Give it up Moore!!!!!

[Kickassguy]

That's an interesting take, considering that the burden of proof is supposed to be on the person making the claim, not the persons in the audience.

And just for kicks, Brashear, March 2006.

Jagr said afterward that he believed he left the game before doing any serious damage. The same could not be said for Flyers enforcer Donald Brashear, who spent the entire evening attempting to avenge another Kasparaitis Olympic hit - the hip check that knocked Flyers/Canada winger Simon Gagne out with a groin injury.
With 1:53 left and the Rangers leading 5-1, Brashear hunted down Kasparaitis and punched him to the ice. Brashear was given 29 minutes in penalties - including the instigator penalty and game misconduct that will draw an automatic one-game suspension. Flyers coach Ken Hitchcock also will receive a $10,000 fine.
"He told me I wasn't going to finish the game," the fearless Kasparaitis said of Brashear. "I finished the game but he didn't - he got thrown out."
Brashear wasn't particularly politic afterward.
"This game is gay now," he observed. "You can't even do anything anymore. ... They changed the game to favor the superstars. You can't do anything anymore to set some respect out there."

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/14006689.htm

Any of this ringing any bells? I realize that sometimes it's difficult to remember things with a selective memor... I mean, sometimes it's difficult to remember things.

 

[Hasbro]

And the second part. How many of the threats were carried out to the extent of ending a career.

 

[Dolemite]

And the second part. How many of the threats were carried out to the extent of ending a career.

Let it go.

 

[Kickassguy]

And the second part. How many of the threats were carried out to the extent of ending a career.

That wasn't the question being originally asked, now, was it?

Dr. No asked for evidence of instances of premeditation resulting in on-ice incidents, because he'd sort of conveniently "forgotten" about them. I've given him these instances (and so have others as he's acknowledged), both of which were public and occurred in this current season. He can do with them what he will. He wanted his "examples", he's received his examples.

I suggest he spend less time worrying about syntactical errors in KK's posts and more time addressing the part where it turns out the person he's ridiculing is right.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Dr. No asked for evidence of instances of premeditation resulting in on-ice incidents, because he'd sort of conveniently "forgotten" about them.

There's no need to be a jerk about it, Canucks fan. I was being sincere in my request.

But wouldn't "premeditation resulting in on-ice incidents" have to be things mentioned in the media THAT RESULTED IN ON-ICE INCIDENTS?

Plonk.

 

[GSC2k2*]

Actually, the real point was that apologists like KK suggest that this sort of incident happens EVERY GAME. It does not. I keep hearing that from the pro-Bertuzzi droolers. I have watched the game for 30 years. What Bertuzzi did is not unprecedented. Far from it, unfortunately. But it does NOT happen every game. ALSO far from it.

Long story short? To anyone who thinks Moore got what was coming to him or that a cheap shot wind-up-and swing-hard-from-behind and a ride to the ice head first is part of hockey? On behalf of the human race, I am glad you're not part of the rest of us.

That is all.

 

[kingpest19]

Another that'll maybe help jog your memory.

Fedoruk didn't record a point in the long-awaited victory, but he was involved in the game's most talked-about play. The rugged left winger was given a match penalty midway through the third period of Anaheim's 2-1 victory over Phoenix on Tuesday night when he left his skates to hit the Coyotes' Petr Nedved with a flying elbow.
...
Fedoruk publicly stated after the Coyotes 2-1 victory over the Ducks that he was exacting revenge for an earlier hit by Phoenix's Denis Gauthier on the Ducks' Joffrey Lupul and Todd Marchant.
...
The shot appeared to be in retaliation for a hit moments earlier by Phoenix defenceman Denis Gauthier against Joffrey Lupul.

"It was something that had to be addressed," Fedoruk said. "I'm not naming names but you have a guy out there with a visor on running around like he's King Kong. He's not going to back it up. If the refs aren't going to call it, then it falls on the players to take it on. There were so many high hits and late hits."
...
''In my eyes, it's an eye for an eye. I don't ever want to see anybody get hurt, but when my players get hurt, I feel obliged to send a message that I'm not going to let this happen. I think Nedved can thank his teammate for what happened.''
...
Lupul didn't return after he was struck but he could be back in the lineup as early as Wednesday at Dallas.

Nedved, who skated gingerly off the ice with the help of two teammates, left the game with a concussion. He will be re-evaluated Wednesday.

"You never want to see anybody get hurt," Fedoruk said. "But I'm an emotional player. When I see one of my teammates get hurt, I'm going to send a message that we're not going to stand for it."
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=144167&hubname=

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=144220&hubname=

From November 2005. Things starting to come back?

Once again the subject was premeditation and threats made in the media. Considering the fact that the hit in question came moments after the hit on Lupul would have required fedoruk to stop the game grab a reporter and release a statement to all the fans in the building he was going an eye for eye

 

[kingpest19]

That wasn't the question being originally asked, now, was it?

Dr. No asked for evidence of instances of premeditation resulting in on-ice incidents, because he'd sort of conveniently "forgotten" about them. I've given him these instances (and so have others as he's acknowledged), both of which were public and occurred in this current season. He can do with them what he will. He wanted his "examples", he's received his examples.

I suggest he spend less time worrying about syntactical errors in KK's posts and more time addressing the part where it turns out the person he's ridiculing is right.

Youre giving instances where the premeditation is a few minutes in coming not announced in the media or weeks long. Theres a big difference especially when it comes to the subject at hand, which is the premeditation of the moore incident.

 

[lemieux32*]

kingpest19, dead on Bertuzzi and his buddies made this threats and announcements ahead of time. These examples are people speaking after they went after someone. Realize you are dealing with people who tried to hold a rally to show their support for Bertuzzi after that cowardly act.

 

[KrisKing*]

Actually, the real point was that apologists like KK suggest that this sort of incident happens EVERY GAME. It does not. I keep hearing that from the pro-Bertuzzi droolers. I have watched the game for 30 years. What Bertuzzi did is not unprecedented. Far from it, unfortunately. But it does NOT happen every game. ALSO far from it.

That is all.

I obviously never said it happens every game. To suggest that is just preposterous. Are you a member of the Liberal party of Canada by any chance?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I obviously never said it happens every game. To suggest that is just preposterous. Are you a member of the Liberal party of Canada by any chance?

I'll repeat: give other examples where a player/coach made public comments about a player, and then subsequently went after that player in a following game.

 

[Alan Jackson]

I'm going to try to summarize my thoughts on the Bertuzzi thing from my point of view. I'm a Canucks fan, so keep that in mind, and keep in mind also I'm not really a huge fan of Bertuzzi. I also know this thing has been beaten to death, so I don't even know why I feel the need to post this, but here goes:

1. I think Moore's hit on Naslund was probably "legal", though I find it difficult to say it was "clean". Naslund was in a bent over, reaching for the puck, and Moore took his shot. Naslund was injured, missed a few games with a concussion, and played the rest of the season with an injured elbow. The Canucks were furious at the time, as any team would be, but they were in a tight race with the Aves, and leading the game 1-0, so they weren't going to risk a penalty going after Moore that night. In his post game scrum, Crawford rips in to the refs for not calling a penalty on the Naslund hit. The comments from the Canucks room include May's famous "bounty" comment. That kind of threat had made before, and will be made again. The Avalanche didn't think much of it, clearly, signing May before this season.

2. The rhetoric was such that league officials attended the next game between the two clubs, and warned both teams. Brookbank and Worrell fought, but not too much else happened. Again, the Canucks are trying to win the division, and erase a 2-goal Avalanche lead in the third to earn a 5-5 tie. Had there been a conspiracy to "injure" Moore, might they not have done something this night?

3. We all know what happened 1 year ago tonight. Canucks get blown out. Moore has the nerve to score one of the goals. Moore starts a fight with Matt Cooke - which Moore probably thought would end things. Probably should have ended things. "Ok, I've fought, that's it." His choice of Canuck was poor, however, and probably angered the embarrased Canuck team even further. If there was a knock on Matt Cooke, what would it be? Its that he can't back up his agressive play, and won't fight. Moore refused many other invitations to fight that evening, as is his right. The tension in the air is electric. Even watching on TV, you could tell something bad might happen.

Bertuzzi, never a player able to keep his emotions in check very well, is pissed off. "This little punk laid out my best friend, he jumps our worst fighter, he's yapping at us all night, won't answer the bell with anybody else, I'm gonna have a go at him".

Bertuzzi stalks Moore all up and down the ice, trying to get Moore to fight. Moore's team is winning, what, 9-2? He has no reason to fight Bertuzzi, he's done his job. Besides, it'll piss him off even more if he dosen't fight.

Then Bertuzzi, beacause he's an idiot, takes a round house punch at Moore, knocking him out. Moore falls, Bertuzzi falls on top -still intent, I might add, on throwing punches at Moore. The rest of the players pile on, and the crowd, not yet aware that Moore is hurt, is in full voice. As they would be at any other arena. As the pile-up clears, it is clear something is wrong. Moore hasn't moved. There's a pool of blood on the ice. The crowd falls deathly silent. Moore is stretchered off.

Lacroix comes out the next morning and holds a press conference. "I'm not a doctor, but it's a broken neck."

"Broken neck" becomes the quote of the day. This is the point where this story becomes a ridiculous farce, and the single biggest over-reaction to any incident in the history of hockey. Regis and Kelly - Regis and Kelly, for chrissakes!, are talking about how this big bad hockey player broke another players neck. Broken neck, broken neck, broken neck. Never a mention that the neck injury was bad, but would heal. Never a mention about Moore's concussion- which is the injury that keeps him out to this day.

If Moore wasn't hurt, Bertuzzi gets five and a game, and maybe a 1 or 2 game suspension. Bertuzzi's suckerpunch was dangerous and stupid, but it was a punch. The next week, Wade Belak crosschecks another player, as hard as he can, right in face. Now, if you were given the choice, would you rather bit blindsided by a powerful gloved suckerpuch to to the back of the helmet - or crosschecked in the face? I'll tell you that would be a pretty easy decision for me.

But Moore IS hurt. The League has always stated that it was the act they punished, not the result. If it was just the act, no way Bertuzzi gets a 17 month suspension. But with all the media hype, the league had no choice.

My feelings are that Moore and his family should be angry - Steve's dream was taken from him due to the careless actions of another player. The Moore family has every right to sue for whatever they can get, and if they hold a grudge against Bertuzzi, who am I to blame them?

I think the majority of fans, however, need to get over this in a big way. Bertuzzi is not a criminal or a thug or a goon. He didn't "curse" Canada in Italy. His action was not the worst in in the history of hockey - likely not even top 50. Avalanche fans can get on the high horse all they want. Remember Claude Lemuiex? Please.

Bertuzzi made a stupid mistake, one that cost another player his dream. Moore's injury was bad luck - bad luck for Bertuzzi, and a million times worse for Moore.

My advice would be that, other than Moore and his family, the rest of us need to get over this thing.

 

[west in the east]

Good Summary AJ, completely agree

 

[bling]

I'm going to try to summarize my thoughts on the Bertuzzi thing from my point of view. I'm a Canucks fan, so keep that in mind, and keep in mind also I'm not really a huge fan of Bertuzzi. I also know this thing has been beaten to death, so I don't even know why I feel the need to post this, but here goes:

1. I think Moore's hit on Naslund was probably "legal", though I find it difficult to say it was "clean". Naslund was in a bent over, reaching for the puck, and Moore took his shot. Naslund was injured, missed a few games with a concussion, and played the rest of the season with an injured elbow. The Canucks were furious at the time, as any team would be, but they were in a tight race with the Aves, and leading the game 1-0, so they weren't going to risk a penalty going after Moore that night. In his post game scrum, Crawford rips in to the refs for not calling a penalty on the Naslund hit. The comments from the Canucks room include May's famous "bounty" comment. That kind of threat had made before, and will be made again. The Avalanche didn't think much of it, clearly, signing May before this season.

2. The rhetoric was such that league officials attended the next game between the two clubs, and warned both teams. Brookbank and Worrell fought, but not too much else happened. Again, the Canucks are trying to win the division, and erase a 2-goal Avalanche lead in the third to earn a 5-5 tie. Had there been a conspiracy to "injure" Moore, might they not have done something this night?

3. We all know what happened 1 year ago tonight. Canucks get blown out. Moore has the nerve to score one of the goals. Moore starts a fight with Matt Cooke - which Moore probably thought would end things. Probably should have ended things. "Ok, I've fought, that's it." His choice of Canuck was poor, however, and probably angered the embarrased Canuck team even further. If there was a knock on Matt Cooke, what would it be? Its that he can't back up his agressive play, and won't fight. Moore refused many other invitations to fight that evening, as is his right. The tension in the air is electric. Even watching on TV, you could tell something bad might happen.

Bertuzzi, never a player able to keep his emotions in check very well, is pissed off. "This little punk laid out my best friend, he jumps our worst fighter, he's yapping at us all night, won't answer the bell with anybody else, I'm gonna have a go at him".

Bertuzzi stalks Moore all up and down the ice, trying to get Moore to fight. Moore's team is winning, what, 9-2? He has no reason to fight Bertuzzi, he's done his job. Besides, it'll piss him off even more if he dosen't fight.

Then Bertuzzi, beacause he's an idiot, takes a round house punch at Moore, knocking him out. Moore falls, Bertuzzi falls on top -still intent, I might add, on throwing punches at Moore. The rest of the players pile on, and the crowd, not yet aware that Moore is hurt, is in full voice. As they would be at any other arena. As the pile-up clears, it is clear something is wrong. Moore hasn't moved. There's a pool of blood on the ice. The crowd falls deathly silent. Moore is stretchered off.

Lacroix comes out the next morning and holds a press conference. "I'm not a doctor, but it's a broken neck."

"Broken neck" becomes the quote of the day. This is the point where this story becomes a ridiculous farce, and the single biggest over-reaction to any incident in the history of hockey. Regis and Kelly - Regis and Kelly, for chrissakes!, are talking about how this big bad hockey player broke another players neck. Broken neck, broken neck, broken neck. Never a mention that the neck injury was bad, but would heal. Never a mention about Moore's concussion- which is the injury that keeps him out to this day.

If Moore wasn't hurt, Bertuzzi gets five and a game, and maybe a 1 or 2 game suspension. Bertuzzi's suckerpunch was dangerous and stupid, but it was a punch. The next week, Wade Belak crosschecks another player, as hard as he can, right in face. Now, if you were given the choice, would you rather bit blindsided by a powerful gloved suckerpuch to to the back of the helmet - or crosschecked in the face? I'll tell you that would be a pretty easy decision for me.

But Moore IS hurt. The League has always stated that it was the act they punished, not the result. If it was just the act, no way Bertuzzi gets a 17 month suspension. But with all the media hype, the league had no choice.

My feelings are that Moore and his family should be angry - Steve's dream was taken from him due to the careless actions of another player. The Moore family has every right to sue for whatever they can get, and if they hold a grudge against Bertuzzi, who am I to blame them?

I think the majority of fans, however, need to get over this in a big way. Bertuzzi is not a criminal or a thug or a goon. He didn't "curse" Canada in Italy. His action was not the worst in in the history of hockey - likely not even top 50. Avalanche fans can get on the high horse all they want. Remember Claude Lemuiex? Please.

Bertuzzi made a stupid mistake, one that cost another player his dream. Moore's injury was bad luck - bad luck for Bertuzzi, and a million times worse for Moore.

My advice would be that, other than Moore and his family, the rest of us need to get over this thing.

I agree with most all of your points and the ones I do not agree with are minor interpretations like your effort to blame Lacroix for starting the rhetoric by stating the Steve Moore had a broken neck, as if that was untrue. The fact is Moore did have a broken neck regardless of whether or not that is what is keeping him from playing again.

Your mention of the Claude Lemuix incident as if his actions make it impossible for Avs fans to be upset about Bertuzzi's attack on Moore..that one still does not make sense to me.

As far as the Avs management putting this behind them by signing Brad May, that is one of the things that has shaken my support for this team. I realize that Lacroix was hoping this ill advised move would help to put this incident in the past, what his huge ego was unable to understand is that you can not force a fanbase to move on until they get closure on this episode. That will not happen until either Steve Moore is back playing or he has been fairly compensated by those responsible for his injury. (It does not help that Brad May has also turned out to be a less than adequate player.)

The other point I wish to make is that for all the talk of how the Avs fans need to move on and all that, I want you to go through all the threads involving the Moore/Bertuzzi controversy and you will see that 99% were started by Canuck fans and/or Bertuzzi apologists. Yes Avs fans do respond and post on them but nearly all are started from the viewpoint of the Bertuzzi camp. So who really needs to "move on" here.....?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Well said, Alan.

 

[Hasbro]

3. We all know what happened 1 year ago tonight. Canucks get blown out. Moore has the nerve to score one of the goals. Moore starts a fight with Matt Cooke - which Moore probably thought would end things. Probably should have ended things. "Ok, I've fought, that's it." His choice of Canuck was poor, however, and probably angered the embarrased Canuck team even further. If there was a knock on Matt Cooke, what would it be? Its that he can't back up his agressive play, and won't fight. Moore refused many other invitations to fight that evening, as is his right. The tension in the air is electric. Even watching on TV, you could tell something bad might happen.

Problem here was there were already two fighting majors when the score was 0-0. If anything the Canucks got blown out because they were to busy taking runs at the Avs rather than they started assing about because they were getting blowout.

If Moore wasn't hurt, Bertuzzi gets five and a game, and maybe a 1 or 2 game suspension. Bertuzzi's suckerpunch was dangerous and stupid, but it was a punch. The next week, Wade Belak crosschecks another player, as hard as he can, right in face. Now, if you were given the choice, would you rather bit blindsided by a powerful gloved suckerpuch to to the back of the helmet - or crosschecked in the face? I'll tell you that would be a pretty easy decision for me.

You left out being riden into the ice and swung on somemore.

I think the majority of fans, however, need to get over this in a big way. Bertuzzi is not a criminal or a thug or a goon.

Bert is admitedly a criminal. He plead guilty of assualt. He's got a track record of violence on the ice, we're constantly being fed Bert-as-Byng-candidate while simultaniously being asked to believe that Moore was a hitman.

Avalanche fans can get on the high horse all they want. Remember Claude Lemuiex? Please.

Speaking of high horses: Jarko Ruutu. Injures Forsberg worse in the same game Naslund gets hit (no bounty no punch in the back of the head) he's drilled two players with their head down this year.

Speaking of players who never fight: Donald Brashear. He'd throw down with greg DeVries just never cared for going toe-totoe with Scott Parker.

Difference here with Claude is he backed into Draper and didn't intend to injure him. And he sure as hell didn't threaten him before hand. The Wings were as much uset about that as Lemeiux not being apologetic afterwords (and a little bit of scape goating as well)

Bertuzzi made a stupid mistake, one that cost another player his dream. Moore's injury was bad luck - bad luck for Bertuzzi, and a million times worse for Moore.

My advice would be that, other than Moore and his family, the rest of us need to get over this thing.

Anytime the Canucks fans want to stop acting like they're being persecuted, Bertuzzi's the victim, slagging Moore and grasping at evry straw to get Bertuzzi off the hook.

 

[KrisKing*]

Alan Jackson made more sense in his post than any of us could dream of. As far as I'm concerned, that should be the final word on the matter.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

His action was not the worst in in the history of hockey - likely not even top 50.

I missed this the first time around, and I'll agree with your first part - Alan Eagleson screwing the players over while acting as NHLPA boss is the worst in my opinion.

Bertuzzi's punch is definitely top fifty, however.

 

[lemieux32*]

Alan Jackson made more sense in his post than any of us could dream of. As far as I'm concerned, that should be the final word on the matter.

At least he said something with some intelligence in it, though a bunch of it was completely wrong. You, on the other hand, have not made one comment of substance in this thread.

 

[Kickassguy]

There's no need to be a jerk about it, Canucks fan. I was being sincere in my request.

But wouldn't "premeditation resulting in on-ice incidents" have to be things mentioned in the media THAT RESULTED IN ON-ICE INCIDENTS?

Plonk.

Why, exactly? Pre-meditation is planning something beforehand and following through on it. Whether it goes through the media or not, the opposing players knew about it, the opposing coach knew about it... how is this any "better"? And apologies if my sarcasm was unwarranted... I was fairly certain both instances were reasonably common knowledge this season.

Once again the subject was premeditation and threats made in the media. Considering the fact that the hit in question came moments after the hit on Lupul would have required fedoruk to stop the game grab a reporter and release a statement to all the fans in the building he was going an eye for eye
...
Youre giving instances where the premeditation is a few minutes in coming not announced in the media or weeks long. Theres a big difference especially when it comes to the subject at hand, which is the premeditation of the moore incident.

Again, why? You're resorting to an argument over symantics. Pre-meditation is pre-planned, then followed through upon. That's exactly what happened in both those instances. The opposing players and coaches were all aware of it. Just because it wasn't trumpeted to the media doesn't make it any better at all.

kingpest19, dead on Bertuzzi and his buddies made this threats and announcements ahead of time. These examples are people speaking after they went after someone. Realize you are dealing with people who tried to hold a rally to show their support for Bertuzzi after that cowardly act.

Realize that you need to shut the hell up. Don't ever put words into my mouth. I fully support Moore in his rehabilitation and lawsuits, Bertuzzi is dealing, deservedly so, with the consequences of an extremely stupid action. That doesn't mean that people aren't wrong when they say pre-meditation isn't part of the game. It doesn't matter if something is announced in the media, or just known between the players on the ice. The intent of the action is EXACTLY the same. To attempt to differentiate between premeditation between players and premeditation in the media is grasping at straws.

 

[KrisKing*]

At least he said something with some intelligence in it, though a bunch of it was completely wrong. You, on the other hand, have not made one comment of substance in this thread.

The things I said actually continued the conversation. You, on the other hand, are just attacking me for some reason.

 

[Alan Jackson]

I missed this the first time around, and I'll agree with your first part - Alan Eagleson screwing the players over while acting as NHLPA boss is the worst in my opinion.

Bertuzzi's punch is definitely top fifty, however.

Yeah, you're probably right. I guess it is top-50, though I'll admit to not watching every hockey game ever played.

Sorry, the "top fifty" was probably hyperbole on my part to make a point. So, fair criticism.

 

[Ensane]

Premeditation is defined as the planning to commit a certain act beforehand. Now, we can argue day in and day out about what "beforehand" means. You'd likely argue with it happens moments before the offense is committed. However, the law on the other hand has rigorous tests that they use when examining offenses with premeditation. Bertuzzi's offense shows a clear presence of premeditation, whereas every other instance you have referred to there is certainly a high amount of ambiguity.

Do you honestly not see the difference between Bertuzzi waiting two weeks versus smashing Moore moments after Naslund got hit?

 

[KrisKing*]

Premeditation is defined as the planning to commit a certain act beforehand. Now, we can argue day in and day out about what "beforehand" means. You'd likely argue with it happens moments before the offense is committed. However, the law on the other hand has rigorous tests that they use when examining offenses with premeditation. Bertuzzi's offense shows a clear presence of premeditation, whereas every other instance you have referred to there is certainly a high amount of ambiguity.

Do you honestly not see the difference between Bertuzzi waiting two weeks versus smashing Moore moments after Naslund got hit?

Yes, there's a difference between those two.

But there's little difference between bertuzzi waiting two weeks versus Domi saying in the media that he was going to get Niedermeyer, and then later in that series elbowing him in the face. And no, I don't proof that this happened so don't ask. But that is the point I was trying to make.

 

[Kickassguy]

Premeditation is defined as the planning to commit a certain act beforehand. Now, we can argue day in and day out about what "beforehand" means. You'd likely argue with it happens moments before the offense is committed. However, the law on the other hand has rigorous tests that they use when examining offenses with premeditation. Bertuzzi's offense shows a clear presence of premeditation, whereas every other instance you have referred to there is certainly a high amount of ambiguity.

Do you honestly not see the difference between Bertuzzi waiting two weeks versus smashing Moore moments after Naslund got hit?

Fair enough. Two weeks is a lengthy amount of time (although I'm sure the Nucks didn't exactly plan on sending out their star winger to exact revenge on a grinder, given the scrutiny that would be sure to follow). That doesn't really change the intent of those who only wait a period, or two in example to follow through on their threats, though, I don't think. And the Brashear incident was the result of a hit that occurred in the Olympics, no? Brashear was chasing Kasparaitis around all game because of that.

Let me just say that of course I'm not supporting the notion of pre-meditation in hockey or any sport for that matter. I'm just trying to point out that it's there a lot more frequently than we think, whether word gets out in the media beforehand or not, and something being privately pre-meditated versus publically pre-meditated, well, both can have equally unfortunate results.