Avalanche defenseman Karlis Skrastins was castigated by Florida Panthers forward Marcus Nilson after Wednesday's game for refusing a fight to settle an old score. Skrastins' check from behind in the most recent world championships gave Sweden's Nilson a concussion. Nilson tried to fight Skrastins, to no avail.
"He hit me with a dirty hit that put me out for three months," Nilson told The Miami Herald. "At least he owes me a fight, I think. He has to be, without a doubt, the most gutless player in the league by far."
screw him. if the incident took place on the ice, he should leave it on the ice and not take it to the media. certainly, i would think nilson's done things which could portray him as gutless too. however, the nature of the injury was serious. so i can understand his frustration. so it would honourable if skrastins did fight him.
Why? Skrastins had nothing to prove.......and if you recall, the Avs were trying to battle back in that game. They didn't need Skrastins in the penalty box, and in fact, it would have been beneficial for the Panthers to have Skrastins out of the game for 5...
Why? Skrastins had nothing to prove.......and if you recall, the Avs were trying to battle back in that game.
That's exactly the reason Skrastins shoudl have fought Nilson. TO FIRE UP THE TEAM!!!!
If the Avs had a "lead", i coudl perhaps understand, but Skrastins should have fought. He's a pretty big and tough guy himself, he should have fought (and destroyed) Nilson.
screw him. if the incident took place on the ice, he should leave it on the ice and not take it to the media.
This is an argument favored by thugs who don't want to be held responsible for their actions, or are performing the mental gymnastics necessary to classify their heinous acts as part of the sport, ie Claude Lemieux.
If someone did something to me which could have shortened my career, hurt my earning potential, took money out of my pockets and my children's pockets, I'd take it personally. You bet I would.
I have no idea what happened between Nilson and Skrastins, I'm just speaking generally. "Leave it on the ice" is never valid.
This is an argument favored by thugs who don't want to be held responsible for their actions, or are performing the mental gymnastics necessary to classify their heinous acts as part of the sport, ie Claude Lemieux.
If someone did something to me which could have shortened my career, hurt my earning potential, took money out of my pockets and my children's pockets, I'd take it personally. You bet I would.
I have no idea what happened between Nilson and Skrastins, I'm just speaking generally. "Leave it on the ice" is never valid.
technically speaking, when you go on the ice, you accept the risks associated with playing hockey. suffering a devestating injury is something that can happen for sure. it's part of the game, unfortunately. yet, i would still be peeved about such an incident (if the player was reckless) and would take it personally for sure. but i would do so on the ice or in person. i don't believe you should whine to the media. that includes selanne's tantrums. that includes roenick's antics. if you got a problem, do so discretely, else you risk putting yourself ahead of the team. that's my main point. in some instances, however, it can be valid to take up an issue with the media if the topic is of great importance to very many people. but to say, "leave it on the ice in never valid", is quite an extreme view IMO.
I don't see any problem with Nilson's comments really (outside of the fact that there are plenty more gutless players in the league than Skrastins). He tried to fight Skrastins and Skrastins wouldn't go. The next step is to publicly embarrass him. It's the only thing that ever got Lemieux to fight anyone. If Skrastins had obliged Nilson in the game, I doubt we'd be hearing the same type of comments coming from Nilson. Skrastins chose not to be accountable for his actions; so, I think it's reasonable for Nilson to embarrass him through the media if that's the route Skrastins wants to take.
Although I'm a biased swede I will give you my view on what happened. To me that hit was very dirty. Nilson faced the boards, maybe a yard from it. Skrastins had very high speed and put him in head first. Could easily have been a game misconduct (would give a suspension in the SEL, thats for sure). However, Nilson isn't much better, he put a ugly hit on a finnish defenseman the game before that. Poetic justice, perhaps but Skrastins hit was definitly not pretty.
I don't see any problem with Nilson's comments really (outside of the fact that there are plenty more gutless players in the league than Skrastins). He tried to fight Skrastins and Skrastins wouldn't go. The next step is to publicly embarrass him. It's the only thing that ever got Lemieux to fight anyone. If Skrastins had obliged Nilson in the game, I doubt we'd be hearing the same type of comments coming from Nilson. Skrastins chose not to be accountable for his actions; so, I think it's reasonable for Nilson to embarrass him through the media if that's the route Skrastins wants to take.
I have never seen the hit, or even heard about it actually, until the blurb appeared in The Post. So I (and presumably most of us here) speak in generalities. But let's say for the sake of argument that Skrastins had no intent to injure Nilson, felt it was an unfortunate incident, and didn't want to rehash something that happened in another tournament in an NHL game. If Skrastins didn't want to go, he didn't want to go. I know that there remains an antiquated code of honor about things like this in hockey, and some people will feel that even if Skrastins doesn't want to fight, he still should. Whatever. He didn't oblige Nilson, and that's that. So Nilson is even more frustrated and mad now, and takes it to the papers. He's trying to make Skrastins look bad, but ends up not looking all that great himself. Maybe he needs pistols at dawn to have closure on this, but he should just move on or wait until the next time they play each other. And would Nilson be contented if they fought and Skrastins gave him another concussion? Could happen, seems like a waste to me.
I think the whole revenge thing in most cases is stupid anyway. Getting people back can be an endless circle, and you have to be mature enough to move past that stuff. After Maltby broke Kamensky's arm; yeah I wanted to kill that piece of crap, but I don't think that Val, or any of his teammates became obsessed with the idea. It's silly. Calling people out in the papers makes for a bit of a WWF type sideshow, and there's enough trash talk and extraneous BS in sports today as it is.
Although I'm a biased swede I will give you my view on what happened. To me that hit was very dirty. Nilson faced the boards, maybe a yard from it. Skrastins had very high speed and put him in head first. Could easily have been a game misconduct (would give a suspension in the SEL, thats for sure). However, Nilson isn't much better, he put a ugly hit on a finnish defenseman the game before that. Poetic justice, perhaps but Skrastins hit was definitly not pretty.
Just out of curiosity, was Nilson facing the boards for a long time, or did he turn right before the hit?
Also, boarding hits, never seemed to me like dirty hits, in the same vein as a knee on knee, or a Darcy Tucker low bridge hip check. Lets face it, in hockey when you go to hit someone, you want to hit them hard, and hurt them, not to injure them, but to hurt them. Even so, they are penalties for a reason, and that's because of the potential of injury. I think most boarding hits are a result of a guy going to check a guy, and he doesn't want to abandon his check because he's facing the boards, in combination with a lot of guys making stupid plays by putting themselves in harms way, and turning into the boards at the last second, not to say that's what Nilson did. It's not a good decision to finish your check in those circumstances, but there is a lot of emotion during a hockey game, especially one where you are playing for your country, and you don't always have the time to think of what would be the fair play. Never the less, I think Skrastins should have fought him, but maybe that's not his game. Hockeyfights.com shows no record of any fights in the NHL that he's been involved in.
Location: "If hockeys to tough, go play tennis"-Bryan Marchment, Colorado Avalanche
Posts: 1,620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lappy
I think the whole revenge thing in most cases is stupid anyway. Getting people back can be an endless circle, and you have to be mature enough to move past that stuff. After Maltby broke Kamensky's arm; yeah I wanted to kill that piece of crap, but I don't think that Val, or any of his teammates became obsessed with the idea. It's silly. Calling people out in the papers makes for a bit of a WWF type sideshow, and there's enough trash talk and extraneous BS in sports today as it is.
I hate to contradict you, but I heard Sakic beat his *** and broke his 9-year streak of no fighting majors. Even to this day.......maltby is on Footey's list, right next to Shanahan and McCarty. Even-though the rivalry has changed a lot, as well as the players have....Footey will still faceplant maltby into the glass whenever possible.
Personally, I think he should have fought. If you want to fight in hockey, REALLY; you go after the guy and taunt him like hell. Pitch-fork him, hack him, slash him, stick him, puck 'em, trip him! And if he still doesn't want to throw......knock him on his *** after the play is over. If the guy you're gunning for isn't going to fight, you'll at least get a chance to throw with somebody.
It looks to me like the guy wasn't really looking for a fight after all. He would've done something more drastic than to actually ASK Skractins to fight.....maybe he would've of put his face through the glove-washer or something.
But the really bad thing I don't like here is the fact that they DIDN'T throw.(The only reasonable explination I can understand was already delivered by another poster here......maybe Scratins didn't want to put his team a man down) I'm sick and tired of people saying there's no place in hockey for fighting anymore, too many players are getting in meaningless brawls, yadda-yadda-yadda (I'm not saying anybody here says that, it's just what I hear on the news every now and then). This is a fight with an actual SUBPLOT. "The puny center takes revenge on the mangy defenseman who put him out for 3 months." That kind of stuff is beautiful! It's exiting to see fights when there's subplots and such involved. That's why it's cool to see Footey smash into redwings who he has bitterly hated for years in the playoffs. Yes, it is WWF style......and I for one.....LOVE IT!
Couple of thoughts here. At least Nilsson had the guts to do his own fighting unlike Draper. And If anyone noticed Adam still puts on the horses when he gets a chance to smoke Slava Kozlov. Remember Slava's faceplant into the glass on Foote? I still laugh everytime I see footage of Claude suckerpunching him in the scrum and Slava falling like a leaf.
I hate to contradict you, but I heard Sakic beat his *** and broke his 9-year streak of no fighting majors. Even to this day.......maltby is on Footey's list, right next to Shanahan and McCarty. Even-though the rivalry has changed a lot, as well as the players have....Footey will still faceplant maltby into the glass whenever possible.
That wasn't Lappy, that was me. Was my breath really that bad? :p
You may be right. Maltby's a bad example for me to have brought up anyway, since most of the league hates him and will go at him whenever they can. My point is that every time there's a play that's dirty or seems vicious and someone gets hurt, it would be ridiculous for it to turn into a viking soap opera that crosses the boundaries of seasons and tournaments. I am all for retribution during the course of a game, or the course of a season, through fighting or a big hit, but this case is different. It didn't even happen in an NHL game.
Quote:
Personally, I think he should have fought. If you want to fight in hockey, REALLY; you go after the guy and taunt him like hell. Pitch-fork him, hack him, slash him, stick him, puck 'em, trip him! And if he still doesn't want to throw......knock him on his *** after the play is over. If the guy you're gunning for isn't going to fight, you'll at least get a chance to throw with somebody.
You make a good point. They were getting very chippy with each other, and at the time I had no idea why. I figured it had something to do with something happened that game, not something from the past. Maybe Nilson didn't try hard enough. Unless/until Skrastins explains why he didn't fight, we will never know. Maybe he knew that would infuriate Nilson even more and thought he'd goad him into taking a bad penalty. It could even be (though I doubt it) that that's not how it's done in Latvia -- I really have no idea. I just think it was silly to run it to the media.
And the WWF remark was not made about on-ice combatants, it was about spouting off in the papers and calling people out that way. If Nilson couldn't get him to throw down on ice, maybe he thinks that maybe he can get to him by barking through the media. Who knows when they will even meet again? To me, it seems like Skrastins has a bit of a psychological edge over Nilson now, not that it matters. But it's not exactly the effect that Nilson was going for, I don't think.
I love the big hits, the fights, the irrational anger that comes over me every time I think a hit on an Av is dirty, all that stuff. I just think it has its limits, and this whole Nilson-Skrastins things has gone past where it's interesting or necessary.
Location: "If hockeys to tough, go play tennis"-Bryan Marchment, Colorado Avalanche
Posts: 1,620
vCash: 500
Sorry I got you two mixed up, I guess I accedently replied to both of you at the same time.
I don't have a problem with players smacking off about each other in the media and such. The only difference here being what you mentioned in your post.....did Skrastins really even remember the incident all? Who knows. If anything, I hope they start calling out one-anothers dives.
I think it's also interesting how you brought up wether it's relevant for Nilson to hold a grudge even-though they are now in a different league. We could have a trial on the subject in fact. But, I still think it's fair game. If the game was out of hand (If the Avs were up by 5 with 2 minutes left), then why the hell not throw?
I have never seen the hit, or even heard about it actually, until the blurb appeared in The Post. So I (and presumably most of us here) speak in generalities. But let's say for the sake of argument that Skrastins had no intent to injure Nilson, felt it was an unfortunate incident, and didn't want to rehash something that happened in another tournament in an NHL game. If Skrastins didn't want to go, he didn't want to go. I know that there remains an antiquated code of honor about things like this in hockey, and some people will feel that even if Skrastins doesn't want to fight, he still should. Whatever. He didn't oblige Nilson, and that's that. So Nilson is even more frustrated and mad now, and takes it to the papers. He's trying to make Skrastins look bad, but ends up not looking all that great himself. Maybe he needs pistols at dawn to have closure on this, but he should just move on or wait until the next time they play each other. And would Nilson be contented if they fought and Skrastins gave him another concussion? Could happen, seems like a waste to me.
Never seen the hit either, but if Nilson felt it was a dirty and lost three months to a concussion because of it, it doesn't really matter what we think. Absolutely Skrastins is obligated to fight Nilson. Because there are rarely any apologies in the sport, the only way to really "apologize" is to oblige him in a fight. That code of honor used to be a beautiful thing, but it has eroded over the years and most players don't have any respect for each other. By not fighting, Skrastins is essentially saying he doesn't have any respect for Nilson. I totally understand where Nilson is coming from and to some extent, Skrastins as well. Fact is that Skrastins should have obliged Nilson and just put everything to bed. He didn't and now this little crapstorm will likely only build from now on.
And I doubt Skrastins meant to injure him because Skrastins seems like a clean player from all the games I've seen him play. But, accountability is accountability.
Never seen the hit either, but if Nilson felt it was a dirty and lost three months to a concussion because of it, it doesn't really matter what we think. Absolutely Skrastins is obligated to fight Nilson. Because there are rarely any apologies in the sport, the only way to really "apologize" is to oblige him in a fight. That code of honor used to be a beautiful thing, but it has eroded over the years and most players don't have any respect for each other. By not fighting, Skrastins is essentially saying he doesn't have any respect for Nilson. I totally understand where Nilson is coming from and to some extent, Skrastins as well. Fact is that Skrastins should have obliged Nilson and just put everything to bed. He didn't and now this little crapstorm will likely only build from now on.
And I doubt Skrastins meant to injure him because Skrastins seems like a clean player from all the games I've seen him play. But, accountability is accountability.
Yep. I didn't want to come across as defending what Skrastins did (or didn't) last week, but mostly to say that I thought it was a little much as far as it ended up going, ie to the media. I completely understand why Nilson is mad, and he has every right to want to get back at him. Obviously Skrastins has his motives for not fighting, whatever they may be and regardless of if it's what we think is "right", but the point is that nothing happened and now it lingers. I just wish it would have lingered privately.
Another point I should have clarified is about it happening somewhere other than the NHL and carrying over. I didn't mean to say that because it didn't happen in an NHL game that Nilson shouldn't try to get even. You are going to be upset at the person no matter what league you are in, and I am sure that many Juniors grudges carry on up to the NHL. Obviously about the only time Nilson can try to get even is during the NHL season. I just don't need to hear about some old grudge from the Worlds during the season, where it has no bearing on anyone or anything, just the two people involved. It's a sideshow, and I don't like it. That's just my opinion.
The hit that Skrastinsh dit to that Nilson guy was absolutely clean. The swede was unlucky and fell on his head, but even the swedish coach said, that it was clean, and skrastinsh shouldn't have been misconducted.
Just out of curiosity, was Nilson facing the boards for a long time, or did he turn right before the hit?
Oh boy. That game was over half a year ago so it's kinda fuzzy in my memory but I think he came in facing the boards to get the puck and Skrastins came from the other way. Maybe he could have seen it, but I doubt it.
Some players just don't fight at all. Skrastins is one of those (I'm pretty sure he's never fought). He got a full faced sucker punch from Bertuzzi when he was with Nashville and he never threw punches back and has never looked for retribution against Bertuzzi. Since he plays a relatively clean game, ala no face wasing / slashing etc... I think he plays a pretty respectible game. Some NHL players will drop, and some won't. I don't believe we will ever see Skrastins drop the gloves.
Not intentional doesn't necessarily mean not dirty, but it makes it sound a little better.
Well that certainly makes Karlis look a little bit better than the Darcy Tucker image, Nilson was trying to paint him in. Nice work diggin that up. Short article, but sheds a little light on the situation.
