What was the point of saying there hasn't "been a Terry incident since the Terry incident"?
Either your original comment was making a larger point about Johnston or you're just nit picking by pointing to an irrelevancy. If you weren't making an argument against Johnston's impact/value, then your original post is just blather.
I mean in retrospect you're not wrong, I was nitpicking an irrelevancy, since the entire post I was replying to was an irrelevancy and I ought not to have bothered. But eh. I should've known it would be taken as "tough guys bad" if I didn't spell it out better.
The point was that it's tiresome seeing the Terry incident still trotted out as fearmongering about the team's lack of toughness. That was a perfect storm, not just some natural thing that happens all the time to soft teams. Plenty of soft teams in the league. Very few Beaglings.
What exactly was an enforcer going to do to prevent that situation? The best face puncher in the league couldn't have made him answer after the fact, he was in the box for the rest of the game and there weren't any more games. So anyone who was going to prevent it would've had to be on the ice at the time. Johnston and Terry have spent a total of eleven minutes on the ice together this season.
So, to echo your question, what's the point? Why keep going back to that specific incident? It's shock value. Doomsaying. Blather, even. The distinction between the Terry incident and run of the mill bullying on the ice clearly matters, or the incident wouldn't be remarkable enough to keep being brought up. And when it veers into outright misrepresentation (the insinuation that claiming Johnston was a/the main factor in stopping further Terry incidents, as if we didn't just have an entire season with no Johnston but also no Terry incidents), I think it's worth pointing out the reality.
None of this is meant to discount the importance of having toughness on the team to limit the more standard-issue bullying. It wasn't about Johnston’s broader role, nor about Carrick’s (to bring it slightly back to the actual thread topic). It was just about being fed up with a particular dead horse that doesn't need beaten anymore.