Injury Report: Viktor Stalberg

Status
Not open for further replies.

Waivers

Registered User
Sep 27, 2013
1,659
898
NY
Well said eco, but still, if I'm a player in the 1970's or any time era you want, pretttttttty sure you know what you are getting yourself into.

Don't wanna play? Then don't play- terminate your contract wherever and go be a regular person bagging groceries or doing accounting work. The excitement isn't the same, nor is the paycheck. :laugh:
 

eco's bones

Registered User
Jul 21, 2005
25,987
12,221
Elmira NY
Well said eco, but still, if I'm a player in the 1970's or any time era you want, pretttttttty sure you know what you are getting yourself into.

Don't wanna play? Then don't play- terminate your contract wherever and go be a regular person bagging groceries or doing accounting work. The excitement isn't the same, nor is the paycheck. :laugh:

Most of those guys from back in the 60's and 70's did not make a lot of money. When the WHA came into being (1972-73--or the year after the Rangers and Bruins went to the cup finals) salaries took a bump up because NHL teams no longer had exclusive rights to players. There was no such thing as free agency then but now this other league gave players another option.

I remember reading Brad Park's 'Play the Man' which was pre-WHA and we're talking about an all star defenseman who at the time was the second best defenseman in the entire league. He was fighting Emile Francis for a $15K a year contract---they would have yearly battles over $500 raises. About the mid to late 70's a $100K a year contact became a really really big deal. Yeah----there's been a lot of inflation since then but even so. Those old timers quite often had summer jobs. Phil Esposito drove a tractor trailer his first several years when he was with Chicago. Ed Giacomin went back to the salt or silver mine or whatever they had back in Sudbury Ont.

The guys who originally fought to start a player's union got ****ed with seriously. Ted Lindsay and Doug Harvey--two of the greatest players of their era got really ****ed with. Some went to the minors never to be heard from again.

The NHL--has this thing about tradition blah, blah, blah--loves all the ceremonial trappings--the outdoor game hearkening back to bygone eras--retiring the numbers of guys like Howell and Bathgate but when it comes to actually doing anything for these guys they don't want to know them.
 
Last edited:

Ola

Registered User
Apr 10, 2004
34,597
11,595
Sweden
I don't think it's fair to just say Stahlberg had his "head down," he was engaged with another player, that was why his attention was not on Gudas. Gudas took advantage of the distraction to head shot him.

I think it's absurd that Quintal let go the Rinaldo hit on Coots and Browns head butting of eh what's his name the SJ player.

Anyway, Gudas makes a hockey hit here. N-S. A D stepping up a forward in the neutral zone. Can't take them out of the game, and when you are picking things apart into details you have to remember how extremely fast a situation like this is happening and what's at stake (ie the D missing the forward looking like the biggest fool of the day).

I think this one is on Stahlberg. He knows what's coming, if it wasn't Gudas he probably would have been alright. A lot of pretty soft Ds in this league. Can't take those risks...
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,463
11,444
parts unknown
I still don't see how it was a suspendable hit. It was dirty in the sense that Gudas targeted a player engaged with another. A dirt bag move. But it's not illegal.
 

bhamill

Registered User
Apr 16, 2012
3,597
4,132
I guess I'm in the minority on this.
Believe me, I love watching the game played hard and if Gudas had caught him in the chest rather than the head I would be calling it a clean hard hit, and wishing our D would do more of it. With all of the concussion problems I just can't condone the continuation of head shots; by other players or our own.
 
Nov 5, 2007
2,742
380
Jersey City
I guess I'm in the minority on this.
Believe me, I love watching the game played hard and if Gudas had caught him in the chest rather than the head I would be calling it a clean hard hit, and wishing our D would do more of it. With all of the concussion problems I just can't condone the continuation of head shots; by other players or our own.

I am in agreement. I dont care if the guys head is down, its no excuse. Find another way to play the body without hitting the head.

And no, I'm not advocating for playing with your head down. I just feel that more injuries than necessary occur because people want to go in for that big highlight reel hit. They see a guy with his head down or a guy already distracted by a defender or 2 and go "man I'm gonna lay this guy out." Its flat out predatory.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,463
11,444
parts unknown
Then we may as well take checking out of the game. If a shot to the chest or shoulder that results in a hit to the head is too physical for you guys, we may as well have a non-check game.

I'm sorry, but that hit was clean. The only thing that was dirty was him going after a guy engaged with another player. But the hit itself was about as clean as can possibly be. Was right to the chest. Talk about penalizing plays where a guy is already engaged if you want. I wouldn't have a big issue with that. But saying things like "find another way to play the body without hitting the head" is ridiculous when talking about a checking league.
 

TheTakedown

Puck is Life
Jul 11, 2012
13,689
1,480
at first glance it reminded me of Dustin Brown's headshot that he committed a few weeks back.

After reviewing it, it was simply an awkward hit. a fine at most would be sufficient. Sucks Stalberg got hurt :/
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,463
11,444
parts unknown
And let's all be honest. If McIlrath did this to Raffl, we'd all be saying it was a clean hit.

It really sucks that Stalberg got hurt. Really sucks. But it was within the rules.
 
Nov 5, 2007
2,742
380
Jersey City
Then we may as well take checking out of the game. If a shot to the chest or shoulder that results in a hit to the head is too physical for you guys, we may as well have a non-check game.

I'm sorry, but that hit was clean. The only thing that was dirty was him going after a guy engaged with another player. But the hit itself was about as clean as can possibly be. Was right to the chest. Talk about penalizing plays where a guy is already engaged if you want. I wouldn't have a big issue with that. But saying things like "find another way to play the body without hitting the head" is ridiculous when talking about a checking league.

Whats ridiculous is that you think the only 2 options are headshots or not hitting. Do you really think there was nothing Gudas could have done in order to not scramble Stalbergs brain?
 

BobbyJet

I am Canadian
Oct 27, 2010
29,736
9,838
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Sorry you old schoolers (of which I'm one BTW), but if that wasn't an intentional shot to the head, I don't know what is. If Torres administered that hit he would have had the book thrown at him. Gudas knew exactly what he was doing - trying to injure.

For the NHL to turn the other cheek on a hit like that is inconsistent to say the least and is sending the wrong message.
 

Hi ImHFNYR

Registered User
Jan 10, 2013
7,173
3,087
Wherever I'm standing atm
Whats ridiculous is that you think the only 2 options are headshots or not hitting. Do you really think there was nothing Gudas could have done in order to not scramble Stalbergs brain?

It sounds like he's interpreting it as "There wasn't a hit to the head, it was clean."

I didn't think he was saying that it was a choice b/t just those two. You may disagree that the head was actually hit. I'm just trying to clarify bc it seems like you're both arguing different things. I didn't see the play but just reading the back and forth here it seems like an error in interpreting each others points.
 

Off Sides

Registered User
Sep 8, 2008
9,755
5,585
I'm probably considered old too, and I just don't see these hits as anything that resembled older style hockey either.

Too many factors to list of what has changed over the years, but overall these hits back in the day would have been met with some sort of retribution, call it what you will, the players themselves would have done something.

Now the league wants to get rid of that sort of thing, but they do not put any of their own policing into effect and it's just a slippery slope that is going to lead to more hits like this.

If the game were even remotely emotional, if these guys were out there knocking the stuffing out of each other, I could see players going up high with these sort of "his head was down" hits, and the players would be expecting it.

But to me all these hits are is a punk move. I am not squaring off with him, so I'll wait until he looks the other way and then sock him sort of thing. The more the players get away with that sort of thing the more it will happen. The league has removed the players from trying to do anything about it, and they themselves are promoting it by not doing anything about it themselves.
 

BobbyJet

I am Canadian
Oct 27, 2010
29,736
9,838
Dundas, Ontario. Can
I'm probably considered old too, and I just don't see these hits as anything that resembled older style hockey either.

Too many factors to list of what has changed over the years, but overall these hits back in the day would have been met with some sort of retribution, call it what you will, the players themselves would have done something.

Now the league wants to get rid of that sort of thing, but they do not put any of their own policing into effect and it's just a slippery slope that is going to lead to more hits like this.

If the game were even remotely emotional, if these guys were out there knocking the stuffing out of each other, I could see players going up high with these sort of "his head was down" hits, and the players would be expecting it.

But to me all these hits are is a punk move. I am not squaring off with him, so I'll wait until he looks the other way and then sock him sort of thing. The more the players get away with that sort of thing the more it will happen. The league has removed the players from trying to do anything about it, and they themselves are promoting it by not doing anything about it themselves.

This post sums it up nicely. The bolded in particular.
 

The Lunatic Fridge

why is my name here?
Aug 20, 2008
35,049
73
New York
Sorry you old schoolers (of which I'm one BTW), but if that wasn't an intentional shot to the head, I don't know what is. If Torres administered that hit he would have had the book thrown at him. Gudas knew exactly what he was doing - trying to injure.

For the NHL to turn the other cheek on a hit like that is inconsistent to say the least and is sending the wrong message.

It's ironic because before the game, people were saying how the flyers were soft now and the only real dbag on their team was no gudas (and simmonds to an extent) low and behold look what happens.

:facepalm:
 

eco's bones

Registered User
Jul 21, 2005
25,987
12,221
Elmira NY
I'm probably considered old too, and I just don't see these hits as anything that resembled older style hockey either.

Too many factors to list of what has changed over the years, but overall these hits back in the day would have been met with some sort of retribution, call it what you will, the players themselves would have done something.

Now the league wants to get rid of that sort of thing, but they do not put any of their own policing into effect and it's just a slippery slope that is going to lead to more hits like this.

If the game were even remotely emotional, if these guys were out there knocking the stuffing out of each other, I could see players going up high with these sort of "his head was down" hits, and the players would be expecting it.

But to me all these hits are is a punk move. I am not squaring off with him, so I'll wait until he looks the other way and then sock him sort of thing. The more the players get away with that sort of thing the more it will happen. The league has removed the players from trying to do anything about it, and they themselves are promoting it by not doing anything about it themselves.

It brings to mind the Orpik hit on Loui Eriksson a couple years back. The puck ricocheting off the boards well away from Eriksson and Orpik catching him with a blind side high hit. Orpik's a player who has done this a lot. He's also a player who will run away from the pay back. That night the pay back was Shawn Thornton and there wasn't any running away because Thornton didn't let it happen. Afterwards Eriksson wasn't the only player concussed though Thornton was suspended 10 games for it.

The NHL doesn't really want that kind of policing of the game coming from the players. But that's where the opening for players like Orpik to do what they do--to walk the line in the gray area between suspendable and not suspendable hits. As long as they don't cross that line there's almost never any ramification.

Justice is this concept that hardly ever gets things right. It means different things to different people. What the league wants it can make but that's not likely to be just either. At least to me the truth is if you're depending on the NHL to make things right......well good luck.....it's very unlikely that that's going to happen.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,463
11,444
parts unknown
Sorry you old schoolers (of which I'm one BTW), but if that wasn't an intentional shot to the head, I don't know what is. If Torres administered that hit he would have had the book thrown at him. Gudas knew exactly what he was doing - trying to injure.

For the NHL to turn the other cheek on a hit like that is inconsistent to say the least and is sending the wrong message.

It wasn't an intentional shot to the head. It wasn't an attempt to injure.
 

mandiblesofdoom

Registered User
May 24, 2012
2,238
1,212
An unintentional hit to the head is also problematic.

It's a tricky issue - skaters lean forward, putting the head in the way of a body check. It requires the hitter to get low to ensure he doesn't clip the jaw.
 

Off Sides

Registered User
Sep 8, 2008
9,755
5,585
It brings to mind the Orpik hit on Loui Eriksson a couple years back. The puck ricocheting off the boards well away from Eriksson and Orpik catching him with a blind side high hit. Orpik's a player who has done this a lot. He's also a player who will run away from the pay back. That night the pay back was Shawn Thornton and there wasn't any running away because Thornton didn't let it happen. Afterwards Eriksson wasn't the only player concussed though Thornton was suspended 10 games for it.

The NHL doesn't really want that kind of policing of the game coming from the players. But that's where the opening for players like Orpik to do what they do--to walk the line in the gray area between suspendable and not suspendable hits. As long as they don't cross that line there's almost never any ramification.

Justice is this concept that hardly ever gets things right. It means different things to different people. What the league wants it can make but that's not likely to be just either. At least to me the truth is if you're depending on the NHL to make things right......well good luck.....it's very unlikely that that's going to happen.

I do not believe the NHL wants to implement a system that would possibly make things "right" or fair.

The only way to do so in my mind would be to have set mandatory punishment without considering intent. Since no one can ever prove intent it only makes sense. Yet that would mean they'd have to treat and punish all the players the same regardless of marketability and they would not, so it would just make it more transparent they are treating players differently. They are never going to apply the same rules to Pronger or AO as they do to others.

Similar to the officials, if they wanted more consistency they would have put in measures to get it. Even when they do, such as coaches challenges and reviews they still get it wrong often enough to question their intentions. They want the refs to manage the games, they want to be able to manage the refs. They'd lose a lot of power to be "subjective" by having consistency within the officiating and within the disciplinary system and I think they believe that would be bad for business.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->