Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Islanders Make The Right Decision

from Stu Hackel of the Red Light at Sports Illustrated,

In a sign that intelligent life exists on Earth, the Islanders’ plan to rebroadcast their infamous brawl-filled Feb. 11 game against the Penguins at a fan viewing party scheduled for this Friday has been changed.

SI.com has learned that the party will go on, but the Islanders and MSG Network have agreed to switch the game to a victory over the Sabres in which Michael Grabner’s hat trick goal was the winner.

In a statement, the team said, “The New York Islanders have requested that MSG Networks change the originally scheduled game to be viewed at the Friday, Aug. 19 meetup. As a part of MSG Plus’ Summer Ice programming, the schedule had the Islanders game from Friday, Feb. 11 against the Pittsburgh Penguins set to air at 7 p.m. Instead MSG Plus will air the Islanders 7-6 overtime victory on Sunday, Feb. 13 over the Buffalo Sabres.”

continued

Filed in: NHL Teams, New York Islanders, Pittsburgh Penguins, | KK Hockey | Permalink
 

Comments

Evilpens's avatar

Correction ! NHL told them to make the “Right Decision”

Posted by Evilpens on 08/18/11 at 01:39 PM ET

Avatar

No more replays of Wings-Avalanche Claude Lemieux @ss-kicking or the NHL network isn’t going to re-broadcast Habs-Bruins from last year either. Oh wait, they celebrated the Habs-Bruins brawl fest with a re-broadcast just three days later.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/18/11 at 02:18 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Brawls and beatings aren’t the same thing.

The more apt comparison would be whether people want the NHL to rebroadcast the Avalanche/Canucks game from February 16th 2004.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/18/11 at 02:30 PM ET

Da lil Guy's avatar

I’d like to watch the last 5 minutes of the March 5 2004 Sens/Flyers game again.

Posted by Da lil Guy from Guelph, Ontario on 08/18/11 at 03:15 PM ET

Avatar

Difference between a brawl and a beating is the scoreboard? ‘Cause 9-3 looked like a beating.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/18/11 at 03:15 PM ET

Da lil Guy's avatar

Hey, I can!

Posted by Da lil Guy from Guelph, Ontario on 08/18/11 at 03:17 PM ET

Avatar

The more apt comparison would be whether people want the NHL to rebroadcast the Avalanche/Canucks game from February 16th 2004.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/18/11 at 12:30 PM ET

Or the game where Marty Mcsorely came up from behind and randomly clubbed Brashear in the temple with his stick for no reason.

Posted by steviesteve on 08/18/11 at 03:42 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Difference between a brawl and a beating is the scoreboard? ‘Cause 9-3 looked like a beating.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/18/11 at 01:15 PM ET

Not at all.  The difference between a brawl and a beating is having two willing participants. Tangradi wasn’t a willing participant of a fight in that game, he was a victim of assault.

Neither of the two games you referenced are comparable in that manner.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/18/11 at 04:05 PM ET

Avatar

Tangradi was a vitcim of a bad boarding penalty in the second period that I never defended, but this wasn’t a Bertuzzi either . The first fight of the night was started by Adams and then Goddard got into it once it was 4 or 5 - 0. So I’d say the Penguins were more than willing and didn’t expect the @ss kicking when the Islanders dropped them.  You can’t instigate and then cry about it when you get smacked down.

C. Lemieux hitting Draper wasn’t a willing particpant either and the NHL has shown that game numerous times as well. If the NHL didn’t glorify the Bruins - Habs Line Brawl a week earlier this game gets far less play. The NHL wants it both ways.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/18/11 at 07:36 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

C. Lemieux hitting Draper wasn’t a willing particpant either and the NHL has shown that game numerous times as well. If the NHL didn’t glorify the Bruins - Habs Line Brawl a week earlier this game gets far less play. The NHL wants it both ways.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/18/11 at 05:36 PM ET

Lemieux’s hit on Draper was in a playoff game. I don’t know if the Avalanche themselves ever threw parties to celebrate just that game, but I’d have a problem with that too.

If the handful of cheap shit that Martin and Gillies had pulled in that game had never happened, I’d have absolutely no problem showing that game, but nothing nearly that bad happened in the Bruins/Habs line brawl.  The thing that separates the Bertuzzi hit on Moore and the Gillies hit on Tangradi is a broken neck.  That’s not a large enough separation for me to say that I’m ok with anybody celebrating this particular Islanders game.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/18/11 at 08:44 PM ET

Avatar

Glorifying the Bruins-Habs brawl, or the Ott-Phil brawl, or the Pens-flyers brawls are like glorifying a boxing match or UFC event.

Glorifying the Islanders-Pens game is like glorifying this or this.

Please note that the UFC gives $200k in total bonuses for a good fight and lifetime bans for cowardly attacks from behind on unsuspecting athletes. Would that the NHL held itself to the same standard.

There’s no ‘well not saying Gillies didn’t take a boarding penalty…durr, but what about Adams and Haley fighting each other in a completely normal fight in the 2nd period.’
The defining events of the game are as follows:

-In a fit of pure courage, Matt Martin waits until Talbot skates past him, checks over his shoulder to see if the ref’s looking, then launches a pearl harbor attack, instead of, you know, just trying to fight him normally

-Trevor Gillies (like he has in the minors, since forever) attempts to start a ‘fight’ with Eric Tangradi by taking a 40 foot charging, elbowing, boarding penalty while he’s not looking and then throwing punches at the player while he’s down and injured, then taunts him as if oblivious to the fact that such an action cements Gillies’ status as a complete coward

-during this, Michael Haley also has a fight, which he wins, earning an ejection for fighting while there’s another ‘fight’ going on. So far, nothing wrong, here. However, Haley neglects to acknowledge his ejection and skates down the ice to fight a goalie. An AHL goon who had been kicked out of the game decides to fight a goalie instead. an NHL goon jumps off the Penguins bench and he and the Penguins goalie proceed to beat on the AHL goon.

The defining image of the game is a goalie and a guy who is supposed to be on the bench curbstomping a guy who is supposed to be in the locker room while a guy on the other side of the ice is taunting a player he just injured on purpose in the most cowardly manner possible.

The game was a complete disgrace to the sport.

Posted by steviesteve on 08/18/11 at 11:26 PM ET

Avatar

In a fit of pure courage, Matt Martin waits until Talbot skates past him, checks over his shoulder to see if the ref’s looking, then launches a pearl harbor attack, instead of, you know, just trying to fight him normally

Please watch the game and realize you are either delusional or a liar. Talbot takes a slash at the Islander ‘s goaltender, Martin challenges him, Talbot turns his back, Martin grabs him to make him face him and Talbot drops like he was in Lee Harvey Oswald’s scope. Try to watch the whole sequence not just what Pens TV broacasts. Pens fans have been quoted as saying the Islanders should have challenged Talbot, they did. The Pens sent out Goddard instead for most of the night.

Michael Haley also has a fight, which he wins, earning an ejection for fighting while there’s another ‘fight’ going on. ... Haley neglects to acknowledge his ejection and skates down the ice to fight a goalie. An AHL goon who had been kicked out of the game decides to fight a goalie instead. an NHL goon jumps off the Penguins bench

Johnson challenged Haley, just as he challenged DiPietro. Remember Johnson went the LENGTH OF THE ICE to fight DP who stupidly accepted the challenge. Johnson has been quoted as saying he had been looking for a fight all season. Johnson also challenged Haley on the way to the box as well. Goddard then left the bench with NO suspension to Byslma. How is that rule supposed to work? 2 games minimum isn’t it? The Islanders already had Gillies off the ice, so there were seven Pens and five Islanders. Who was escorting the extra Pens off the ice?

Tangradi wasn’t a willing participant of a fight in that game, he was a victim of assault.

Tangradi like Gillies were in the lineup for one reason. Let’s not forget that Tangradi had just concussed Jack Hillen on a high elbow not long before the Gillies incident. No replays are ever shown of that because it doesn’t fit the narrative. Saints and choir boys weren’t in the lineup that night. Look at Letang intentionally taking a head shot at Tavares in the final minute of the first.

Lemieux’s hit on Draper was in a playoff game

When did attempt to cripple become okay in a playoff game? It shouldn’t matter and I’m not glorifying either event. It is the hypocrisy of the NHL and a lot of the fans out there that is offensive.

The Islanders did NOT select this game to be re-broadcast MSG did. The Islanders had viewing parties for all of the games MSG chose to show this season. The Islanders did not set this up to glorify this particular game. Whether you like it or not MSG knew this game was significant and they chose to broadcast it. Normally, we like independence in the media and the sports teams they cover, but in this case it became objectionable and the NHL CENSURED the media. A nice slippery slope we are now heading down.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/19/11 at 12:01 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

When did attempt to cripple become okay in a playoff game? It shouldn’t matter and I’m not glorifying either event. It is the hypocrisy of the NHL and a lot of the fans out there that is offensive.

It’s not ok, but you also don’t see the Avalanche holding watch parties to celebrate that game as some sort of bullied kid getting retribution for the wrongs against him.

And what slippery slope are we talking about here?  One where the NHL tells the media which games they can and can’t show?  We’re already down that slope.  This is nothing new. The NHL has the right to tell whomever they want when and if they’re allowed to show the games that the NHL holds exclusive rights to.  This isn’t going to lead to some horrible bottom gutter of the NHL only letting local broadcasters re-show the games that they first approve; it’s going to lead to the NHL shutting down replays of the games that shouldn’t be replayed.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/19/11 at 12:46 PM ET

Avatar

Then the NHL should tell MSG not to show the game and not get the Islanders involved since the the rights have been sold to MSG to re-broadcast their games already.

don’t see the Avalanche holding watch parties to celebrate that game

No, we never see Red Wings fans looking to see if the game is being broadcast because they have moved on.  I wouldn’t know or even care if there are watch parties in other cities. For all we know, plenty of teams throw parties for the fans when games are shown. Noone outside of the market generally cares what games are shown locally. This is an issue solely because it is the Islanders and they are an easy target for lazy journalists.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/19/11 at 02:45 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

No, we never see Red Wings fans looking to see if the game is being broadcast because they have moved on.

No, we really haven’t.

And the comparison of the Lemieux/Draper incident and retribution are not comparable.  I’ve explained this twice already.  You want to compartmentalize and say that the game is fine but you don’t support what Gillies did… Those were the same game.

Start answering the question about why the Bertuzzi/Moore and McSorley/Brashear games aren’t televised instead of throwing a bad comparison around.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/19/11 at 03:41 PM ET

Avatar

You want to compartmentalize and say that the game is fine but you don’t support what Gillies did… Those were the same game.

As a whole,  Islander fans have far more to enjoy watching the 9 goals than what Gillies did. Edit that part out for all I care. Yes, they are part of the same game, so was the concussion on Hillen and the board on Tavares. Just because I don’t like a few parts of a game doesn’t mean the whole thing needs to be thrown out either, but the whole game provide context that the “lowlights” don’t.  I have no problem showing the world what a world class idiot Gillies looked like either, part and parcel of the game. I’m sure there would be a fair share of Islander fans booing what he did as well as cheering. I know that play is a source of great divide among Islander fans.

Are you certain the Bertuzzi/Moore and McSorley/Brashear games weren’t ever televised? But just to be clear I didn’t bring up either game being televised either, I mentioned the playoff bloodfest between the Avalanche and Red Wings and the Bruins versus Habs from the same month that got mutliple showings.  One game had Campbell using his elbow pad as a weapon to slice open an opposing players face and Lucic typically elbowing a guy to the head (elbows to the head usually do not entail a willing combatant. Sorry Lucic failed to concuss his opponent, but he was trying and you have to give him an A for effort. So you may think they are not comparable, but I do.

Lemieux/Draper incident and retribution are not comparable.

Why not? The primary motivation was retribution for a broken face. Is it not comparable because this was a black mark on the league by the Wings and Avalanche? You said because it was a playoff game? You’re sticking to that rationale? The criteria was that there were no watch parties? Is that really it? Do they not show highlights of that particular incident every time these teams meet in the playoffs? Is that not considered pandering to a “watch party” since teams organize events to watch games all of the time and they promote them with these type of “highlights”? Is this the same NHL that has NBC replaying Milbury going into the stands at MSG during the Winter Classic and now they are worried about what should and shouldn’t be re-broadcast? Assualting your fan base is certainly a great promotion and then making him the face of your league broadcast is really a way to project your product in a positive light.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/19/11 at 04:07 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Why not? The primary motivation was retribution for a broken face. Is it not comparable because this was a black mark on the league by the Wings and Avalanche? You said because it was a playoff game? You’re sticking to that rationale?

The Lemieux hit on Draper was indeed part of a playoff game and while it was a cheap shot and a shitty thing to do, it wasn’t a premeditated assault.  The Draper broken face was also a hell of a better reason to go after retribution than the DiPietro broken face. 

Unless you’re trying to compare McCarty beating up Lemieux to Gillies attacking Tangradi.  Because if that’s what you’re trying to do, good luck finding any rational hockey fan who agrees that these are comparable. 

What’s more is that nobody waited until a hockey game had already been decided to suddenly become the tough guys.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/19/11 at 04:36 PM ET

Avatar

What’s more is that nobody waited until a hockey game had already been decided to suddenly become the tough guys.

Did you watch the game to see who started the chippiness? That’s all I ask. Adams takes on Haley and loses. Then Godard decides he needs to go after Haley as well. Did you see Letang intentionally board Tavares at the end of the first and then cry murder when Tavares slashed him back? Two periods to go. Did you see Orpik drive Grabner and Okposo into the post and boards once the game was decided? Can you watch this entire game and say for yourself you know what happened?

The Lemieux hit on Draper was indeed part of a playoff game ... it wasn’t a premeditated assault.

Knowing Claude Lemieux’s history, can you really be sure of that statement? Still don’t know why is the playoffs relevant to a dirty hit?

compare McCarty beating up Lemieux to Gillies attacking Tangradi.

You’re not going to get me to defend Gillies actions, he ran him no questions asked. I ask you was it in retaliation for Tangradi concussing Hillen moments earlier? I’m sticking to the fact that the Lemieux hit on Draper was terrible and the NHL never fails to show it to “incite” the fans and then glorify McCarty taking his pound of flesh. The issue is at what point does the NHL care about what games or even highlights are shown. My point is that they re-broadcast Milbury going into the stands on the biggest ratings draw of the year and that pretty much proves to me they don’t give a lick about there image.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 08/19/11 at 04:51 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com

 

image

image