GARTH'S CORNER: Seabrook Suspended 3 Games

Seems fair for the playoffs . Depends on how long Backes is out . Should not be allowed to return till player that was injured can return.

wheres all the hawks fans telling me yesterday that Seabrooke wouldnt get suspended?

Seems fair to me. We lose our captain and No. 1 center for the remainder of the year and they lose their 3rd best defenseman. I hope Jackman kills Kane or Toews.

Seems fair to me. We lose our captain and No. 1 center for the remainder of the year and they lose their 3rd best defenseman. I hope Jackman kills Kane or Toews.
- Hockey Jedi

It sure looked as if Toews was trying to get at Backes as hes trying to get up on his own. I feel Its not fair enough. But man was Keith also running around wacking and hacking with that stick. He should also be suspended for his actions.

It sure looked as if Toews was trying to get at Backes as hes trying to get up on his own. I feel Its not fair enough. But man was Keith also running around wacking and hacking with that stick. He should also be suspended for his actions.
- poisondhearts37

Replays catch Keith taunting Backes as he struggles to get up, show Seabrook with a huge smile while Backes is still on the ice, and Toews taunting Backes which is why Backes tries to go after him while still wobbly. Look a little further and you see two instances of Bickell trying to injure players sticking his knee out.

Seems fair to me. We lose our captain and No. 1 center for the remainder of the year and they lose their 3rd best defenseman. I hope Jackman kills Kane or Toews.
- Hockey Jedi

I hope Blues don't lower themselves to the Blackhawks level. But if they do, it would be much more likely you see Reaves taking Toews out for the year, a few game suspension to him hurts the team less than losing Jax for a few.

Seems fair to me. We lose our captain and No. 1 center for the remainder of the year and they lose their 3rd best defenseman. I hope Jackman kills Kane or Toews.
- Hockey Jedi

Its already known he is done for the rest of the year?

What a farce!!! Only 3 games? The League is sending a message to all playoff teams. Open Season.

What a farce!!! Only 3 games? The League is sending a message to all playoff teams. Open Season.
- potosicc

Im of the feeling if its not a super popular teams higher end dman they will get more games. Popularity plays a factor.

Seems fair for the playoffs . Depends on how long Backes is out . Should not be allowed to return till player that was injured can return.
- Maximum Signal

I've never understood the rationale behind this kind of thinking...on the surface it seems justified, but what happens if, say, a player is charging down the ice at an unsuspecting Crosby - at the last second, Crosby turns around to see his opponent about to destroy him, and out of pure defensive instinct, he jumps at the opponent with his shoulder out and makes direct contact with the head...player A flies flat on his back and smashes his head off the ice and his gone with a major concussion for a year - you'd force a superstar to sit the same amount of time?

Ya, it's easy to say 'yes', but you have to look at the entire situation...no one in hockey would ever admit it, but some players are just more valuable to the league, and are given higher treatment because they sell the game and line people's pockets more than others do....it's a business at the end of the day...the system in place now is not perfect, and few things in sports are, which is one of the reasons people tune in...unpredictability (not necessarily in suspension justification) is part of the beauty of it...automatically declaring that a player must sit until the player he injured returns, is saying that all injury situations, including all parameters (including how it went down, who was involved, how it will effect the bottom line, etc), are black and white, when in reality, there's so much grey area

Did that make any sense? Frig, I need a beer

I've never understood the rationale behind this kind of thinking...on the surface it seems justified, but what happens if, say, a player is charging down the ice at an unsuspecting Crosby - at the last second, Crosby turns around to see his opponent about to destroy him, and out of pure defensive instinct, he jumps at the opponent with his shoulder out and makes direct contact with the head...player A flies flat on his back and smashes his head off the ice and his gone with a major concussion for a year - you'd force a superstar to sit the same amount of time?

Ya, it's easy to say 'yes', but you have to look at the entire situation...no one in hockey would ever admit it, but some players are just more valuable to the league, and are given higher treatment because they sell the game and line people's pockets more than others do....it's a business at the end of the day...the system in place now is not perfect, and few things in sports are, which is one of the reasons people tune in...unpredictability (not necessarily in suspension justification) is part of the beauty of it...automatically declaring that a player must sit until the player he injured returns, is saying that all injury situations, including all parameters (including how it went down, who was involved, how it will effect the bottom line, etc), are black and white, when in reality, there's so much grey area

Did that make any sense? Frig, I need a beer
- HabzSquanch

That is a lot of ifs . Hardly the same as a hit being delivered the way this one was . Is today being 420 making you a little more creative in your thinking ? Star players should think before they hit just like any other player. That is 90% of the problem . a screwed up punishment system with no consistent justice.

See here's what I hate. Seabrook atleast was making a hockey play. Was it dirty yes and I think 3 games is fair punishment. A guy like lucic cup checks an opponent nowhere near the play and only gets a $5000 punishment. Lucic should have been suspended for 5games. Send a message that if you are up to buffoonery you are only asking for suspension. Hard hits happen and it's unfortunate but you can stop players from spearing a guy in the balls from behind, out of the play. Kaleta got 5 games for leading with his head in corner puck battles, that can be justified a lot better than what lucic did

See here's what I hate. Seabrook atleast was making a hockey play. Was it dirty yes and I think 3 games is fair punishment. A guy like lucic cup checks an opponent nowhere near the play and only gets a $5000 punishment. Lucic should have been suspended for 5games. Send a message that if you are up to buffoonery you are only asking for suspension. Hard hits happen and it's unfortunate but you can stop players from spearing a guy in the balls from behind, out of the play. Kaleta got 5 games for leading with his head in corner puck battles, that can be justified a lot better than what lucic did
- joshs

I agree with this , There is definitely a Boston bias in the NHL offices . Everyone sees it but Bruin fans.

First off, I am not even commenting on the actual play itself. What I will comment on, is the stupidity of the league. How do two plays that were pretty much the same thing, conjure up two entirely different results? I am talking specifically about the Orpiks-Toews hit, and the Seabrook-Backes incident. Let's be fair NHL, if you are going to set a bad precedent with one play, then it must be called that way right down the line. I will not even get into the Lucic and Perry spears, which should have warranted suspensions as well.

The league looks pretty amateurish right now.

As for Backes, tough luck buddy, you reap what you sow. He is a dirty player, always picking on smaller opponents. He has been trying to take runs at Toews in the first two games, so let's not pretend the guy is an angel in all of this. Let's not forget how he jumped the Av's Nathan Mackinnon not all that long ago. I would venture a guess in saying not a lot of players in the league felt too bad for him last nite.

First off, I am not even commenting on the actual play itself. What I will comment on, is the stupidity of the league. How do two plays that were pretty much the same thing, conjure up two entirely different results? I am talking specifically about the Orpiks-Toews hit, and the Seabrook-Backes incident. Let's be fair NHL, if you are going to set a bad precedent with one play, then it must be called that way right down the line. I will not even get into the Lucic and Perry spears, which should have warranted suspensions as well.

The league looks pretty amateurish right now.

As for Backes, tough luck buddy, you reap what you sow. He is a dirty player, always picking on smaller opponents. He has been trying to take runs at Toews in the first two games, so let's not pretend the guy is an angel in all of this. Let's not forget how he jumped the Av's Nathan Mackinnon not all that long ago. I would venture a guess in saying not a lot of players in the league felt too bad for him last nite.
- plyrs99

That's impossible...see Boston Bruins

Yes the Tampa goal should have counted, but saying the Habs "always get favorable calls in their barn" and that the refs are always on their side and helping them is just dumb. The same refs travel all throughout the league.. Your seriously going to tell me they want the habs to win all their home games but on the road they don't care? You sound like a bitter fan of a non-playoff team.

I agree with this , There is definitely a Boston bias in the NHL offices . Everyone sees it but Bruin fans.
- Maximum Signal

15 games for thorton seems very biased

And you have French Canadien refs disallowing goals against the Habs in their building, but it's the bruins who have the league in their back pocket

Yes the Tampa goal should have counted, but saying the Habs "always get favorable calls in their barn" and that the refs are always on their side and helping them is just dumb. The same refs travel all throughout the league.. Your seriously going to tell me they want the habs to win all their home games but on the road they don't care? You sound like a bitter fan of a non-playoff team.
- KovyFan27

They do, and now it's in black and white for all to see

15 games for thorton seems very biased

And you have French Canadien refs disallowing goals against the Habs in their building, but it's the bruins who have the league in their back pocket
- 77emac77

Get real . If the game was anywhere but Boston . There would have been criminal charges against him for that act . 15 games was not near enough any other player in this league that was not a Boston Bruin would have gotten at least 25 !

They do, and now it's in black and white for all to see
- 77emac77

Haha a bruins fan comenting on whats a fair call and what isnt. If the refs were biased what gives on the briere call that led to tampas first goal? Thats the epitome of phantom calls. Secondly I believe the habs are in the top 5 of most penalized teams in the league. People need to grow up. Cant stand seeing the habs succeed? Haha poor you.

Haha a bruins fan comenting on whats a fair call and what isnt. If the refs were biased what gives on the briere call that led to tampas first goal? Thats the epitome of phantom calls. Secondly I believe the habs are in the top 5 of most penalized teams in the league. People need to grow up. Cant stand seeing the habs succeed? Haha poor you.
- munky123

Yup, but I'm hoping they make it to next round

Yup, but I'm hoping they make it to next round
- 77emac77

You think the B's have a worse chance against Tampa?