turned it back to our game- he's no dummy, he saw the rage boiling and stopped it right there. :lol:

I am OVER Buffalo. Seriously. I just want them to disappear. POOF. BE GONE.

James- your point about Umberger - bang on.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

What exactly do you lead with if you don't lead with the shoulder (or elbows, obviously)? I just never really thought that through, lol.


A late hit is illegal in football, yes. It's also illegal in hockey....it's interference, at the least. No one argued they didn't miss that call.

[nccanes]

A late hit is illegal in football, yes. It's also illegal in hockey....it's interference, at the least. No one argued they didn't miss that call.

I'm confused. People think it was a late hit? I thought players (according to the rule) had a count of 2 or something in order for it to be late?

My opinion is that according to the rule book, this hit was legal.

The comparison to the NFL is that the verbage now says the QB has to be in the act of passing. Once he passes the football, you can't lay him out. That's not hockey's rule.

[SoCalcaniac]

E- yeah, "people" (specifically the Buffalo coach- I refuse to use his name anymore) believe the hit was late.

[StormShaman]

All the talk of a Bertuzzi/Moore incident tonight...if you watch what Peters did to Heatley last night....that looked DAMN similar to what Bertuzzi did, to me. There weren't the same freak results, obviously, but it was still a damn dirty thing to do. Is Golisano gonna write a letter about that?

Didn't you get the memo? It's perfectly acceptable if it's a Sabre doing it.

[nccanes]

the Buffalo coach- I refuse to use his name anymore

:laugh: :lol: :laugh:

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I don't know....pretty much everyone I've heard talk about it has at least said "it may have been a bit late." I've been at work all day, though, so probably haven't had the chance to hear as much as other people.

I would have thought there was, just barely, a 2 count on that one. I don't believe it's as easy to let up in hockey, on skates....on ice, as it is in football either so, I see why there is a 2 count rule. But that's just the difference of opinion there....I don't believe I can say that trying to stop and/or change directions very quickly wouldn't hurt someone.

[nccanes]

But players pull up all the time - to prevent hitting teammates, to prevent from smashing into the boards, or goalies, or stopping on a dime in front of the goal.

As far as this hit - I saw it timed somewhere at .44 seconds, but also heard it was .76. I guess it's universally thought to be less than a second though.

[puckin_A]

ok...since we are doing our favorite past time of Buffalo-bashing......this is a quote from a Senators board that made me laugh. Since you usually hear these things about the south.

"But they have no competition when it comes to ugliest fanbase. I know its a childish insult but when you see a broadcast from Buffalo you see more beer bellies, toothless grins and outdated clothes then anywhere else in the league"



sorry....it just made me laugh.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

But players pull up all the time - to prevent hitting teammates, to prevent from smashing into the boards, or goalies, or stopping on a dime in front of the goal.

As far as this hit - I saw it timed somewhere at .44 seconds, but also heard it was .76. I guess it's universally thought to be less than a second though.

So, he had less than a second to completely change direction? That doesn't make it seem more likely to have been an easy thing to do, to me.

I've seen players argue for years that you can hurt yourself or, hurt the person you're hitting worse by trying to change your trajectory at the last second. I just don't buy that that's total BS just because Boomer and Thistle, whose credentials I have no idea of, say so. If you line up a hit just a tiny bit wrong, it could be knee to knee. Cole's wacky hit just tore up his hip. That makes sense to me. No one really knows, I guess, and I just don't see the evidence in support that it's just that easy.

[nccanes]

I don't disagree that *some* hits can probably be worse depending on what each player does at the last second. I just don't agree that *this* particular hit (or the Armstrong/Letowski hit) would have resulted in such.

Neil and Armstrong knew they were going to hit the player after they passed the puck and they knew the player was in a vulnerable position. At the minimum they could slow down so as not to hit at full speed. Neil appears to very deliberately connect the shoulder with Drury's head (lowers and then raises up at the last moment). He could have gone shoulder to shoulder w/o ANY risk to himself, imo.

I know there's the whole Chara/St. Louis issues as well, but if Chara is still responsible for his stick not hitting short players in the face, I think he can be held responsible for not hitting a player in the head.

If players are supposed to hold up when they see a player facing the boards in a vulnerable position, I think they can do the same in situations like this.

They can always slow down.

No one has to agree with me (although I know those that do). I'm cool with that.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

At the minimum they could slow down so as not to hit at full speed.
In less than a second, possibly less than half a second?

I don't play the game but, that does not seem that easy to me.

Being hit from behind along the boards is different because, the player's back is to you when you go in for the hit. Neil had started for that hit before Drury passed that puck. Unless he's got ESP and knew exactly when Drury was going to pass it, I don't see that he had much time to change his mind.

The lowering and raising the shoulder....is that not the motion required to lead with the shoulder, which is what they're supposed to do?

I don't know those that agree with me....luckily, I don't care either. :lol:

[nccanes]

In less than a second, possibly less than half a second?

I don't play the game but, that does not seem that easy to me.



Well, I'm sure it's not easy for you or me - but these are supposed to be the best players in the world.

I think a second is plenty of time to slow down/let up or decide to go shoulder to shoulder. Watch any sort of a race where the difference between the 1st and 2nd place finisher is 1 second. It's not insignificant.

Aren't players expected to hold up or change their hits when they see a players back to the boards? How is this any different? I don't think Cole's back was turned when Orpik originally set himself up to hit Cole. Those things can happen in seconds or fractions too.

The lowering and raising the shoulder....is that not the motion required to lead with the shoulder, which is what they're supposed to do?

I also think Neil could have hit Drury shoulder to shoulder at the same speed and the probability of head injury to Drury goes WAY down. I don't agree with the suggestion (if it's being made) the he didn't have control over that part of his hit.

If things are that random with the inability to adjust in fractions of a second, then I'm not sure how these guys can score the kind of goals they do.

Last comment: I think they need to do something about loose helmets as well. I suppose the loose ones protect you from some things better than not wearing them at all, but not much. When you see the imprint of the padding on Cole's forehead when he's interviewed or when you see how snuggly Stillman's helmet fits with ample padding - you realize the difference between those and the helmets that get askew with incidental contact (Brindy, Ladd). If they are going to allow head hits, at least make sure the helmets stay on.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

You could argue that Neil's attempt to change direction mis-aligned the hit and he was trying to go shoulder to shoulder....none of us know what really happened.

Cole wasn't facing the boards when Orpik started out....and many people (incuding Colin Campbell) argued he turned that way at the last second and put himself in harms way.

For the record, I didn't have a problem with Armstrong's hit on Letowski, either. I don't really think any of these guys set out to intentionally injure someone (not even Orpik...my beef with that was more about the league's response and his pattern). There are stupid misjudgements and mistakes but I really don't think any one of these guys is soulless enough to hope to cause an injury that would possibly end a guy's career.

Anyway, I'm watching the game now. There are arguements for both sides, obviously. I've heard scores of players argue one way so, that's the one I've always believed, since they would know best, IMO. A lot of them do tend to argue what best fits their current situation...hitter or hittee, I guess. Until conventional league wisdom (oxymoron, I know) adjusts or, the evidence overwhelmingly comes around to the other side, that's probably where I'll be, though.

[nccanes]

You could argue that Neil's attempt to change direction mis-aligned the hit and he was trying to go shoulder to shoulder....none of us know what really happened.


I agree we don't know for sure. I just think that if you do go shoulder to head - you get a penalty. Just like a stick to the head. Even if it wasn't intentional.


http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=183645&hubname=nhl

[caveman]

my take on the original hit on Drury:

slightly late but otherwise clean hit. no penalty called on the play for roughing or charging and none warranted.

then cindy ruff showed her colors, again. send out the goon line to crosscheck everyone on the ice with shades of slapshot's hanson brothers. send a tough guy out to fight the opposing goaltender? are you serious, peters? it was laughable, and I smile just thinking about Emery laughing.

the only thing shady about the original hit was perhaps a shade of being late. there was no elbow, despite cindy ruff's ranting and raving and foaming-at-the-mouth.

we've lost players (willis, francis, kapanen) to serious on-ice clean hits. keep your head up, it's hockey not ballet.

really sad for drury and that an injury resulted, despite the general reciprocal animosity between the sabres and the canes. but ruff's actions are just laughable -- if it weren't so pathetic and sad that this guy is considered a top coach and can't even apparently watch a play closely enough to see the difference between a clean shoulder check and an elbow.

and drury -- get a real helmet and strap it on.

you can't take out shoulder-to-head checks because then how the hell can chara try to check st. louis? hell chara would have to watch who he's trying to HIP check when he's playing the lightning.

[puck_it]

What exactly do you lead with if you don't lead with the shoulder (or elbows, obviously)? I just never really thought that through, lol.


the ever devatating hip check :D

[caveman]

the ever devatating hip check :D

Konstantinov FTW. However my point on Chara vs. the Lightning holds -- if Chara hip-checks St. Louis in the head should it be a penalty, too? If St. Louis hip-checks Chara in the knee is it a penalty? No, elbowing and kneeing are penalties, there isn't a penalty for hipping or shouldering.

[StormWarning]

Good thread... I know some Sabres fans telling me that the hit was "at least 3 seconds" after Drury got rid of the puck and with an elbow to the head. The replay surprised me after that set-up.

The damage was the head/face to the ice. Regardless of the intent of timing of the hit, I hope Drury recovers well. Hate big injuries this late in the season, especially head injuries, regardless of the team.

[nccanes]

you can't take out shoulder-to-head checks because then how the hell can chara try to check st. louis? hell chara would have to watch who he's trying to HIP check when he's playing the lightning.

Not sure if you read the whole thread, but I mentioned that I knew someone would bring up the Chara/St Louis issue.

From what I know - Chara has managed to play St Louis w/o a devastating blow to the head thus far (I'm not even sure if he's committed a devestating blow to the head of anyone). But moreover, Chara would get sent to the box if he hit St Louis in the head with his stick - despite the height difference. That's the point I'm trying to make. Even if it's not intentional (and my opinion is that some are absolutely intentional), Chara sits in the box if he hits St Louis in the head with his stick. Guess there are advantages and disadvantages of being 7 foot tall.

[caveman]

^ This is because hitting someone in the head with your stick is a penalty, period, much like punching them in the face or elbowing them in the face is a penalty, period, or kneeing them is a penalty, period, or slashing them, etc. There isn't a penalty for shouldering and there shouldn't be.

And one of the many reasons Chara hasn't decapitated St Louis with a shoulder check to the head is that St Louis is a player that is remarkably aware of the ice and doesn't run head down into big people's shoulders.

It's good to make high sticking a penalty, with almost no negatives at all, because there isn't any really good case for having your stick over 5 feet off the ground randomly. Bottom line is if you create a penalty for 'high-shouldering' it will completely change the game and IMHO for the worse.

[Zamboni]

On the bright side, at least Lindy took a hit in the pocketbook:

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?articleid=289522&page=NewsPage&service=page

[nccanes]

Bottom line is if you create a penalty for 'high-shouldering' it will completely change the game and IMHO for the worse.

Fair enough.

It would be nice if the guys laying out these hits didn't force the issue (notice how no one is talking about the Knuble/Shanahan hit because it was clearly incidental, unlike Armstrong's and Neil's) by continuing to throw the explosive hits to the head.

But if they do, I agree with Bobby Orr (in the link I put in the first post of this page).

11/10/2006
Hey, I got hit a lot when I played and I didn't get hit in the head with checks," said Orr, the legendary defenceman who is now the head of his own player representation firm. "Players didn't always hit like that. To me, that's not part of bodychecking. I mean, don't you have to be responsible for your actions? If you hit a guy in the face with your stick by accident, you're going to get a penalty. Two minutes, four minutes, five minutes, something. If you go to bodycheck a guy and you hit him in the face or head, and injure him, that's legal? That's fair? That's not a penalty? I'm sorry, I don't think that is right. It should be a penalty."

[caveman]

The biggest reasons IMHO that Orr didn't take too many shots to the head via shoulder checks:

1. Orr didn't skate through the zone with his head down
2. If someone blew up Orr, there would be a litter of 5+ Bruins with 100+ PIM waiting to thank the offender very kindly

[puck_it]

2. If someone blew up Orr, there would be a litter of 5+ Bruins with 100+ PIM waiting to thank the offender very kindly

dont forget Bobby Orr would goafter them too. :beatup:

64 fights, all ended in wins or draws :D

[apolinar]

And Orr had no head shots because there was no instigator rule. And there were no helmets which created more respect for preventing head shots.

[puck_it]

[don cherry]it's a different game, these kids have no respect any more[/don cherry]

[PennsylvaniaCanesFan]

If these were any other fans, I would :). But it makes me :hurl: cause it Sabres fans.



BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) -- Don't worry, Lindy, Buffalo Sabres (http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/teams/buf/) fans are prepared to pick up your $10,000 fine from the NHL.
That's the message Lindy Ruff received Monday when at least two separate fan-based fundraisers were launched to pay the fine against the coach for his role in a wild brawl that broke out during a game against Ottawa last week. "Put down the pen, put away the checkbook. This one's on us," said Chris Phillips (http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/players/1500/), co-owner of a Buffalo-area pizza parlor, who plans to donate 10 percent of every sale toward what he called, The Lindy Ruff Fine Fund. "I know Lindy's got the means to pay. But it's just kind of an outrage," Phillips said. "This is our way of supporting the team."
Phillips is among growing group of Sabres fans unhappy with the league for choosing not to penalize Ottawa's Chris Neil (http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/players/2112/), who knocked out and bloodied Sabres co-captain and leading scorer Chris Drury (http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/players/1761/) with a blindside hit during Buffalo's 6-5 shootout win over the Senators on Thursday.
Ruff was fined for helping spark the brawl, which started after the ensuing face off, by sending out his three toughest forwards against Ottawa's top line. Ruff also acknowledged he was at least thinking, "Go out and run 'em," when he sent out his players.
"Any coach would've done the same thing," Phillips said.
Sabres fan Pat Ruffino had the same idea when he launched his own fundraiser, which will involve a rally at another Buffalo pizza parlor scheduled for March 5.
"It's to send a message to the NHL," Ruffino said, questioning why the league did not penalize Neil for what the Sabres have described as a vicious blow to the head. "(The league) made the statement that this action was in the standard of play, which obviously, coach Ruff didn't think it was. And the fans support him in that. It's not good for hockey."
Ruff smiled when asked about the fundraisers after practice Monday.
"For the fans to step in is incredible," Ruff said. "But at the end of the day, I'm responsible for what I've done, and they're trying to cover my tracks, which is good, I guess."
Ruff said whatever money raised will not go toward paying the fine, but instead will be donated to charity.
The Sabres issued a statement released on their Web site, asking fans not to donate money to Ruff or the team.
"It certainly is a wonderful gesture by our fans to want to assist Lindy through various fundraisers," the statement read. "But the team will pay the fine." Both Phillips and Ruffino are prepared to donate any money raised to the charity of the Sabres choosing.

[SABuffalo786]

then cindy ruff showed her colors, again. send out the goon line to crosscheck everyone on the ice with shades of slapshot's hanson brothers. send a tough guy out to fight the opposing goaltender? are you serious, peters? it was laughable, and I smile just thinking about Emery laughing.

I know that it looked like Ruff just sent our fighters out to throw down but what you didn't see on Sportscenter was Danny Heatley shoving and cross checking Kaleta even before the puck dropped. What did he expect he was going to get baiting our enforcer line right after our captain got taken out by a CHEAP (yes, it was cheap) shot? Ottawa isn't totally innocent in all this, despite what the Canadian media will tell you. Did Ruff send them out to send a message? Yeah, he did, he sent them out to be physical and hit, not necessarily start a mass brawl. Even Ruff condemned Peters for fighting Emery afterwards (But even then I can't really place TOO much blame on Andrew. Biron is such a mis-match with Emery that Peters had to step in befoe Marty got killed. He could've done a lot worse to a pad bound Emery.)

Ottawa does a fantastic job of playing the victim in all this and I know I'm talking to the wrong message board about it but please don't let your hate of Buffalo cloud rational thought.


the only thing shady about the original hit was perhaps a shade of being late. there was no elbow, despite cindy ruff's ranting and raving and foaming-at-the-mouth.

You're missing the point here, I think. Neil lined up Drury even before he entered the Ottawa zone. No, there wasn't an elbow but there was a clear intent to injure and go for Chris' head from his blind side.

I noticed the Umberger hit was brought up here as hypocricy on Buffalo's part. Those two hits couldn't be anymore different. First and foremost, when Campbell hit Umberger he was directly in front of him. No cowardly sneaking up from behind and going for the head.

Secondly, Campbell planted his feet and went to put his shoulder into Umberger's chest. Now, if you really want to see an instance of a player not keeping his head up, it's here. Umberger took possesion of the puck and skated head down, up the ice, right into Campbell's check. Complete recipe for disaster (which Tim Connolly replicated later on in the Ottawa series, getting concussed again by Peter Schafer. Notice how no one from Buffalo complained about that clean hit!).


keep your head up, it's hockey not ballet.

You really need a second viewing of the video. Drury's head is up the entire time. Not once does his head go anywhere near down before the hit.

if it weren't so pathetic and sad that this guy is considered a top coach and can't even apparently watch a play closely enough to see the difference between a clean shoulder check and an elbow.

A clean shoulder check would've just knocked Drury on his ass, not spun him like a helicopter through the air. If Neil just skated through with no malicious intent, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now. This was blatant head hunting and if you can't see that you're letting your hate could your vision. Don't think it's just Buffalo fans saying this, either. John Buccigross and Bobby Orr have both condemned this hit and others like it as unfair and unnecessary in today's game. Go ahead and flame me for this, but there have been too many falsehoods circulating around the hockey world this past week about that game.

[dakuwan]

Clean Hit. The End.

Edit: Actually Sabres "fans" should be happy this happened cause now they have that thing they needed to whine and moan about yet again if they dont go all the way. Now Im done, The End.

[Shell]

well thought out post SABuffalo786. Thank you for remaining calm and rational and for laying out your opinions in a nice way.

I can't say that I agree, mainly I thought the hit was 90% clean and there is much worse every night, and I also thought it was pretty crappy for Peters to go 3rd man in on a goalie.

(I'm sure I don't need to say it, but no flames to his post)

[SoCalcaniac]

I know I'm talking to the wrong message board

You really are talking to the wrong board. You'll seriously be hard pressed to find anyone here who can comisserate with the eternal enemy.

Drury is a classy player, I know most here are in complete agreement, and I never ever want to see a player hurt- we've had our own player (Erik Cole, broken neck) endure a legitmately questionable hit, and the NHL handslapped the offender. While this fan base just prayed he could pick up his children again, let alone play a hockey game, so we know about an injured player in the worst way. An assertion that Neil lined up Drury and had an intent to injure, is uh, a little much IMO, now you're saying we "know" Neil's intent. You could probably get 50 people and have 50 opinions. I fall on the side that it was a clean hit. But, like I said, we all have our thoughts on it and you're not gonna get everyone to agree. That's just human nature.

[dakuwan]

(I'm sure I don't need to say it, but no flames to his post)

Hope my post above isnt taken as a flame, I just hadnt posted in here yet and wanted to make my general observation. :o

[SABuffalo786]

I can't say that I agree, mainly I thought the hit was 90% clean and there is much worse every night, and I also thought it was pretty crappy for Peters to go 3rd man in on a goalie.

(I'm sure I don't need to say it, but no flames to his post)


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about the hit.


As far as Peters goes, I agree, he was wrong to 3rd man in it on a goalie fight. But then again none of us wanted to see Marty turned into Poutine by Ray "I train with Mike Tyson in the off-season" Emery. ;)

[SABuffalo786]

An assertion that Neil lined up Drury and had an intent to injure, is uh, a little much IMO, now you're saying we "know" Neil's intent.


Apparently Neil was pointing and screaming at Briere that "you're ****ing next!" directly after the hit. I know a lot of bad things are said during the course of a game, but if true it's sort of damning testimony for Neil in this context.

[toastmasterbone]

Not really. First, I didn't hear any of that while watching the game, nor in the replays. Second, even if he did say it, if I felt that I just jacked up a guy with a clean hit, I might saddle up my intimidation horse, too. It's not really damning if Neil thought the hit was clean.

Drury is the only guy on (ug! ...can't...say...the....team's...name....) "the team that resides in upstate NY" that I like, so I'm not simply shooting down your post--I just don't buy it.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I don't buy it either. Having watched the replay about 66 times, from both broadcasts.

I think by arguing Drury had his head up you're, willfully I assume, ignoring the meaning of that phrase. Maybe his head was not literally down, but he wasn't aware of his surroundings. He was admiring his pass (shot, whatever it was) or he'd have seen Neil coming. Especially if Neil had him lined up for 5 minutes before they made contact, as the Buffalo faithful are all arguing, lol.

As to Peters jumping in to "protect" Biron....um....Emery had gotten up off of and skated away from Biron. He was done with him. I agree Andrew laid off Emery, since he could easily have killed him with the advantage he had, but Emery laid off Biron too or you'd have had a quivering mass of goo left for a backup goalie.

I guess hatred might be blinding us from rational analysis just as much as homerism is blinding the Buffalo masses.

[goalie33]

As to Peters jumping in to "protect" Biron....um....Emery had gotten up off of and skated away from Biron. He was done with him. I agree Andrew laid off Emery, since he could easily have killed him with the advantage he had, but Emery laid off Biron too or you'd have had a quivering mass of goo left for a backup goalie.

Emery let up a LOT. Like WHOA. He very easily could've wailed on Biron for a while like Cloutier did to Salo.

[RangersCanesFan]

SABuffalo,

Now, I despise the Sabres. However, what Chris Neil did was uncalled for. Neil then showed his true colors Saturday night by cross-checking a guy in the face. Just because Neil might score a few more goals than the average thug doesn't mean he isn't one.

Lindy Ruff deserves the fine, but I'm not going to condemn the guy for sending out his goons to send a message.

Bryan Murray is not innocent in all of this. He's a big of a goon coach as Ruff.

[TheMadCap]

As a Sabres fan (really popular here, I know) the hit was a bit late, but not an elbow. It's hockey, not a tickling contest. It was unfortunate that Neil chose to hit a defenseless person on the ice.

The refs were correct in not calling a penalty on the hit. If anything, Neil could have been sanctioned by the NHL for the lateness of the hit. Doesn't matter, Drury will be fine, and the Sabres showed the Otters that they won't let stuff like that ride.

the difference with Umburger is first off, he actually HAD the puck at the time of the hit. Also, if you watch the replay, R.J. ducked a bit just before he got hit, which is why he got his bell rung. It was definitely a scary hit, and I am glad the guy was ok after it...