The Iceman
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2007
- 5,113
- 3,769
Did the NHL review the Backes elbow on Anderson?
- Thread starter The Iceman
- Start date
BlueForever75
Registered User
- Oct 4, 2017
- 5,691
- 2,303
Of course not why would they? Backes doesnt where a Leaf on the front of his sweater!!!!
Same way that Miller's elbow to Kapanen's head wasnt reviewed.....wrong jersey. Or why Marchand's baseball swing with his stick was reviewed.
Same way that Miller's elbow to Kapanen's head wasnt reviewed.....wrong jersey. Or why Marchand's baseball swing with his stick was reviewed.
I'm not going to lie, I don't often complain about penalties, or league justice. But I don't get why nothing is being said at all. He elbowed the goalie in the head during play.
It was obviously intentional, too. It wasn't like it was part of a hit, it wasn't a scramble, and it wasn't incidental while skating by. He was standing in front of the net, and he swings his elbow back into the goalies head.
This has to be an example of something that the league "doesn't want in the game". So why is he not even getting a phone hearing? Some acknowledgement?
It was obviously intentional, too. It wasn't like it was part of a hit, it wasn't a scramble, and it wasn't incidental while skating by. He was standing in front of the net, and he swings his elbow back into the goalies head.
This has to be an example of something that the league "doesn't want in the game". So why is he not even getting a phone hearing? Some acknowledgement?
Let's not turn into lunatic fans. He was clearly positioning his stick for a tip on net. Whether this was a case of accidentally-on-purpose or not, I don't think he deliberately elbowed Andersen in the face without ANY correlation to the play in front of him. He was too close to the goalie, and played recklessly, like Backes does.
Still don't understand the coincidental minors on that play at all.
Zizzzzy
Registered User
- Dec 6, 2017
- 2,005
- 1,484
Freddy is probably lucky to have not been given another embellishment fine if I have to be honest. I am not entirely sold that it was an intentional elbow to start either.
That said, the ref clearly put his arm up to call the interference penalty... but then decided to just even things up and go with a 4 on 4? We would have ended up with a 5 on 3 if they didnt f*** us on the original infraction.
We've been f***ed into defending a 5 on 3 we shouldn't have, and got f***ed out of having a 5 on 3 we should have.
That said, the ref clearly put his arm up to call the interference penalty... but then decided to just even things up and go with a 4 on 4? We would have ended up with a 5 on 3 if they didnt f*** us on the original infraction.
We've been f***ed into defending a 5 on 3 we shouldn't have, and got f***ed out of having a 5 on 3 we should have.
The Iceman
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2007
- 5,113
- 3,769
Good point. Polak got a 2 min offsetting penalty. So if Backes was getting 2 originally should he not have gotten an additional 2 for the scrum?
Goonface2k14
Registered User
I dunno. Kadri got 3 games. This was an intentional shot to the head of a vulnerable player.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 74,301
- 40,219
One guy ran across the ice to deliver the headshot in retaliation, the other had eyes in the back of his head.
Shirley you see the difference?
HamiltonNHL
Parity era hockey is just puck luck + draft luck
- Jan 4, 2012
- 21,444
- 12,169
League spys: We have to review an intentional elbow to the head.
The League: Send details and Video please. Who was it ?
League spys: Backes
The League: Nevermind. We're good.
The League: Send details and Video please. Who was it ?
League spys: Backes
The League: Nevermind. We're good.
GoonieFace
Registered User
I kind of agree. I think he felt Andersen on his back and gave him the intentional unintentional business.
Yep. He knew exactly where he was. It could have given him a concussion. A dangerous shot to the head.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 74,301
- 40,219
Yeah, he meant to hit him but I think it was luck that he hit him on the button.
But what does it matter if he got lucky? The intention was there and he nailed him in the head.
Dzonna
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2017
- 1,034
- 430
That’s about as objective as it gets. I knew Backes’ identity was to be a hard nosed player but I didn’t think he would stoop that low. Surprised by the NHL’s continuous decisions to be inconsistent.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 74,301
- 40,219
Intention may be clear to us but are view is skewed as fans. Hard to say definite intent when he has his back to him.
Pathetic that Backes wasn't suspended. Literally intent to injure. Nothing else. There's no fear of contact from the goalie. He wasn't protecting himself.
Absolutely should be a game. But this series has been rigged from the start.
Absolutely should be a game. But this series has been rigged from the start.
HamiltonNHL
Parity era hockey is just puck luck + draft luck
- Jan 4, 2012
- 21,444
- 12,169
HamiltonNHL
Parity era hockey is just puck luck + draft luck
- Jan 4, 2012
- 21,444
- 12,169
The List Of Jericho
Judas effect
Not sure how that’s embellishment, his head snapped back and the elbow wasn’t exactly a love tap
