llamateizer
Registered User
I agree with you, remember the Bertuzzi's hit? Or the one on Brashear?Players don't intentionally go for the head. There's no such thing as "predatory"
And more recently, Burrows knee?
I agree with you, remember the Bertuzzi's hit? Or the one on Brashear?Players don't intentionally go for the head. There's no such thing as "predatory"
welp. time to see whta DoPS does about Kadri hit now.
relative to this, it should be 2-3 games (at least).
Players don't intentionally go for the head. There's no such thing as "predatory"
In before sharks and ducks(now certain converted duck fan now a knights fan) fans say Doughty hit was worse.welp. time to see whta DoPS does about Kadri hit now.
relative to this, it should be 2-3 games (at least).
Hopefully the kings play hockey next game as well as you play the victimIn before sharks and ducks(now certain converted duck fan now a knights fan) fans say Doughty hit was worse.
In before sharks and ducks(now certain converted duck fan now a knights fan) fans say Doughty hit was worse.
Interestingly enough you can compile all of Carrier's hit and we can dissect all of your baseless claims that nothing happened. I claim something happened and you said nothing happened. Where is your evidence ? ****, you're arguing but where is your evidence? Maybe pipe down until you know that nothing illegal happened. Compile a video for me then.
The only thing you're consistent at is being inconsistent.
Hopefully the kings play hockey next game as well as you play the victim
Except the onus for proof is on the one making the claim of something happening. You're on the wrong side of this one unfortunately.
Lol knew you'd chicken out when I used your logic against you.
Except that's not the same logic. You made the initial claim. I countered with the reality that you had no evidence to show your claim that something happened. You asking someone to prove a negative is not the same logic. It's rich that you're going to call anyone chicken when you refuse to provide any evidence for your position and you made the initial claim. A claim that is completely immaterial to the thread because even if you were right, it doesn't change that what Doughty did was dirty and got him suspended and was the correct call.
You made a claim that you were right. Where is the evidence? Prove it. I told you why I couldn't. Why can't you? Don't make pathetic excuses after you were on your high horse. If you're going to weasel out of your own premise, then I'd suggest you not to reply, try to save face a bit at least
That was a way worse version of the cogliano hit, did Jim fox cry like a little ***** about this hit too?
No, it's more that you don't know how logic and claims actually work. You trying to flip the burden of proof isn't logic and is just a huge fallacy. There's a reason why you won't talk about the Doughty hit and there's a reason why you won't support your claims with evidence. It's because you have none and so the only thing you can do is move the goal posts to distract.
Lol the irony. You said. "all claims must have evidence.
My claim was that they were running players all night.
Your claim : you didn't see anything at all no one was being ran.
Your conclusion post a video of it.
I said can't will one to exist since I searched.
And you acted like you won an argument (lol) .
But when I asked you to show evidence for your counter argument you suddenly developed amnesia.
Not sure I see a suspension here. Maybe I missed an angle showing why more clearly?