Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Actually, that's basically what the article that you mocked was arguing
|
While curiously silent, despite being an avid follower of the Penguins (Crosby superfan) and regular blogger, when Crosby mangled Methot.
Hard to justify an empassioned plea for wide sweeping rule changes and a bizarre attributation of concussion issues to hack and slash hockey, just because Crosby got a concussion, when Crosby doing some slicing and dicing isn't even worth a mention. He even goes on to mention another, totally different slash by Niskanen from games earlier that had zero impact on Crosby. But Methot? That seems like a great example if you want to talk about the problem with hacks and slashes, yet strangely absent!
I agree with the punishment. 5 and a game. He seems to think the punishment is light because officiating is trash and NHL and concussions and Crosby.
I don't have a problem with the conclusion: "penalise more slashes," I have a problem with the conclusion: "penalise more slashes on Crosby," which is where the article arrives and shows, really, no sign of being anything but the injustice done to Crosby. The article was embarrassing to read.
You seem stuck on whether the pinky mangling was as bad as a concussion or not. It doesn't matter, and as long as you keep thinking the result matters then you fail at being objective. The action is all that matters, the injury does not.