Where's the Boulton Talk????????

[broken27]

From such a harsh panel of critics, I expected this to be a hot issue on this forum...

NOBODY cares? dbleber, is he "tough" for his actions? Is he cowardly?

Should his suspension be one game more than Havlat? More? Less?

This guy did the exact same cheapshot twice in the span of a week... NOBODY in here has an opinion?

Guess he's not Czech or European so it's okay, or maybe it's just not important enough because he's not a Senator or Leaf? He almost took out the ultimate head-hunter trophy on you Leafs fans out there... NO OPINION???

Wow...

Dan

[Big Johnny69]

Obviously not that big of a deal. Haven't heard anything on this. What did he do?

[Big Johnny69]

Never mind, just saw the lowlight on the Score. Pretty terrible. 6 games is sufficient. Looks like the TB player was pulling back and Boulton's reaction was to stick out his elbow. I've had that happen to me before playing. Stopped to go the other way and the guys reaction was to stick out his leg. Not attempting to injure me but just a reaction to try and stop me. Boulton is a bit of a goon so who knows, maybe he was trying to injure.

[Paulio]

That Hartley has been taking alot of the heat. I guess he has that evil side to him where he tends to send out some useless no talent goon to get even when his team is down. He deserved what he got, but if any such occurance happens again in Atlanta, where the team has been brutal, you may see Hartley get something handed to him. Tampa's coach had some harsh words..

[broken27]

Never mind, just saw the lowlight on the Score. Pretty terrible. 6 games is sufficient. Looks like the TB player was pulling back and Boulton's reaction was to stick out his elbow. I've had that happen to me before playing. Stopped to go the other way and the guys reaction was to stick out his leg. Not attempting to injure me but just a reaction to try and stop me. Boulton is a bit of a goon so who knows, maybe he was trying to injure.

Wow, you're really unclear as to the intent of that? I'll just chalk that up to not knowing Boulton... There is really no reason for that guy to ever be in a game, much less on the ice, other than to hurt people. He's a pure goon. But the fact that he did the EXACT same thing to Lindros a week earlier just underlines the need for a MUCH stiffer penalty than 6 games in my mind... Hell, I'd love to see Lindros' career ender as much as the next guy (simply because I was a Nords' fan and also I believe it would be proof he shoulda quit a long time ago), but not by cheap shot. Keep the Scott Stevens' style hits, but cut the cheap stuff...

Dan

[powerlefty]

See below...

From such a harsh panel of critics, I expected this to be a hot issue on this forum...

NOBODY cares? dbleber, is he "tough" for his actions? Is he cowardly?

Not tough. Stupid.

Should his suspension be one game more than Havlat? More? Less?

Why ask this? Why not ask: "Why 2 games more than Sutton? Should Sutton's have been more?" It's more relevant - similar cheap shots by players on the same team. Comparing to Havlat's infraction is apples and oranges - kicking (at least in North America, maybe you can shed some light on how it is viewed in Europe) is viewed as an entirely different type of offense.

This guy did the exact same cheapshot twice in the span of a week... NOBODY in here has an opinion?

Could the common thread be Hartley?

Guess he's not Czech or European so it's okay, or maybe it's just not important enough because he's not a Senator or Leaf? He almost took out the ultimate head-hunter trophy on you Leafs fans out there... NO OPINION???

You must be a fan of Oliver Stone - huge conspiracy against the Czechs. By the way, who did shoot JFK?

Wow...

Dan

[spackler]

I don't think it's as big news on this forum because a), he doesn't play for the Sens, and b) it wasn't committed against a Sens player. I bet on Toronto forums Boulton going after Lindros was a hotter topic than Havlat's kick was on the same forums.

[dbleber]

NOBODY cares? dbleber, is he "tough" for his actions? Is he cowardly?
Dan

The main reason it is not a hot topic is because this guy shouldn't even be in the NHL. Nobody cares if he gets 6 games or the whole season. Also, he took a shot at Lindros but it didn't do any damage. Now Ranger it did rattle him up, but nobody knows this kid either. The sad truth sometimes is that if it doesn't affect a big star, it doesn't get the attention it may deserve,

Now is he "tough". He is a known for being a tough guy, that’s how he got into this league but his actions were not tough. If he wanted a piece of Lindros he should have dropped the mitts, Lindros use to be always up for a good tussle not sure now with the whole mush head thing! Or he should have nailed him with a good hard shoulder and sent him on early retirement. As for ranger he just missed his check and slipped the elbow. To be honest the hit on Lindros was worse then the other hit. On Lindros he went straight for his melon with a head of steam to boot, with Ranger he actually went for a clean hit but when it was dodged he stuck out he's elbow. Believe it or not, that happens quite a bit and it is kind of a natural reaction. You told you mind and body that you want to hit this guy, when he moves your mind reacts to complete the request. May sound stupid but it's true.

Is he a coward. No. He didn't do anything that warrants that, but he was stupid. That can't be argued.

P.S Thanks for the invite Dan. I didn't know my thoughts meant so much to you!!!

[g8r]

Seem to remember many people here saying punishment should fit the crime and that the players injury should be taken into account. The fact that Ranger has a fractured jaw and Boulton got 6 games, while Havlat gets 5 for what he did.

My opinion, 6 games is acceptable, especially when you see the hit at full speed, he was flying and it probably was reaciton just to try and hit him. Although, it is the players responsibility to control themselves on the ice, thats why a suspension is still warranted. On the other hand if 6 games is good for this incident, Havlat should not have received more than 3.

[dbleber]

I don't agree with that at all! While elbowing a guy because you missed the hit is wrong, it is not even in the same league as kicking somebody with a skate. And yes he hit Lindros in head a couple of nights before the hit on Ranger, but it was more of a questionable cheap shot. Havlat kicked someone! Enough said. The two are just so different that I don't even know where to begin.

[broken27]

On the other hand if 6 games is good for this incident, Havlat should not have received more than 3.

Totally agree.

Dan

[Andru]

From such a harsh panel of critics, I expected this to be a hot issue on this forum...

NOBODY cares? dbleber, is he "tough" for his actions? Is he cowardly?

Should his suspension be one game more than Havlat? More? Less?

This guy did the exact same cheapshot twice in the span of a week... NOBODY in here has an opinion?

Guess he's not Czech or European so it's okay, or maybe it's just not important enough because he's not a Senator or Leaf? He almost took out the ultimate head-hunter trophy on you Leafs fans out there... NO OPINION???

Wow...

Dan

I didn't expect any more than that. The NHL has proven to be pretty weak on infractions to the head. The NHL should take a page from the NFL about this stuff. Contact to the head is a major penalty. Period.

1st offense ) 5 and a game
2nd offense) 5 + 2 ( unsportsmanlike ) and 8 games.
3rd Offense) 5 + 2 and 16 games.
4th Offense) gone for the rest of the year and the first 30 games of the next season

The only way to stop it is to punish severely. I believe all contac tto the ehad shoul dbe a penalty whether you used your shoulder or not. hands, shoulder, forarm, elbow, you head. If it makes contact with another players head accident of not. penaly ranging from 2-10 min.

[dbleber]

I didn't expect any more than that. The NHL has proven to be pretty weak on infractions to the head. The NHL should take a page from the NFL about this stuff. Contact to the head is a major penalty. Period.

1st offense ) 5 and a game
2nd offense) 5 + 2 ( unsportsmanlike ) and 8 games.
3rd Offense) 5 + 2 and 16 games.
4th Offense) gone for the rest of the year and the first 30 games of the next season

The only way to stop it is to punish severely. I believe all contac tto the ehad shoul dbe a penalty whether you used your shoulder or not. hands, shoulder, forarm, elbow, you head. If it makes contact with another players head accident of not. penaly ranging from 2-10 min.

You should stick to watching ringette then, that wouldn't work in hockey. If a clean hit is given with the shoulder and it hits another guy in the head because his head was down or the guy was shorter then why should that be penalty? Delibrate shots to the head should be treated seriously and this was. 6 games is a fair assement considering the outcome.

[dbleber]

Totally agree.

Dan

No surprise here! Once again the Czech blinders are on and you are missing the point. Kicking is different then sticking your elbow out after a miss hit, anyone who has ever played contact hockey will understand what goes through your mind and body when you have someone lined up and they pull out last minute. Now kicking someone, for the second time I might add, is completely different and Havlat got what he deserved, Czech, Canadian, Russian or from Mars...kicking has no place in hockey.

[el tigre]

Seem to remember many people here saying punishment should fit the crime and that the players injury should be taken into account. The fact that Ranger has a fractured jaw and Boulton got 6 games, while Havlat gets 5 for what he did.

My opinion, 6 games is acceptable, especially when you see the hit at full speed, he was flying and it probably was reaciton just to try and hit him. Although, it is the players responsibility to control themselves on the ice, thats why a suspension is still warranted. On the other hand if 6 games is good for this incident, Havlat should not have received more than 3.

In sports (as in real life), if you are found guilty then your prior record is taken into account to determine sentencing. Havlet has received 2 suspensions in the past, including one for kicking. That's why he got 5 games instead of only 2 or 3.

[el tigre]

You should stick to watching ringette then, that wouldn't work in hockey. If a clean hit is given with the shoulder and it hits another guy in the head because his head was down or the guy was shorter then why should that be penalty? Delibrate shots to the head should be treated seriously and this was. 6 games is a fair assement considering the outcome.

While I agree that the numbers Andru presented are little too severe, but IMHO many of the penalties in the NHL are too lenient. Yes, there is such a thing as a clean shoulder hit to the head, but that is extremely rare. In broomball pretty much any contact to the head is at least a minor penalty, and I believe minor hockey is the same.

FYI, here are some of the penalties from broomball's rulebook:

Buttending/Spearing - automatic major
Checking from Behind - automatic major
Checking from Behind into Boards - automatic major + game misconduct*
Fighting major - includes automatic game misconduct*
Major in last 5 minutes - includes automatic game misconduct*
Misconduct in last 10 minutes - automatically upgraded to game misconduct*
Attempt to Injure - automatic match penalty**
* Game Misconduct = suspension from remainder of the game + the next game.
** Match = suspension until case is reviewed by Discipline Committee, who cannot issue a suspension less than 3 games.

In addition, virtually any penalty that causes an injury is upgraded from a minor to a major by the referee (although this is discretionary). Plus many leagues have their own rule that calls for an ejection after 3 minor/major penalties.

Although I don't believe hockey is ready for the automatic one-game suspensions for game misconducts, the other rules would certainly go a long way to cleaning up the game. Broomball does not have anywhere near the amount of goonery and cheap shots that hockey does.

[dbleber]

The fact is that you can do a lot of things to change the game, but then what are we left with? Some sort of hybrid of hockey mixed with soccer/broomball/football and God knows what else. There have been a lot of changes that have helped the league but we have to draw the line somewhere. Like I said before, delibrate shots to the head are being dealt with, 6 games is a justified sentence, but hockey is a physical game and if you don't have the parts to play with the big boys and are willing to take the risks that come with it then play another sport. It's that simple. If we keep going down this road we will end up with No hit hockey, I guess it's fine to make us amatuers play it but the pros need to have contact to be able to take the puck from somemone. If you think that this can be done when someone who has a lot of skill has the puck and you do not have the option to use your body to stop them, then you A) have never played hockey at a high level and seen what talented guys can do with the puck or B)gone from a high level of hockey to a No hit league where you have to try and stop these guys. It can't be done, unless you break the new rules of obstruction.

[el tigre]

The fact is that you can do a lot of things to change the game, but then what are we left with? Some sort of hybrid of hockey mixed with soccer/broomball/football and God knows what else. There have been a lot of changes that have helped the league but we have to draw the line somewhere. Like I said before, delibrate shots to the head are being dealt with, 6 games is a justified sentence, but hockey is a physical game and if you don't have the parts to play with the big boys and are willing to take the risks that come with it then play another sport. It's that simple.

Sorry, but there are plenty of sports where physical contact and toughness are part of the game, but without the level of fighting, goonery and cheap shots that you get in hockey. Lots of big boys playing tough and physical in football and rugby, for example. As you say, you have to draw the line somewhere - I just think it needs to be set a little lower for a lot of the stupid stuff that adds little or nothing to the game.

Let's face it, having a "designated fighter" who's sole purpose is to pick a fight with the other team's "designated fighter" is a waste of bench space. If you received an automatic ejection for fighting (like they do in football), no team would give a roster spot to these guys. And nobody would miss them. You'd still have tough, physical players who hit hard and muck it up in the corners and might even get into a scrap now and them (Chara comes to mind here) - but they can actually play hockey. It's not like power forwards and physical defencemen are going to become obsolete because you toughen the rules on fighting.

[dbleber]

Now fighting that is a different topic isn't it? I think you will see by the rule changes already made and recent team moves (Oliwa - comes to mind) that the fighter is becoming obsolete which I agree is a good thing. I like tough guys who can score, pass, muck it up in the corner and drop the gloves. Iginla is the model hockey player in my mind. Did you see how fast his gloves dropped when Avery gave him that cheap shot? It was awsome, classic "give me cheap shot and be prepared to lose your teeth"! Even Chris Neil is showing that a tough guy can still contribute to the teams goal of winning. The preset fight between tough guys and taking a roster spot for those guys is becoming a thing of the past just by making the game faster. We don't have to enforce such extreme rules, let the boys police themselves. You give me a cheap shot, I'm going to make you pay on the next shift, game or what ever. If that comes in the form of a fight, hard hit clean or dirty then so be it, but the boys on the ice will let each other know when someone crosses the line. Those of us in the stands who have no idea what it is like to play at that level can't truly say how the game should be played, but the guys on the ice can and if they want things like visors and strict rules on head shots they will let us know.

[Shivas Irons]

On the other hand if 6 games is good for this incident, Havlat should not have received more than 3.

Most people, myself included, view kicking and stick swinging in a vastly different light than a "cheap shot" body check or elbow.
The player who was hit, Ranger, says he doesn't think it was a cheap shot. I doubt Hal Gill had the same reaction to Havlat's kick. Since these incidents were quite different I don't think comparing length of suspension is relevant and to suggest it's an anti-Euro thing is ridiculous.

[Andru]

You should stick to watching ringette then, that wouldn't work in hockey. If a clean hit is given with the shoulder and it hits another guy in the head because his head was down or the guy was shorter then why should that be penalty? Delibrate shots to the head should be treated seriously and this was. 6 games is a fair assement considering the outcome.

I suppose accidental high sticks should be ignored as well?

You see unlike you. I believe professinal hockey players are human beings. They have families and children and lives after hockey. They should be treated as such.

The notion that if a player is in a vulnerable position, then it's ok the slam his head in the glass as long as you use your shoulder and not your elbow, is ridiculous. A head shot is a head shot. Like the National Football League the NHL should do everything they can to remove this from the game. If it means harsh penalites so be it.

The NFL is hardly a ringette league. That neanderthal thinking is the reason Americans see Hockey and the WWE in the same category.

[dbleber]

Accidental high stciks aren't ignored, a high stick is 2 mins or 4 mins if there is blood. What more do you want, "off with their head"? You don't have time to think about things like I should backoff because maybe he will get hurt. The game is to fast, your body is to pumped up and you are focused on one thing...the puck. Rules are in place and they should be left the way they are.

[Andru]

Accidental high stciks aren't ignored, a high stick is 2 mins or 4 mins if there is blood. What more do you want, "off with their head"? You don't have time to think about things like I should backoff because maybe he will get hurt. The game is to fast, your body is to pumped up and you are focused on one thing...the puck. Rules are in place and they should be left the way they are.

The point about the high stick is this. Accident or not you're punished. Sometimes it isn't fair, but they do it to protect the people playing this game for our entertainment. They can do the same for head shots.

In reference to head shots and the speed of the game. Defensive Football players are getting the message and so will hockey players. I'm not sure why someone has to die before everyone wakes up. Also they made these rules before equipment makers starting putting plastic armour on the outside or elbow pads and shoulder pads. The rules need to be updated to reflect the new gear and the damage it can cause.

[el tigre]

Also they made these rules before equipment makers starting putting plastic armour on the outside or elbow pads and shoulder pads. The rules need to be updated to reflect the new gear and the damage it can cause.

Actually, I think it is the gear that needs to be changed more than the rules.

Broomball is played on the same playing surface as hockey, and yet hard plastic on the outside of elbow pads or shoulder pads is not allowed. If your elbow or shoulder pads have hard plastic, it must be covered with soft padding. A lot of players don't even bother with shoulder pads. Some don't even wear gloves!

In almost 20 years of officiating, I've seen plenty of hard hitting but no serious injuries or concussions. Mind you, the pace of play for broomball is slower than hockey because you just can't build up the same speed on shoes that you can on skates - but I think the rules and equipment contribute to a safer environment for the players as well.

[dbleber]

Ithink this is all pretty trival. I agree that the equipement today is very different but so are the rules and the game. These direct head shots are not that common. Many head injuries come for the head rebounding off the boards or the ice after a hit. Wht would you like to do about that, they have already changed the glass, better helmets, whats next no hitting? The guys that go out and deliver a head shot are beiing punished, you just don't get away with it any more now that they cameras everywhere. I think it should be left alone. The reference to football is kinda of funny because although both have contact, both have different types of contact. Hockey players build way more speed on skates then a guy does running, now add the big gear, big players (some hockey guys could play football the size of them now!), now take all of this and throw them into a small box. Thats hockey! You have guys going at reallt fast speed hitting each other head on, football normally it is either one guy running and the other making a somewhat static tackle or the if they are both in motion then the tackler usuallt gets him from behind. You just don't have the same type of hitting. Anyway as usual i have my thoughts and there are people who will agree, others will have your own but this seems like it is at its end as far as debating goes.

[jonf]

First of all, hits to head in the NFL ARE allowed, as long as it is not helmet to helmet, or a clothsline-type hit. So to all those who have been saying that the NFL protects people's heads, this is true only to a limited extent. The NHL does the same...any hit to the head using the stick, or elbow is illegal. To make a rule prohibiting contact to the head in hockey would be absolutely ridiculous. I play rec-league hockey, and have done for years. I have never played in a contact league, except as a goalie. However, I cannot count the number of times I have been hit in the head during the normal course of play. It is never intentional or malicious, its just the reality of the game. If you started to call penalties every time an individual is hit in the head, you might as well not bother putting a team on the ice. They'll all be in the penalty box within about 5 minutes. If you don't like contact, don't play hockey. It's part of the game, no matter the level. Hockey without contact is like american beer. They call it alcohol, but everyone knows it's just water.

[dbleber]

First of all, hits to head in the NFL ARE allowed, as long as it is not helmet to helmet, or a clothsline-type hit. So to all those who have been saying that the NFL protects people's heads, this is true only to a limited extent. The NHL does the same...any hit to the head using the stick, or elbow is illegal. To make a rule prohibiting contact to the head in hockey would be absolutely ridiculous. I play rec-league hockey, and have done for years. I have never played in a contact league, except as a goalie. However, I cannot count the number of times I have been hit in the head during the normal course of play. It is never intentional or malicious, its just the reality of the game. If you started to call penalties every time an individual is hit in the head, you might as well not bother putting a team on the ice. They'll all be in the penalty box within about 5 minutes. If you don't like contact, don't play hockey. It's part of the game, no matter the level. Hockey without contact is like american beer. They call it alcohol, but everyone knows it's just water.

HERE, HERE!!!