I guess with the title this is an invite for Oilers fans to come on here.
I'll bite I guess, even tho it looks like few care.
First off. That was a bad hit that deserved a suspension. Although I personally think one game would be adequate. I guess because Ekblad got injured they tacked on one or two due to the rules.
Hendricks is not a dirty player.
Ekblad put himself in a vulnerable position by turning his back.
It just wasn't THAT bad a hit.
I do believe the hit on Hall was more predatory than Hendricks', albeit clean. And I agree that the passer was the person most at fault.
The hit was retaliatory in that the game was escalating and Hendricks wanted to rise to the occasion. To say it was star for star, targeted, or malicious is silly. The officiating was letting everything go in that game, so they were partly responsible as well IMO.
As an Oiler fan I've been on the receiving end of too many of these o keep track of, and as much as it sucks its just part of the game.
- Aerchon
It WAS that bad of a hit.
It did warrant a 3 game suspension, and in my opinion, he should've been out longer.
Ekblad DID'T put himself in any kind of position. He was going to get the puck when Hendricks took a cheap-shot hit to Ekblad's head. Hendricks had no reason to hit him that way. Dirty!
Retaliation for what?? Gudbranson hit on Hall was 110% clean. No reason for retalition, and IF Hendricks wanted to retaliate, he should be a man and go fight Gudbranson, not cheap shot our Best D.
