CANADIAN ELITE LEAGUE

treasuretroll: Yeah, I'm not impressed what the NHL has become..... MMA on ice! Maybe muppets or Disney on ice is cute but not MMA! The concussions in the *******11 season are cause for concern! Gary Bettman says and I quote: " we do not wanna fundamentally change our game" If it's fundamental to have retirements due to post-concussion syndrome that I've missed something. The games become Americanized and Americans love violence. Bettman is pro American, Pro New York! Case in point...... Zdeno Chara hit Canadiens Pacioretty with an illegal hit injuring him no suspension! Matt Cooke (Penguins ) elbows a Ranger player who's injury is less severe.. Cooke suspension remainder of regular season, first round of playoffs! Who saw that coming? To make a long story short we should form our own league. The Canadian Elite League. Of course it would observe IIHF rules like No touch icing, Fighting results in ejection of combatants, plus 2 game suspension. Penalty shot for hitting player without puck. Just to name a few. Here's how it would look. Eastern Division: Montreal Canadiens, Toronto Maple Leafs, Ottawa Senators, Quebec Nordiques, Halifax Whalers, Hamilton Steelkings . The Western Division: Winnipeg Jets, Edmonton Oilers, Calgary Flames,Vancouver Canucks, Regina Wranglers, Manitoba Monsters. Wouldn't it be nice.

FogofWar: Funny, the American team always says the love and hate playing Canada because it's a challenge; but that we are also too physical. Hockey is a violent game to begin with; and Canada is world renown for being the most dominant physical team in international hockey. It isn't "Americanized" because of the hitting; that's truly Canadian. It's "Americanized" by the referee calling bogus penalties on hits that aren't illegal in novice hockey; and creating tension on the ice. When refs call inconsistent games; it aggravates players; and leads to more hitting; and dirtier hits.

I would love to hear you defend your claim that Zdeno Chara's hit was somehow illegal. There was nothing illegal about it. It is unfortunate that it just happened to be at the right place on the ice; and at the right time; to smack his head off the glass. That hit was investigated by the police; and they determined it was not illegal also. What next, are you gonna insist that they charge Olli Jokinen for slashing Richard Zednik's throat with his skate? Accidents happen…it is unfortunate; but welcome to reality.

On the topic of injuries; and the violence "Americanizing" the sport; remember the Canadian junior player who was killed in a fight when his head struck the ice?

Matt Cooke's elbow was an illegal hit. Chara's was not. Elbow to skull is what causes the majority of the concussions in the NHL; yet you seem to be defending Matt Cooke over Zdeno Chara. Chara also does not have a history of intentionally targeting players heads with the intent to injure; Matt Cooke does. That was taken into consideration heavily when deciding on an appropriate suspension for him.

Really, IIHF rules? No touch icing? Are you serious? Game misconduct for fighting? Stick to figure skating hunny. Penalty shot for interference? Completely inappropriate. A penalty shot is to serve as a breakaway that was taken; i.e. tripping a player on a breakaway. How does hitting a Dman at the blue line take away a breakaway chance? Get real.

I grew up watching the old league; and let me tell you; there was just as many hits; fights and other 'violent' acts in the game; with a hell of a lot less equipment; yet they manned up and kept playing. With players like Scott Stevens taking your head off if you put it down; and Bob Probert beating the crap out of you if you lipped off; players learned NOT to be a~*xy^~$. If someone tried to hit your star player from behind; he was targeted by every team in the league. It was called policing. Now; the rules don't allow that. You police a dirty hit; and you get suspended. You want to take the unnecessary injuries and dirty hits out of the league; let players stand up for each other again; and take morons like Matt Cooke out of the league altogether.

FogofWar:

unfortunate as it is; this is not illegal. Pacioretty was in play of the puck; therefore not interference. The hit was one stride; therefore not charging. The hit was shoulder to shoulder; therefore not elbowing. The hit was from the side; therefore not checking from behind. The hit was to the body; therefore not boarding. How was this illegal?

FogofWar: Now let's look at Matt Cooke:




This is the hit you defend over Chara?

The hit came from the player's back; a blindside. His elbow was extended, an elbow. He raised his body to reach his head; deliberately targeting the head with his elbow. Hell that was so blatantly illegal even the announcers from NBC knew it was a game misconduct.

How can anyone in their right mind try and say this is better sportsmanship that Chara's hit. Chara had no intent on hurting the man; Matt Cooke had every intent on hurting Ryan McDonagh. Matt Cooke is a disgrace to the game.



This is why there is concussions in the NHL; and this is why you see so much ugly fights and violence. Thank Matt Cooke for bringing that to the game.


Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard

Savard was hospitalized that night; taken off the ice on a stretcher. He missed several games with a severe concussion.


Skates in from behind; a blindside hit. Elbow fully extended; a blatant elbow. Targeting the head. This hit was more than deserving of a suspension.


We can also see a pattern of the type of players Matt Cooke has injured; all leading scorers.

FogofWar: If you want to decide for yourself what kind of player Matt Cooke is; watch this. Don Cherry analyzes Cooke and lets you decide what you think.


Matt Cooke Cheapshotting History:

FogofWar: This is called justice in hockey. First game between Pittsburgh and Boston after Cooke injured Savard with the hit shown earlier….and you want to remove this; but keep elbows to the head?

treasuretroll: Well..... How do I defend that. You have some pretty awesome video evidence to support your argument. Are you a lawyer or something. I have to say you have me rethinking my previous post. Hope I didn't appear too mental. Can we call a truce. War, I hear you.

treasuretroll: Fogowar, The Canadian Elite League idea, I don't apologize for though. Also, NHL can draft on US and European players, Canada gets Canadians and Ontario born players can only play for Leafs or Senators. Post your thoughts on that

FogofWar: Garry Bettman is a tool and is hurting the game; there is no question there; but there is no way that you could pull of a Canadian League. It just wouldn't happen. Look at the CFL in comparison to the NFL. There is no way that players could make as much in an entirely Canadian league as they do a North American league; so many Canadians would still be playing in the NHL. You also would not draw the owners of current Canadian teams away. To them it is business; and they need to look out for their investment. Downscaling to an inferior league would not be an option for them; and so you would never draw fans away from their teams (except Edmonton because they don't have more than a handful of 'real' fans).

The biggest problem with starting our own league is the prestigious prize: the most coveted trophy in sports worldwide; Lord Stanley's Cup. The most famous trophy is over 120 years old now; and leaving behind that piece of Canadian heritage would be too much for most Canadians; myself included. That cup doesn't just mean something to the players; it means something to every hockey fan also. Without it; there would be no point to making a new league...and there is no way to separate it from the NHL.

I would rather see Canadians stand up and show their lack of support for Bettman; and their support of Canadian teams, even if it is a 'rival' team of yours; still support them. The more money Canada revenues from the NHL, the less power Bettman will have to keep the sport in the US. Bring the cup home!

FogofWar: What is ironic is that Aaron Rome get's suspended for an interference call because he hit Horton after the puck was gone; giving him a concussion; yet when Boychuck took Raymond into the glass; folded in half; crushing his vertibrae, there is not only no penalty; but the league isn't going to investigate and even consider a suspension....strange that neither of these instances had the puck involved; and the only differences are:

1. The hit that led to a suspension was shoulder contact at centre ice; while the hit that had no suspension was to someone whose back was twisted into a position in which it would be fractured.

2. The hit that led to a suspension was from a player who followed through with his shoulder; targeting the shoulder of the other player. by definition, 100% clean, other than the fact that it was late. The hit that led to a suspension was delivered by a player who had both feet planted. If you are not moving; then it is not interference; as you are allowed to defend your ice; meaning this hit really wasn't even interference; what the penalty and suspension were given for; while the hit that had no suspension was done by pushing a vulnerable player into the boards away from play, while his body was folded and pinned down by the player delivering the hit; by no means a legal method for executing a check.

3. The hit that led to a suspension was from a Canadian team; wile the hit that had no suspension was from the American team playing said Canadian team.



...and worst of all; when Mason Raymond got his back fractured from an illegal hit that had no call; or suspension; the fans in Boston were booing him; chanting "flopper", then singing "Let's go Boston" while Raymond had to be carried off the ice by his teamates; as the Boston players sat on the bench and skated around.

It's not the violence in hockey that makes it "Americanized"; it's the lack of respect; and the loss of all class. After seeing that; I would be embarrassed to even say I was from the city of Boston.





Whereas the hit on Nathan Horton; we see the Vancouver fans applauding opposing player Horton as he comes to; and begins to regain consciousness. Yet Boston criticizes Vancouver for not having class.




Yes; there are many things wrong with the league...and Boston demonstrated almost all of them in under 2 minutes...

ANDREWLG61: FOGOFWAR.... I agree, why form a separate league because of a few instances. The NHL is a great league, but Gary Bettman needs to review all the tapes of hits to the head that has resulted in serious injury in *******11. He doesn't have to fundamentally change the game, just make a hit to the head (a deliberate hit to the head) illegal. I understand the competition committee is looking at this. BTW your youtube vids to support your rebuttal to this "Treasure Troll" person's debate are outstanding.

FogofWar: deliberate hits to the head are illegal. However; with the instance of Rome; they clearly made an example of something that was anything but deliberate. There was no intent to target the head; or to injure. He just stood his man up; straight out. I really don't think that Boychuck intended to hurt Raymond either; but the fact was that he pushed him into the boards after the play; while Raymond was moving away. I really wouldn't have had a problem with the suspension on Rome; so long as they would call the same on Boychuck. They didn't because Boychuck didn't target the head. Apparently, the board thinks that targeting the head is terrible; but targeting the spine is okay?

To make an example of deliberate hits to the head is fine; and Matt Cooke is a shining example; that's why he was out for the rest of the season. However; if they are going to start calling unintentional clean hits that injure a person's head based solely on the fact that there was an injury; then they should do the same regardless of where the injury was.

FogofWar: ...and for the record; I am not one in believing the agenda that the NHL is deliberately calling the games in order to prevent Canada from winning. If you look at the PIM (Penalties in Minutes) in the entire Boston/Vancouver series; Boston took more penalties than Vancouver. There was however; anything but consistent refereeing, even by the same ref in the same game. Several instances occurred where Vancouver was called for something Boston was not; and the Rome/Boychuck hits were prime examples.

The only two differences in those hits in terms of what the league may, or may not be looking at:

Rome's hit created an injury to the head/Boychuck's hit created an injury to the spine.
Rome played for Canada; Boychuck played for the USA.

Of course the league calls things differently for hits to the head; as they are focused primarily on that right now; but unless they are trying to send a message that it is okay to deliberately target the spine or other parts of the body; so long as not the head; then they are certainly feeding to the idea that they are favouring the US teams. One can easily understand why, even on the NHL website itself; articles have been written on this topic.

FogofWar: The policies these chairmen are making are ridiculous. They are 'concerned' about the injuries that have been increasing in the game; yet the allow injuries to go unchallenged, and don't even look into them. It's definitely time for a change.

There is no question; having watched the Rome hit over and over; his feet were planted; he braced himself into a lower position targeting the chest; he led with his shoulder. There was no 'head shot', 'blindside' or interfering. It was 100% legal. There is no doubt in my mind that the ONLY reason a penalty was called; and a suspension dealt; was because of the extent of the injury. If that is the case; and they are suspending based on injuries; what about Mason Raymond? His vertebrae suffered a compression fracture; and he will be out until at least November of next season...far, far, far worse than Horton. Obviously the league needs to redefine it's policy of suspending for injuries.

What aggravates me even more is the fact that these chairmen won't listen to the professionals. Don Cherry, Mr. Hockey himself; arguably the most intelligent hockey man in the world; and a huge mind into the coaching and policy making of the game; has repeatedly expressed concerns about injuries and their cause. Back in the mid to late 1990s; before all the major injuries started to occur; he said they would. He knew exactly why as well. Since the later 1990s he has, on numerous occasion, shown the equipment used in hockey. Before these injuries occurred, players used softer pads; now they use hard shell plastic and composite plates. Which would hurt more; taking a boxing glove to the face; or a plate of armour? Pretty simple conclusion is it not?

Over the years; Don Cherry has shown several players who, to this day, still use traditional soft pad equipment. These players have not injured others. Why is it that the only injuries occur as a result of the hitter wearing hard shell equipment?

Why the hell does the league continue to preach concern for the safety of players; and implement policies to 'eliminate' injuries; yet refuse to listen to the greatest mind in the sport, and remove the one thing that causes them?

.ANUBIS.: ☥ ☥