1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

2013-14 NHL Season

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Beef03, Sep 27, 2013.

  1. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Well-Known Member

    And then … would the Flames have been blasted for beating on a coach or would people have let Torts hold it for being ignorant enough to think that going into the opposing room was going to stop foolish behavior of the opposition?
     
  2. mb

    mb Active Member

    I totally get the idea of not putting your team at risk. Which is why I was curious what some of the hockey experts here thought. I just wonder if you'd have had five Flames jumping five Canucks if Torts had sent out something other than his heavyweights. Because as soon as he did, it was clearly on.
     
  3. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    Probably not but it's not a chance I'd be willing to take.
     
  4. Beef03

    Beef03 Active Member

    Torts is a blow hard. I think most people would have been in the Flames' corner on this one. At that point he is the aggressor further elevating a situation.
     
  5. Beef03

    Beef03 Active Member

    It's not worth the chance, but stupid shit like this has happened before, like John Scott going after Kessel because they were lined up against each other. That line was put out there by the Flames for one reason and one reason only, to stir shit up early. If the gloves don't drop, then you have a line of idiots running around taking shots at other players and that's not something you want to risk a top nine forward too.
     
  6. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    After the first, sure, but not to start the game. That's the first time all year Hartley has started those guys, I wonder why.
     
  7. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Well-Known Member

    Tend to agree. Would have to think this would outweigh the they're-beating-the-little-ol'-coach card.
     
  8. Beef03

    Beef03 Active Member

    I agree completely. It was bush league for Hartley to start that line like that. But Torts has got to have better control of himself. I was fine with him tearing into Hartley from the bench, but for him to go to the Flames dressing room like that during the intermission is garbage. There are far better ways to handle it than that, especially considering he had an entire period to cool down between the line brawl and the intermission. Torts going to the Flames dressing room does nothing to calm the situation, it only makes it worse than it already is.
     
  9. SoCalDude

    SoCalDude Active Member

    Since Monday at L.A., how many fights have the Canucks been involved in??
     
  10. Beef03

    Beef03 Active Member

    Counting the L.A. game, they have now had 10 fighting majors since Monday, five came in tonight's game. but then in tonight's game, you have things like Kassian getting a double minor for his tilt (mugging?) instead of a fighting major.
     
  11. Beef03

    Beef03 Active Member

    I will say this, Torts at least seemed regretful for going after Hartley in the intermission in his post game press conference.
     
  12. MileHigh

    MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

    I'm just a casual follower of the sport, but WHY did Hartley put the fourth line out there? What was he trying to do/prove/accomplish (other than stir up shit as was noted)? Because he knew it would get under Torts' skin?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page