Why Thornton was right.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    I


    Exactly Sandog! That hit is 100x worse compared to ST's love taps! The only reason the "Big 3" on here is going mental over what ST did is because they want ST gone! Nothing more!! If this was Chara that did this would they be saying? "Throw the book at him" Get him off the roster! I don't condone what ST did, but I certainly don't see it as a reason to get him out of hockey for good. ST is one of the most code ethical guys out there. He had a total meltdown & lost his head on this one, but it's not as bad as these 3 blowhards are making it out to be! Brooks Orpik is a pansy if those little pokes knocked him out! 

    [/QUOTE]

    He punched a defensless guy while he was on the ground. Thats ugly no matter who does it.

    If Chara or Bergeron or anyone else slew foots someone and then continues to punch him in the head knocking him out while hes on his back, i would want the book thrown at him too. Thats ugly hockey no matter what name is on the jersey. 

    If someone does that to anyone on our team we'd be calling for blood.

    Thornton defintely isnt known for being cheap or dirty by any means but i dont see this is him doing what he had to do or just him playing his role. He lost his cool and did something really stupid.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree Davey. I'm not condoning what ST did...He lost it & did something that isn't wanted in the game, BUT my beef is with the ones who are saying ST's career should be over as a Boston Bruin. And THE ONLY reason they're saying this is because it's Shawn Thornton, because they hate him! That's my beef. These same people are the same double standard bast-- ards who complain when ST doesn't do anything. Now he does this & "take his head off & feed the wolves!" Like it's crucifixin time all over again. That's what I don't condone! 

    Lastly, Orpik hit a defensless player illegally as well. A shoulder to the head is no longer allowed & interference is not allowed either. Orpik did both.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kitchener. Show kitchener's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    Back in the 70's guys use to beat the crap out of guys who cheap shotted there team mates all the time,if you didn't want to fight to bad,you still got pummeled.Not much difference than Emery beating the crap out of Holtby,he wasn't lying down but he didn't want to fight and was trying to get away.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to kitchener's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Back in the 70's guys use to beat the crap out of guys who cheap shotted there team mates all the time,if you didn't want to fight to bad,you still got pummeled.Not much difference than Emery beating the crap out of Holtby,he wasn't lying down but he didn't want to fight and was trying to get away.

    [/QUOTE]

    Who did Holtby cheapshot?

    The stupidity is real bad today.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I


    Exactly Sandog! That hit is 100x worse compared to ST's love taps! The only reason the "Big 3" on here is going mental over what ST did is because they want ST gone! Nothing more!! If this was Chara that did this would they be saying? "Throw the book at him" Get him off the roster! I don't condone what ST did, but I certainly don't see it as a reason to get him out of hockey for good. ST is one of the most code ethical guys out there. He had a total meltdown & lost his head on this one, but it's not as bad as these 3 blowhards are making it out to be! Brooks Orpik is a pansy if those little pokes knocked him out! 

    [/QUOTE]

    He punched a defensless guy while he was on the ground. Thats ugly no matter who does it.

    If Chara or Bergeron or anyone else slew foots someone and then continues to punch him in the head knocking him out while hes on his back, i would want the book thrown at him too. Thats ugly hockey no matter what name is on the jersey. 

    If someone does that to anyone on our team we'd be calling for blood.

    Thornton defintely isnt known for being cheap or dirty by any means but i dont see this is him doing what he had to do or just him playing his role. He lost his cool and did something really stupid.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree Davey. I'm not condoning what ST did...He lost it & did something that isn't wanted in the game, BUT my beef is with the ones who are saying ST's career should be over as a Boston Bruin. And THE ONLY reason they're saying this is because it's Shawn Thornton, because they hate him! That's my beef. These same people are the same double standard bast-- ards who complain when ST doesn't do anything. Now he does this & "take his head off & feed the wolves!" Like it's crucifixin time all over again. That's what I don't condone! 

    Lastly, Orpik hit a defensless player illegally as well. A shoulder to the head is no longer allowed & interference is not allowed either. Orpik did both.

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you all there?

    Your comparing punching a person in the head as he's going down to a body check?

    Holy crap.

    Seriosuly folks. Are you all that stupid where your loyalty to a team overrides your common sense that easy?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaveyN. Show DaveyN's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Are you all there?

    Your comparing punching a person in the head as he's going down to a body check?

    Holy crap.

    Seriosuly folks. Are you all that stupid where your loyalty to a team overrides your common sense that easy?

    [/QUOTE]

    You are posting a comment in a thread titled "Why Thornton was Right" referencing him hitting a defensless player in the head numerous times while he was laying down on the ice.

    I would hope that that alone answers the question in bold print.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kitchener. Show kitchener's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kitchener's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Back in the 70's guys use to beat the crap out of guys who cheap shotted there team mates all the time,if you didn't want to fight to bad,you still got pummeled.Not much difference than Emery beating the crap out of Holtby,he wasn't lying down but he didn't want to fight and was trying to get away.

    [/QUOTE]

    Who did Holtby cheapshot?

    The stupidity is real bad today.

    [/QUOTE]

    No Holtby didn't but Emery beat that crap out of him while he was trying to get away,didn't  defend himself,only diff was he wasnt lying down,but no suspension for Emery,if Orpik didn't go out on the stretcher this isn't an issue,so if.Holtby had gone out on a stretcher would Emery have gotten a suspension,just saying

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to marco0863's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmwalters' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Please review the definition of anecdotal evidence (especially in scientific context):

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

    Now please reconsider your assertion that you are not using anecdotal evidence to back up your claim that "there are more serious injuries now than in the past."  Unless you have some hard evidence, this is what you are doing....this is what we are both doing.

    Thank you.

     

    Go Bruins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm fairly familiar with the term thanks, and it's really unacademic to consider the above merely andecdotal.

     If YOU don't have evidence my statement is non-representative, or cherry-picked...you really have no business calling it "anecdotal".

    And...since when did it become necessary to  introduce "hard evidence" to support something everyone knows...on an internet chat forum.

    Please refer the definition of common sense(not Aristotleian)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense

    Now please get off your portentous high-horse.    

    I never brought up the 70's, you did.  My only reference to any particular decade was the 60's.  Even though the 70's would be considered a more violent decade in pro hockey, I didn't argue because it didn't have any bearing on the above statement.

    Second, I'm certain I can find plenty of independant data to support my statement, however, since you called me on it,...you should be providing the research to impeach, as opposed to merely suggesting my position is as flimsy as yours.

    Thank you too.

    [/QUOTE]

    In the seventies there were more brawls but  the play itself is more violent today.   it has to be the game is faster guys are stronger.  Guys didn't even have helmets back then - imagine that today.  It wouldn't be a question of serious injuries but rather fatalities if guys were not c wearing helmets today

    [/QUOTE]

    Absolutely,positively,100% correct. The game has moved way past bench clearing brawls but towards more violent and devastating injuries. Looking back, bench clearing brawls were nothing more than a good old donnybrook to let off some steam.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    Kinda glad I wasn't around a computer all weekend - looking through these threads from the last three days, there's some serious bats#!t craziness that I missed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaveyN. Show DaveyN's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to red75's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Kinda glad I wasn't around a computer all weekend - looking through these threads from the last three days, there's some serious bats#!t craziness that I missed.

    [/QUOTE]

    Its a LOOONG season Red...im sure there'll be plenty more.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Madhouse27. Show Madhouse27's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    Here's Flyers tough guy Jay Rosehill with his thoughts on the matter and some positive comments about Thorton. 

    http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/former-leaf-rosehill-supports-thornton/

     

    blah, can't seem to make it a clickable link...sorry. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    Here you go, Mad.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDL5xn3k2n8

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAxCoA6u0os

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrr. Show NeelyOrr's posts

    Re: Why Thornton was right.

    In response to AFNAV130's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Games and society today need more events like this. I'm dead serious too. To often people do things without any repercussion.  Especially in hockey. Scott got what? 10 games for concussing Louie?  Really? That vicious of a hit. Then Orpik levels him with a shot to the head and nothing? No game? Guy just had a concussion and you hit him like that? Then be a big p***y and decline to fight? Big man can make the big hit, then run away? Then you have Neal on Marchand. Whatever, I saw it and good on Thornton. You want to run around, put massive hits on people and then not back it up? Fine. You'll get the message soon enough. Not like it came out of nowhere. Maybe Orpik will remember that next time he wants to do something like that. And guess what, the door goes both ways. I'd want to see the same to happen to a Bruin if he did what Orpik did.

    [/QUOTE]

    Orpik got what he deserved.

     

Share