Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 9417549)

Now then ladies.

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 9417558)

It's no bother- I'd rather be an expert in horse humping than ice hockey!

Which is lucky ;)

Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 9417572)

I know nothing about it except that if you are there watching it live you can't see the puck and have to rely on the big screen to find out what's going on.

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 9417539)

Which basically means you have to play the puck and not the man which was exactly what I said Sherlock.

I seem to remember your poor knowledge and similarly ill thought out comments last year when you tried to pretend you were some expert during the Olympics with your insiteful tactical analysis.

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 9417708)

The simplest analogy I can think of in football is a shoulder charge. If a shoulder charge in football can be described as "playing the ball" then you might, possibly, be right.

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 9417590)

Actually I was very impressed with the Boston Fans last night. Easily the most intimidating Hockey fan's I've heard.

Originally Posted by cheeky_monkey (Post 9417740)

In what way????

Originally Posted by lmartin999 (Post 9417821)

Do they chant "Go...<insert name> Go" as well?

I haven't heard anything in hockey to match:

"He's blonde, he's bent, his arse is up for rent, Shane Warne Shane Warne" etc.

:thumbup:

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 9417732)

To me it looked like Nathan Horton had clearly played the puck

Originally Posted by lmartin999 (Post 9417821)

Do they chant "Go...<insert name> Go" as well?

I haven't heard anything in hockey to match:

"He's blonde, he's bent, his arse is up for rent, Shane Warne Shane Warne" etc.

:thumbup:

Originally Posted by lmartin999 (Post 9417821)

Do they chant "Go...<insert name> Go" as well?

I haven't heard anything in hockey to match:

"He's blonde, he's bent, his arse is up for rent, Shane Warne Shane Warne" etc.

:thumbup:

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 9417853)

Agreed, it was a late hit and deserved to be punished.



I think that knock him over conveys the intention more than taking him out. I don't think for a moment the intention was to cause the harm he did. Rome is hard but he has never shown any indication in the past that he is a goon.

Hitting can be used to separate an opponent from the puck, or to wear down an opponent and distract them. Usually both. If you can get someone towards the end of the game getting the puck and thinking they had better get rid of it PDQ otherwise some big barsteward is going crash them up against the boards then it has been effective. In football a big centre half leans all over a forward, pulls his shirt, kicks his shins. It is not that different apart from the speed the game is played at.

Borderline IMO, at least through these blue and green goggles. Nevertheless, a player is responsible for their actions on the ice and he hurt an opponent and has to pay the price.



Steve Moore's hit on Naslund was not that dissimilar to Rome's hit last night. It was deemed legal by the referees and the NHL at the time. As I said, players are held responsible for their actions. The locker room "code" is that if the authorities don't take appropriate action the players will. Possibly one of the reasons the NHL suspended Rome for the rest of the play-offs was to ensure one of the Bruins didn't take things into their own hands.

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 9417774)

The noise and the chanting was louder and more coherent than other hockey crowds I've seen on the box.

Originally Posted by cheeky_monkey (Post 9419188)

ive been to see the Oilers..and the chants and the atmosphere was laughable compared to English football at any level.