Are you an expert?

I think we all agree, the question could have been asked differently.

I think where some of the disagreement around here comes is whether or not asking about an elbow - which was not asked by the former PR guy Senators shills like Mendes other reporters -- was legitimate.

It absolutely was correct to ask about the elbow.

 

It was correct to ask, sure. But you've got to word it much better and in a way that doesn't give off your bias, especially when you're wrong, as Sutton did not have his elbow up. (Twoback, the hit is not garbage. You and the rest of the uninformed can scream all you want, but your screaming will not change the fact that Sutton delivered a completely clean hit.)

A reasonable wording would have been something like: Did you have your elbow out on the hit and if so, was that by accident?

 

That's not a reasonable wording. That's a wording designed to give the player an out.
If you're going to call me "uninformed" -- a group, I might add, that now includes a Hockey Hall of Fame journalist, the greatest player on the planet and two sports journalists who make seven figures -- it's fair for me to ask if you're a journalist.
And it's also fair for me to say that if you're not, you're not really qualified to declare how a professional like Ray Fittipaldo should be transacting business.

 

That is a fair point about the journalist. Now I ask you, how qualified are you to talk about the hit? If you have to be a journalist to question other journalist, shouldn't you have played hockey to question these hits?

Those guys who make 7 figures don't watch hockey, their opinion is irrelevant. I assume you're talking about Crosby and well of course he should be listened to, but he also should be taken with a grain of salt considering who he plays for.

Now, what is it you say to the 99% of other people who say it was clean. You've named 4 people that agree with you. 2 never watch hockey and 2 that live in and work in Pittsburgh.
There's a list a lot bigger than that, from people who have played, coached and covered hockey that live outside of Pittsburgh that agree that it was a clean hit. Are you saying they are clueless?

 

Coming in late here, but have been enjoying the debate.

First, I have played hockey since I was 8 years old. (32 years). I have no preference between these two teams. I live 2,000 miles from either one. Hit looked clean to me. Vicious, but clean.

From a journlism standpoint (this is the journalism board, right?) I think all three parties who have been discussed here could have handled it better.

1. The Pittsburgh reporter should have worded the question differently or, at least, decided that he'd gotten his answer from the non-answer and stopped badgering.

2. The player could have simply said: "Despite how the replay looked to you, my elbow wasn't up. Look again. Next question."

3. The other reporter should not have been calling out a colleague in print (e-print, as it were). The readers don't care about internal media squabbles. I also don't think it's fair to paint the guy as a homer just because he asked a question you and the player didn't like. It was a legitimate question. While the hit looked clean to me, it was certainly close enough to be worth a question.

There. End of thread

 

Which 99 percent are that? The ones you surveyed? The dolts who've been broadcasting the Sens-Pens series on Versus and failed to call out Ottawa for their sore-loser antics at the end of Game 4? In no other sport would that crap be let go without admonishment. In no other sport would an elbow to the head be called a "clean hit." Not even the NFL would go along with that.

 

Who gives a shit about other sports, that has no bearing on hockey. If you don't like it go watch other sports. Again, no elbow!

 

Your response is the verbal equivalent of a starting fights when your team is about to go down 3-1 in the series and has just given up 7 goals in a game.

 

I see you avoided the question, what do other sports have to do with hockey. Why does it matter what other sports would do in that situation? Please answer that.

 

This response is proof that you're a jaded fanboy when it comes to the topic of the hit, seen as a completely clean hit by the majority of people outside of Pittsburgh. The only thing you need to tell you that it was is the fact that the NHL, who benefits much more by having the Pens around than the Senators, did not even so much as review the hit. The fact that you're still on here arguing that it was a dirty hit just makes you look like a fool. Just agree to disagree and go enjoy the rest of the playoffs.

 

I took that to be a rhetorical question.
There are basic standards of sportsmanship. There are basic standards of what constitutes acceptable sporting behavior.
An elbow/forearm to the head at 20 MPH or so is pretty much beneath those of any sport, perhaps even MMA (although I'm not sure about the rules there, honestly).
So I guess that's your answer.

 

Oh, and as for CWilson, the Cooke hit on Savard back in the regular season drew no suspension, either.
And it was just as wrong.