You people are oblivious to what happened, take accountability. I dont understand why you people think this is a clean hockey check. That was Sedin's first hit of the year so in what way is their evidence that he was "finishing" a check?
- nickmo2699

take accountability for what exactly? Sedin will get nothing more than a fine, if that. For me, the hit was a fraction late. The hit was a bit high on Dk's chest, and a rode up to make contact with his head, but IMO, the intent TO HEADHUNT, wasnt there. Keith's hit on Danny, his intent was obvious; to deliver a blow to Daniel's head, ergo to injure him.

2 years huh? Yea your right man great work. actually am 23 years old and have been a hawks fan my entire life. Hawks 4 Canucks 0. Your team is the Miami Heat of hockey. Best in the regular season cant bring home the bacon come playoff time. Hope your car was burned during the pout fest after the SCF loss last year.
- nickmo2699

Easy big guy, not like there wasnt a 49 year gap between Hawk Cup wins. Shall we go through the years the Hawks choked??? '71, '91, '92.....cant forget that 20 year gap when hockey in Chicago was irrelevant and an afterthought

take accountability for what exactly? Sedin will get nothing more than a fine, if that. For me, the hit was a fraction late. The hit was a bit high on Dk's chest, and a rode up to make contact with his head, but IMO, the intent TO HEADHUNT, wasnt there. Keith's hit on Danny, his intent was obvious; to deliver a blow to Daniel's head, ergo to injure him.
- TLinden16

Keith's intentions were clear and I cant agree with you more. All im saying is that he lunges for Keith's Jaw. If I'm Keith I grab him then and there and rough him up and not handle it like he did.

Easy big guy, not like there wasnt a 49 year gap between Hawk Cup wins. Shall we go through the years the Hawks choked??? '71, '91, '92.....cant forget that 20 year gap when hockey in Chicago was irrelevant and an afterthought
- TLinden16

And what exactly would you call the last two-three years for Vancouver? They were the best team in the NHL last year and there is no reason they should have lost to Boston.

take accountability for what exactly? Sedin will get nothing more than a fine, if that. For me, the hit was a fraction late. The hit was a bit high on Dk's chest, and a rode up to make contact with his head, but IMO, the intent TO HEADHUNT, wasnt there. Keith's hit on Danny, his intent was obvious; to deliver a blow to Daniel's head, ergo to injure him.
- TLinden16

Chest, huh? Try again.

http://youtu.be/22wQYhn1bhA

You people are all dumb. Open your eyes all the way. His shoulder elevates and makes contact with the jaw. Im going to lose my mind reading these Vancouver fans nonsense. Guess what? You havent won a cup so all your opinions dont mean sh*t. Take accountability. Hawks fans dont argue that Keith deserves a suspension but admit that your alien looking player threw is shoulder to the jaw of Duncan Keith. I dont understand how you blind Vancouver fans can type being as blind as you are.
- nickmo2699

Then don't read it - go back to the Hawks blog. It's easy.

And what exactly would you call the last two-three years for Vancouver? They were the best team in the NHL last year and there is no reason they should have lost to Boston.
- nickmo2699

No reason? taking a little bit of credit away from boston arent we? Lets re hash this thing AGAIN:

Kesler hurt...no 2nd line = Chara and Seidenberg (awesome shutdown pair) are able to shut down our #1 line

Luongo was a sieve in beantown

Thomas was lights out, and out of his skull awesome

.....adn it went 7 games, hardly a choke, Larry

When you say "repeat offender", it means that hes been suspended before.

Being an agitator is not repeat offending.

Perhaps a dictionary in your stocking this year?
- Mattjd123

Actually.. no, no it doesn't. He's a repeat offender because he has been fined for spearing and sucker punches from the bench... and has also been called a few times before the NHL disciplinary committee.

so yea, he's a repeat offender.

I'm sure this has been posted here.

http://youtu.be/22wQYhn1bhA

And you're going to tell me how much more dirty Keith's hit was then this? Nah- Sedin doesn't shoulder/elbow Keith's head into the glass. Totally clean hit with ZERO intent.

BTW: Checks against the boards are usually with your body.. not a flying/shoulder-elbow to the head.

Keith's intentions were clear and I cant agree with you more. All im saying is that he lunges for Keith's Jaw. If I'm Keith I grab him then and there and rough him up and not handle it like he did.
- nickmo2699

you know what, I personally would be less pissed if Keith grabbed Danny and started feeding him (with danny in full turtle) rather than what he did. At least he couldve claimed it was in the heat of the moment. Instead he used a predatory and premeditated tactic to remove Danny from the game. If the league is serious about removing headshots, give Keith 5 games. I know he's not a repeat offender, but its a good lesson, and like you said, he will get some much needed rest for the playoffs!

you know what, I personally would be less pissed if Keith grabbed Danny and started feeding him (with danny in full turtle) rather than what he did. At least he couldve claimed it was in the heat of the moment. Instead he used a predatory and premeditated tactic to remove Danny from the game. If the league is serious about removing headshots, give Keith 5 games. I know he's not a repeat offender, but its a good lesson, and like you said, he will get some much needed rest for the playoffs!
- TLinden16

What's the difference between Keith retaliating and doing the same thing that happened to him minutes prior? Same exact hit, same exact spot on the body.

What's the difference between Keith retaliating and doing the same thing that happened to him minutes prior? Same exact hit, same exact spot on the body.
- CaptainBlackhawk

Go Troll your own blog.... if you can't understand that the hits are completely different then you obviously know nothing about the subject of hockey.

Go Troll your own blog.... if you can't understand that the hits are completely different then you obviously know nothing about the subject of hockey.
- SMP8719

And if you can't comprehend that Sedins shoulder contacted Keiths head then watch the video again with out the Teal and Blue glasses on.

Both checks targetted the head. Keiths was worse because the puck wasn't there and it was a preditory shot, but Sedins is far from being a clean check.

Go Troll your own blog.... if you can't understand that the hits are completely different then you obviously know nothing about the subject of hockey.
- SMP8719

Oh I know the difference.

I guess my homer glasses aren't so firmly squared on my face when you realize there was INTENT on both hits. That's something some of you obviously can't grasp. That's not trolling that's attempting to bring a sense of realism to the situation.

What's the difference between Keith retaliating and doing the same thing that happened to him minutes prior? Same exact hit, same exact spot on the body.
- CaptainBlackhawk

Hahah, that comment right there sums up your incredible lack of a) objectivity or b) hockey knowledge. im thinking you are a combination of both a and b. Beat it Larry

And if you can't comprehend that Sedins shoulder contacted Keiths head then watch the video again with out the Teal and Blue glasses on.

Both checks targetted the head. Keiths was worse because the puck wasn't there and it was a preditory shot, but Sedins is far from being a clean check.
- Ben37

Read my posts.... I have never said Sedins hit was clean. But it isn't suspendable. Otherwise there would be multiple suspensions a day.

Hahah, that comment right there sums up your incredible lack of a) objectivity or b) hockey knowledge. im thinking you are a combination of both a and b. Beat it Larry
- TLinden16

Realizing that both players had intent to hurt the other? And Keith's was a retaliation to someone head hunting against the board?

That's the only difference. Sedin was attempting to hit Keith in the head, and Keith was retaliating along the same lines.

Look at the clip I provided - the ex-NHLer rips Sedin for the hit as well.

Wake up

Realizing that both players had intent to hurt the other? And Keith's was a retaliation to someone head hunting against the board?

Look at the clip I provided - the ex-NHLer rips Sedin for the hit as well.

Wake up
- CaptainBlackhawk

Dude, you're wrong. Sedin isn't trying to injury Keith. That's a standard check on a guy who just had the puck. Comparing it to a blantant elbow is ridiculous.

And if you can't comprehend that Sedins shoulder contacted Keiths head then watch the video again with out the Teal and Blue glasses on.

Both checks targetted the head. Keiths was worse because the puck wasn't there and it was a preditory shot, but Sedins is far from being a clean check.
- Ben37

Shoulder checking into the body where the head is contacted but not targeted and throwing an elbow into the face in a blatant attempt to injure are so different, it isn't even comparable. It just isn't even close.

Dude, you're wrong. Sedin isn't trying to injury Keith. That's a standard check on a guy who just had the puck. Comparing it to a blantant elbow is ridiculous.
- micah555

Please look at the clip again.

It's not a standard check to come in with your shoulder/elbow to his HEAD against the board. As much as it is OK for some fans to rationalize it that way. That's not standard in any hockey league I've ever watched/played in. That's why Keith retaliated against Sedin.

Shoulder checking into the body where the head is contacted but not targeted and throwing an elbow into the face in a blatant attempt to injure are so different, it isn't even comparable. It just isn't even close.
- micah555

He was shoulder/elbow checking to his HEAD. His HEAD! That's where you're wrong.

And if you can't comprehend that Sedins shoulder contacted Keiths head then watch the video again with out the Teal and Blue glasses on.

Both checks targetted the head. Keiths was worse because the puck wasn't there and it was a preditory shot, but Sedins is far from being a clean check.
- Ben37

Almost all the contact was to the body with maybe 10% high. How can you say the head was the primary target? Clearly Kieth's contact was 100% to the face. That is the head being targetted.

It would help if you would research a little. The misinformed all seem to think that all contact to the head is illegal under any circumstance and any contact to someone's head is undeniably intentional.

He was shoulder/elbow checking to his HEAD. His HEAD! That's where you're wrong.
- CaptainBlackhawk

His elbow was low.

His shoulder was partially high.

Stop watching how Kieths head moves on contact and look where all the body is.

Please look at the clip again.

It's not a standard check to come in with your shoulder/elbow to his HEAD against the board. As much as it is OK for some fans to rationalize it that way. That's not standard in any hockey league I've ever watched/played in. That's why Keith retaliated against Sedin.
- CaptainBlackhawk

I've watched the clip. The frame-by-frame is a lot more vicious looking than the actual hit. Sedin is not a big guy and he's not a know hitter. There was zero elbow to the head in that hit; the elbow is tucked like it's meant to be. It's standard shoulder-to-body contact with incidental contact to the head. The head does not get driven into the boards with any body part of Sedin's touching it. Sedin is in the centre of the Keith's chest when Keith contacts the boards.

It's not ever okay for Keith to do what he did. These plays are not interchangable.

He was shoulder/elbow checking to his HEAD. His HEAD! That's where you're wrong.
- CaptainBlackhawk

His elbow is tucked. It never gets close to Keith's head.