Tinordi K-O...concussions alert

[Whitesnake]

I don't disagree about Tinordi, I'm not sure where you've gotten that from. In fact, I said myself he needs to focus on hockey, if the best highlights of him are throwing punches, he's in trouble.

As far as heavy suspensions, we've seen the the department of player safety at work, they're not something as a player I would put alot of trust in.

But that's now. Remove fighting and yes, there would need a serious adaptation if that happens.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

This is just laughable really. So you don't like my Plekanec example....fine. I know what I've read and saw over the years. And don't really care if you believe me or not. So how about Subban? He talks a lot on the ice...do you need a link for that? Gallagher drives the net and hits the goalie often...need a link?

But you didn't say "Plekanec crosschecks and slashes a lot". And it doesn't matter if Subban talks "a lot", or if Gallagher drives the net "often". If you want to claim that Subban talks the most, or Gallagher is the "worst" for driving the goalie, you're trying to say something different, and you better be able to back it up. Better than you have this Plekanec issue, anyhow. Even I could quickly pull up articles talking about Subban's trash talk (Google search even predicts that search with autofill) or Gallagher's penchant for the front of the net (again, Gallagher+crash+net yields SEVERAL results). But somewhere else discussing the magnitude/frequency of Plekanec's stick fouls, a guy who has all of 16 PIM and averages ~40 PIM a year? Doesn't seem to exist. Which is to say, you're grossly exaggerating to the point of making something up.

Marchand is one of the most hated guy in the league with tons of cheap shots....Where's his accountability? How the **** do you stop at having a link when the idea of my point is that TONS of people in the league do dirty stuff and yet do NOT have to be accountable for it.

The idea of your post involved Plekanec being some whirlwind of stick fouls that would be impacted in some way by a hypothetical change in how fighting is handled league-wide. In other words, BS.

And the fighting lobby and lovers like you says that fighting makes players accountable...well not really as those players rarely have to drop them. But no....we are more eager to see players to be accountable for a fair hit. What's great too is that for you, only the anti-fighting people are part of a lobby or have an agenda. CLEARLY, the ones who still want that in the game don't have a lobby to be a part with or don't have an agenda.....Of course not. Great world you are living in. Was fun bro. But then, it's so not the place to talk about this....yet you keep responding. I guess that to do what YOU wanted.....somebody will have to stop responding.....I'll give you the first try.....not expecting a response.

You can stop responding if you like. But yes, it is those who would remove fighting from the game who have the agenda for change that doesn't seem congruent with the players' wishes, and are lobbying super hard for their cause on the backs of tragic outlier cases like Boogaard, etc. Accountability is only one part of the equation btw, though it is a major one.

 

[Istvan]

Interesting comment by Mark Tinordi that fighting will be out of the game in 5 years.

 

[RJJ]

Interesting comment by Mark Tinordi that fighting will be out of the game in 5 years.

He is just speculating like everyone else but the NHL has taken a huge step in that direction this year. Came out of nowhere too. All of a sudden teams started dropping their one-dimensional heavy weights like flies. I think there are only a few left in the league. I just wonder if this is here to stay or just a trend that will reverse itself.

 

[sandysan]

Interesting comment by Mark Tinordi that fighting will be out of the game in 5 years.

It's a good thing I've never heard this before.

Going from say 95% to 49% is 5 years is a tall order.

Anyone catch the matt cook weber affair where he gets a little speary, cross checks weber in the face and the covers up with his Mitts velcroed to his hands? Does ANYONE want more of this?

So if weber decides to settle accounts with cookie some time in the future, what's the over under we have the same cast of characters nearly swooning over the mist recent " staged" fight.

 

[lamp9post]

Can't be compared to the anti-fighting movement. Not even close.

Why not? Here is your definition of politics and lobbying:

It's politics because it's entirely lobbying of a special interest group from outside of an organization lobbying for special consideration/change, not because it's in conflict with my opinion. That's what makes it annoying on at least some level though, sure.
.

So by supporting a coaching change how are you not also a lobbyist? You are a member of an outside group (unless you work for the Habs) who seeks change in the form of firing the coach despite the fact that neither players nor management have publicly stated that they wanted a coaching change (players would never publicly state they want a coaching change the same way they would never publicly state they want fighting removed from the game).

So why are those who support a change in the rulebook a 'lobby group' but not those who support a change of a coach? Is it a question of scale? Are you exempt from your own criticism because the lobby group you are a member of is smaller? Based on your description, it seems like anyone with an opinion is a member of a lobby group and therefore can simply be dismissed as 'annoying politics' if that opinion happens to be different than your own. I guess the difference is that I wouldn't seek to bog down a discussion about coaching by re-routing it into a discussion of who has an agenda and is a lobbyist (although many seem to enjoy arguing over this, especially as it relates to Therrien and Desharnais).

You can stop responding if you like. But yes, it is those who would remove fighting from the game who have the agenda for change that doesn't seem congruent with the players' wishes, and are lobbying super hard for their cause on the backs of tragic outlier cases like Boogaard, etc. Accountability is only one part of the equation btw, though it is a major one.

Why don’t we both agree not to dismiss opposing arguments as ‘mere lobbying’ and actually address them based on their faults and merits?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Why not? Here is your definition of politics and lobbying:



So by supporting a coaching change how are you not also a lobbyist? You are a member of an outside group (unless you work for the Habs) who seeks change in the form of firing the coach despite the fact that neither players nor management have publicly stated that they wanted a coaching change (players would never publicly state they want a coaching change the same way they would never publicly state they want fighting removed from the game).

So why are those who support a change in the rulebook a 'lobby group' but not those who support a change of a coach? Is it a question of scale? Are you exempt from your own criticism because the lobby group you are a member of is smaller? Based on your description, it seems like anyone with an opinion is a member of a lobby group and therefore can simply be dismissed as 'annoying politics' if that opinion happens to be different than your own. I guess the difference is that I wouldn't seek to bog down a discussion about coaching by re-routing it into a discussion of who has an agenda and is a lobbyist (although many seem to enjoy arguing over this, especially as it relates to Therrien and Desharnais).

The semantics surrounding "lobbying" is all very interesting and all, but having an opinion and sharing it aren't at ALL the same as acting on that opinion with the goal to affect change. And there's an incredibly fundamental difference between the impetus for change coming from inside vs outside of an organization/corporation/government/etc.

But enough of the lessons on that topic. If you don't get it, it doesn't matter. If you want to say that I'm simply lobbying for the lobbying to stop, I won't necessarily argue with you about that. But I'm not necessarily lobbying to keep fighting in the game though, as there's no expressed intention internally to remove it.

Why don’t we both agree not to dismiss opposing arguments as ‘mere lobbying’ and actually address them based on their faults and merits?

Hmm... have I remembered to "address the faults and merits" of any arguments over the dozens of threads, and countless post/character count? Yup. Pretty sure I have. If you missed any of it, dig harder. I've touched on the origin and expressed intentions of the movement to remove fighting pretty extensively at this point.

 

[lamp9post]

The semantics surrounding "lobbying" is all very interesting and all, but having an opinion and sharing it aren't at ALL the same as acting on that opinion with the goal to affect change. And there's an incredibly fundamental difference between the impetus for change coming from inside vs outside of an organization/corporation/government/etc.

But enough of the lessons on that topic. If you don't get it, it doesn't matter. If you want to say that I'm simply lobbying for the lobbying to stop, I won't necessarily argue with you about that. But I'm not necessarily lobbying to keep fighting in the game though, as there's no expressed intention internally to remove it.



Hmm... have I remembered to "address the faults and merits" of any arguments over the dozens of threads, and countless post/character count? Yup. Pretty sure I have. If you missed any of it, dig harder. I've touched on the origin and expressed intentions of the movement to remove fighting pretty extensively at this point.

Agreed, so why do you accuse and dismiss other posters for being 'lobbyists' simply for expressing their opinion on this message board?

 

[Whitesnake]

But you didn't say "Plekanec crosschecks and slashes a lot". And it doesn't matter if Subban talks "a lot", or if Gallagher drives the net "often". If you want to claim that Subban talks the most, or Gallagher is the "worst" for driving the goalie, you're trying to say something different, and you better be able to back it up. Better than you have this Plekanec issue, anyhow. Even I could quickly pull up articles talking about Subban's trash talk (Google search even predicts that search with autofill) or Gallagher's penchant for the front of the net (again, Gallagher+crash+net yields SEVERAL results). But somewhere else discussing the magnitude/frequency of Plekanec's stick fouls, a guy who has all of 16 PIM and averages ~40 PIM a year? Doesn't seem to exist. Which is to say, you're grossly exaggerating to the point of making something up.



The idea of your post involved Plekanec being some whirlwind of stick fouls that would be impacted in some way by a hypothetical change in how fighting is handled league-wide. In other words, BS.

Okay let's go at it again...the idea of my post was a response to somebody talking about "stick work". We've seen multiple posts on this very own HF board and I've read, heard and seen mention about Plekanec stickwork over the years that wasn't often called but yet was present and he was known as such throughout the league. Now....I've personnally NEVER noticed that as much as it was reported but this thread isn't about Plekanec. It's about Tinordi and then it went to fighting, accountability, stick work and such. So the idea of my post, even if you don't like Pleks name so remove his name and replace by whoever you want who relates more for you to stick work than him, was about accountability, stick work and such. THAT WAS my idea of the post. Now you're trying to make a big diversion for some kind of odd reasons. So again, remove Pleks, and use the other names instead. But then somehow because you don't like my point about Plekanec is makes my WHOLE idea about stick work and accountability BS? Great, so the day you say something bad about Therrien that I totally disagree and ask you to share a link you won't be able to do or won't want to do it, I then have the right to call your whole argumentation against Therrien as BS. See how it sounds? Again, remove Pleks from the list. Talk to me about stickwork if there are no fighting. And talk to me about, in today's league, the lack of accountability that smaller players who plays with an edge do have right now since no tough guys will ever fight them anyway. But I guess that at that point, you'll just refer me to the links you posted before....Fine.

You can stop responding if you like. But yes, it is those who would remove fighting from the game who have the agenda for change that doesn't seem congruent with the players' wishes, and are lobbying super hard for their cause on the backs of tragic outlier cases like Boogaard, etc. Accountability is only one part of the equation btw, though it is a major one.

But then I'ad ask you what are the other parts, but I already know the links you posted earlier. But tell me this....what is the difference between an agenda and an opinion? If my opinion that I don't see anything relevant fighting an agenda because I disagree with you. But if I'd agree with you it would make it an opinion?

And the day, and it won't happen, that you would find my name in a list of people called "The activists who ORDERS the NHL to stop fighting or else...", THEN you can call me a lobbyist. Until then, I'M just a guy who posts on a message board. I'd love to believe that I have way more power than I actually do....but I know I don't.

 

[Whitesnake]

Agreed, so why do you accuse and dismiss other posters for being 'lobbyists' simply for expressing their opinion on this message board?

I'm still looking as to where we are actually ACTING on our opinion with the goal to affect change. I'd like to think that I'm just this franco who doesn't understand that statement, but somehow it seems to mean that we are actually members of a group who are continually whining to the NHL to stop the violence....I will have to check but I'M pretty sure I'm not in those groups....People can't seem to be able to make the difference between not finding fighting relevant, wanting to see it be abolished and YET not turn around when a fight occurs. Yep, I will watch those fights. But if the league decides that it's over and done with, I won't cry and will be glad. And whenver I need a fix on violence, I'd watch boxing and MMA. So I'm not an anti-violence guy. I'M just somebody who doesn't believe in that spectacle within the game of hockey. Plain and simple.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Agreed, so why do you accuse and dismiss other posters for being 'lobbyists' simply for expressing their opinion on this message board?

Despite my mentioning the media several times, you think I'm just talking about posters on this board? "The movement" is much larger than that.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Okay let's go at it again...the idea of my post was a response to somebody talking about "stick work". We've seen multiple posts on this very own HF board and I've read, heard and seen mention about Plekanec stickwork over the years that wasn't often called but yet was present and he was known as such throughout the league. Now....I've personnally NEVER noticed that as much as it was reported but this thread isn't about Plekanec. It's about Tinordi and then it went to fighting, accountability, stick work and such. So the idea of my post, even if you don't like Pleks name so remove his name and replace by whoever you want who relates more for you to stick work than him, was about accountability, stick work and such. THAT WAS my idea of the post. Now you're trying to make a big diversion for some kind of odd reasons. So again, remove Pleks, and use the other names instead. But then somehow because you don't like my point about Plekanec is makes my WHOLE idea about stick work and accountability BS? Great, so the day you say something bad about Therrien that I totally disagree and ask you to share a link you won't be able to do or won't want to do it, I then have the right to call your whole argumentation against Therrien as BS. See how it sounds? Again, remove Pleks from the list. Talk to me about stickwork if there are no fighting. And talk to me about, in today's league, the lack of accountability that smaller players who plays with an edge do have right now since no tough guys will ever fight them anyway. But I guess that at that point, you'll just refer me to the links you posted before....Fine.

Okay, so you just meant "Anyone in general" is the "worst ever" at something, and we're supposed to take it any more seriously now?

But then I'ad ask you what are the other parts, but I already know the links you posted earlier. But tell me this....what is the difference between an agenda and an opinion? If my opinion that I don't see anything relevant fighting an agenda because I disagree with you. But if I'd agree with you it would make it an opinion?

And the day, and it won't happen, that you would find my name in a list of people called "The activists who ORDERS the NHL to stop fighting or else...", THEN you can call me a lobbyist. Until then, I'M just a guy who posts on a message board. I'd love to believe that I have way more power than I actually do....but I know I don't.

Believe me when I tell you, I'm challenging your opinion, not your "power".

 

[Whitesnake]

Okay, so you just meant "Anyone in general" is the "worst ever" at something, and we're supposed to take it any more seriously now?".

I think that I was pretty clear before. Point was totally about accountability or lack thereof despite the presence of tough guys. And you are totally entitled to think whatever you want. It's not like I'm going to think that you have an agenda against me or anything like that....it's "just" your opinion.

Believe me when I tell you, I'm challenging your opinion, not your "power".

With the arguments you provided, you're challenging me to nothing. I told that you that I was against fighting in the NHL as it doesn't bring anything. Which is MY OPINION. Yet, when I tried to explained it, you decided to refer me as previous threads on the subject. That's actually not what I called being challenged.

 

[groovejuice]

The semantics surrounding "lobbying" is all very interesting and all, but having an opinion and sharing it aren't at ALL the same as acting on that opinion with the goal to affect change. And there's an incredibly fundamental difference between the impetus for change coming from inside vs outside of an organization/corporation/government/etc.

But enough of the lessons on that topic. If you don't get it, it doesn't matter. If you want to say that I'm simply lobbying for the lobbying to stop, I won't necessarily argue with you about that. But I'm not necessarily lobbying to keep fighting in the game though, as there's no expressed intention internally to remove it.



Hmm... have I remembered to "address the faults and merits" of any arguments over the dozens of threads, and countless post/character count? Yup. Pretty sure I have. If you missed any of it, dig harder. I've touched on the origin and expressed intentions of the movement to remove fighting pretty extensively at this point.

I like your mutual discussion. It's intelligent and quite interesting.

I'd only add that, to my knowledge, no-one is lobbying.

Lobbying implies influencing those with decisive power with seduction, argument, bribery, blackmail...

Nobody is a lobbyist here. We're a commonly bound group with a very broad interpretation of what constitutes wise and strategic management of our players and the amount of success of our management group.

We're discussing, we're conversing. Often we're argumentative. But we're really not lobbying. Because Therrien, Bergevin, and Molson don't care or read our opinions.

 

[Malreg]

While you guys argue over semantics of how to argue, I'll just leave this here:

Matt Holmes ‏@dogsradio 1h1 hour ago

Tinordi is a go tonight for @BulldogsAHL

 

[aresknights]

Good news!

 

[CN_paladin]

While you guys argue over semantics of how to argue, I'll just leave this here:

Matt Holmes ‏@dogsradio 1h1 hour ago

Tinordi is a go tonight for @BulldogsAHL

So the team doctors are 100% sure that he wasn't concussed. I would have given him more time to feel it out.

 

[jaffy27]

So the team doctors are 100% sure that he wasn't concussed. I would have given him more time to feel it out.

Is that assumption based on your medical expertise or is it just a hunch on your part, and if so, how much more time precisely, and based on what facts....oh that's right, you have none, but I can assure you team doctors do (key word here is Doctor). Don't want to sound brash, but I'd never ask a painter how to land an airplane.

 

[Team_Spirit]

So Tinordi played last night. No concussion.

5 Tinordi, Jarred D 0 0 +1 3 0


please close this thread.