Clearly you didn't watch the game.. the dirty team was in red... stop watching highlights they edit all the real stuff out...

pax isnt going to be suspended.. a hearing would of been called already

the league obviously feels there is sufficient evidence of a bite or else they wouldnt of called the hearing.

its really very simple.. they arent going to call a hearing just because a player complains about something. there must be at least sufficient evidence to warrant grabo's hearing.
- Dozzer

Though you can't actually see him biting him, I'd say the look on Patches face says it all. You can see him whip his hand back and exclaim that he got bit and went back in to hit Grabs for it. But again, the video doesn't show it actually going down. Like when a goalie has the puck under his pad over the line, you just know it's in but if you don't see the puck then chances are you're out of luck.

- sanfordnson

Who's was it?

marks on his flesh burn

you can tell by the marks left on the flesh

but again, if there isnt an NHL medical official present (not employed by the habs) then the leafs can argue bias which would throw that evidence out of the picture.

thats going to be the thing it hinges on.
- Dozzer

Marks on his flesh prove what??? That is was 100% grabs?? That

The ref saw his arm and told him to get lost. Doubt he put anything in the report. No report from the ref, no video evidence no suspension.

I'm not saying there isn't a difference, because force does leave a deeper impression. But really, if you look back at your posts, you could make the case with your (flawed) reasoning that any player with a bite mark and an "NHL doctor" (who are concussion specialists, not regular doctors) to confirm the marks will get someone suspended.

You are looking past what Pax did, which very well could wipe away Grabo's potential suspension.
- Compeyson

alright just dont start crying when grabo cant play tomorrow

everything you guys are arguing

1: concussion specialist? first year med students can tell the difference between impressions left by pressing flesh into teeth and a bite

2: what pax did is beside the point. you dont get a free pass because another player did something wrong, and if they were concerned about what pax did where is his hearing?

blue and white disease guys.. you are displaying it with fervor this morning

I find it fascinating how you frame things.
- robin_steele264

How do you mean?? How am I framing this?? Video is pretty clear.....

Though you can't actually see him biting him, I'd say the look on Patches face says it all. You can see him whip his hand back and exclaim that he got bit and went back in to hit Grabs for it. But again, the video doesn't show it actually going down. Like when a goalie has the puck under his pad over the line, you just know it's in but if you don't see the puck then chances are you're out of luck.
- weirdoh

there is more evidence to consider than just video. how many times do i need to go over this?

Marks on his flesh prove what??? That is was 100% grabs?? That

The ref saw his arm and told him to get lost. Doubt he put anything in the report. No report from the ref, no video evidence no suspension.
- burn

We don't know that but as I was saying, if you see the video the ref didn't even give it a second look, he told him to get off the ice, that is what I was basing it on.

alright just dont start crying when grabo cant play tomorrow

everything you guys are arguing

1: concussion specialist? first year med students can tell the difference between impressions left by pressing flesh into teeth and a bite

2: what pax did is beside the point. you dont get a free pass because another player did something wrong, and if they were concerned about what pax did where is his hearing?

blue and white disease guys.. you are displaying it with fervor this morning
- Dozzer

Is it transmitted by bites??

EDIT: Talking of, new Walking Dead tonight

alright just dont start crying when grabo cant play tomorrow

everything you guys are arguing

1: concussion specialist? first year med students can tell the difference between impressions left by pressing flesh into teeth and a bite

2: what pax did is beside the point. you dont get a free pass because another player did something wrong, and if they were concerned about what pax did where is his hearing?

blue and white disease guys.. you are displaying it with fervor this morning
- Dozzer

I hate when video evidence gets in the way of that blue and white disease...

Marks on his flesh prove what??? That is was 100% grabs?? That

The ref saw his arm and told him to get lost. Doubt he put anything in the report. No report from the ref, no video evidence no suspension.
- burn

if the ref didnt report it as a bite or "possible bite" then thats in grabo's favour i agree.

but something had to be the catalyst for the hearing to be called. thats what you guys are forgetting here. if there is a hearing that means there is enough evidence of a bite. so if its not video, then its something else. the two key things we dont know is

1: what the refs report says

2: what the medical report says (if there even is one)

Is it transmitted by bites??

EDIT: Talking of, new Walking Dead tonight
- lumlums

there it is!! grabo was just excited for the new season!

there is more evidence to consider than just video. how many times do i need to go over this?
- Dozzer

Because marks prove 100% it was grabo..... how many times do we have to go over this?

Is it transmitted by bites??

EDIT: Talking of, new Walking Dead tonight
- lumlums

Leafs fans are rabid!!

I hate when video evidence gets in the way of that blue and white disease...
- burn

yes because video evidence is the only evidence

anyways i am done with this.. its like talking to concrete

guarantee you guys would be singing a different tune if the roles were reversed

there it is!! grabo was just excited for the new season!
- Dozzer

Who isn't???

Because marks prove 100% it was grabo..... how many times do we have to go over this?
- burn

It's ok burn. We know you'd still be defending the leaf player if he bit his ear off and spit it at a ref.

Leafs fans are rabid!!
- burn

I've been told that my retorts and witty one-liners are quick, do you mean rapid???

if the ref didnt report it as a bite or "possible bite" then thats in grabo's favour i agree.

but something had to be the catalyst for the hearing to be called. thats what you guys are forgetting here. if there is a hearing that means there is enough evidence of a bite. so if its not video, then its something else. the two key things we dont know is

1: what the refs report says

2: what the medical report says (if there even is one)
- Dozzer

The canadiens making a complaint......

I don't think this is the league calling it, but rather the Canadiens making a complaint and the league having to have the review based on that.

It's ok burn. We know you'd still be defending the leaf player if he bit his ear off and spit it at a ref.
- robin_steele264

Can it be Chris Neil's???

my guess is Grabo did chomp.. But what is Pacioretty doing putting his sweaty smelly hands on grabos mouth and tugging back? Kind of smothering him. It is not like Grabovski tied him down and started chomping..

alright just dont start crying when grabo cant play tomorrow

everything you guys are arguing

1: concussion specialist? first year med students can tell the difference between impressions left by pressing flesh into teeth and a bite

2: what pax did is beside the point. you dont get a free pass because another player did something wrong, and if they were concerned about what pax did where is his hearing?

blue and white disease guys.. you are displaying it with fervor this morning
- Dozzer

Sorry Dozzer by the evidence presented so far.. just because you think he did it doesn't mean anything. People are going by the actual evidence presented so far.. and there is no evidence that he bit him. Now in the hearing other evidence could come up that is factual.. but your presumption of guilty by trial is a sign of prejudgement.. until the hearing happens.. no one knows for certain.

A biting feeling could've come from the visor when he was neck cranking Grabo or when he mouth gouged Grabo. To believe a cry baby.. on just heresay isn't fair.

As for the league vs the Leafs.. history shows Leafs with their full buildings get no love from the league.. Domi got 28 games for the headshot to Neidmayer even tho Neids had carved up his face with his stick.. Jamieson got 8 games from a shot to Kaberle's head well beyond the play and we know Kaberle never hurt a soul.

But if the league adds nothing more to the table either than the video and Pacs comments than we will be railroaded again.

yes because video evidence is the only evidence

anyways i am done with this.. its like talking to concrete

guarantee you guys would be singing a different tune if the roles were reversed
- Dozzer

I guarantee it...

yes because video evidence is the only evidence

anyways i am done with this.. its like talking to concrete

guarantee you guys would be singing a different tune if the roles were reversed
- Dozzer

The only thing I will remember is that the Habs got their ass kicked on the score sheet and on the ice, anything else that comes from it, I don't care.

It's ok burn. We know you'd still be defending the leaf player if he bit his ear off and spit it at a ref.
- robin_steele264

clearly.


What have I said that isn't true. All I said is the video isn't conclusive. FACT.