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

"During the season, he was fined an undisclosed amount by the league after spearing Detroit Red Wings forward Aaron Downey at centre ice during the two teams' pre-game skate on February 23, 2008"

"Following a game against the Edmonton Oilers on April 4, Burrows received a $2,500 fine from the league for punching Oilers enforcer Zach Stortini from the bench"

So maybe he hasn't been suspended.. but he has been reprimanded in the past.. so yeah i would say this is not the first incident.
- Kieran

also had an incident spearing staal way back didn't he? (again in the groin)

I sniped this from someone else's twitter post, but it applies very well!

April 5, 2011Triple H and The Undertaker Fined for Chair ShotPursuant to WWE's Concussion policy, the stunt of using a folded metal chair shot to the head is prohibited. Triple H and The Undertaker have both been fined for violating this policy at WrestleMania XXVII. WWE penalizes through fine and/or suspension for violation of this policy, which is unchanged and still in effect.


That's right boys and girls, the freakin WWE has a better headshot policy than the NHL.

It actually isn't the first time as a previous poster mentioned... he did the exact same to Matt Cooke. although as most people agree with Cooke has been cheap and actually deserved it.
- SMP8719

So if I undestand you correctly, Keith is justified (somewhat? A little bit?) in giving it back to Cooke, but not Sedin? Thus, this all hinges on whether what Sedin did in the corner was dirty or in violation of the rules? If it was, then Keith is justified in going after Sedin? Or did Cooke's consistently dirty play in the past somehow merit a response? What's the threshold in determining when a player can take matters into his own hands?

I don't think you want to say any of that. I think what we need is a one game suspension for Sedin, slightly higher for Keith, and then dropping the instigator rule in seasons to come.

I don't think anyone here is saying that Keith's hit has any place in the game. Should he be suspended? Yes.

It's just rather ironic that you have Canuck fans calling for his expulsion from hockey, riding their high horses... when in reality Sedin had committed the same foul earlier in the game. It also seems like they forget about Burrows running around taking cheap shots at guys too.

I think we all forget though that these guys know the risks about playing the game, and get paid handsomely to do it. Hockey is a contact sport and the number one rule in hockey that you learn as a kid is you PROTECT YOURSELF AT ALL TIMES.

Been fined before for spears, and sucker punches from the bench.

Should have gotten something for biting and hair pulling.
- Kieran

This has been thoroughly covered. Bergeron repeatedly poked him in the mouth. I don't know anybody who would stand for that. Don't poke someone in the mouth if you don't want to get bitten.

The hairpulling incident was also covered, even by an American newspaper (can't remember which one), but it was widely overlooked that Keith fishhooked Burrows previous to the hairpulling. Both cheesy tactics, but one gets overlooked.

This has been thoroughly covered. Bergeron repeatedly poked him in the mouth. I don't know anybody who would stand for that. Don't poke someone in the mouth if you don't want to get bitten.

The hairpulling incident was also covered, even by an American newspaper (can't remember which one), but it was widely overlooked that Keith fishhooked Burrows previous to the hairpulling. Both cheesy tactics, but one gets overlooked.
- Fosco

Fish hook me once, same on you. Fish hook me twice... nobody fish hooks me twice.

The hit was horsepoop.....hits like that and Doan where intent is obvious should be 10 games regardless of first offense or not.

These are players livelihoods and intentionally head-hunting should be eradicated.....disgusting.....

So if I undestand you correctly, Keith is justified (somewhat? A little bit?) in giving it back to Cooke, but not Sedin? Thus, this all hinges on whether what Sedin did in the corner was dirty or in violation of the rules? If it was, then Keith is justified in going after Sedin? Or did Cooke's consistently dirty play in the past somehow merit a response? What's the threshold in determining when a player can take matters into his own hands?

I don't think you want to say any of that. I think what we need is a one game suspension for Sedin, slightly higher for Keith, and then dropping the instigator rule in seasons to come.
- AL SEC0RD

He was warranted to hit him back... Just not in the cheap shot variety that he chose. Which should have been a 5 min major. Cookes hit on him was much cheaper then Sedins little hit. Although I believe he should have received a 2 min penalty for it being late. There are multiple hits a night that aren't that much different then Sedins... and most go un-penalized. Aaron Romes hit in the Stanley cup final wasn't as cheap as keith's and way closer to a hockey play and he was suspended for 4 stanley cup final games... that is equal to at least an 8 gamer during the season.

I don't think anyone here is saying that Keith's hit has any place in the game. Should he be suspended? Yes.

It's just rather ironic that you have Canuck fans calling for his expulsion from hockey, riding their high horses... when in reality Sedin had committed the same foul earlier in the game. It also seems like they forget about Burrows running around taking cheap shots at guys too.

I think we all forget though that these guys know the risks about playing the game, and get paid handsomely to do it. Hockey is a contact sport and the number one rule in hockey that you learn as a kid is you PROTECT YOURSELF AT ALL TIMES.
- Kieran

The "same" foul....not quite...Sedin didn't intentionally target the head - penalty, sure but not the "same" foul chief....

I don't think anyone here is saying that Keith's hit has any place in the game. Should he be suspended? Yes.

It's just rather ironic that you have Canuck fans calling for his expulsion from hockey, riding their high horses... when in reality Sedin had committed the same foul earlier in the game. It also seems like they forget about Burrows running around taking cheap shots at guys too.

I think we all forget though that these guys know the risks about playing the game, and get paid handsomely to do it. Hockey is a contact sport and the number one rule in hockey that you learn as a kid is you PROTECT YOURSELF AT ALL TIMES.
- Kieran

Sedin laid a hit on a guy who had just passed the puck. Keith laid an elbow on an unsuspecting target without the puck. It's not even close to the same thing.

Last year I played was 1992 and for the Merrit Centennials, I tore up my knee in the second preseason game after I tried to clear the puck from in front of my net (I was a defenceman) and a guy got tripped and clipped my knee from the side into my goaltender who fell on top of my leg. I tore my ACL, MCL and compound fractured my femur. Took 3 major surgeries to fix it and by the time I was finished rehabbing my window was closed.
- DariusKnight

Did you know Barry Ryce? He played goal for Merrit around then...friend of the family.

I cant believe how many people think that any kind of contact to the head is illegal. The NHL hasnt adopted this rule yet. Targetted head shots...yes... give penalties and suspensions for these dirty hits. Over and over in the first half of the season Shanny was clear about coincidental contact being unavoidable...and not illegal in it's own. Usually if there is a suspension for these types of hits it's because other cryteria has been met.

If Danny even gets a penalty for a hit like this...it's for being a tad late. 2 minutes....

It disgusts me how many radio and TV sports hosts still cant figure out the obvious. I pity people who listen to these guys without using their own powers of observation. You watch hockey with your eyes not your ears.

Anyone listening to the Team1040 today?

Troy from white rock just phoned in. He said he thought Daniel purposely threw his head into keiths shoulder so he could put his team on the power play.

What a fukking donkey

Anyone listening to the Team1040 today?

Troy from white rock just phoned in. He said he thought Daniel purposely threw his head into keiths shoulder so he could put his team on the power play.

What a fukking donkey
- TheCouv

Troy from White Rock = Scooby Doo = dshiddy

Ian Esplen: The National Headshot League
The National Headshot League
- IanEsplen

....

This has been thoroughly covered. Bergeron repeatedly poked him in the mouth. I don't know anybody who would stand for that. Don't poke someone in the mouth if you don't want to get bitten.

The hairpulling incident was also covered, even by an American newspaper (can't remember which one), but it was widely overlooked that Keith fishhooked Burrows previous to the hairpulling. Both cheesy tactics, but one gets overlooked.
- Fosco

You mean Bergeron gave him a facewash.. which is a pretty standard on-going in the league.. I believe Burrows gave a couple of those during last night's game.. funny how he didn't get bit though. I guess that's because grown men usually don't bite each other.

So, I guess with your second point you've just justified Keith's hit on Sedin then. Keith retaliated.. Just like Burrows.. did.. except he didn't pull Sedin's hair.

Troy from White Rock = Scooby Doo = dshiddy
- chompsey

I don't call into radio stations, but if I did, it would be as a hockey expert.

The "same" foul....not quite...Sedin didn't intentionally target the head - penalty, sure but not the "same" foul chief....
- chompsey

Yes, you can cleary state this because you are Sedin's conscience.

You mean Bergeron gave him a facewash.. which is a pretty standard on-going in the league.. I believe Burrows gave a couple of those during last night's game.. funny how he didn't get bit though. I guess that's because grown men usually don't bite each other.

So, I guess with your second point you've just justified Keith's hit on Sedin then. Keith retaliated.. Just like Burrows.. did.. except he didn't pull Sedin's hair.
- Kieran

When do you think anyone will give a poop about the Leafs again? By all accounts, they have been irrelevant since 2003-4....so I am not surprised to see you hearing chirping a team that actually wins.....

You mean Bergeron gave him a facewash.. which is a pretty standard on-going in the league.. I believe Burrows gave a couple of those during last night's game.. funny how he didn't get bit though. I guess that's because grown men usually don't bite each other.

So, I guess with your second point you've just justified Keith's hit on Sedin then. Keith retaliated.. Just like Burrows.. did.. except he didn't pull Sedin's hair.
- Kieran

Why do Leafs fans continue to troll our threads?

Hey, I lived in Toronto a few years back, dated a girl from Milton. I visited your town often. You should move to Toronto.

Yes, you can cleary state this because you are Sedin's conscience.
- Kieran

weak troll attempt......

Last time i checked, any infraction which causes an injury to the head is an AUTOMATIC 5 min major. I remember last year, Burrows made a questionable hit and was given 5 minutes just because the player injured his head.

I cant believe how many people think that any kind of contact to the head is illegal. The NHL hasnt adopted this rule yet. Targetted head shots...yes... give penalties and suspensions for these dirty hits. Over and over in the first half of the season Shanny was clear about coincidental contact being unavoidable...and not illegal in it's own. Usually if there is a suspension for these types of hits it's because other cryteria has been met.

If Danny even gets a penalty for a hit like this...it's for being a tad late. 2 minutes....

It disgusts me how many radio and TV sports hosts still cant figure out the obvious. I pity people who listen to these guys without using their own powers of observation. You watch hockey with your eyes not your ears.
- boonerbuck

Quit making it so hard to dislike you.....

weak troll attempt......
- chompsey

Well saying you know what someone else's intentions are is a pretty weak argument on your part.

How do you know what his intentions were? You don't.