Seriously.
I know they are talking about making what he did a penalty, and maybe they should, but, I mean- there wasn't a rule against it when he did it, right?
And it was entertaining, and it did lead to them getting a goal, I guess.
Cause I'm looking in the rulebook now, and here's what I don't see:
Penalty Rule: #358
"Being a little bitch."
When screening the goaltender, it is inadvisable to face the goaltender, not look at the play, and wave your hands and stick around like a little bitch. If someone in fact decides to act like a little bitch, he will be penalized for two minutes, or if his little bitchiness ends up in the opposition somehow bleeding, a double minor of four minutes for, and I quote, "being a tremendously annoying little bitch."
I mean, fuck- I don't know- if there isn't a rule against it, I say, go ahead and be an entertaining little bitch!
It's not like there isn't any precedent for it in hockey:
Sure, it might not have been pretty, but the Chiefs won that game, right?
3 comments:
Don't they say there is a fine line between stupid and clever? When I saw this I thought "hey that is a pretty wild way to get the goalie out of the game". He didn't touch him, he just really took Martie out of the moment..which in a sense is what should be done. Was it silly..sure..I love how the sports guys are all bent out of shape..sadly it was a first and last for that move.
He is a piece of work. He is bad for the game. If he was just a pest, like Tucker or Lemieux, it would be one thing. But in a day in age where hockey needs to get good publicity and you have this moron being unsportsmanlike, it'll just turn people off.
If anything, I'd describe it as Raideresque. The NHL in it's disastrous expansion to the suburbs masquerading as big cities diluted the rivalries.
The night the Rangers won their Stanley cup, I marched up broadway with the faithful from MSG to Columbus Circle, they stormed the fountain singing "Potvin Sucks" and "1983." And this is what makes sports great - spite.
This is one of those plays where it solely depends on what team you hate more. Anti-Ranger - he's a little bitch. Anti-devils - that's a clever way of finding a loophole in the rules, I want him to do my taxes.
You know, here's an interesting thing. If something like this happened in Baseball or Football, the League would say "We'll review it during our off-season meetings to see if it deserves a rule change." And then promptly forget about it, like the Pats Cheating, or the tuck rule. But the NBA and NHL would make the change in a heartbeat, the NBA would do it because they hate their players and can boss them around. The NHL would do it because they are the good looking girl who doesn't realize she's good looking so she'll blow all the guys in the bathroom.
Post a Comment