CDSF- (2)Blues vs (3)Blackhawks (Blues win 4-3)

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

Someone asked if I am proud of our guys? Yes, yes I am...every team has an agitator (except, perhaps, your guys), Shaw knocked down Boumeester, I think, while driving late to the net, happens all the time...Forwards and D jousting as the forwards drive the net...the Blues D-man, whoever it was, surely went down easily.

As far as the Ladd interference...I think, because it was in the middle of the ice, it seemed worse than it was...but, I think, also, if you roll back your DVRs, and watch the Blues "finish their checks", about the same amount of time between the guy getting rid of the puck, and getting hit, has been similar to that Ladd play.

As far as Crawford going Billy Smith on Fabbri...Fabbri, had nowhere to go, and hit Crawford high...but, I certainly, also, didn't see any extraordinary effort to "avoid the contact"...the extra Blues call, apparently was somebody spearing Ladd in a scrum.

The Blues have been somewhat lucky, that the 'Hawks are simply not a physical team, up and down the lineup...A couple of times, I thought that the 'Hawks could lay a clean hit on Tarasenko, as he pulled up on the half-boards, I think TVR passed up an opportunity to smoke him, just before one of the PPs that led to a goal, but, only Ladd and Seabrook really seem to hit.

Elliot was both good and lucky (the puck that got behind him and flipped up, instead of rolling in, for instance). And this series looks liable to be "stolen" by him.

But, my guys have been down in series before, and have proven to be a "tough out"...

On to game 5...

You honestly think Fabbri didn't try and not hit him? There was no spear, it was initially reported as a spear then changed ebcause it was wrong.

Refs blew it, no other way to describe.

Shaw was late and not driving for the puck he had his eyes on the the Blues player and hit him. Fair and easy call to make. Bone head play.

And even defending the Ladd hit...

Good grief.

[albertGQ]

Shaw should be suspended. What he said was worse than Avery's "sloppy seconds" comment.

Yes, I realize the differences like Shaw's comments were in the heat of the battle and Avery's was premeditated.

He's not a superstar so I think he league will throw the book at him. Something like2 or 3 games but if the Hawks lose game 5, it will be 4 more regular season games plus game 5.

[Hackey]

Shaw's intention using the word has nothing to do with LGBT I'm sure. Saying it on the ice during an intense hockey game I really hope he doesn't get a suspension. Just not a fan of people taking ownership of words and telling you how you can use them. It's all about context and intent. A lot of words have multiple meanings and words change over time. A warning maybe to be careful what you say on the ice seems like enough.

[flamesfan1297]

^Agreed. Give him a warning this time, and if it happens again then you can give him a suspension. It's an emotional game and I'm sure he never meant it in any way against LGBT. Flipping off the ref though, that was just stupid. I hope he gets a fine for that.

And be prepared to have alot of angry people quoting your post

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Shaw's intention using the word has nothing to do with LGBT I'm sure. Saying it on the ice during an intense hockey game I really hope he doesn't get a suspension. Just not a fan of people taking ownership of words and telling you how you can use them. It's all about context and intent. A lot of words have multiple meanings and words change over time. A warning maybe to be careful what you say on the ice seems like enough.

So if he calls Simmons a N word or some other racial slur he should get a warning?

It's not acceptable to call someone a ###### anymore regardless of intent, simple as that.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Shaw's intention using the word has nothing to do with LGBT I'm sure. Saying it on the ice during an intense hockey game I really hope he doesn't get a suspension. Just not a fan of people taking ownership of words and telling you how you can use them. It's all about context and intent. A lot of words have multiple meanings and words change over time. A warning maybe to be careful what you say on the ice seems like enough.

The NBA suspended Rondo for saying the same thing to an official for 1 game.

The NHL will be destroyed in the media if they don't do something similar.

[Kipper is King]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Shaw's intention using the word has nothing to do with LGBT I'm sure... A lot of words have multiple meanings and words change over time..

But the particular word in question is inherently a slur against LGBT people. (We know he wasn't asking for a cigarette in the UK) If he wasn't a homophobic idiot, he wouldn't use that word.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

So if he calls Simmons a N word or some other racial slur he should get a warning?

It's not acceptable to call someone a ###### anymore regardless of intent, simple as that.

If him and Simmons are friends and Simmons doesn't care then ya fine. That's basically the only other context that words is used in. Either derogatory to blacks or endering to friends. Calling someone what Shaw said has been used to describe anyone and everyone and a large amount of the time it has nothing to do with being gay.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Yeah I'm not sure what other context or intent there could be except a gay slur.

That being said there is something about suspending based on a lip reading I don't like. I know we all know what he said but it still seems off.

I think this is easy for the NHL. You give him one game for his conduct and if reading lips isn't justified then it's for fingering the ref. Optics wise the NHL doesn't look light on the language and shaw misses a game. Maybe two.

[saillias]

Hackey utterly wrong as usual. There is not a single NHL player who is out as gay. Why do you think that is?

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Weitz

The NBA suspended Rondo for saying the same thing to an official for 1 game.

The NHL will be destroyed in the media if they don't do something similar.

Which is what it is. I can understand from their perspective they probably don't want to deal with the potential backlash.

[CMPunk]

Originally Posted by Kipper is King

But the particular word in question is inherently a slur against LGBT people. (We know he wasn't asking for a cigarette in the UK) If he wasn't a homophobic idiot, he wouldn't use that word.

I doubt he's homophobic...it's just part of the culture to use that word.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Which is what it is. I can understand from their perspective they probably don't want to deal with the potential backlash.

Or, you know, its the right thing to do.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by saillias

Hackey utterly wrong as usual. There is not a single NHL player who is out as gay. Why do you think that is?

LOL for a lot of reasons which are vastly more significant than this.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Yeah I'm not sure what other context or intent there could be except a gay slur.

That being said there is something about suspending based on a lip reading I don't like. I know we all know what he said but it still seems off.

I think this is easy for the NHL. You give him one game for his conduct and if reading lips isn't justified then it's for fingering the ref. Optics wise the NHL doesn't look light on the language and shaw misses a game. Maybe two.

Well they could just ask the officials working in the box if he said it or not, I'm sure one of them heard what he said.

[killer_carlson]

Well, in the most telling indicator of what would bring a suspension, espn.com has shaw alleged slur on their front page.

google tells me that usa today and the chicago tribune also have stories on it.

So expect at least a game - more the greater the mainstream coverage.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If him and Simmons are friends and Simmons doesn't care then ya fine. That's basically the only other context that words is used in. Either derogatory to blacks or endering to friends. Calling someone what Shaw said has been used to describe anyone and everyone and a large amount of the time it has nothing to do with being gay.

Again, just because the word USED to be acceptable doesn't mean it is now.

I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that. Rules change, words change, opinions change, people change. Calling someone that isn't acceptable anymore, end of story.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by saillias

Hackey utterly wrong as usual. There is not a single NHL player who is out as gay. Why do you think that is?

I think there are a number of NHL players in the past and currently who have come out to their teammates but not to the media. Or it is just understood by their teammates.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Again, just because the word USED to be acceptable doesn't mean it is now.

I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that. Rules change, words change, opinions change, people change. Calling someone that isn't acceptable anymore, end of story.

That's your opinion. I'm not going to tell people what words they can and cannot use and what context they are using them in.

[SuperMatt18]

He will gets something between the slur and the middle finger to the refs. The combination of both will likely get him a game.

Both were aimed at a referee so easy to suspend him for the acts as well.