[News] Kessel suspended rest of preseason. Will not miss any regular season games

[Magnum PEI]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

A 6 foot, 215 pound fighter turtling to a 6 foot 1, 219 pound fighter is significantly worse and different than Kessel turtling to a 6 foot 8, 270 pounder

Turtling > Two handed ankle slashes

A lot of goons are in the 6-foot range. Doesn't mean they can't beat the snot out of people. Look at Rick Rypien.
I think Kessel would look pretty foolish if he immediately dropped to his stomach and covered his head, but whatever. (He ended up looking silly with the spear anways). He got one good whack in to get some distance, the second one was little more than a tap.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI

People still make fun of Claude Lemieux for turtling against Daren McCarty.
At the end of the day, he slashed a big goon twice and got suspended three games. I'm not sure what people expected to happen.

That was Lemieux's schtick. It wasn't that he couldn't fight. He was the Jarkko Ruutu of the day. He would go around like he wanted to drop the gloves and would try to draw penalties by making himself look helpless.

This thread is just symptomatic of the irrational Leaf/Toronto hate. If this was Baertschi doing this against a 6'8 270lb goon attacking him, I think he'd be getting more credit and less guff about it.

[Flames89]

This conversation has entered into the absurd

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by valo403

Plenty of proof that Scott very well could have if not fended off. Literally no possibility Kessel's first slash could have hit anyone in the head, barring teleportation.

Ok, so it is fair to assume that under different circumstances that ignore what Rob Ray claims Scott told Kessel, that Kessel could have been beaten into a pulp. But it is not fair to assume that under different circumstances, Kessel's wild swings could have resulted in an injury to someone else?

Dude, that doesn't make sense.

Also, tell me, did Kessel look both ways and behind him to make sure that his wild swings were not putting others at risk?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Ok, so it is fair to assume that under different circumstances that ignore what Rob Ray claims Scott told Kessel, that Kessel could have been beaten into a pulp. But it is not fair to assume that under different circumstances, Kessel's wild swings could have resulted in an injury to someone else?

Dude, that doesn't make sense.

Also, tell me, did Kessel look both ways and behind him to make sure that his wild swings were not putting others at risk?

I addressed the vociferous claim that Kessel's first swing could have killed someone. It simply could not have. Done.

[Hockeyboi]

Originally Posted by valo403

He isn't getting off with his second slash, that's exactly what he was suspended for.

Your idea of Kessel fighting Scott is ridiculous. He would have got his ass handed to him, and very likely would have been injured. It's manning up to get the #### kicked out of you by a neanderthal when you aren't a fighter and aren't ever expected to fight? Really? That sounds more like idiocy than anything else.

Kessel didn't want to be a "hard man", he wanted to be a skilled forward. There's no reason he should have to even entertain the possibility of dropping the gloves with some no talent goon.

On what planet is Kessel getting suspended for the rest of the pre-season a punishment?... He should of gotten the suspension in the reg season same as Clarkson..... As for Kessel not being a hard man I agree but he wanted to act hard when he had a stick in his hand and slashed a guy that was on his way down hitting the ice!!

[strombad]

Originally Posted by valo403

I addressed the vociferous claim that Kessel's first swing could have killed someone. It simply could not have. Done.

But ignored the vociferous claim that Scott could have beaten Kessel to a pulp without ever having thrown a punch. Hypocritical.

[BlackWallStreet]

And kessel did it the week before against schenn what a lil bytch boy

[valo403]

Originally Posted by strombad

But ignored the vociferous claim that Scott could have beaten Kessel to a pulp without ever having thrown a punch. Hypocritical.

Hmm, now where in the post that I responded to was that mentioned?

You seem to like to have your own little conversations, and when I don't engage in them it results in these odd little outbursts. Perhaps respond to the words on the page, not the voices in your head.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Hockeyboi

On what planet is Kessel getting suspended for the rest of the pre-season a punishment?... He should of gotten the suspension in the reg season same as Clarkson..... As for Kessel not being a hard man I agree but he wanted to act hard when he had a stick in his hand and slashed a guy that was on his way down hitting the ice!!

Huh? I don't think it's a major suspension, but it's still punishment. Not sure how you can deny that.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by valo403

Hmm, now where in the post that I responded to was that mentioned?

You seem to like to have your own little conversations, and when I don't engage in them it results in these odd little outbursts. Perhaps respond to the words on the page, not the voices in your head.

Oh, allow me!

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Ok, so it is fair to assume that under different circumstances that ignore what Rob Ray claims Scott told Kessel, that Kessel could have been beaten into a pulp. But it is not fair to assume that under different circumstances, Kessel's wild swings could have resulted in an injury to someone else?

Dude, that doesn't make sense.

Also, tell me, did Kessel look both ways and behind him to make sure that his wild swings were not putting others at risk?

But then...

Originally Posted by valo403

I addressed the vociferous claim that Kessel's first swing could have killed someone. It simply could not have. Done.

Interesting.
Go be condescending to someone else, you're just a sad troll who is struggling to say anything logical or significant, you're embarrassing yourself.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by strombad

Oh, allow me!



But then...



Interesting.
Go be condescending to someone else, you're just a sad troll who is struggling to say anything logical or significant, you're embarrassing yourself.

Perhaps go back to the initial post I responded to.

Hint, Posts 181 and 185

[strombad]

Originally Posted by valo403

Perhaps go back to the initial post I responded to

Where you ignored the possibility?

You tell me how zero punches can result in beating someone to a pulp, and I'll use the same logic to tell you how using your stick as a weapon (even if pointed at the ankles) can result in an injury.

I believe we've discussed the idea of probability and possibly, two terms which deeply confused you, but we can go there again if you are having trouble clicking back a page.

Sorry kid, time to go outside, you're done.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by strombad

Where you ignored the possibility?

You tell me how zero punches can result in beating someone to a pulp, and I'll use the same logic to tell you how using your stick as a weapon (even if pointed at the ankles) can result in an injury.

I believe we've discussed the idea of probability and possibly, two terms which deeply confused you, but we can go there again if you are having trouble clicking back a page.

Sorry kid, time to go outside, you're done.

Ignored what possibility? Kessel did swing his stick, there's no mysteries there. That swing simply could not have killed someone, unless ankle trauma can lead to death. Read the words I responded too, you're once again demonstrating an inability to respond to what is written, instead flying off into something you've imagined.

And please, give me a run down, I'd love to see a demonstration of you actually grasping those concepts.

I'm going to stay right here thanks, lunch break isn't for a while. If you want to keep going on about things I didn't write perhaps take it to PM.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Clearly with Scott tied up his second slash is intent to injure, not self defense.

Clearly, with Scott punching Brennan in the head, Kessel's second slash is intent to try to help the guy who just saved him and had no real intention of injuring anyone.

See how that works? The difference is that my point of view is supported by what is going on in the video, while your point of view is just a made up assumption based on your ability to read Kessel's mind.

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Now you justify the second swing by saying he is swinging his stick to help his fellow player? So which is it, it's ok now to swing your stick to help your fellow players when there is a scuffle. BTW Kessel almost hit the ref who already was involved in the play doing his job.

I don't know what "which is it" you are trying to ask me. You should try framing your questions better so that there are two or more options and one of those options should actually include the stance that I have written out in my previous post.

My post clearly is discussing the BS notion that Kessel is "out of danger" one second after he is "in danger". One second does not significantly change a situation.

The only difference from the one second to the other is that Brennan came to Kessel's defense and then Scott immediately punched Brennan in the face. Kessel is obviously looking at Scott and seeing Scott punching Brennan. Then Kessel suddenly decides that instead of continuing to run away that he would go back in to hit Scott again.

Between the options of "Kessel suddenly felt the urge to attack" versus "Kessel suddenly felt the urge to defend the guy that came to his defense" the latter is much more realistic in my mind.

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

BTW Kessel almost hit the ref who already was involved in the play doing his job.

BTW, who gives a crap if Kessel "almost" hit the ref? I am not generally very impressed by Kessel but I feel confident that even his most wild lumberjack swing has more control to it than anything Scott (or anyone on this message board) does in a given day. That's why Kessel is a top-whatever forward in the NHL, which means he is one of the best in the world (he has exceptional hand-eye coordination).

[theg69]

I have nothing to add - came for the entertaining fights, left satisfied.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by valo403

Ignored what possibility? Kessel did swing his stick, there's no mysteries there. That swing simply could not have killed someone, unless ankle trauma can lead to death. Read the words I responded too, you're once again demonstrating an inability to respond to what is written, instead flying off into something you've imagined.

And please, give me a run down, I'd love to see a demonstration of you actually grasping those concepts.

I'm going to stay right here thanks, lunch break isn't for a while. If you want to keep going on about things I didn't write perhaps take it to PM.

Do you have trouble understanding things? Is English a second language? You seem obsessed with Kessel's first swing!

I'm not arguing that it's terribly likely Kessel could have killed someone with THAT swing (though it's possible, Scott could have tripped and hit hit head on the ice, amongst other things), but what everyone here is saying is that using your stick as a weapon can lead to injury. I'm not sure if you haven't had your coffee yet, but you can't seem to grasp that.

Now, WHY is it you should be grasping that? Because in your extremely hypocritical nature, you continuously talk about Kessel in terms of what DID happen, but refer to Scott in terms of what MIGHT have happened.

You can't have it both ways, unless you have split personality disorder and you're just confused.

What DID happen:
Scott threw zero punches
Kessel chopped his leg with the stick

If you want to be hypothetical and talk about Scott beating Kessel up, something that never happened, then you have to allow for hypothesis over what might have happened with Kessel's use of his stick as a weapon.

You can't have both. Choose one:
1. Scott doesn't touch Kessel, Kessel chops him in the leg causing no injury
2. Scott hypothetically beats Kessel to a pulp, Kessel hypothetical swings at a different area and seriously injures Scott

How, can you respond to that and address it fully? Or will you gloss over the area that has lead to you embarrassing yourself repeatedly?

[valo403]

I can talk about different things and have different conversations at the same time, it's an interesting thing that my brain has managed to figure out, maybe one day you'll develop this skill most of us acquire as children.

Once again, read the words that I responded to.

Again, if you'd like to keep prattling on about things I didn't say please take it to PM.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by valo403

I can talk about different things and have different conversations at the same time, it's an interesting thing that my brain has managed to figure out, maybe one day you'll develop this skill most of us acquire as children.

Once again, read the words that I responded to.

Again, if you'd like to keep prattling on about things I didn't say please take it to PM.

When one is in direct conflict with the other, it's called being a hypocrite. If you'd like I can provide a definition so you're aware.

The condescending thing is fun isn't it? I find it less fun when your best attempt at a jab is a silly attempt at pretending someone has missed out on knowledge obtained during childhood, but if that's the best you can muster, then do your best! Perhaps soon you can go back to your classic "stupid" and "moronic" jabs which you had to be told were not part of mature conversation. You reference to childhood seems quite fitting indeed.

[Coach]

Keep going. Someone's mind is going to be changed. I just know it!....