John Jaeckel: You Can't Have It Both Ways

John Jaeckel: You Can't Have It Both Ways
- John Jaeckel

SHIRT!

Your thoughts about the Seabrook hit are dead on. If the Orpik hit was a "clean hit," then the Seabrook hit has to be too. End of story.

Backes is a punk. Not sad at all to see him flattened. I don't want to see anyone get hurt though.

Important point, he went for the puck and missed it a millisecond before Seabrook hit him. For anyone to argue he didn't have the puck and shouldn't have been hit is ridiculous.

Backes is a punk. Not sad at all to see him flattened. I don't want to see anyone get hurt though.

Important point, he went for the puck and missed it a millisecond before Seabrook hit him. For anyone to argue he didn't have the puck and shouldn't have been hit is ridiculous.
- Hemingways

He basically was in exactly the same position Toews was, head down, didn't have the puck. I'm not going to argue that. Both Orpik and Seabrook saw the opportunity to flatten the opposing captain and took it. One got penalized and will be suspended, the other didn't.

A JOKE.

Maybe I'm old school, but the NHL office of league discipline has failed in policing the game versus the way the players policed themselves prior to the instigator rule.

Neither is perfect, but the complete comic charade of the league "hearings," the suspensions handed out (or not), the utter lack of consistency and shifting rationale has become hard to take.

Brendan Shanahan, Colin Campbell? Doesn't matter. The next guy in charge. Probably won't matter. The problem is a league and quite honestly a culture of "make goods," and whoever cries loudest wins.

Here's an idea. You write the rules? Follow them. Whether the player in question is a star like Seabrook or a slug like Raffi Torres. The fact is, when you start making exceptions for players, teams or interpretations of your own rules, it's a slippery slope that leads to what we have today.

Or let the players discipline themselves as they did for decades—when there was some respect in the game as well.

It's also ridiculous when Seabrook wasn't even getting a penalty until the Blues attacked him, then he's ejected and suspended. I agree, the Orpik hit is a good comparison. It's a hockey play. They can change the rules if they want plays like that out of the game, but as far as the current rules go, it's not an illegal hit.

The Hawks got caught up in playing the Blues game instead of their own especially yesterday and they got burned big time. As much as I liked seeing the Hawks hit back for a change instead of being on the receiving end of the cheap shots that's not how they won two cups in four years. I think they may have learned a hard lesson here and hopefully will focus on their puck possession game. The Blues might just come out Monday trying to settle scores and go for the big hits. This would not be smart on their part because if they win game 3 they will have a strangle hold on the series. They will give the Hawks a chance to get back into the series if they come out preoccupied with exacting revenge and if the Hawks play it smart and get back to their game they can get back into this series. Leave the cheap shots to the Blues. That's not the way the Hawks play and certainly not the way they won the cup.

It's also ridiculous when Seabrook wasn't even getting a penalty until the Blues attacked him, then he's ejected and suspended. I agree, the Orpik hit is a good comparison. It's a hockey play. They can change the rules if they want plays like that out of the game, but as far as the current rules go, it's not an illegal hit.
- Hemingways

Yep, great point. The officials completely lost control of it right there. Only when the local hue and cry got loud, they changed their minds! Fire these clowns. That, also, is inexcusable.

He basically was in exactly the same position Toews was, head down, didn't have the puck. I'm not going to argue that. Both Orpik and Seabrook saw the opportunity to flatten the opposing captain and took it. One got penalized and will be suspended, the other didn't.

A JOKE.
- John Jaeckel

I agree, and wasn't saying you're arguing the puck possession, I'm seeing a lot of complaints he didn't have the puck in various articles today. If you watch the replay, he reached for the puck and missed it, or intentionally left it against the boards, which wouldn't make much sense since there wasn't another Blues player nearby. Just as Keith is touching the puck Seabrook hits Backes. It's bang-bang. And Backes has his knees bent and is slouched, otherwise Seabrook doesn't hit his head at all.

Now, hits like that, imo, should not be part of the game, it too often leads to a head injury, but that's a different argument. It's a clean hit by the current rules. The rules should be changed, but I'm not sure how in the real world that kind of hit can be forced out of the game. To suspend someone because the other team attacks the checker, or because the player is injured, is silly.

Agree with everything u said JJ. The Blues depth is also killing the Hawks depth. Their fourth line is dominating like the hawks fourth line has in past playoff runs and this years version did for a stretch. Cant win when five of your six scorers are d men.

Am I also the only one who wonders what the hell Hitchcock is doing dressing a goon like Reeves in the playoffs? He has no hockey talent and is guaranteed to take at least 1 dumb penalty per game, 2 per game so far in this series. If the Hawks power play were working at even a league average rate we would be up 2-0, even with our relatively poor play in this series.

I hate Jackman but at least he can play, dressing Reeves isn't any different than seeing John Scott in a playoff game, it's useless.

Nice piece JJ. Happy Easter and Happy Passover. (That matzoh kills me every year)
If the Seabrook hit was EXCATLY like the Orpik, then why did Toews come up holding his shoulder, while Backes was just woosy? Now, I don’t believe he targeted him in the head. But I don’t have the sophisticated slow motion frame by frame machinery to really see what actually happened.

It's also ridiculous when Seabrook wasn't even getting a penalty until the Blues attacked him, then he's ejected and suspended. I agree, the Orpik hit is a good comparison. It's a hockey play. They can change the rules if they want plays like that out of the game, but as far as the current rules go, it's not an illegal hit.
- Hemingways

Maybe if Toews would have stayed down on the ice there would have been a penalty and possibly a suspension for Orpik.

According to Elliot Friedman no supplemental discipline on Bickell for the hit on sobotka

Yep, great point. The officials completely lost control of it right there. Only when the local hue and cry got loud, they changed their minds! Fire these clowns. That, also, is inexcusable.
- John Jaeckel

Maybe not a great point as based on the conference of the officials, the Linesman could have made the call....

NHL RULES

32.4 Reporting to Referee - The Linesman shall give to the Referees his interpretation of any incident that may have taken place during the game.

The Linesman must report upon completion of play, any circumstances pertaining to:

(i) Major penalties- Rule 20
(ii) Match penalties- Rule 21
(iii) Misconduct penalties- Rule 22
(iv) Game Misconduct penalties- Rule 23
(v) Abuse of Officials- Rule 39
(vi) Physical Abuse of Officials- Rule 40
(vii) Unsportsmanlike Conduct- Rule 75
(viii) Double-minor penalty when it is apparent that an injury has resulted from a high-stick that has gone undetected by the Referees- Rule 60

Should a Linesman witness a foul (above) committed by an attacking player or goalkeeper (undetected by the Referees) prior to the attacking team scoring a goal, the Linesman shall report what he witnessed to the Referees, the goal shall be disallowed and the appropriate penalty assessed.

John Jaeckel: You Can't Have It Both Ways
- John Jaeckel

:

Am I also the only one who wonders what the hell Hitchcock is doing dressing a goon like Reeves in the playoffs? He has no hockey talent and is guaranteed to take at least 1 dumb penalty per game, 2 per game so far in this series. If the Hawks power play were working at even a league average rate we would be up 2-0, even with our relatively poor play in this series.

I hate Jackman but at least he can play, dressing Reeves isn't any different than seeing John Scott in a playoff game, it's useless.
- Hemingways

Reaves has taken some dumb penalties in the series no doubt but comparing him to Scott is just Bollig is a much better comparison. Almost exact goals and assists per game averages and similar PIMs.

The Hawks didn't have any jump in their step in game 2. They looked tired. I know they played a 3 game OT the game before, but I was watching some of the 2010 Finals and was shocked to see how fast they were, especially Kane. Kane hasn't looked as fast at any point this season as he did in the 2010 playoffs.

Back to this series. I'm still mad at how they played a prevent defense for 8 minutes in the end of regulation of game 1 and Oduya threw a pass into two Blues players that lead to the tying goal instead of turning to his right and clearing the zone. The team is making bad passes, sloppy passes, just look off. Very seldom is anyone going to the net or standing in front of Miller. When they do they're floating, not staying put, which isn't anything new but still annoying.

Are you saying the the player safety/self-policing aspect if the NHL was better before the instigator rule? If so - even though it's taboo in some circles to say that - I agree wholeheartedly!

The Hawks got caught up in playing the Blues game instead of their own especially yesterday and they got burned big time. As much as I liked seeing the Hawks hit back for a change instead of being on the receiving end of the cheap shots that's not how they won two cups in four years. I think they may have learned a hard lesson here and hopefully will focus on their puck possession game. The Blues might just come out Monday trying to settle scores and go for the big hits. This would not be smart on their part because if they win game 3 they will have a strangle hold on the series. They will give the Hawks a chance to get back into the series if they come out preoccupied with exacting revenge and if the Hawks play it smart and get back to their game they can get back into this series. Leave the cheap shots to the Blues. That's not the way the Hawks play and certainly not the way they won the cup.
- jhawk159

Exactly!

Territorially the Hawks controlled the game after the first and can still without Seabrook but they have to stop trying to go hit for hit with the Blues and must completely skate away from the after whistle nonsense that is exactly what Coach Bloat wants them to get suckered into. I still think the Hawks can win provided they take these next two games. But there are still a few no shows that have to bring their games Sharp, Saad, Shaw, Leddy and Oduya being those players. And while Versteeg has made a few good passes for goals he needs to be better all over the ice and of course Hossa needs to produce. Kane and Toews probably deserve a pass only because both are rusty and probably still not 100%.

Reaves has taken some dumb penalties in the series no doubt but comparing him to Scott is just Bollig is a much better comparison. Almost exact goals and assists per game averages and similar PIMs.
- stljam

Well Reaves can skate and Scott can't at all. But Reaves has no other abilities. Bollig has become a more rounded player this season, shocking everyone. lol. So he's not really a great comparison to Reaves. Bollig also has played a pretty clean game this year, not taking a bunch of stupid penalties or cheap shots. He's also refused to fight much of the year. I heard a radio interview late in the season where Bollig said he was trying to prove he belongs in the league and is not just a goon, he wants to have a long career. The Hawks gave him a 3 year extension a couple of weeks later. So in that situation, good for him, but there have been several games this year where the situation called for someone to stand up for a teammate, and with Bickell being out for a while, Bollig was the obvious (only) choice and he did nothing.

Jj nice writeup
I agree baches plays on the edge and as a player when the opportunity presents itself to retaliate you do. Play with your head down and you end up in La La land

:
- arh777

What was Steen trying to do, hit someone with his parasol?

The difference in the hits is Backes didn't have the puck. I love Seabrook but it was unnecessary and it cost us the game. Backes head was down and he was leaning low, but the puck was not by him. Playing reckless is costing us.

Not